|
People get to feel smug.
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 15:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 15:38 |
|
|
Borrowed Ladder posted:How can people still flat out not believe William = MIB after MIB recognizes the greeter and mentions she's been recast?? I saw one poster say that maybe he just remembered her from a different time? What kind of horseshit nonsensical writing would that be? Hey guys let's write in some dialogue for our mysterious unnamed character about someone that only William has interacted with. Because the MiB has been to the park shitloads of times and knows most of the bots? He expresses surprise on multiple occasions when he meets characters that he doesn't know about. That greeter bot shows up in Dolores' memory flashbacks in a different role as well. Logan also checks her out when he and Will meet their greeter-bots. Maybe the MiB is Logan? Logan is already the heir to a big family business, and he's a mass-murdering dipshit from the getgo. I still think the mulitple timeline poo poo is bollocks. It all works from a single timeline perspective just fine - all the weird flashback scenes are just bots accessing their memories and becoming more self-conscious. We know that the hosts have memories that are so vivid they're actually relivable. None of this timeline poo poo is necessary. However, I am pretty sure that the scenes with Bernard and Dolores in the hidden basement lab are actually Arnold and Dolores 34 years in the past, and we're watching Arnold become convinced that the bots are self-conscious. So, the Will and Dolores arc. We know that the Wyatt narrative is being generated by old-Ford in the present. We've never seen young-Ford live (except possibly in the background of the church-steeple massacre flashbacks). There's a scene in E3 where old-Ford gives Teddy the new backstory, and the MiB is directly interacting with the new narrative. Any mention of Wyatt firmly anchors a scene in the present. Right after Teddy gets his new backstory, there's the scene where Teddy and Dolores find out she doesn't have weapons privileges, and she's still there when Teddy hears about Wyatt for the first time in-game and rides off to get his revenge. Again, Wyatt = present. Immediately there's a Bernard/Arnold scene in the hidden basement with Dolores. No mention of Wyatt. Then there's another Dolores scene - in downtown Sweetwater next to her yellow horse, where she finds out that Teddy has been ambushed by Wyatt. Still in the present. Next D scene - she's riding home on the same yellow horse only to get ambushed by literally Cowboy Stephen motherfucking Ogg, apparently guest starring from Red Dead Redemption 2. A disembodied voice tells her to kill him - she shoots the Trevor-bot and rides off, again on her yellow horse. This scene could be in the present or in the past, I suppose. She gets shot in the stomach, but in the next moment she's fine. Either she's reliving memories, or this scene happens in multiple timelines simultaneously. No Wyatt here. The very next D scene is the last scene in E3, where she stumbles into William's camp with her yellow horse in the background. Cue Will and Dolores' entire arc up until now, which is mostly self-contained and doesn't contain any Wyatt references in itself. All of the scenes leading up to this arc line up in sequence from one timeline perspective without any problems. If there is a jump to a past Dolores timeline in there somehwere, then we've got a big gap in the story - where the hell does present-Dolores go after she finds out that Teddy is alone in the mountains getting ambushed by Wyatt's men? Is the shot of her getting shot in the stomach at the farmhouse the present? Does she just 'die' there and get picked up by the park techs? Was the MiB telling the truth when he said that she'd been kidnapped by Wyatt's men? Mahoning posted:Bingo. There's way too many scenes earlier in the series of Delores alone, then remembering something (sometimes accompanied with a voice whispering "remember") and suddenly she's in the exact same place but with William. I guess this could work. This answers the question of what happened to present-Dolores. So then we've got three timelines? 34 years in the past there's Arnold becoming convinced that Dolores is self-conscious and the church-steeple massacre which might be where a bot or bots (maybe Dolores?) went insane and killed Arnold. Then there's W & D's self contained arc, which might be 30 years in the past - Logan's family's company (Delos?) is considering buying the park out because it's losing money. Then there's the present, which includes all of Old-Ford's scenes, the Wyatt narrative, Bernard-bot and Theresa, Maeve becoming the AI singularity, the MiB arc, all the corporate intrigue and espionage stuff, and possibly a second Dolores arc where she's alone, retracing her journey with William, following Arnold's voice and the maze symbols. The flashback scenes are fairly ambiguous though. The only scene where a 'remember' voice happens directly before a Will scene is right at the beginning of E2 . The cut to Will is right to his first scene on the show though, before he enters the park and before he meets Dolores. It's definitely suggestive, but she has no actual memory of any of these early Will scenes. The only scene that fits this scenario exactly takes place outside of Pariah in the cemetery. At first Dolores is totally alone (no horse, no nothin), then she has a flashback - the voice says 'find me, show me how' and then suddenly we're back in the cemetery with 4 horses, Will, Logan, and Slim. This definitely could be a multiple timelines scene. Most of the flashback scenes with the voice and the sudden pans to Will aren't that explicit though. The only other time that Will actually disappears is in E8, when Dolores sees her own body in the lake. She turns around and Will is gone. She turns around again, her body is gone. She turns back around again and Will is back. The other times this happens Will could be not there or he could be just off camera. There's one scene in particular that's a huge problem for any multiple timeline interpretation. It's near the beginning of E4, in the map room with Stubbs and an anonymous tech. Their conversation is worth quoting in its entirety, because it seems to connect the W&D arc to the present. quote:Tech: We've got a host making a pretty big deviation from her loop. In the next Dolores scene, a host attempts to get her back to Sweetwater until William steps in and tells him 'she's with me'. We don't get any followup after that, so presumably they 'unflag' her once they know she's following a guest around and go back to trying to plug all the other Wyatt-caused leaks. This scene almost confirms that the W&D arc is taking place simultaneously with Ford's new Wyatt narrative, which we know is happening in the present. I suppose it's possible that the new narrative they're talking about is just some new narrative in the past that Ford is implementing that isn't Wyatt but is also still disrupting the park, but Stubbs definitely doesn't look any younger in this scene (certainly not 30 years younger), and again, the disruption Wyatt is causing is a huge plot element for just about every other plot arc except for Maeve. Ok, so maybe Stubbs is a bot who doesn't age. You see how multiple timelines interpretations just plunge down a rabbit-hole of ambiguities and inconsistencies? The simplest explanation is that there is only one timeline (with the possible exception of Bernard/Arnold scenes in the hidden basement and vivid bot flashbacks), MiB, William and Logan are three separate characters, and Ford is throwing the park into chaos which is overwhelming the staff, who are allowing all kinds of crazy poo poo to slip under the radar. With one timeline, all of the scenes flow together just fine, there aren't any inconsistencies, and the show is tighter and better for it. GunnerJ posted:I don't have a huge stake in the two timelines thing. It seems pretty plausible but if it's not true, whatever. The most interesting criticism of it, though, is "so what?" What we're talking about is the possibility that the show is using a particular narrative framing device, that the story unfolds both in the present and through events in the past that influence the present, but not signaling this to the audience. So my question is, what is gained by doing things this way? Exactly. It adds nothing to the show. emTme3 fucked around with this message at 17:12 on Nov 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 15:53
|
|
|
Told youCojawfee posted:Look at me, I called it. I'm the best show watcher.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 15:54
|
|
|
The biggest reason why Ed Harris isn't William is that he just told his origin story to Teddy. There's no point in knowing the significant thing that happened to him a year ago if we're going to have to watch two more episodes of what happened to him 20 years ago that we already know have less to do with him than his monologue about Maeve.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 16:02
|
|
|
GunnerJ posted:I don't have a huge stake in the two timelines thing. It seems pretty plausible but if it's not true, whatever. The most interesting criticism of it, though, is "so what?" What we're talking about is the possibility that the show is using a particular narrative framing device, that the story unfolds both in the present and through events in the past that influence the present, but not signaling this to the audience. So my question is, what is gained by doing things this way? What would be lost by having a "30 years before" (or whatever) caption for the introductory scene with William and Logan? Who is this mysterious Man in Black? Why does he seem to care so much about the Maze? Why is he so cruel to the hosts? How did he save the park? What happened to Arnold 35 years ago? How was the Man in Black born in the park 30 years ago? What is the meaning of the church/town? How is William going to react to falling in love with a host? Are Logan and William really going to invest in the park? Does William ever overcome Logan in the company? What is William's marriage going to be like? With two timelines these questions are answered easily and there is no need for further exposition, flashbacks, etc. With this set-up we get to know each of the characters on their own and get to see what it is that makes life worthwhile - experience, pain, suffering make things real. 30 years later and Dolores is still on the same loop. William/MiB are very different. Does this work for everyone? Guess not. Works for me.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 16:09
|
|
|
People keep saying timelines but keep talking about different time periods.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 16:10
|
|
|
Norns posted:What would be the point of that? He can shut him down or wipe his memory at any time. He already has him under control. Sure, but that's one more thing Ford would have to delete and that takes time and Bernard has evidence he needs to get rid of in a timely manner anyway. I'm not going to claim that I'm certain about this, but we should also consider that it's not like Ford actually respects Bernard enough to tell him the truth either. Also- I love the avatar! Solkanar512 fucked around with this message at 16:23 on Nov 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 16:15
|
|
|
All really seems to point at 2-time periods (better than "2-timelines" really), every episode provides further arguments to it, Im almost convinced But still, Dolores scenes are very convoluted if interpreted that way. We are to believe she is actually in the past with Willian, where she occasionally have flashbacks of an even earlier past and sometimes also flashbacks of the present when she is alone (???), not to mention the scenes where there are apparent continuity between her supposed past scenes and present scenes. Or we are to believe she is actually in the present all the time reliving her memories of the past with Willian (her flashbacks of the present actually moments where escapes those past memories), except there are scenes of this past with Will and Logan and without Dolores. Is very confusing I hope when they reveal it (if its reaqlly true), they manage to make some sense out of this mess Jack Gladney posted:The biggest reason why Ed Harris isn't William is that he just told his origin story to Teddy. There's no point in knowing the significant thing that happened to him a year ago if we're going to have to watch two more episodes of what happened to him 20 years ago that we already know have less to do with him than his monologue about Maeve. His backstory is perfectly compatible with Will backstory (Will is going back to get married, MiB got married 30 years ago after going to the park) Elias_Maluco fucked around with this message at 16:26 on Nov 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 16:22
|
|
|
quote:Tech: Unclear. The boss is disrupting so many storylines with his new narrative, it's hard to tell. If it was meant to be more significant to the storyline, I woulda had the actor run it again.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 16:22
|
|
|
Invicta{HOG}, M.D. posted:Who is this mysterious Man in Black? Why does he seem to care so much about the Maze? Why is he so cruel to the hosts? How did he save the park? What happened to Arnold 35 years ago? How was the Man in Black born in the park 30 years ago? What is the meaning of the church/town? How is William going to react to falling in love with a host? Are Logan and William really going to invest in the park? Does William ever overcome Logan in the company? What is William's marriage going to be like? That's fine, but I don't get why it is that the show doesn't make it explicit that one plot is in the past and others in the present might be influenced by it. It's the way it's being obscured that seems pointless to me, not the idea that there are two time frames at all. So what about any of this would be lost is the show was just upfront with the audience that, hey, these William and Logan guys are visiting the park 30 years ago compared to what's going on in the rest of the show. eta: These aren't even rhetorical questions, I just don't see what's gained by making this a "reveal." GunnerJ fucked around with this message at 16:32 on Nov 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 16:26
|
|
|
Why did Dexter hide that Ghost Adama wasn't real?
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 16:29
|
|
|
Gorilla Salad posted:Why did Dexter hide that Ghost Adama wasn't real? Because it was a bad show
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 16:30
|
|
|
GunnerJ posted:I don't have a huge stake in the two timelines thing. It seems pretty plausible but if it's not true, whatever. The most interesting criticism of it, though, is "so what?" What we're talking about is the possibility that the show is using a particular narrative framing device, that the story unfolds both in the present and through events in the past that influence the present, but not signaling this to the audience. So my question is, what is gained by doing things this way? What would be lost by having a "30 years before" (or whatever) caption for the introductory scene with William and Logan? The show is focused on the hosts grappling with reality and having unreliable memories. By having an ambiguous chronology, the viewer is experiencing the same confusion as the hosts. Additionally, not knowing for a fact that William=MIB makes it so the outcome of William's story more open and tense. I think it's more likely that William is in the past, but I don't know that for sure.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 16:42
|
|
|
I'm pretty convinced there are two timelines now, I just really hope they pull it off well, because it seems really easy to gently caress it up and have it fall completely flat.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 16:48
|
|
|
ghostwritingduck posted:The show is focused on the hosts grappling with reality and having unreliable memories. By having an ambiguous chronology, the viewer is experiencing the same confusion as the hosts. This was kinda my thought but I also don't feel "confused" by the plot one way or another. Like I hadn't considered the idea of there being two timelines until I started reading this thread and it didn't really resolve much confusion. The confusing things about what Hosts are seeing would probably be confusing anyway. quote:Additionally, not knowing for a fact that William=MIB makes it so the outcome of William's story more open and tense. I think it's more likely that William is in the past, but I don't know that for sure. This might be something that, if true, is more obvious if you know there are two timelines, but then again, maybe not. Some people think/thought he's Logan.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 16:58
|
|
|
splifyphus posted:The flashback scenes are fairly ambiguous though. The only scene where a 'remember' voice happens directly before a Will scene is right at the beginning of E2 . The cut to Will is right to his first scene on the show though, before he enters the park and before he meets Dolores. It's definitely suggestive, but she has no actual memory of any of these early Will scenes. Scenes with William can be both flashbacks and memories of Dolores. We have seen this sort of blurring of perspective with the invisible door. Piriwi fucked around with this message at 18:48 on Nov 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 18:45
|
|
|
I just binged through this recently to catch up and it's phenomenal. Have the creators spoken about the influence of Humans on this, though? I doubt Westworld would exist in its current form without Humans.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 18:49
|
|
|
Westworld is influenced by a movie called Westworld released in 1973.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 18:51
|
|
|
Also Humans is a remake
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 18:51
|
|
|
Oh, speaking of the film, I know some people pointed out The Gunslinger and his leitmotif showing up when Bernard went down to the basement, but you could hear it again when Maeve got all slashy. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 19:08
|
|
|
Trash Trick posted:I just binged through this recently to catch up and it's phenomenal. Have the creators spoken about the influence of Humans on this, though? I doubt Westworld would exist in its current form without Humans. Humans built the park, yes
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 19:24
|
|
|
Where did the name Man in Black come from? Was it a fan thing that just latched on or an official thing?
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 19:36
|
|
|
whalestory posted:Where did the name Man in Black come from? Was it a fan thing that just latched on or an official thing? It's official. Even Aeden calls him that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 19:38
|
|
|
Elias_Maluco posted:Also Humans is a remake Was the Swedish version pretty much the same? I feel like Westworld is similar in that there's bound to be overlap in portraying androids that look and act fully human until they're turned off or get their software messed up.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 19:59
|
|
|
kimbo305 posted:Was the Swedish version pretty much the same? I feel like Westworld is similar in that there's bound to be overlap in portraying androids that look and act fully human until they're turned off or get their software messed up. Pretty similar, even the characters, but not the same I liked the swedish one better, more focused on the social implications of the robots and there's some pretty clear and uncomfortable parallels between the robots and immigrant workers (on how they are view and dealt with by society) which is kinda missing in the UK version, and also in the swedish version the line between conscious robots and regular ones is more blurred But Humans is pretty good too, and has better production values In both the robot awakening is caused by some magical code, is not spontaneous (like it also seems to be the case in WW)
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 20:11
|
|
|
Cojawfee posted:People keep saying timelines but keep talking about different time periods. Technically timelines is accurate. It's not that there are two timelines like a time travel movie, it's that we are watching two different timelines unfold. The fact that Ford explains how the hosts recall their memories with perfect clarity as if they were actually there just adds more fuel on the fire. I don't know how anyone can not see the theory now. I really am a convert, I was insisting it wasn't the case for a few episodes, but I can't ignore the evidence. This show has been clever enough, consistently, to actually make background details and small, very minute things actually matter and it doesn't seem to be a case of "reading too much into it." Sagebrush posted:Humans built the park, yes I get you were making a joke but what's funny is indeed, they've shown Hosts building the park. Which is kind of clever because it probably is way cheaper and means everything can actually be built old-west style after the massive machines fix the terrain. Blazing Ownager fucked around with this message at 20:17 on Nov 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 20:15
|
|
|
Does the Swedish version end interestingly? Because I very much liked the UK premiere but almost forgot to watch the finale due to increasing boredom over the course of the series.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 20:16
|
|
|
What if the park is actually on the train, and the real world is the park?
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 20:21
|
|
|
Lycus posted:Does the Swedish version end interestingly? Because I very much liked the UK premiere but almost forgot to watch the finale due to increasing boredom over the course of the series. No, the 3rd and last season kinda sucked and it ends rather abruptly when the robot revolution is about to begin I think it got cancelled, that's problably why it ended like that Elias_Maluco fucked around with this message at 22:30 on Nov 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 20:23
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:What if the park is actually on the train, and the real world is the park? The park is much smaller than people imagine and the train is just for loading new areas
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 20:26
|
|
|
I think I may duck out of this thread. I'm not bothered whether there's two or sixty-nine timelines, if it happens it happens, but I don't think I'll have personally enjoyed the show any more if I managed to call it before hand. Not throwing shade, if you enjoy that stuff then you do you. I was mostly using this thread to think about westworld in between episodes and maybe discuss some of the philosophy stuff, but I don't think that's really the point of a TV IV thread. Plus I reckon the Bernard is a robocop twist might have been a bit better if I hadn't been reading all the theories about it, though I wouldn't have noticed the appearing door bit without the thread. I'll probably still end up inevitably lurking the thread next time I procrastinate from working anyway. EDIT: actually nah, Cojawfee is probably right. curse of flubber fucked around with this message at 23:03 on Nov 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 21:15
|
|
|
Ok, see you next time you post in here next week.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 21:32
|
|
|
Megaspel posted:I think I may duck out of this thread. I'm not bothered whether there's two or sixty-nine timelines, if it happens it happens, but I don't think I'll have personally enjoyed the show any more if I managed to call it before hand. *Raises a shot of watered down whisky, jerkily drinks it*
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 21:45
|
|
|
Cojawfee posted:What I don't get is when do the stories get reset? Do new people come in every day? Or is it like a week long package where you come in and everything is reset to the beginning of the storyline. Does Dolores' family get murdered every night? I think there's loops within loops, and the minor loops reset every day until someone interacts with them. There are more guests in the park, but the park is huge and the hosts are designed to take the guests on adventures which take them further away from interacting with another loop. I don't know what's to stop two different guests from coming into Westworld and going, "Yeah, I really want to see that Dolores narrative!" at the same time, but I think the people running Westworld are really good at social engineering - as mentioned briefly to William during the train station thing - and know almost exactly what a guest is going to do once they get in the park.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 22:02
|
|
|
Professor Shark posted:*Raises a shot of watered down whisky, jerkily drinks it* That's a real humdinger you have there. Shall we drink to the lady in the white shoes?
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 23:09
|
|
|
Ford just wants to tell his stories to somehost who listens...
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 23:28
|
|
|
This show has made me so insane I think this thread is actually being run by the AI because the host disconnected.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 23:28
|
|
|
I think they said they have 1400 guests in the park at one point? The mechanics of the park are one the top 5 things of "Don't give a poo poo about" because who cares? I don't really think the cyclical timing is going to have an impact on the narrative.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 23:58
|
|
|
Borrowed Ladder posted:How can people still flat out not believe William = MIB after MIB recognizes the greeter and mentions she's been recast?? I saw one poster say that maybe he just remembered her from a different time? What kind of horseshit nonsensical writing would that be? Hey guys let's write in some dialogue for our mysterious unnamed character about someone that only William has interacted with. Yeah. That's what convinced me to be honest. It's too much of a reverse chekovs gun. That and William started talking like MiB as soon as he left Logan behind. The most important detail for me though is that you'd never not name a charcter unless there's a reason. Like if MiB's name turned out to be Bob Belcher it'd be just confusing. You don't know his name because his name is Bill
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 23:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 15:38 |
|
|
Thundercracker posted:The most important detail for me though is that you'd never not name a charcter unless there's a reason. He's Clint Eastwood
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2016 00:10
|
|
