Page 249 of 418 FirstFirst ... 149199239247248249250251259299349 ... LastLast
Results 2,481 to 2,490 of 4172

Thread: The OT thread V1

  1. #2481
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,581
    Ok, I haven't seen those movies but I really enjoyed ex machina and they seem in the same vane. Will have to watch it.

  2. #2482
    Insider PBSteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    3,084
    Interesting, I thought ex machina was pretty bad.

    Like great, let's pretend to talk about the moral implications of building an AI in our own image but actually ... not really talk about the implications of building an AI in our own image.
    Last edited by PBSteve; 10-13-2017 at 10:48 PM.
    Ever so many citizens of this republic think they ought to believe that the Universe is a monarchy, and therefore they are always at odds with the republic. -Alan Watts

    I work for the company building the Paragon

  3. #2483
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,581
    I just think it's funny how polarizing AI is... I think it's somewhat inevitable that human intelligence will be supplimented/ enhanced in the near future. This transition will blur the lines within our lifetimes, so it's just fascinating to watch. For me, if something springs from human intelligence and surpasses us then great. I'd say it's a stage of human evolution where our physical form changed from biological to mechanical. Just my opinion.

    Specifically on ex machina, seeing AI manipulate human emotion was kind of cool I guess.

  4. #2484
    Insider AndrewTheWookie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Central Coast, CA
    Posts
    374
    Blade runner doesn't really focus on the intelligence or sentience of replicants. They're genetically engineered... humans, basically, and are biologically indistinct from regular humans, which is the point of the Voight-Kampff test. They have normal emotions and responses, and are never depicted as having robotic intelligence or anything like an AI. The movie is about whether there's a difference between being born or made, if having actual memories vs implanted memories means anything, what makes humans... humans, etc. So it's like Ex Machina in that they both deal with human response to an unknown, but they look at two different aspects.
    Last edited by AndrewTheWookie; 10-13-2017 at 11:26 PM.
    I don't know, fly casual

  5. #2485
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,581
    Ah. Very cool. I am definitely going to see it now. I think the Voight-Kampff test was actually referenced in fallout 4 somewhere.

  6. #2486
    Blade Runner does stand up to the test of time. Not looking at the age of the actors (Ford, Pat Hingle, Edward James Almos, Joanna Cassidy, Byron James, Darryl Hannah, pre-batshit crazy Sean Young, and of course Ritger Hauer), the dynamic visuals of the movie are epic. This was made in 1982, right off the heels of Aliens, but also Star Wars trilogy. Yet, it shows a dyspoic world, a world what could be. It is stunning and beautiful. But see it for yourself. I would go with the Final cut edition. It is just that great of a movie. But decide for yourself. Not everyone likes the same things, or sees the same way. I am a moviephile. I can talk about a movie like this till your ears bleed, because great & talented directors, when given a good script, can make something epic.

    For instance, the 1984 Dune from David Lynch. IMO, it has the look, the feel of the book. Great actors (Richard Jordan, Patrick Stewart, Jurgen Prochnow, Linda Hunt, Stephen Doriff & including Sting-Gordon Sumner) are all through out The strangeness of the era, the outrageous times and people, but it left a large chunk of the book, the meaning from it, to the side and then brought in a conclusion from a later sequel to give more of a completiin to the movie. The 2000 Dune with William Hurt, did a marvelous job at retelling the book, but the acting was not there. Hurt, is not Duke Leto Atreides, though a fine actor, and it shows throughout. But, i prefer the long cut of the 1984 Dune, even though Lynch disowned it (as per DGA rules, it is now directed by Alan Smithee).

  7. #2487
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,581
    Although not particularly popular, Prometheus was one of my favorite movies. The new alien movie disappointed me because it didn't really do enough explanation of the architects. Movies that toy with those concepts of life are fun. I am not a movie buff and watch very few over the course of a year, but I enjoy movies that have a strange story more than ones that depend on the cast.

  8. #2488
    Insider PBSteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    3,084
    Quote Originally Posted by ironyusa View Post
    I really enjoyed ex machina
    Quote Originally Posted by ironyusa View Post
    Prometheus was one of my favorite movies.
    I'm detecting a trend here
    Ever so many citizens of this republic think they ought to believe that the Universe is a monarchy, and therefore they are always at odds with the republic. -Alan Watts

    I work for the company building the Paragon

  9. #2489
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,581
    Yeah, I like "bad" movies.

  10. #2490
    Quote Originally Posted by Nobody View Post
    You really need to understand the premise of the short story and movie. 1st, they are 2 different mediums. Since Philip K. Dick did not write the movie, nor script, nor direct the movie. So you can not have any interpretations of the nouvelle/short story, to the movie.

    The idea of the movie is, what makes a human a human. You are correct about that, that RIDLEY Scott does have themes of life & death in a lot of his movies. But Scott, upon reading the reasons that he stated on the subsequent releases (the director's cut, Final cut, etc), that the studio forced certain cuts, cuts were made for whatever reasons tbat Scott did not like with HIS movie. That is the key, HIS MOVIE.

    Now within the movie, Scott had blurred the lines between the theme, that is the key. In the original, it always blurred the line, always posed the question, was he a replicant? Through the actions of the replicants, and Deckard, what defined a human defined a replicant. They are born, they live, act and react, have experiences and they die. The only difference is that their date, for a replicant death is written down, while humans do not. That is the trick, not stating what is life, but how do you, the viewer define life it. What are the keys to prove that you life is deserving? In some regardless, the 'skin jobs' even met their god, their creator, even bettering what man has achieved. and exactly what that realization means.

    So no, the movie is not cut and dry. It is not a engineering question of right or wrong, works or doesn't; it is philosophy of tbe very things that define what is humans.
    i never said i did.

    the movie is only not cut and dry in the sense that deckart, in examining what replicants are and what there lives mean, must examine himself and all life for what it is. THAT is the question, what is life, and why is life, and at what point is there a meaningful difference between created naturally and created artificially ... not if deckart is a replicant or not.

    its a junior high level of movie twist to try and make the movie about if deckart is a replicant. its far more interesting of a movie to watch and learn what deckart does ... that replicants ARE people. they are, at there core, just as human as he is.
    Last edited by cockerpunk; 10-14-2017 at 08:04 PM.
    social conservatism: the mortal fear that someone, somewhere, might be having fun.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •