MovieChat Forums > The Thirteenth Floor (1999) Discussion > How could they be certain they were at t...

How could they be certain they were at the top of the tree?

posted 11 years ago by skelk
15 replies | jump to latest

How could the people at the upper level in this film really be certain that they were the top dogs (i.e. the creators and not the simulants)? They had already proven how easy it was to create a simulation that was then able to create its own simulation. Having proven that for themselves then wouldn't they question their own reality even more? The further up the tree you go the simulations would get even more complex and the fact that they were seemingly able to travel up the tree would indicate that something was amiss. The test in the film was to travel somewhere you'd ordinarily not go. What if in their simulation they had to travel off planet or even to the horizon of the visible universe to prove it wasn't real?

[–] virgiltx 10 years ago

Well, we don't know if we're at the top of the tree, do we? So why would they know?

____________________
The story is king.

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] FredMcLovin 10 years ago

There are limits to each simulations. Remember when douglas traveled to the end of his ? So if the people at the top dis not found an end to their world it means its not a simulation.

[–] skelk 10 years ago

Or it is a very good simulation? As the simulation develops those who created it surely develop at a faster pace. What would stop them just adding extra code to excite our imaginations?

[–] brazilianhitman69 10 years ago

Maybe the simulation is large enough that is outside of any spaceships they could produce in the simulated 2024.

If our universe is a simulation, we'd probably have to travel pretty damn far.

____________________________________
"You say tomato, I say pimp." -Michael Westen

[–] MadSimian 10 years ago

Well, for instance let's take the expanding limitations of the simulations in the movie.

1)LA circa 1930s. Color is off and technology is so-so. Assumedly, the edge of the simulation is closer because 1930s cars can't travel as far or as fast as a more modern car.
2)LA circa 1990s. High definition and better tech. A much farther edge due to the increased capacities of the vehicles.
3)LA circa 2020s. VERY high tech BUT, as far as we know, is still just a simulation of a single city. However, the detective says that he'd finally gotten in contact with the French authorities when checking on Mol's character's background story. This makes me assume that in the 2020s, there are simulations for at least every major 1990s' city and, assumedly, all of these are more like sandbox games for the 'real' people(a la GTA). Which means that, assumedly, if the "top" layer in the movie is just another simulation, there are at least simulations of all other major cities.

So, to take this to its logical end, the next step up would be an entire planet simulation. Then a solar system...then a galaxy...then a universe/multiverse...and then a "super" reality...maybe even farther(but my imagination falls short trying to think of what something beyond that would be like) with each successive layer having better tech and an edge even farther away and harder to get to. Which is actually what modern quantum physics says is the nature of our reality. Really makes you think, doesn't it?

It'll be like Luke Duke and the other guy.
Really?
Yeah.
NO!

[–] brazilianhitman69 10 years ago

Here's a quote I like to repeat:

"What I thought was unreal, now for me... seems in some ways to be more real than what I think to be real... which seems now more to be unreal." (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0399877/quotes)

____________________________________
"You say tomato, I say pimp." -Michael Westen

[–] psdhart 10 years ago

I agree, great quote

[–] VVolfySnackrib 9 years ago

There are no loading screens in this movie! What does it mean?! :O

[–] lexicron 10 years ago

Good question.

[–] dark_carcasss 9 years ago

they couldnt and they didnt. i think that was the point

[–] Banaga 9 years ago

The last time they go 'a level higer' what supposedly is happening (if you believe they are the 'top dogs') is a computer program taking over the mind of a human being. This seems impossible to me and is never explained in the movie. This in itself seems to let us know that when they can still go a level up we must be dealing with a simulation taking over the simulation on top. Otherwise it would be a bit strange; a computer program taking over a human mind. This would ruin the movie for me.

[–] EndOfRoad 9 years ago

That's one of the reasons we're left to guess whether anything we see in the movie is real.

It is mentioned that the humanoid units within the simulation (1937) have taken their world for granted despite the obvious glitches. Then again, those are only perceived as glitches by the programmers. As long as you remain within your layer of reality, you grow accustomed to it.

Is there an ultimate reality on top of all the other layers? That's the braincracking fun of the whole idea. But how can it be depicted? The plot only works because at the beginning of the film, we are led to believe that the 1999 reality is supposed to be ours - the viewers'. Just as much as the story of 'Die Hard' is basically set in 'our universe'. The visual difference between 1999 and 1937 seems obvious due to the colouring. That's not the case when we compare 1999 and 2024.
This entire dilemma just makes the plot and the questions that arise more interesting.

---------

Consider this: You're recording a monitor which, at the same time, plays back the footage of your camera in real time. Thus, you see an infinite row of 'sub-reflections', a repeated image getting smaller and smaller.

1. Is each single image less real than the image containing it?
2. Are we to assume that the very first and largest image on our monitor is the only representation of true reality that counts?
3. Is the reality of us holding the camera really the ultimate one? Maybe we're being recorded from without.

We could also perceive THIS MOVIE as a simulation in itself. By that logic, the actors of 'our universe' are the ultimate real individuals that all the subsequent roles they play are modelled after.

[–] ZaBici 8 years ago

I've said it in another thread as well, seems nobody caught this. The movie ends with a white static line, just like old TV's used to do. This implies they were monitored, hence it wasn't the real world.
More to the point however, there is no way to definitively prove you are the top dog, philosophically speaking, it makes no difference then, because you cannot prove it. For those interested you can read on solipsism as well, again a theory that can never be either proved or disproved.

[–] notofdisdimention 8 years ago

I think one can prove this..

When they can't see any sample where someone from above have downloaded into any person of their world.

They knew about the simulation as in the case of 1999 when Douglas got the hint he checked the limit of the simulation so the same hold here..

and the way it ended that old Tv thing..it is like when you are making a sci-fi movie it will end in that way..when you make a movie on theatre/plays and ol mostly it ends with the curtain closing.. You can understand it as a theme thing might not be related to films's story but to its theme