Westworld (1973)

I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

The Worst Film Ever

As somebody who had not heard any of this before, it became a curious phenomenon to sit and watch a film and slowly have the realities begin to click into place.

It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

Peter Martin (Richard Benjamin) and John Blane (James Brolin) enjoy a $1000-a-day vacation at the high-tech Delos amusement park, where it is possible to live out one's fantasies in an environment populated by lifelike robots. The guys opt for Western World, where they get to engage in shootouts with a ruthless gunslinger (Yul Brynner), safe in the knowledge that protocol prevents the machines from harming the guests. Their fun ends, however, when the robots develop a serious fault…It's easier to shoot holes in the plot for Michael Crichton's Westworld than it is to put a few rounds into Yul Brynner's robot gunslinger. Here's just a few of the awkward questions that arise throughout the course of the film:What happens if more than one guest wants to be sheriff? How does Delos ensure the safety of guests during a bar brawl? Is it wise of Delos to allow guests to blow up their property with dynamite? How can Delos ensure that there are no REAL rattlesnakes in the vast expanse of the theme park? Why doesn't the Gunslinger's heat vision detect Peter's body heat when he is lying down in the laboratory?That said, Westworld is a very entertaining film if you can put aside the problems that the script throws up. The first half is an enjoyable light-hearted piece of pure escapism, with buddies Peter Martin (Richard Benjamin) and John Blane (James Brolin) immersing themselves in the Western world, enjoying the basic pleasures of a frontier land: drinking, shooting, and womanising. The second half is gripping sci-fi horror, as the theme-park's mechanical marvels go on the fritz, the gunslinger becoming a relentless killing machine intent on evening the score with Peter (inspiration for James Cameron's The Terminator?).In addition to providing thrills and spills, Crichton's film also throws up all sorts of interesting philosophical and ethical dilemmas to chew over, most notably the moral implications of catering for guests' primal instincts (sex and violence).8/10. Not perfect, but still very good, with a marvellous performance from Brynner.

There is no denying that "Westworld" is an original film and the first of its kind. Released in 1973, the film did very good business at the box office and it was the right decision to make a sequel. The scale of "Westworld" is quite small and this affects the look of the film. If a higher budget had been commissioned by "M.G.M," then the final results would have been better. There are no sets or camera shots that show the scientists entering or leaving their laboratories via any corridors. We eventually see long, dark corridors at the end of the film, so why not earlier on? There are no camera shots that show the outside of the complex where all the robots are made and repaired. Those criticisms aside, "Westworld" is still very good. The plot is kept quite simple which is an advantage. No one stands out on the acting front in particular. Even though Yul Brynner gets top billing, he doesn't have much screen time and his dialogue is limited. He adds a lot to the proceedings though when he is in the film. I enjoyed the scene when he walks along the corridors in semi darkness as he stalks his prey, it was quite atmospheric. It is a great idea in having ones own private fantasy come to life through an amusement park when everything around you has been recreated to exact specifications. Having all of that suddenly going wrong after a few of the robots begin malfunctioning, is the equivalent of being plunged into a nightmare world where the rules of survival are changed. The characters who are caught up in all this, only have their wits to keep themselves alive. At the end, the last remaining character is wondering just what on earth he has been through and if such tragic events will occur again.

Campy as this movie is, you can really see the genius of the premise, written and directed by Michael Crichton. Well ahead of its time in 1973, when computers were far from ubiquitous, it shows the inevitable progression of robot technology, and 'computers designing computers'. There are also some fantastic shot sequences in the second half of the movie, particularly as rogue robot (Yul Brunner) hunts down one of the guests (Richard Benjamin) at Westworld. This also prefetches the 'Terminator' series. Unfortunately, I can only recommend it with reservations, because the first half of the movie is too silly, alternating between cliché scenes in a saloon and lame attempts at humor. Dick Van Patten's character is just ridiculous. The sex scene between Benjamin and the robot prostitute is too, with a corny preamble and then some laugh out loud rolling back and forth. There's just not enough darkness and grit in the first half, and I don't necessarily mean not enough hardcore violence, I mean it's just too light. Part of the problem is in casting Benjamin, and another part is in direction and editing towards a PG rating.The film does redeem itself when the robots snap. Yul Brunner turns in a great performance and the look in his eyes is memorable. There is real tension, and I loved how the film also combined at least parts of 'Medieval World' and 'Rome World' into the story, though it could have done more. You have to cut it some slack for having been made in 1973, and appreciate it for the outstanding premise, the potential of which Jonathan Nolan and Lisa Joy recognized before creating HBO's series.

I wanted to see it before I get into the new television series of the same name based on this. This is totally amazing film, especially coming from the early 70s. Obviously everyone understands the cowboy culture, because it was from the past. But mixing it with the future was the real beauty here. The robots and all, I don't think all the people from that era understood it clearly, but surely they have got entertained. So now, people do have knowledge about the things what in this film was talked, but still this film is effective despite the technology differs.No doubt this film was the source of inspiration for many films that came after it. That's what I was remembering while watching that so many titles popped in my mind. So hats off to the creator of this. But looking at its rating and reviews, seems an under-rated and under-recognised film. The story was kept simple, not making any complication, either technical terms or characters and the story developments.The two friends head for an amusement part where they can have the real wild wild west holiday by drawing the arms against the robots. But one day when something goes wrong, one of them who got stranded there, looks for a way out and how he makes it told in the remaining narration. It does not give any reason why malfunction happened. Because that's how things happen right, like when a plane crash, we investigate what caused it later. So in this, it was just focused on a disaster, but the first half of was different which was more an introduction to what kind of world the story sets in.If 'Star Wars' is the father of all the space films and 'The Lord of the Rings' for all the fantasy films, then this must be the father of all the dystopian films that we see in the present cinema. Certainly it is not a masterpiece, but the idea of the film plot stands alone. It opened the door for the similarly themed films like 'Night of the Living Dead' did for the zombie films. A must, must see film, particularly by the film fanatics.8/10