A Conversation About "Westworld" - Part 2
Sunday, October 16, 2016 at 11:00AM A conversation between Lynn Lee and Kieran Scarlett. At the end of Part 1 of the discussion, Lynn left us to wonder just how long "Westworld" can keep this story going. We pick up where we left off.
Warning: Spoilers Ahead
Kieran: That’s an excellent point about Marsden and Wood’s performances that I hadn’t considered. I did think Wood was much more compelling in the second episode than she was in the pilot. I found myself adjusting to the tonal rhythms of her performance, which are quite specific. I appreciate that there isn’t a rigid uniformity to how the actors portray AIs. Each has their own texture and we’re not just watching actors play mindless automatons, which would have been so boring. That we get insight into their creators and programmers based on how each AI behaves is also an intriguing facet to the performances that I suspect will be explored more fully as the series progresses.
I didn’t talk much about Ed Harris much because of the concerns that you raised. I suppose it, like you said, is a moral dilemma about whether we should have free reign to abuse these AIs (which, again…yes. It seems unambiguously wrong). The fact that people enter this world to play out their most basest most violent desires is inevitable and can’t be avoided given that human beings (men in particular) are often awful. But I think, given that these AIs so convincingly resemble recognizable human beings the moral quandary isn’t nearly as complex as I suspect the creators think it is. The Ed Harris storyline and the Ben Barnes character (sexual fluidity aside, which we don’t often see) just seemed uncomplicated in how reprehensible it is—something that’s as unpleasant to watch as it is uninteresting and thankfully doesn’t envelop the entire series.
Ben Barnes and Jimmi Simpson as Westworld Guests
The question of how long can they keep this going is definitely something I considered, for many of the same reasons you highlighted. More logistically, I found myself wondering how they’re going to keep the narrative compelling enough to keep all of these film actors on the hook for this television show. I know that shortened television seasons do allow for actors to move more fluidly between film and television, but this show’s huge cast of actors who have worked primarily in film feels like something we haven’t seen before. Is the narrative going to serve them all well? Are we in for more of an anthology approach where perhaps Anthony Hopkins and Jeffrey Wright remain constants in a world of revolving AI and guest storylines? That’s an approach that I think would be interesting to see. It would also allow the writers to not feel tethered to this breadth of characters who are all interesting in some way or another, but who don’t all necessarily lend themselves to multiple season arcs that will maintain the narrative thrust and complexity we’re seeing now.
I’m also interested to see how racial politics are explored in the series. We’ve already seen promising glimpses of that in the Maeve’s storyline and the “flashbacks” to her other life. There’s always something to be said about the unique experience of black womanhood and those distinctions and contrast are thrown into sharper relief the further back in history one goes. I’m curious to see if the creators make a concerted effort to go there or if they’re content to allow the show's many other themes to simply supersede that issue.
Lynn: Yes, yes to exploring racial politics (and gender politics)! And I’m always for giving Thandie Newton and Jeffrey Wright more screen time generally. You’ve also reminded me that one detail I like about Westworld is the racial diversity among the guests; we’ve already seen Asian tourists (of course) and black tourists, and probably other races, and this seems right to me. You pay, you play, even if it dilutes the “authenticity” factor a bit. Maybe it doesn’t even do that, if this turns out to be a post-racial world? After all, we don’t even know what year this is supposed to be, or if we’re even on Earth.
An anthology approach would be really interesting, though these days when I hear “anthology” I think Ryan Murphy, who likes to use the same actors in different settings, rather than different actors in the same setting. Also, did you know that in the original Crichton Westworld, the park had other worlds the guests could choose from – Roman World, Medieval World, Future World, etc.? Think of the possibilities! Although I suppose it would be weird for a show called “Westworld” to abandon Westworld. And yeah, I’m not sure all of these actors are on board for more than a season. If I had to bet, I’d actually put money on Hopkins exiting first. A, I’d be surprised if he was willing to enter a long TV commitment, and B, god/creator characters don’t usually have a long life span in AI stories. I’m a little worried for Wright’s character, too, with all his tinkering around; he’s sort of like the J.F. Sebastian to Hopkins’ Tyrell.
On the other hand, I have a strong feeling, given that it’s Jonathan Nolan writing and J.J. Abrams producing and just the way the show’s been doling out narrative hints, that they’re setting up a long game (pun intended) for the show’s mysteries that will extend into the next season. (There is going to be a season 2, right?) Tbh, I don’t know that I want this to become another “Lost.” Especially since with both Nolan and Abrams, I feel like their concept sometimes outstrips their execution. I’m seeing a little of that already in “Westworld”: it’s a bit thematically heavy-handed at times, and the dialogue can be awfully clunky. The worst of it seems to be going to the boss lady played by Danish actress Sidse Babbet Knudsen, who was so great in “Borgen” but isn’t doing anything for me here. (I would also not mind greatly if the show kills off that obnoxious narrative director and the smug head-of-security character played by off-brand Hemsworth, unless those two develop heretofore unseen additional dimensions.)
Still, these might just be kinks that need to be ironed out, and they’re not enough to dim my interest. I’m definitely looking forward to seeing what happens next!
"Westworld" airs Sunday Nights on HBO
Reader Comments (3)
I'm a fan of the original film and it was interesting to see how they tweaked it enough to make it different. The story does raise some interesting questions about what it means to be human and do the danger of playing God which goes back to "Frankenstein". The original film had a more playful version of the classic west- this one is much darker. It' is a great looking show and the money is on screen. I would like to see a story like in which one of the guest has "Brokeback Mountain" with the James Marsden host...
Men in particular? C'mon, was that really necessary?
Questions: would they really let the guest abuse the host to such a degree? I mean Ed Harris goes beyond just shooting them?