What is so bad about the "Cutting" thing? It is just a little tribute to the deceased person. Why is it so controversial in their world?
shareI thought the same thing. Maybe to make the film more interesting, naïve, fresh?? I have no friggin clue.
shareI totally agree. If one does not like the implant there is still the option of getting a small tattoo that jams it. Another solution (even though not metioned in the movie) ;when you feel your last days come just note it in your will, so your family nor a cutter will be able to use it. It seems to me it is absolutely unlogical that people were protesting against the technology.
Anyway, if a corporation some day would sell these kind of implants I believe it would not even become half as popular as it did in the movie.
[deleted]
The lady who gave Alan his tattoo said something about the initial tattoo only disrupts the audio process of the implant, and that if the tattoo was not causing him irritation then he would come back in a week where she would do another tattoo (or go over the original one) and this would disrupt the video process of the implant.
So this is why it appears the tattoo did not have any affect because it was only the audio that had been affected at that time.
And the reason why I thought the people were protesting was because throughout the film was the idea that people would act differently knowing their life was being recorded, and so this was a form of control which the people were protesting against.
Now that food has replaced my sex life, I can't even get into my own pants!
Interesting thought, but still it's not completely logical.
Think about it, why would people live their lifes differently if they get to say wether anyone would ever see it or won't see it. And even in the rare chance they don't want it to be seen but it actually is, than it most probably will be in the hands of a cutter who isn't going to free your darkest little secrets. So if there is any reason to protest against, I still think they're overreacting.
" Think about it, why would people live their lifes differently if they get to say wether anyone would ever see it or won't see it. And even in the rare chance they don't want it to be seen but it actually is, than it most probably will be in the hands of a cutter who isn't going to free your darkest little secrets. So if there is any reason to protest against, I still think they're overreacting."
Sorry, man, but to understand the gravity of this, you have to think like a regular human being:
1- Do you think you will act normally for the rest of your life, knowing that there is a person that you don´t know - that knows everything about you? its about PRIVACY!!!
2 - Codes were made, but theres always someone that can break it. Cutters are only humans, and there are a few good Cutters...
I think the protesters ran out of stuff to protest.
Too crazy for boystown; too much of a boy for crazytown.
Yeah, but, even if you have control over who sees your OWN implant, you don't have control over who sees you in the Rememories of others.
For example, the Doctor who Hackman was doing the rememory of, how Hackman saw he had an affair with the woman who was talking to his widow in the post-rememory screening scene?
What if Hackman had included that scene in the Rememory? The mistress would be exposed, and probably be embarrassed and everyone would be mad at her. She would have no way to contol this but having not had the affair in the first place.
Sure, Hackman had common courtesy and didn't select it, but if he was feeling cruel he could have.
That's just an example form the film, there's many other ways that one can imagine the implants of others would affect one's life and behaviours.
Hm, the whole problem wasn't related to the 'cutting' itself, but more to the implants, don't you think? About the cutting, well I think it's pretty obvious why it was controversial - it could be 'just a little tribute to the deceased person' but it could also turn 'sinners into saints', just as said in the movie. And some things aren't meant to be forgotten. Plus, of course, you can question wether it is good/not to live not by the whole truth.
But the main point is that such an invasion to one's privacy would not be so good. Is the little tribute to the dead person so important that it justifies a recorded lifetime, everything recorded?
hm.
The protesters as said somewhere in the movie, were more upset about people that did not choose to have implants and were in other's memories whether good or bad, being exposed at these Rememories. If the implanted person chose to keep this chip after knowing about it, fine but who they interacted with get put in the final cut. Heck even in real life they have to get permission to use people even on news stories if they were in the background, kind of like you see on COPS when their faces are blurred out, they had the option of being left out of it.
My 2nd point is that cutters didn't always obey the "rules" as it was mentioned because Robin Williams abided by all some were hell bent on exposing the dead and their malicious actions/thoughts so noone is safe having said that.
What I don't understand, is why isn't the main message from the protesters privacy issues rather than some pseudo-spiritualistic message like "choose you own memory"/"live for today" etc.?
They way they are protesting, I'm just not buying it. Real people would simply not get that worked up about that kind of idea.
This sentence has nothing to do with what I just have written above.