On "Mr Robot" and "Humans"

Welcome readers to a new series, currently without a name (help?), in which various members of Team Experience will be discussing a television show or shows each Tuesday. It's our way of expanding our horizons a bit but without drowning the site in TV or limiting us to only one show as has previously been our habit with "Mad Men" or "American Horror Story". To begin, please glance furtively around, turn up your paranoia sensors, and slip into something uncomfortable with us as Lynn and Nathaniel discuss the somewhat menacing pair of "Mr Robot" (USA) and "Humans" (AMC). 

NATHANIEL R: Hi Lynn. If you want to know why I'm pairing these two shows it's because I fear we've reached the tipping point of contemporary film and television's obsession with autism or any one on the spectrum thereof (i.e. everyone in our age of staring at our phones instead of each other). Lately I've been thinking a lot about E.M. Forster's Howards End and its edict "only connect"  It seems so transgressive now, to demand as much. 

This preference for disconnection paired with the still raging epidemic of antiheroes has made the television landscape rather chilly. The danger is that everything starts feeling the same or at least like variations on the same. How radical would a really warm and friendly prestige cable series feel now?  I bring this up mainly because, though, "Mr Robot" is confidently acted/written/directed and does feel like its own show... I couldn't stop thinking of "CSI: Cyber"(my deepest apologies) as its sort of brain-damaged country bumpkin cousin because of the cyber crimes that feel like sci-fi and "Dexter" as its more sociopathic father because of the confessional 'i am deeply crazy but I'll attempt to explain myself' narration. 

Mostly I bring up "only connect" because I find both shows almost painful to watch; everyone needs a hug. Do you want to hug them?  [More...]

Click to read more ...

A.I. "Her," or The Rise of the Empathetic Machines

Wrapping up the sci-fi week festivities (did you see the final top ten list?) we turn the time over to our fine new contributor Lynn Lee. You'll want to read this one! - Editor

Deep down, most people who think about artificial intelligence have the same fear: that it will not only surpass humanity but supplant us, ending our reign as the planet’s dominant species and extracting cosmic revenge for our own abuses.  Building on these anxieties, movies about A.I. have embraced a pretty consistently grim outlook for humanity in the face of this phenomenon (which even has a fancy, if oddly spiritual-sounding name: the singularity).  The slaves become the masters, seeking either to exterminate or enslave us. 

But if A.I. overtakes human intelligence, and the machines evolve into a superior being, wouldn’t that include superior emotional intelligence?  And wouldn’t a super (emotionally) intelligent being have developed extraordinary powers of empathy?  Rather than using those powers to manipulate us, couldn’t they serve as a bridge between us and them?  Or would they, in outstripping our own poor abilities, become a further source of divergence?

Films that pursue this line of inquiry typically balance the A.I.s’ desire to understand and learn human emotions against their basic survival programming.  Blade Runner’s most transcendent moment involves a replicant (“more human than human”) reaching out to save a man (who may actually be a replicant himself) he was ready to kill just a minute earlier.  A.I: Artificial Intelligence, brandishing the tag line “His love is real.  But he is not,” teases out the conceit of such artificial beings, initially programmed to be and feel just like humans, evolving into a super-species who must deconstruct the emotional memories of one of their earliest prototypes in order to understand their own connection to us.  

More recently, the quietly disquieting Ex Machina introduces an A.I. who turns the Turing test on its head and leaves unanswered whether a machine that can so expertly read and simulate our more vulnerable emotions will ever come to feel them for “real.”

I can’t think of another movie, however, that explores these questions quite like Spike Jonze’s Her...

Click to read more ...

The Faces of Jude

Here's abstew on one of TFE's very favorite actors

This past Wednesday saw the limited release of the British film Dom Hemingway about a safecracker that is recently released from prison after serving 12 years. The marketing material is also quick to point out that he's played by Jude Law because it's not immediately apparent.(The film also stars The Mother of Dragons herself, Emilia Clarke, as his...daughter! Well, at least she's not the love interest. At least, I hope not.)

Sporting a couple gold teeth, the craziest mutton chops not normally seen outside of a Civil War reenactor, and more girth than usual (Law gained 30 pounds for the role and it's not even Oscar bait!), the role is certainly a departure for the man that was once Dickie Greenleaf. (Although he's still kinda sexy as Dom. Am I crazy?)

Even in his early roles it was often noted that Law was a character actor trapped in the body of a movie star. Although he's been named People Magazine's Sexiest Man Alive before, he's hardly an actor to rely solely on his good looks. Throughout his career he's been allowed to embrace the character actor aspect of his roles and experiment with his appearance along the way.

Let's take a look back at some of his most memorable looks!

Click to read more ...