Please Log in to Vote.
1 out of 1 members found this useful.
WestWorld
this post was made after watching this video on the day Michael Chriton died. The likeness of this image to Ken spoke to me - as well as the context of what the character is in relation to the subject of superior technology gone awry.
- Please Login to Add Comments
- show all sub-comments
- Report Abuse
Please Log in to Vote.
0 out of 0 members found this useful.
Yul Wilbur
Posted November 6th, 2008 by steven martini in response to Robots with gunsR2-D2! How often my childhood eyes reflected in awe and wonder at that little lovable useful round trash can projected onto the big screen!
Great images Chris!
None of your robots, however, look as Integral as the baldy in the black hat above - created by the late great Michael Crichton. It feels a fitting connection on the day he joined his Creator, to appreciate His own creation (within a Creation).
I remember seeing Jurassic Park for the first time. I was in the Ziegfield Theater in NYC. Still in High School. It was jam packed in the LL. You could feel everyone's energy erupt as the Dinosaurs stomped on the screen for the first time looking, and feeling, so real. It all seemed so plausible and true (relatively speaking). It took all four quadrants working on overdrive to achieve the illusion of these awesome special effects and light projected wizardry.
It has me wondering, wandering the quadrants. Care to join?
If Crichton writes a book getting inspiration from that magical UL space of creativity (as well as any UR research) and puts it on the page (UR) for us (LL) to read and interpret (UL). We all have our separate 'vision' of what the book is. Similarities in our 'visual imaginings' (again UL) are highly probable due to the same words (UR) we are all reading, but there's also an infinite amount of wiggle room for differences, projections, and identifications with characters and events. To then make a film out of this book - abstracting all the 'important' information according to an individual Director (Spielberg) and the collective Studio (Universal) and condensing it onto even less pieces of paper in a film script, to be staged and encoded in the light capturing film cameras by the film crew, a collective of parts doing their duty for the whole. Then the film (UR) is sent to another collective of computer driven special effects men to flesh out the colors and make what started as a magical vision (UL) of not so mythical beasts based off the discovery of bones (UR) in the dirt back in 1824. , much like the scientists who piece meal fossils together to understand the whole. The film is now the screen to be distributed on thousands of theaters (UR-LR-LL) for all to share (UR-LL).
All with the sole purpose of inspiring the next generation of audiences to participate in carrying the torch forwards and upwards to the next level of development, creatively, technologically, socially, culturally.
As an aside...I do find it interesting that the 'experts' have been saying Dinosaurs are related to birds and even had feathers. Does this mean the Mythical winged feathered serpent of Quetzecotl flew through a whole tier to a become Trans-Mythical-Rational beast of burden!?!?!
The burden, of course, being Liberation.
:)
Please Log in to Vote.
0 out of 0 members found this useful.
sorry
Posted November 7th, 2008 by Christophe Witz in response to Yul WilburI didn't mean no disrespect to Michael Crichton. I appreciate his fictional work, and publicly praised some of his books (f.e. 'Sphere') and the films that were made of them.
It was not so clear to me that you meant your post as a dedication to Crichton. I thought it would be fitting to go a little deeper into the "robots run amok" topic that you seemed to have opened. If a picture says more than thousand words, then you said 1001 words, but the context you created was in my eyes not suficient to interpret your intention correctly. My fault, sorry.
Yes, me too I was huge dinosaur fan as a kid, I knew all these names like Stegosaurus and Iguanodon and Archeopterix, and the Jurassic park movie was one and a half hour of pure joy for me. I was just old enough to pass the age restriction test, and I felt very lucky for that.
You got the Quadrants quite right, as far I can see. It's fascinating to see the journey of the idea for a good book come up in our brain (UR), getting written down for single readers to read (UL), then shot on film (LR) to be seen in the movie theater for everyone to see (LL). I often hear from people who read books: "oh in my imagination this scene or this character was pretty different from what they showed" but then again, reading books can get you really lonely, while the movie theater is a collective experience with all this event character around it, like eating pizza or chinese chicken soup afterwards.
So R2-D2 is your favorite? That tells me a lot. LOL. No just kidding. There are plenty of other cute robots in popular culture, but I restricted myself to the three cuuutest ones around. Sooooo sweeeeeeeet! 
Please Log in to Vote.
1 out of 1 members found this useful.
good to know
Posted November 7th, 2008 by steven martini in response to sorryI usually wonder how much context needs to be 'spelled out'. It's always a slippery slope as an artist, how much do you tell and show and how much do you let be discovered? It's the same in a LL conversation I guess.
I tend to assume only a gentle nudge is all that's needed (it's an artistic reflexive reaction based out of my own experience working in Hollywood where they like to hit you over the head with your own head)
I assumed everyone would see Yul Brenner and laugh at the likeness of Ken talking about technology. I assumed they'd click on the WestWorld link and see the connection to Crichton. I assumed it would be a fun little chain to link and...
...I was partially correct because here we are having fun talking about our favorite robots...LOL...
On a more serious note, late in this video (approximately 13 second til the end) Ken was saying that 2nd Tier technology won't be able to be operable by 1st tier unless we can communicate at 2nd Tier. This is the opposite of 1st Tier technology, which can be used by anyone at any level. Is 2nd Tier the death of simple point and click technologies or am I misreading this statement?
- Please Login to Add Comments
- Report Abuse








.jpg)

Please Log in to Vote.
0 out of 0 members found this useful.
Robots with guns
Posted November 6th, 2008 by Christophe WitzAh yeah, Robots with guns, great topic. What about this one:
or that one:
But of course we should not forget that there are also less violent robots, like these:
So sweeet!