Category: Science Fiction

Different Means Different

First off, I’m finally back! I’m going to rededicate myself to writing something on this page at least once a week.

Now, on with the point….

After rewatching “Rogue One”, I’m watching some of the special features. Something Kathleen Kennedy (then head of Lucasfilms) said resonated with me. Not just about Star Wars, but also Star Trek and almost every other intellectual property that is going through a revival or renewal right now.

“We can go through a period of nostalgia, but what are we going to do with future generations who want to step into their own era of this vast mythology and universe called ‘Star Wars’?”

I think that fits just about every fandom out there. What have been many of the complaints about the new Star Wars and Star Trek movies?

– “It breaks canon.”
– “It doesn’t match my memories.”
– “The feeling is different.”
– “Why is suddenly so much diversity?”
etc.

As Spock observed about V’Ger, the fandom had reached its limit and it must evolve. Same with Doctor Who and a new woman actor. No, it isn’t the same as what you grew up with, and that’s fine.

No, “Star Trek Discovery” doesn’t look like the original TOS, and that’s fine too. It looks great, and has fantastic acting. Production technology is different now. Audiences expect different, more robust stories. The Kelvin timeline Star Trek stories are more energetic for a more action-oriented audience, but they can still ask interesting science fiction questions.

Different doesn’t mean bad. Different doesn’t even necessarily mean better.

Different means different.

IDIC

New Star Trek

Starting in 2009, the Star Trek franchise was rebooted with a new movie that created an alternate timeline. This was first referred to as the J-J-verse, both with derision and not, then recently made officially the Kelvin-timeline in reference to the USS Kelvin that was destroyed at the beginning of the movie.

The first one was good. It was fun, and had new spin on the franchise. Sure it had plenty of plot holes. The biggest one for me that pushed me out of the movie was the construction of the starship on the ground. True, there were no real deep issues involved but rather an exercise in melding the science and drama of Star Trek and the action of Star Wars.

The second one, Star Trek Into Darkness, was good at parts, too. There were some interesting character and political moments and exciting bits of action. But then the whole John-Harrison-is-Khan thing could have even been good. Except for when it started being an almost scene for scene homage/remake of Wrath of Khan.

Now there is the latest in the Kelvin timeline, Star Trek Beyond. I saw this over the weekend, and I thought it was great. It still had the action of a modern movie (helped by the director Justin Lin who also directed three of the Fast and the Furious movies) but also had some good thought provoking moments. Questions on why we do what we do, questions on the wisdom of pushing boundaries and the risks we take when we do. The old line of “just because we can do a thing, should we do that thing.” And each of the main characters has a chance to shine. I highly recommend it.

Here’s what I don’t understand. Why are so many people hating on the new Star Trek movies so much? Is it just because they are action movies? Each of the movies from TWOK on have had action, each more than the one before. Chris Pine said that a thoughtful movie can’t be made today, and as much as I don’t want to admit it, he’s right. People like to complain about dumb movies full of explosions, but they keep going to Transformers movies. I’m not sure even Donnie Darko could be created this year. I think you can have both. I think you can have a thought-provoking movie with production value.

I think it’s better to trust movie makers we know. And give things a chance. How many times do we have to experience how completely different from the tone of a movie the trailer is to start not trusting them? People could at least wait until the thing comes out and make up their own mind. Or at least find a reviewer they tend to agree with and go with them. But just don’t hate something because it’s cool to hate it or you think too many people like it.

Sex with Robots

This post will have some spoilers for a few shows and movies. Be warned.

I recently watched a series on Amazon called Humans. (It is originally from AMC and Channel 4.) From the site, the show description is: “In a parallel present, the latest must-have gadget is a Synth: a highly-developed robotic servant. In an attempt to keep his family together, Joe Hawkins purchases a Synth, only to discover that sharing life with a machine has far-reaching and chilling consequences.”

One of the repeating themes of the show is how some people began to anthropomorphize their in-home Synths. One went so far as to try to sue a theater for throwing her and her Synth out of a play because the Synth wasn’t supposed to be there. She tried to say it was a violation of its/his “human” rights because she believed he emotionally understood the play.

As would be expected, one of the uses for such Synths is sex. There are Synth brothels and the units available for in home use have “adult options” where they can give the appearance of passion.

One of the focuses of the series is a family of Joe and Laura Hawkins and their three kids. Joe buys a Synth they call Anita to help out around the house. Laura at first doesn’t want Anita around until the Synth saves Laura’s son’s life. Later, when Laura is out unexpectedly to do something for work, Joe becomes jealous and decides to turn on Anita’s adult options “just to see.” He regrets it almost before they are done and orders Anita to delete the records of what happened from her memory. Of course it comes to light and Laura calls him a cheater while he tries to justify his actions by comparing it to using a sex toy.

I suppose it makes some sense that Laura would feel betrayed like that. Anita had been living in their house for a while at that point, taking care of the children. Their youngest had already emotionally bonded with Anita like with a nanny or something.

This isn’t the only example of sex with robots in TV or movies, of course. I watched Blade Runner earlier, and had an odd feeling at the scene were Deckard and Rachael get together in his apartment. Deckard makes Rachael (a Nexus 6 Replicant) say “Kiss me.” and “I want you.” I’m still trying to decide if he wanted her to realize she felt it or if he just wanted to think she felt it.

So, this raises a few questions. Does having sex with a robot count in terms of relationships? Is it in effect any different from using a hand-held sex toy while fantasizing about someone? Does it matter if the AI actually feels an emotional connection or just the human?

Maybe it’s not cheating if the subject of the act doesn’t have agency. An inanimate sex toy can’t decide on its own. A fantasy can’t decide on its own. But what if the subject of the fantasy is someone you know?

And then, what if the robot has some agency but also has an imperative to obey whatever a human says? Would it then be coercion? Sexual harassment? If (or when) we have sex robots, can you rape a machine?

What used to be thought were solid lines of what it meant to be human in every part of our lives are becoming increasingly blurred. If (or when) we create robots with a level of real AI that provides any agency at all, those lines will become even less clear.