Westworld is the most promising new science fiction series of the season

Existential threats to humanity intermingle with gamer action and a creepy mystery

Read the whole story

 

[pokrface]

Super excited—though also fascinated to learn that Ed Harris isn't a direct clone of Yul Brenner's gunslinger (and, holy shit, talk about nightmares—I saw Westworld first when I was eight or nine and Yul Brenner vied with Alien's alien for The Thing That Haunted The Darkness In My Room The Most).

 

[JonathanSmith]

I barely care about TV anymore, but I'm really looking forward to this. I can only hope it delivers on the promise of good, thought provoking science fiction. So little television manages that, even wonderful series like Firefly.

 

[sarusa]

Westworld is unlike anything you’ve seen before on television, and I don’t mean that in the sense of visual effects.

The Japanese have been exploring these specific themes in TV series for decades - anime runs the full spectrum of scifi, not just the Star Trek / Bab5 / Stargate / Battlestar Galactica / etc space opera rut Western TV has been stuck in for those same decades.

Westworld isn't the first to try to avoid that cliche - there's been stuff like Dark Matter - but the level of quality and attention here could make space opera not the assumed default. Probably not, but anything helps. I'm chuffed!

 

[JoeB777]

oldtaku[/url]":2k4o95lu]

Westworld is unlike anything you’ve seen before on television, and I don’t mean that in the sense of visual effects.

The Japanese have been exploring these specific themes in TV series for decades - anime runs the full spectrum of scifi, not just the Star Trek / Bab5 / Stargate / Battlestar Galactica / etc space opera rut Western TV has been stuck in for those same decades.

Westworld isn't the first to try to avoid that cliche - there's been stuff like Dark Matter - but the level of quality and attention here could make space opera not the assumed default. Probably not, but anything helps. I'm chuffed!

Yeah. What advantage that anime hunt is over live-action is that it is perhaps one-tenth to 1/100 the cost to develop a series that explore certain issues.

 

[Frodo Douchebaggins]

Very excited. Having friends over and making A Thing of the premiere.

 

[Buxaroo]

I'm resubbing to HBO streaming service just for this show. It's probably one of the few things on TV that interest me at the moment.

 

[panchito401]

Tremendously annoying to have to wait one week per episode. Netflix model is far better.

Also, HBO is too expensive. Torrents!

I prefer the HBO delivery method. It gives me something to talk about with my friends who are into the show, and we're all usually at the exact same spot. Since I only watch TV on Sunday nights outside of sports, HBO shows are perfect for me. I'm really looking forward to this one.

If you'd rather marathon it out or watch on demand, you can also do either at the end of the season, so best of both worlds I think.

What makes HBO too expensive? You decided it was too expensive? They made a product that's worth paying for and put a price on it. Millions of people are willing to pay that price to consume it.

 

[Whiner42]

Wow, multilayered stories offering multilayered commentary and allegories. This sounds like awesome entertainment; the trailer looks fantastic.

And thanks to Annalee, we know about it, which brings me to the point:

So many people will skip this series because, you know, it's Westworld. Yes, it shares the name with the movie because of the premise, but that's where it ends ... and a lot of people will be misled by that.

I missed the first season of BSG because, for God's sake, it was Battlestar Galactica and I didn't need to see a warmed-over rehash of a cheesy '80s series. Big mistake - but who's to blame?

Branding can hurt as well as help. I wonder if the producers realize that.

 

[MacCruiskeen]

JoeB777[/url]":1urrl1r2]Tremendously annoying to have to wait one week per episode. Netflix model is far better.

My wife and I were just saying the same thing. We were just going to get Ash v. The Evil Dead via Netflix's dvd service (we don't get any premium cable channels--not worth the money for us), and realizing it meant we wouldn't be able to watch it all at once. What good is that? It's at the point where we'll see something like this come up and we'll just say--we'll wait till it comes around on Netflix.

 

[SixDegrees]

Possibly the most intriguing element of Westworld, however, is how much the series is a perfect alloy of science fiction and western. These are two genres that share a lot in common, but are rarely hybridized to good effect, Firefly notwithstanding.

I'm guessing you've never seen The Adventures of Brisco County, Jr.

 

[LuDux]

JoeB777[/url]":gdqrqrnl]Tremendously annoying to have to wait one week per episode. Netflix model is far better.

Also, HBO is too expensive. Torrents!

New televisions are too expensive. Break and enter!

New cars are too expensive. Steal a car!

Groceries are too expensive. Steal them!

Art is too expensive. Steal it!

 

[rolphus]

Is there any way to get it in the U.K. without a Sky subscription? Can't find any episodes or a season pass on iTunes, Amazon, or the XBox store.

I guess NowTV's my only option right now?

 

[NinjaNerd56]

Person Of Interest was very underrated...and Nolan had network handcuffs on.

More budget and freedom to tell a story or 6?

Westworld for the win...

 

[Frodo Douchebaggins]

LuDux[/url]":2poeocxy]

JoeB777[/url]":2poeocxy]Tremendously annoying to have to wait one week per episode. Netflix model is far better.

Also, HBO is too expensive. Torrents!

New televisions are too expensive. Break and enter!

New cars are too expensive. Steal a car!

Groceries are too expensive. Steal them!

Art is too expensive. Steal it!

You're using a bad comparison. If someone steals a TV, or car, or food, or whatever tangible good, the original owner no longer has it. Digital reproduction isn't really comparable to theft, imo.

That said, subscribe to HBO Now, or HBO Go, or whatever the hell the stream-only service is called, as well as the Showtime equiv. Or rather, I subscribe when the shows I watch are currently in-season, I don't bother during the boring months. I'll turn the HBO one back on in a couple of hours.

 

[Frodo Douchebaggins]

rolphus[/url]":282no7a1]Is there any way to get it in the U.K. without a Sky subscription? Can't find any episodes or a season pass on iTunes, Amazon, or the XBox store.

I guess NowTV's my only option right now?

HBO Go/Now?

 

[LuDux]

Frodo Douchebaggins[/url]":170kk6a6]

LuDux[/url]":170kk6a6]

JoeB777[/url]":170kk6a6]Tremendously annoying to have to wait one week per episode. Netflix model is far better.

Also, HBO is too expensive. Torrents!

New televisions are too expensive. Break and enter!

New cars are too expensive. Steal a car!

Groceries are too expensive. Steal them!

Art is too expensive. Steal it!

You're using a bad comparison. If someone steals a TV, or car, or food, or whatever tangible good, the original owner no longer has it. Digital reproduction isn't really comparable to theft, imo.

Your analogy is bad.

If you steal from artists, even if there is no physical loss, there is very real financial loss. The original artist still has the art - but you've enjoyed their service without compensation.

Digital reproduction may not be comparable to theft, but use or consumption of a service without compensation - indeed, with the stated and deliberate intent of depriving the artist of financial compensation - is absolutely theft, in both the legal and the moral sense.

 

[Annalee]

SixDegrees[/url]":1ypdkiqq]

Possibly the most intriguing element of Westworld, however, is how much the series is a perfect alloy of science fiction and western. These are two genres that share a lot in common, but are rarely hybridized to good effect, Firefly notwithstanding.

I'm guessing you've never seen The Adventures of Brisco County, Jr.

I have seen it. it's definitely one of the few examples of a good western/sci-fi crossover.

 

[Kevin Lowe]

JoeB777[/url]":ne6bysf1]Tremendously annoying to have to wait one week per episode. Netflix model is far better.

Also, HBO is too expensive. Torrents!

I'm sure they'll bend over backwards to address the concerns of the lucrative "people who just take our shit without paying for it" market.

 

[GreenMeters]

LuDux[/url]":y1becvoq]
Your analogy is bad.

If you steal from artists, even if there is no physical loss, there is very real financial loss. The original artist still has the art - but you've enjoyed their service without compensation.

Digital reproduction may not be comparable to theft, but use or consumption of a service without compensation - indeed, with the stated and deliberate intent of depriving the artist of financial compensation - is absolutely theft, in both the legal and the moral sense.

No, that's still not right, because you're presenting a false dilemma. If someone would either watch something for free or choose not to watch it all, then the artist has lost nothing. In fact, there is still probably a benefit to the artist of having a larger fan base talking about and promoting their material. Yes, there's a balancing act to strike between avoiding copyright fascism and dealing with people who say they would go without if free copies weren't available but really would pay. But you're positing a black and white line that really isn't there. If we followed your logic, libraries would be illegal.

 

[DataMeister]

LuDux[/url]":28j1hz3g]

Frodo Douchebaggins[/url]":28j1hz3g]

LuDux[/url]":28j1hz3g]

JoeB777[/url]":28j1hz3g]Tremendously annoying to have to wait one week per episode. Netflix model is far better.

Also, HBO is too expensive. Torrents!

New televisions are too expensive. Break and enter!

New cars are too expensive. Steal a car!

Groceries are too expensive. Steal them!

Art is too expensive. Steal it!

You're using a bad comparison. If someone steals a TV, or car, or food, or whatever tangible good, the original owner no longer has it. Digital reproduction isn't really comparable to theft, imo.

Your analogy is bad.

If you steal from artists, even if there is no physical loss, there is very real financial loss. The original artist still has the art - but you've enjoyed their service without compensation.

Digital reproduction may not be comparable to theft, but use or consumption of a service without compensation - indeed, with the stated and deliberate intent of depriving the artist of financial compensation - is absolutely theft, in both the legal and the moral sense.

There is not any greater financial loss to the artist than there is if the torrenter never existed. It's not really a financial loss as much as it's a lack of financial gain, and there is a difference.

However, that doesn't mean I think it's valid to do. I'm completely against stealing digital content and consider anyone who is so selfish to do such a thing to be a borderline evil person. No one deserves to be entertained by others. That is purely a luxury, and if the entertainers want to lock up their creations behind a fee that is their right.

 

[mrseb]

Frodo Douchebaggins[/url]":165upnwd]

rolphus[/url]":165upnwd]Is there any way to get it in the U.K. without a Sky subscription? Can't find any episodes or a season pass on iTunes, Amazon, or the XBox store.

I guess NowTV's my only option right now?

HBO Go/Now?

Nope, Sky Atlantic has the exclusive rights to most HBO stuff in the UK, as far as I can tell.

So, yeah, Sky Atlantic is your only 100% legal choice on Westworld I think.

 

[Jim Salter]

Annalee, have you read the Dream Park novels, by Larry Niven and co-authors? With the glowing way you speak of the themes of gaming meets reality here, if you haven't read them, you should.

 

[rolphus]

mrseb[/url]":3stz8hvz]

Frodo Douchebaggins[/url]":3stz8hvz]

rolphus[/url]":3stz8hvz]Is there any way to get it in the U.K. without a Sky subscription? Can't find any episodes or a season pass on iTunes, Amazon, or the XBox store.

I guess NowTV's my only option right now?

HBO Go/Now?

Nope, Sky Atlantic has the exclusive rights to most HBO stuff in the UK, as far as I can tell.

So, yeah, Sky Atlantic is your only 100% legal choice on Westworld I think.

Boo. Some HBO stuff like GoT seems to make it to iTunes and other TV episode stores, but not much. Guess I'll just cave in and try Now TV for stuff other than the odd F1 race.

 

[althaz]

panchito401[/url]":251nwazt]

Tremendously annoying to have to wait one week per episode. Netflix model is far better.

Also, HBO is too expensive. Torrents!

I prefer the HBO delivery method. It gives me something to talk about with my friends who are into the show, and we're all usually at the exact same spot. Since I only watch TV on Sunday nights outside of sports, HBO shows are perfect for me. I'm really looking forward to this one.

If you'd rather marathon it out or watch on demand, you can also do either at the end of the season, so best of both worlds I think.

What makes HBO too expensive? You decided it was too expensive? They made a product that's worth paying for and put a price on it. Millions of people are willing to pay that price to consume it.

I guess it depends on where you live, but in Australia it costs $300 to watch Westworld and another $300 if you also want to watch Game of Thrones.

No matter who you are, you can't say that $300 for a single season of any show is ever worth it.

Unless it's another season of Firefly. That's worth way more.

EDIT: I should note, these prices have fallen drastically in the last year. Not so long ago it cost $1250 per year (the minimum amount of time one could sign up for) to watch HBO in Australia.

 

[pokrface]

No, that's still not right, because you're presenting a false dilemma. If someone would either watch something for free or choose not to watch it all, then the artist has lost nothing. In fact, there is still probably a benefit to the artist of having a larger fan base talking about and promoting their material. Yes, there's a balancing act to strike between avoiding copyright fascism and dealing with people who say they would go without if free copies weren't available but really would pay. But you're positing a black and white line that really isn't there.

Exposure != compensation for an artist—don't fall down that stupid trap. Cf "Fuck you, pay me." Or, if you'd prefer not to watch a long youtube video, here's a 4-panel comic.

The key here is the concept of utility. When you download and watch a non-physical digital good like an episode of a show, you're gaining utility. Whether or not you wouldn't have paid for the good in the first place is irrelevant, because you have gained utility without compensating the source of the utility. Whether or not there is a physical reduction in the good you've consumed—obviously watching a show doesn't destroy the show like eating a burger would—is similarly irrelevant. You have gained utility without compensation.

If we followed your logic, libraries would be illegal.

No. Libraries don't make copies and freely distribute them (this is a little muddy because libraries traditionally can make limited amounts of copies for purposes of preservation, but that doesn't matter for lending). A library lends N copies of a work, where N = the number of copies they purchased. They don't buy one book and copy it a million times. Similarly, it's legal for you to lend a DVD that you own to someone. It's not legal for you to copy the DVD 500 times and give it to 500 people.

 

[GreenMeters]

Lee, you utterly contradicted yourself in two paragraphs. First you say that it's bad that someone could gain utility without compensating the author for it; but then say it's OK if I lend an unused DVD to a friend. That friend has gained utility without compensating the author.

So really the easy duplication and transmission of digital data is exactly like a traditional library or loaning a DVD or book to a friend, only incredibly more efficient. And just like with libraries, there's nothing immoral about doing so. The only issue is balancing the economics so there are ways to continue encouraging authors.

 

[Whiner42]

chromal[/url]":2tossfbq]

I'm hesitant to let this article get away with calling this new. It was pretty dusty when I saw the original on VHS nearly two and a half decades ago. It struck me as an odd series to reboot, and it's not really a universe I want to revisit. I don't understand how stuff like this gets greenlit while stuff like a second second of Firefly get abandoned.

Thank you for PERFECTLY illustrating the point of my previous post!

Branding can hurt as well as help. I wonder if the producers realize that.

Now, go back and actually read Annalee's review of the show.

 

[BobsYourUncleBob]

Great Review, Annalee. I truly appreciate the consistently high quality of your contributions.

Now ... not to thoroughly submarine my proffered kudos, but a couple of small 3rd paragraph typos did reveal themselves:

"As the series opens, Ford has just released a software update that nobody realized was coming. The update is called "reverie," and it gives the robots [a] new set of gestures that make them appear to be staring off into space and dreaming. Though[t] it adds to the robots' realism ..."

Add a vowel; drop a consonant; the bar is raised higher still. But hey ... at least we know you're not some nascent AI Bot!

 

[Peevester]

SixDegrees[/url]":2d6qigea]

Possibly the most intriguing element of Westworld, however, is how much the series is a perfect alloy of science fiction and western. These are two genres that share a lot in common, but are rarely hybridized to good effect, Firefly notwithstanding.

I'm guessing you've never seen The Adventures of Brisco County, Jr.

Brisco County Jr (yet another show made 100 times more awesome by Bruce Campbell) had a SF element going on, but it never really got started because of only lasting one season. Damn Fox.

 

[Eldorito]

althaz[/url]":1v9j0hlh]

panchito401[/url]":1v9j0hlh]

Tremendously annoying to have to wait one week per episode. Netflix model is far better.

Also, HBO is too expensive. Torrents!

I prefer the HBO delivery method. It gives me something to talk about with my friends who are into the show, and we're all usually at the exact same spot. Since I only watch TV on Sunday nights outside of sports, HBO shows are perfect for me. I'm really looking forward to this one.

If you'd rather marathon it out or watch on demand, you can also do either at the end of the season, so best of both worlds I think.

What makes HBO too expensive? You decided it was too expensive? They made a product that's worth paying for and put a price on it. Millions of people are willing to pay that price to consume it.

I guess it depends on where you live, but in Australia it costs $300 to watch Westworld and another $300 if you also want to watch Game of Thrones.

No matter who you are, you can't say that $300 for a single season of any show is ever worth it.

Unless it's another season of Firefly. That's worth way more.

EDIT: I should note, these prices have fallen drastically in the last year. Not so long ago it cost $1250 per year (the minimum amount of time one could sign up for) to watch HBO in Australia.

That's rather misleading (and wrong). It costs $45 a month for foxtel play, it runs for 10 weeks so you need 3 months - $135. That's assuming you watch nothing else, which considering Netflix doesn't have Mr robot I'd find that hard to believe.

Edit: I'm not trying to say it's good, using HBO exclusives to sell a fairly shitty product from Foxtel sucks and I wish I could get HBO play. Or even just buy singular episodes off Apple/Google. But it's not $300 to stream one show, it's $540 for a fair number of exclusive shows. Over priced, sure, but still a lot better than US cable prices.

 

[Amasa]

At around minute 51 or so of the trailer there is a sequence where a ring is dipped into a vat of white stuff and comes out with what looks like a westworld robot, or maybe a precursor of a westworld robot. It's been a while since I was immersed in Fallout 4 but was that reminiscent of similar action in The Institute?

 

[Adonis91]

DataMeister[/url]":d6858fhb]

LuDux[/url]":d6858fhb]

Frodo Douchebaggins[/url]":d6858fhb]

LuDux[/url]":d6858fhb]

JoeB777[/url]":d6858fhb]Tremendously annoying to have to wait one week per episode. Netflix model is far better.

Also, HBO is too expensive. Torrents!

New televisions are too expensive. Break and enter!

New cars are too expensive. Steal a car!

Groceries are too expensive. Steal them!

Art is too expensive. Steal it!

You're using a bad comparison. If someone steals a TV, or car, or food, or whatever tangible good, the original owner no longer has it. Digital reproduction isn't really comparable to theft, imo.

Your analogy is bad.

If you steal from artists, even if there is no physical loss, there is very real financial loss. The original artist still has the art - but you've enjoyed their service without compensation.

Digital reproduction may not be comparable to theft, but use or consumption of a service without compensation - indeed, with the stated and deliberate intent of depriving the artist of financial compensation - is absolutely theft, in both the legal and the moral sense.

There is not any greater financial loss to the artist than there is if the torrenter never existed. It's not really a financial loss as much as it's a lack of financial gain, and there is a difference.

However, that doesn't mean I think it's valid to do. I'm completely against stealing digital content and consider anyone who is so selfish to do such a thing to be a borderline evil person. No one deserves to be entertained by others. That is purely a luxury, and if the entertainers want to lock up their creations behind a fee that is their right.

According to a 2014 study (open the PDF from this link, it's the second sentence in the introduction), nearly 70% of Europeans report downloading or streaming movies for free. That's a heck of a lot of evil people out there. The vast majority of Europeans in fact. Perhaps your definition of evil needs serious revamping.

 

[EnerJi]

althaz[/url]":31aupjt0]

panchito401[/url]":31aupjt0]

Tremendously annoying to have to wait one week per episode. Netflix model is far better.

Also, HBO is too expensive. Torrents!

I prefer the HBO delivery method. It gives me something to talk about with my friends who are into the show, and we're all usually at the exact same spot. Since I only watch TV on Sunday nights outside of sports, HBO shows are perfect for me. I'm really looking forward to this one.

If you'd rather marathon it out or watch on demand, you can also do either at the end of the season, so best of both worlds I think.

What makes HBO too expensive? You decided it was too expensive? They made a product that's worth paying for and put a price on it. Millions of people are willing to pay that price to consume it.

I guess it depends on where you live, but in Australia it costs $300 to watch Westworld and another $300 if you also want to watch Game of Thrones.

No matter who you are, you can't say that $300 for a single season of any show is ever worth it.

Unless it's another season of Firefly. That's worth way more.

EDIT: I should note, these prices have fallen drastically in the last year. Not so long ago it cost $1250 per year (the minimum amount of time one could sign up for) to watch HBO in Australia.

It seems you can get it *far* cheaper if you don't need to see it live. Looks like GOT is available for just $31 in iTunes Australia, for example:

https://itunes.apple.com/au/tv-season/g ... 1104325534

 

[Chaedog]

I guess I don't have it that bad here in Michigan, its only $15 more a month for the HBO package that also includes Showtime and Cinemax and all their channels as well. I upgraded for GoT and kept it since its nice having the movie channels around for when your bored. Looking forward to watching this tomorrow after the kiddo goes to school and the wife and I can watch with out distractions (plus well she works nights and isn't here right now ).

 

[pokrface]

Lee, you utterly contradicted yourself in two paragraphs. First you say that it's bad that someone could gain utility without compensating the author for it; but then say it's OK if I lend an unused DVD to a friend. That friend has gained utility without compensating the author.

So really the easy duplication and transmission of digital data is exactly like a traditional library or loaning a DVD or book to a friend, only incredibly more efficient. And just like with libraries, there's nothing immoral about doing so. The only issue is balancing the economics so there are ways to continue encouraging authors.

You're trying to combine what are properly two different arguments into one argument sandwich, and it's not a very good sandwich.

First, the "libraries would be illegal" bit, and whether or not borrowers or secondary owners should compensate the artist for utility. Note that this applies almost exclusively to works stored on physical media. If it's on physical media and they borrow it—book, DVD, disc, record, tape, whatever—then the presumption is that the artist was compensated, when the copy was originally purchased.

Remember, you don't own the work when you buy a DVD or a book. You own the media, but you don't own the movie or the book or the game. The copyright holder does. The copyright holder's rights include controlling how copies of that work are made. And loaning a thing—such that while I've loaned it to you, I don't have it—is a protected right that the buyer of the good has. What you or I couldn't do in that situation is to make a copy of the thing so that we both have it. Then we have created a copy that we aren't allowed legally to make. That is copyright infringement. But If I loan or sell the thing and I no longer have it, that is not copyright infringement, and the artist has been properly compensated for that copy of the work. That's how copyright dovetails up with the doctrine of first sale.

(Though, sickeningly, the first sale doctrine is on shaky grounds these days. In the situation described in Vernor v. Autodesk, the copyright holder does indeed want payment from everyone who owns the copy of the program. Which is horrifying and wrong, but there you go.)

Now turn to the argument of "I would never have bought this anyway so the artist isn't losing any money." This is a uniquely digital argument, because it hinges on you (and I'm not picking on you—this is the generic third person "you," not you GreenMeters) creating a copy of a thing and then gaining utility from that copy. The fact that there's no effective marginal cost to creating or moving that copy is immaterial—the copyright holder controls the right to create and monetize those copies. Whether or not you have "cost" them anything is a how-many-angels-on-the-head-of-a-pin argument; you are receiving a benefit that you should have had to pay to get, without paying.

The seeming contradiction here—that in the case of a physical good you could just borrow it, versus how with a digital good you can just copy it—is not a contradiction at all. Borrowing the physical good deprives the original owner of it for a time, and buying it transfers the good. Even though the concept of "utility" can mean the enjoyment you get from watching a movie and that enjoyment stays in your memory even if you sell the DVD, you no longer have the good and there is no value or copy created—it's one physical thing, and giving it to someone else deprives the original owner.

A digital good is different. You've magically created at zero cost to you a second copy that can be enjoyed simultaneously. This is the right of the copyright holder, not you. You are gaining utility without paying for it.

Yeah, it's annoying and requires some mental gymnastics, and it's also difficult to construct meaningful analogies that explain the nuances without breaking down as you walk toward the edges. But it is what it is: saying "oh, I never would have paid for it, so it doesn't matter" doesn't hold water. You're getting something for nothing. At least if it was a physical thing, it's nominally zero-sum.

And that's why you can legally check out a book at the library, but can't legally bittorrent a TV show, regardless of whether or not you would have purchased either.