If you haven't already seen the movie you might not want to read
Brent Allsop <firstname.lastname@example.org> Wrote:
> other's claimed this wasn't a "deathist" movie. But to me the
> above kind of illogical cold and stupid thinking is the very
> definition of deathist.
There are times when death is preferable to life, like an eternal life full
of misery and ugliness and pain, the very definition of David's life in the
movie. If that's what you mean by "deathist" then I'm a deathist and
proud of it.
> like ALL other popular discussion of the future, it is
> entirely based on the "Turing test" view of lonely consciously
> isolated beings.
I don't know what you're talking about. The movie asks for no more than
what every other movie has asked since the invention of photography,
that you form an opinion of the inner subjective state of a screen character
by observing the way the character behaves. Come to think of it, that's
exactly what we do with real characters not just movie characters.
> Another utterly stupid assumption the entire plot hinged on
> was the idea that once the mother spoke the special words to the
> android boy, it would suddenly drastically change him and forever lock
> him into the mind set of only loving the person that spoke the words.
> The only thing that could be done to change such would be to destroy
> the boy. It's difficult for us to alter ourselves, but it's absurd to
> think that an android couldn't be modified.
Of course he could be modified, but if you asked David if he wanted to
undergo such a procedure so he'd no longer love his "mother" I'll but
he'd vehemently say no, I'll bet he'd fight you to the death. For one thing
such a modification would have to be so drastic he'd no longer be the
>Why would an android have to go to talk to "Dr. Know" like he did?
>Surely he would be able to, if he didn't already have it - purchase
>and install a direct interface into the world of all internet knowledge
Unfair! If you know how to depict that on screen in a visually interesting
manner then you're in the wrong line of work, you should be making movies.
John K Clark email@example.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 14:39:41 MDT