I really like this one, the quatrain structure of it and the allegory of a self deprecating machine - though I'm inclined to debate a couple of points:
I've always felt that society (or civilization even) was more a yoke upon which which we domesticate the wild of those within it (i.e. the social contract). And whenever I've stepped into wilderness, it felt like I was just relieving myself of the harness that had otherwise imposed civility (meaning that rather than civilize the wild, I let the wild relieve me of the constraints found in civilization). I also feel as though domesticating the wild is an innately hubristic (or even human) thing, and have always been drawn more to the idea that the wild should be made to adopt us, rather than us to tame it.
I'm curious as to your thoughts on that, and am open to talking it out if you're in disagreement
Posted 4 Years Ago
1 of 1 people found this review constructive.
4 Years Ago
I can dig that point of view and have no real disagreement with any part of what you said. Have you.. read moreI can dig that point of view and have no real disagreement with any part of what you said. Have you ever seen or heard of a show called Westworld? It's one of those rare shows doesn't dumb itself down while still remaining pretty entertaining at the same time... if not a little excessively graphic in every sense of that word. I won't tell you anything else about it but I will say that I think you would find a fair amount of intellectual value in it. I had to watch the entire series two separate times to really grasp what they were trying to do, and I will tell you it's quite profound... in my opinion anyway. And it's really, really well cast for the most part.
4 Years Ago
The first season was excellent, Anthony Hopkins w/the God complex and the iterations of Promethean m.. read moreThe first season was excellent, Anthony Hopkins w/the God complex and the iterations of Promethean man - I also had to watch it twice and can understand why you'd bring it up. I'd have to go back and refresh my memory to have a real conversation about it (as you're right, there are many layers) but I'd list it in my top five for sure
For as well respected and acknowledged that Anthony Hopkins already is, I still think he's an underr.. read moreFor as well respected and acknowledged that Anthony Hopkins already is, I still think he's an underrated actor. A lot of people had some pretty serious issues with the third season, and I can see where they're coming from but I still was pretty blown away by the entirety of it all. There's a scene in the first season where Anthony Hopkins' character talks about Michalangelo's "creation of adam" painting, how he hid the shape of human brain in the background of the painting and it illustrates a key theme across the entire series. (this is that scene in particular--- www.youtube.com/watch?v=SxN5ShX896E )
4 Years Ago
I'd definitely agree, though I've always considered him one of the greats - and I haven't seen the t.. read moreI'd definitely agree, though I've always considered him one of the greats - and I haven't seen the third season, though I considered the first as very near a masterpiece. My only complaint was the second season cliff hanger (I'm of the opinion that a sequel isn't always necessary) and thought the samurai follow up lacked the allegorical power of that first arc.
I remember the scene you're talking about (the ghost in the machine) and thought that the strength of the whole narrative was centered on that allegory:
The ghost in the machine and the search for meaning under the eye of one's creator (i.e. the hidden secret and the symbolism of the maze). The Michaelangelo brain is perfect in that regard, especially in the context of AI but just as much in that of creationism.
There's massive existentialist interplay there though, and it consistently brought me back to Shelley's Frankenstein (reconciling the creation with the creator), but you could easily bring up Camus (the absurd) and some of the other existentialists for reference (Descartes' "I think therefore I am" comes to mind).
I'll have to check out season three, and recap on the first two - it's been a while but I imagine it'd still be well worth watching
4 Years Ago
I think you will really enjoy the third season for the most part. Nothing is really going to top th.. read moreI think you will really enjoy the third season for the most part. Nothing is really going to top the first season but that was never the point. The series takes a very, very different turn to the point of almost completely changing genre's (while still retaining that Michelangelo brain theme). The third season will make you want to rewatch the series from the start and will allow you to see some things, a lot of things, that were designed to be missed without that third season... it's almost an entirely different show because of it even though you've already seen it.
I really like this one, the quatrain structure of it and the allegory of a self deprecating machine - though I'm inclined to debate a couple of points:
I've always felt that society (or civilization even) was more a yoke upon which which we domesticate the wild of those within it (i.e. the social contract). And whenever I've stepped into wilderness, it felt like I was just relieving myself of the harness that had otherwise imposed civility (meaning that rather than civilize the wild, I let the wild relieve me of the constraints found in civilization). I also feel as though domesticating the wild is an innately hubristic (or even human) thing, and have always been drawn more to the idea that the wild should be made to adopt us, rather than us to tame it.
I'm curious as to your thoughts on that, and am open to talking it out if you're in disagreement
Posted 4 Years Ago
1 of 1 people found this review constructive.
4 Years Ago
I can dig that point of view and have no real disagreement with any part of what you said. Have you.. read moreI can dig that point of view and have no real disagreement with any part of what you said. Have you ever seen or heard of a show called Westworld? It's one of those rare shows doesn't dumb itself down while still remaining pretty entertaining at the same time... if not a little excessively graphic in every sense of that word. I won't tell you anything else about it but I will say that I think you would find a fair amount of intellectual value in it. I had to watch the entire series two separate times to really grasp what they were trying to do, and I will tell you it's quite profound... in my opinion anyway. And it's really, really well cast for the most part.
4 Years Ago
The first season was excellent, Anthony Hopkins w/the God complex and the iterations of Promethean m.. read moreThe first season was excellent, Anthony Hopkins w/the God complex and the iterations of Promethean man - I also had to watch it twice and can understand why you'd bring it up. I'd have to go back and refresh my memory to have a real conversation about it (as you're right, there are many layers) but I'd list it in my top five for sure
For as well respected and acknowledged that Anthony Hopkins already is, I still think he's an underr.. read moreFor as well respected and acknowledged that Anthony Hopkins already is, I still think he's an underrated actor. A lot of people had some pretty serious issues with the third season, and I can see where they're coming from but I still was pretty blown away by the entirety of it all. There's a scene in the first season where Anthony Hopkins' character talks about Michalangelo's "creation of adam" painting, how he hid the shape of human brain in the background of the painting and it illustrates a key theme across the entire series. (this is that scene in particular--- www.youtube.com/watch?v=SxN5ShX896E )
4 Years Ago
I'd definitely agree, though I've always considered him one of the greats - and I haven't seen the t.. read moreI'd definitely agree, though I've always considered him one of the greats - and I haven't seen the third season, though I considered the first as very near a masterpiece. My only complaint was the second season cliff hanger (I'm of the opinion that a sequel isn't always necessary) and thought the samurai follow up lacked the allegorical power of that first arc.
I remember the scene you're talking about (the ghost in the machine) and thought that the strength of the whole narrative was centered on that allegory:
The ghost in the machine and the search for meaning under the eye of one's creator (i.e. the hidden secret and the symbolism of the maze). The Michaelangelo brain is perfect in that regard, especially in the context of AI but just as much in that of creationism.
There's massive existentialist interplay there though, and it consistently brought me back to Shelley's Frankenstein (reconciling the creation with the creator), but you could easily bring up Camus (the absurd) and some of the other existentialists for reference (Descartes' "I think therefore I am" comes to mind).
I'll have to check out season three, and recap on the first two - it's been a while but I imagine it'd still be well worth watching
4 Years Ago
I think you will really enjoy the third season for the most part. Nothing is really going to top th.. read moreI think you will really enjoy the third season for the most part. Nothing is really going to top the first season but that was never the point. The series takes a very, very different turn to the point of almost completely changing genre's (while still retaining that Michelangelo brain theme). The third season will make you want to rewatch the series from the start and will allow you to see some things, a lot of things, that were designed to be missed without that third season... it's almost an entirely different show because of it even though you've already seen it.