Directed by: Michael Crichton
Written by: Michael Crichton
Starring: Yul Brynner, Richard Benjamin, James Brolin
I'm a big fan of Michael Crichton's novels. I was a late bloomer when it came to reading and the first book over 60 pages I had ever finished was Jurassic Park when I was in sixth grade and I've been reading ever since. His science fiction novels had a big impact on me as a kid so now I try to watch or read anything that has his name on it. I'd been trying to find Westworld for quite some time and I finally caught it on Turner Classic Movies.
First off, it's very clear that Crichton took elements from this movie when he wrote Jurassic Park. Not just the fact that it's about a high-tech theme park that goes haywire and people die, they have a few minor specific details including the story's antagonist having a vision based on movement (the Tyrannosaurus Rex and The Gunslinger after acid is thrown at it's face). But Steven Spielberg's Jurassic Park also has some vague similarities such as the design of the control room and a few shots relating to the camera focusing on a computer. I'm not saying that they were direct homages, but I'm willing to bet that Spielberg any many other people in the film's production crew watched Westworld for inspiration. These things aren't complaints or praises, just observations that I found intriguing.
If we're talking praises though, the best aspect of this movie is the way it's filmed. The science fiction parts are filmed like science fiction films were made and the western parts were filmed like western films are made in those times. Creating a hybrid of those two genres is a neat idea by itself, being a unique and fresh take on the western genre which was incredibly popular at the time, and to add those little bits in there is more than you can ask for. During the parts in the Westworld town, you've got that clearly-in-a-set look and the camera shots are slightly crude. When you're in those futuristic corridors you've got the symmetrical hallway shots and the white soft colors of 70s sci-fi. I'm not entirely sure if it was 100% intentional but after reading a few things about the movie, I believe it was.
I enjoyed some of the ambiguity of the plot. We know it's a computer virus (the first time that concept was ever explored in a film, as they hadn't been invented yet), but we don't know what it actually did to the robots and why they went crazy. I think it implied that the set goals programmed into the robots became their main driving force and began killing people to complete them. The Gunslinger (who is wonderfully played by Yul Brynner) is suppose to be an antagonist to the main characters and is programmed to want to kill them, but once the virus gets rid of the worry of harming them, it does everything it can do complete the goal. It's better illustrated with the guest in Medieval world, who has to fight a knight to win the heart of the Queen. Once the knight kills the guest, and the next time we see the knight, it's sitting next to the queen dead, implying it became king and completed it's programming. They complete their goal and then die. At least that's what i got from it, it's good that it's not completely explained.
There are a lot of tiny flaws in it, though. I don't get why The Gunslinger had a real gun. I could buy that the guests could be given real guns that only shoot at the robots but why would they give a real gun to a robot? Other than the two main characters, there was a third whom the film went back to for humorous moments and we never seem him during the scenes in which the robots go crazy, and I know that there were quite a few deleted scenes, so I believe that it's possible that there was a scene in which The Gunslinger killed him and took his gun. If that's the case, it was a mistake to delete the scene.
There was also a part near the end in which an employee tells the main character that he doesn't stand a chance against the robots unless he can find acid. Upon hearing this, the main character acts as if he has a plan and says that he can handle The Gunslinger. The line of dialogue made no sense to me. The character wasn't particularly brave nor implied to be smart nor had scene any acid earlier in the film, so why did he seem to know what he was doing? Following that part, all he does is run away from the robot. He coincidentally finds acid and harms the robot, but he had no idea it was going to be where he was running to. He had no reason, character or story-wise, to be so confident there.
There was also odd editing near the very end in which the burned Gunslinger tries attacking the main character one more time and there is a few silly quick shots going back and forth between the main character and the robot in what I think is an attempt to add surprise and suspense but it goes on for a second too long and ends up looking silly. The last scene of the movie shows the main character sitting down and the line that was said earlier in the film "have we got a vacation for you!". I don't mind it but I don't see why they had to play it over and over and repeat the words 'you'. The word 'you' didn't have any significance there, it's the word 'vacation' because of it's irony. But that's a very small issue.
I'm very excited for the television series on HBO, which has a cast including Ed Harris and Anthony Hopkins. There are a lot of ideas that could be explored with the concepts in this movie, and I hope they take advantage of those ideas.
6.5/10
No comments:
Post a Comment