The film itself has some seemingly problematic places, which leads to the urge to complain during the viewing process, and often jumps out of the plot. You can think these are bugs, but put yourself in the world of Reeves (don’t care about money, But there is a bitter search for it, maybe there is another interpretation, so I am here to force the director's brain to supplement, it is a supplementary to answering some questions for the director:
The film looks good visually. Although the robot action is a bit blunt in the back, but I also understand that the low-cost production late cost is limited, so I won't pick up the problem in this regard. However, the film itself has many seemingly problematic places, which leads to the urge to complain during the viewing process, and often jumps out of the plot. You can think these are bugs, but put yourself in the world of Reeves (don’t care There may be another interpretation of the money, but I am struggling to find it), so I force the director's brain to fill the director's mind, which is a supplementary to answering some questions for the director:
1. Can the thinking installed in the hard disk be copied? After the film, the little boss "Jones" has said that the purpose of the research project is to replicate human thinking in large quantities and train a pilot to be used for 10,000 (cheaper than AI), so the thinking installed in the hard disk is immortal. And can be copied. So the question is, why did the initial research have to wait for so many donors? The thinking of a donor is Ctrl C + Ctrl V, with a robot, the experiment can do the same. 1.1. The reason is ethics and law. Even if the laboratory is set up in Puerto Rico, which is remote and close to the law, even if it is an arms dealer disguised as a pharmaceutical company, it still has to comply with the law. The film also emphasizes the donor repeatedly at the beginning Authorization file. So in the current public morals, it is definitely not enough to make people alive. For Westerners, the Lazarus-style behavior of resurrection of the dead should be performed only by Christ, so the only way to put the thinking of the dead in the machine. Play this kind of sideball. Then it is very likely that there will be corresponding restrictive clauses, which are used to restrict thinking not to be copied and to ensure its uniqueness (this will be detailed later). Therefore, the unlucky company can only find one donor after another, and only do one experiment at a time, and the project funds are strained in the end. 1.2. The director or screenwriter's handling of this and similar issues, so why doesn't the director arrange a line to give these simple explanations? Because the director thinks this is obvious! I think the audience can understand it, and I think he used a lens to emphasize that the license agreement is talking about this. Well, I am stupid, and I need to write some words to organize my thoughts. We can also see that there are many things like this. In many cases, the director deliberately skips thinking points, which leads to areas where the audience can think after watching.
2. A broken AR helmet, what is there to show off in Hololens’ bad street today? This is not a bug, but just a slot. Although the FOV of Hololens is far less than that shown in the film, the whole form is the same (all CGs can only be seen by the user, and the surrounding audience cannot see it. The vision of the movie is just for the audience to see. Understand, Reeves didn't even know what it was when he was operating it. What kind of "jing" is it? Not science fiction at all. Moreover, people around are still using Apple and Alien notebooks, and there is no problem. Reeves, you write algorithm code and become a code farmer. Why do others use notebooks to write? The little boss of the research team can't be so special. Here is the answer for the director's brain: Reeves is not a writer of algorithms, his job is to manipulate and monitor the process of human consciousness transmission, whether the consciousness is complete and normal. The way people’s memory and thinking are stored is determined by which neural link is taken, how much is transmitted each time, or what constitutes a neurotransmitter. Therefore, during the operation of Reeves, there are a large number of three-dimensional operations to control the adjustment of the entire neural link. Anyone who has done 3D graphics knows how many operations are wasted in viewing angle adjustments. Therefore, in the case of a large number of three-dimensional operation and control, only he uses AR, and other displays for writing codes or monitoring data are justified.
3. Why do you think when you first look at the robot? Any scientific research must be gradual, starting with the smallest change and progress, and accumulating step by step into huge progress. This is the basic principle of scientific research. In line with this principle, I don’t even have to think about it. It’s better to transplant human consciousness first. It’s better not to be someone else. It’s best to transplant consciousness between clones of the ontology, to ensure that the problem is found with minimal interference from external factors, and research is guaranteed. Success. Then consider the transplantation of consciousness between different human bodies, and solve the corresponding rejection problem (Ultra Brain 48 hours); finally, it is the problem of transplanting human consciousness to robots. So why did the film change this order and jump directly to transplanting to the robot, which caused the Reeves team to be too spanned to the crotch, and the research fell into a bottleneck? Let’s talk about the background setting first. The background of scientific and technological development in the film has reached consciousness and can be exported and stored in electronic storage. . (Personally, I think this is one of the most reliable parts of this film. It is not data but a program that can be calculated by CPU. It is easy to upload consciousness as data, and programming consciousness as a computer program is not a simple upload. ) That is to say, the basic conditions for all kinds of consciousness transfer are already available. The experiment of consciousness transfer between animals in the film has been successful. The transfer of consciousness between humans is technically feasible, but no one has done it. The first reason is the legal issues mentioned above. The ethics and laws of human cloning are strictly prohibited, and there is no other way to talk about it; it does not make sense to take out the consciousness of one dead person and put it on another dead person. The second reason is the business problem. The research project supported by the film is a company. The research of the company is different from university research. It is for profit. It must have a clear business purpose and commercial application scenarios. The small boss "Jones" in the film has already cited many examples. This application scenario is estimated to be learned by him many times after reporting to the board of directors. The company is not like the two entrepreneurs who clone Jones and Robot Reeves at the end of the movie. Many things have been discussed for many times, and the next question arises. The transplantation of consciousness between people is prohibited by law, but in business. It is also difficult to succeed.
4. Is their business really successful? Can a human cloning society be established? Imagine that the UAE rich man made a transplant, cloned a young self, and copied his consciousness to the clone. The company and industry he has struggled for his entire life are managed by the clone, and he cannot direct the clone because the consciousness of the clone is The rich man himself; the best case is to clone the rich man to provide for the old man to live his life, but the most likely scenario is to clone the rich man and kill the old man directly like the boss of "The Sixth Day" in order to maintain his uniqueness. Human beings have unique attributes in society. In the film, when Reeves created the mechanical Reeves, he had already thought about giving it an independent machine Reeves attribute. This is why the director added a robot element to a human clone movie. One of the reasons. As in "Clone Island", the problem of uniqueness will cause a lot of conflicts between the body and the clone. No one will spend money to buy a guy to replace him, so the so-called continuation and eternity of life does not exist. The only possibility is that the rich have high ideals for the development of their own industry and hope that their company can live for hundreds of years, but their children and grandchildren are insufficient and professional managers are unreliable, so they clone themselves to take over. In this case It is possible, but basically it is a concept to have a child that is most satisfied with asexual reproduction, not a substitute for survival. Only in this way is it meaningful to give the clone its own uniqueness rather than inherit it from the ontology before the clone is born. Or another way is that the rich man accidentally loses his spouse or child, and does not want to find a new one or regenerate one. You can clone one as in the film, but it is basically done by an extremely sane person who extremely materializes the people around him. To put it aside, we can see that even if the human cloning society excludes the inevitable discrimination in the initial stage, it cannot be established on a large scale from the root. We don’t have to worry about the racial degradation due to cloning defects like the little grays in Stargate. What we really need to worry about is the next step of "Transcendental Hacker". After the development of consciousness programming technology, there will be a plot like "Black Mirror" S4E4. A large number of people live in the digital world after death, and the digital world Rulers will appear. The brainwashing and indoctrination capabilities of rulers in the digital world are much stronger than in reality, and eventually humans will evolve into a swarm consciousness race. The business model in the end of the film is destined to be a niche market, and the size is only large enough to support "start-ups" such as Reeves, so big arms companies are also disdainful of doing this.
5. Character reactions As for the reactions of many characters in the film, we feel that it is not close to our usual reactions. This matter has been said a lot in other film reviews. For example, the wife of a doctor who originally had traditional Hippocratic values, after learning that she was a clone, did not complain hysterically that her husband, for his own desire for family reunion, cloned herself and her children without the consent of her will. Reeves’ behavior of objectifying his family. Here, the little boss of the company "Jones" finally wants to control the clones, and it is very likely that they will be locked up in the laboratory, which is actually beneficial to social stability. It was the doctor's wife who made compromises for herself as a clone and for the child to continue to live as a clone, and together with Reeves, she called anyone who wanted to infringe her own interests as a bad person. This kind of transformation is actually very black, which is also the charm of the film. For example, in order to show the atheism of scientists like Reeves and the Silicon Valley brother, the duality of maintaining social stability and the duality of technological progress is seriously biased towards technological progress, so they have very little expression of feelings, and the communication between the two is due to the difference in values. Consistency does not require too many lines to persuade, causing audiences who are not exactly the same as the "future" scientific values to be a little jumpy. At the same time, it also expresses that the director and Reeves may not agree with this value. On the contrary, I think that the final happy ending Reeves, who was on vacation, is the person Reeves wants to be. Finally, regarding the rating, the whole film feels like it can be used as a prequel to "The Sixth Day", looking at how the cloning technology was invented:) Pretending to be a hard science fiction movie, in fact, it does not satisfy the rigorous theoretical nature of hard science fiction at all. But under the cloak of "hard" science fiction, the director wanted to express his worries about the development of science and the changes in the way of thinking after being cloned (so the setting that Reeves tells his wife the truth is at least Worth half a star). Although writing so many words for the director, I personally feel that this film is basically three-star and half-level, and I feel that I want to express a lot of content, but my control skills are limited. Just like the original "The Day After Day", the visual effects are fine. The content to be expressed is buried too deeply, and the feedback from the public is far less effective than the straightforward narratives of "The Night When the Comet Came" and "This Man Comes From Earth". And the story is to be told to others, just tell the story that you hear is not a diary. So by analogy, this film review is more for organizing ideas for myself, chatting for sharing, and it is at most a 3.5-star film review. :) But in 2018, superhero movies dominate half of Hollywood. Although Hollywood is the base camp of the donkey party, it is more fully aligned with populist entertainment in business. In fact, I have watched a lot of Marvel movies, but it feels the same as watching Nicholas Cage's "Soul Chariot", "Frenzy Speed" and Stallone's "The Expendables". It is pure commercial entertainment to pass the time. In such an environment, it must be worthy of extra points to be able to persist in shooting such an independent film!
View more about Replicas reviews
