Caravaggio
Senior member
- Aug 3, 2013
- 508
- 1
- 0
I
OK, but...
You are treating 'Cherry 2000' as though it was a serious film but little known.
I was fooled by the way you sold it. It looked like a turkey, for sure, but that it was also a comedy was not obvious from the clip you selected.
Having checked the reviews on IMDb, rather than just the wiki offering, it is clear that it is a 'camp comedy' 'cult classic'. With a very small and tight cult. It cost a bundle, made no money, it's release was endlessly delayed and had an average score of 2.5/5.
It appears to be a piece of B movie 70's absurdity. Few reviewers take it seriously.
'Ex Machina' is also unbelieveable but it is intended to be a serious attempt to pinpoint the ethics of AI.
Both films fail because the writers lack any grasp of the difficulties involved in creating life-like machines with 'real' personalities. Personalities that can fool human interrogators.
Science is science, Hollywood is fantasy.
That said, as a joke, Cherry 2000 is a good one. But cannot be taken seriously, unlike 2001 or Bladerunner, say. The latter ask the right questions and are wise enough not to pretend to have any answers.
Cherry 2000 and Ex Machina offer parallel themes. The first asks: "will men have sex with robots if women become scarce?" (a resounding 'yes', according to Cherry)
The second asks: "will men be able to make robots, that men know are robots,
but will be preferred to real women as partners?"
No.
Cherry 2000 is a 1978 classic.
In the year 2017, the United States has suffered a series of civil insurrections and economic downturns, fragmenting into post-apocalyptic wastelands and limited civilized areas. One of the effects of the economic crisis is a decline in manufacturing, and heavy emphasis on recycling aging 20th Century mechanical equipment. At the same time, robotic technology has made tremendous developments, and female androids (or "gynoids") are used as substitutes for wives. Society has become increasingly bureaucratic and hypersexualized, with the declining human sexual encounters requiring contracts drawn up by lawyers prior to sexual activity.
Business executive Sam Treadwell's (David Andrews) "Cherry 2000" android (Pamela Gidley) short circuits during sex. He is told by a repairman that she's irreparable and that finding a replacement will be difficult since she was a limited edition. To make matters tougher, the gynoid dealer says that Cherry 2000 parts were built in a defunct factory in "Zone 7", a particularly dangerous, lawless area.
After removing Cherry's small optical memory disk, Treadwell hires Edith "E" Johnson (Melanie Griffith), a tough tracker, to guide him into Zone 7.
The story ends with Sam ultimately having to make a decision either to save his beloved gynoid "Cherry" or the very human "Edith" as the available escape aircraft is able to only accommodate two.
Sam sends Cherry on a diversion mission to get him a Pepsi.
Edith and Sam kiss as they fly away.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherry_2000
OK, but...
You are treating 'Cherry 2000' as though it was a serious film but little known.
I was fooled by the way you sold it. It looked like a turkey, for sure, but that it was also a comedy was not obvious from the clip you selected.
Having checked the reviews on IMDb, rather than just the wiki offering, it is clear that it is a 'camp comedy' 'cult classic'. With a very small and tight cult. It cost a bundle, made no money, it's release was endlessly delayed and had an average score of 2.5/5.
It appears to be a piece of B movie 70's absurdity. Few reviewers take it seriously.
'Ex Machina' is also unbelieveable but it is intended to be a serious attempt to pinpoint the ethics of AI.
Both films fail because the writers lack any grasp of the difficulties involved in creating life-like machines with 'real' personalities. Personalities that can fool human interrogators.
Science is science, Hollywood is fantasy.
That said, as a joke, Cherry 2000 is a good one. But cannot be taken seriously, unlike 2001 or Bladerunner, say. The latter ask the right questions and are wise enough not to pretend to have any answers.
Cherry 2000 and Ex Machina offer parallel themes. The first asks: "will men have sex with robots if women become scarce?" (a resounding 'yes', according to Cherry)
The second asks: "will men be able to make robots, that men know are robots,
but will be preferred to real women as partners?"