I think that was one of the successes of the series. There are such good philosophical questions introduced, but the potential to address them in a ham-fisted, facile, middle-school-smart way is so great they made the right choice in raising, but not addressing them.
What aspects of the storytelling did you find slipshod? I felt it was quite compelling and well paced.
Re:The science of Westworld
by UnoriginalGuy on Saturday January 07, 2017 @10:28AM
(#13344557)
> and consciousness as an extension of inner conversation.
>> To me it seemed like they barely touched on this.
You may want to finish all of the first season then. It is the major theme.
Re:The science of Westworld
by maroonblazer on Saturday January 07, 2017 @02:48PM
(#13346185)
> You may want to finish all of the first season then. It is the major theme.
I did, and your point nails it. It felt like something they tacked on to the last episode or two as opposed to being woven throughout the entire season.
Re:The science of Westworld
by FullMtlAlcoholc on Saturday January 07, 2017 @11:53PM
(#13348346)
>I had high hopes for the show in that we'd get some interesting perspectives on what a world with AI might be like, the moral and ethical issues associated with sentient-seeming machines
Was the eponymous theme park not enough?
To me it seemed like they barely touched on this. I had high hopes for the show in that we'd get some interesting perspectives on what a world with AI might be like, the moral and ethical issues associated with sentient-seeming machines, etc. Some kind of "Humans"/"Äkta människor" meets "Black Mirror". But that never materialized. To make matters worse the slipshod storytelling and lackluster character development became a distraction such that it made it difficult to take the AI aspects all that seriously.