SubJeff on 15/6/2009 at 13:42
Interesting take on the psychology thing because I think it can go one of two ways. Scary looking thing equaling danger is effective because it piles fear on fear but something that looks really benign yet being really dangerous is another thing altogether, like with people's fear of clowns.
DDL on 15/6/2009 at 16:17
Quote Posted by Subjective Effect
something that looks really benign yet being really dangerous is another thing altogether, like with people's fear of clowns.
Embarassingly it took me less than a minute to recall the name of this film:
(
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0114367/) Screamers
"Hi, I'm a cute lost little child with a teddy bear. OF DEATH."
rachel on 15/6/2009 at 18:16
It is probably unfair that they quote that single bit out of context, but that particular sequence actually is one of the most painfully obvious green-screened CGI in recent history.
I mean, it's bad enough that the plot is shit, but blowing millions into special effects and getting that kind of result? Fucking waste.
Screamers on the other hand, now that's a classic. :thumb:
Volitions Advocate on 16/6/2009 at 04:45
It was a little campy. but aside from the mysterious we-dont-know-why-the-robots-do-it plot hole, I thought it was a very plausible sci-fi story. And one that deserved a good story arc to finish up.
So long as the Robocop sequel curse didn't follow Peter Weller around. I waited for years for a sequel to Screamers.
catbarf on 16/6/2009 at 16:11
Quote Posted by Vivian
Why the fuck does the evil supercomputer robot lair have screens everywhere? Does an evil robot need to look at a screen to know its unlocking a door? and fucking BUTTONS - because robots in constant remote control via some kind of super wifi need to actually push a goddamn button to turn the lights on. Why do they even
have lights?
Machines will do stupid things if they're programmed to do so, and becoming self-aware doesn't mean that Skynet is suddenly able to analyze its own behavior and act like a human. If Skynet had leftover 'human-friendly design' code, then it might well build things designed for human users.
As for the intelligence thing- I don't think most Terminators are beyond stupid. Wireless is good, but it wouldn't be feasible to send enough info to have a single centralized brain control all of them. I think that instead they'd be autonomous and dumb, but with certain ones being built for intelligence (like the time-travellers), and others having the capability to be remotely directed to boost their IQ during important operations.
Something I remembered: Did anyone notice that the same snake-bot-thrashing-on-a-table shot was repeated three or four times in less than a minute?
SubJeff on 17/6/2009 at 10:06
Skynet is always evolving its tech so the screens and so on could be remnants of the pre-wifi system or even remnants of the time when humans still worked there.
Vivian on 17/6/2009 at 10:19
I guess some kind of ergonomic hangover from the way skynet was built is a good enough fanwank, but wasn't the Dr Robotnik oil refinery/evil lair built after it'd already nuked everyone?
SubJeff on 17/6/2009 at 11:00
Its all nonsense tbh. T4 was trash. It makes less sense than T3.
catbarf on 17/6/2009 at 13:55
Quote Posted by Subjective Effect
Its all nonsense tbh. T4 was trash. It makes less sense than T3.
Agreed.
On a different note, has anyone here played the old DOS game Skynet?
