[net.sf-lovers] Loose Ends

victoro%Nosc@crash.ARPA (02/27/85)

From: <bang!crash!victoro@Nosc>

> From: boyajian%akov68.DEC@decwrl.ARPA  (Jerry Boyajian)
> Subject: re: Movie Loose Ends
> What's to explain? It was meant only to be a throwaway --- a gag
> pulled on the one guy by the other. There was no intent on
> developing it as a concept; the story moved off in another direction
> totally. Now, I agree that it's a fascinating idea that deserves a
> full treatment of it's own, but it really had no relevance to the
> story in BRAINSTORM, except very superficially.
> 
> --- jayembee (Jerry Boyajian, DEC, Maynard, MA)


	Ah, but is did matter.  Brainstorm was the story of the unseen
consequences of a discovery.  The development of the story centered
around the everincreasing spin-offs from the single idea of recording
brain waves.
	Therefore I have a strong feeling toward the 'uncompleteness'
of the man-animal link, even missing a 'throwaway' comment such as;
'Well, not it in the records, regardless.'
	Nuff said, I guess if I didn't like the film so much I would
care so much for it's flaws.

--- victoro (Victor O'Rear, SDSU, San Diego, CA)

leeper@ahutb.UUCP (m.leeper) (03/02/85)

REFERENCES:  <804@topaz.ARPA>


> What's to explain? It was meant only to be a throwaway --- a gag
> pulled on the one guy by the other. There was no intent on
> developing it as a concept; the story moved off in another direction
> totally. Now, I agree that it's a fascinating idea that deserves a
> full treatment of it's own, but it really had no relevance to the
> story in BRAINSTORM, except very superficially.
> 
> --- jayembee (Jerry Boyajian, DEC, Maynard, MA)

I also think that it matters.  The problem is that the BRAINSTORM idea
is so rich in implications.  Even a long novel would leave most of the
implications untouched.  When technology can raise man to be a totally
empathetic creature, completely understanding the thoughts of another,
the nature of all human relationships the invention touches will
change.  The at-death-experience is one of the least interesting
implications they could follow.  (Still for the idea and the ideas the
film does have, I like the film a lot.)

				Mark Leeper
				...ihnp4!ahutb!leeper

srt@ucla-cs.UUCP (03/10/85)

In article <509@ahutb.UUCP> leeper@ahutb.UUCP (m.leeper) writes:

>   ...   The at-death-experience is one of the least interesting
>implications they could follow. ...
>
>				Mark Leeper
>				...ihnp4!ahutb!leeper

Oh, come on now.  The question of what happens when a man dies can
hardly be considered uninteresting.  Some would argue that this
question is what has driven man to civilization and the pursuit of
knowledge.  I hardly think this is "one of the least interesting"
topics BRAINSTORM could have pursued, particularly given the need
to write a story, and not just a collection of interesting extrapolations.

				-- Scott Turner

leeper@ahutb.UUCP (m.r.leeper) (03/12/85)

REFERENCES:  <804@topaz.ARPA> <509@ahutb.UUCP>, <4237@ucla-cs.ARPA>


> In article <509@ahutb.UUCP> leeper@ahutb.UUCP (m.leeper) writes:
> 
> >   ...   The at-death-experience is one of the least interesting
> >implications they could follow. ...
> 
> Oh, come on now.  The question of what happens when a man dies can
> hardly be considered uninteresting.

No, but it is less interesting than any number of other ideas they
touched on but passed up.  What it would do to our understanding of
animal intelligence and psychology would have been more interesting.
What it would do to human relations, what it would do to defense
technology, what it would do to psychiatric treatment, to the
entertainment industry,  all these were ideas picked up and then
abandoned.  By rights, this should have been BRAINSTORM I, first of a
long series to how the world would be completely transformed by this
one tool.  I do find the at-death experience of some interest, but
there is so much more that could be done with the premise given time!

				Mark Leeper
				...ihnp4!ahutb!leeper

srt@ucla-cs.UUCP (03/15/85)

In article <551@ahutb.UUCP> leeper@ahutb.UUCP (m.r.leeper) writes:
>REFERENCES:  <804@topaz.ARPA> <509@ahutb.UUCP>, <4237@ucla-cs.ARPA>
>
>> >   ...   The at-death-experience is one of the least interesting
>> >implications they could follow. ...
>> 
>> Oh, come on now.  The question of what happens when a man dies can
>> hardly be considered uninteresting.
>
>No, but it is less interesting than any number of other ideas they
>touched on but passed up.  What it would do to our understanding of
>animal intelligence and psychology would have been more interesting.

Would you rather know

  (a) how/what/if a chimpanzee thinks?

		-or-

  (b) if there is life after death, and if so, what is it like?

For me the answer is clear.  Do you REALLY care more about how an animal
thinks?  If you say so, I'll believe you, but I can't help but find it a
rather odd outlook on life (we'll continue this discussion in Heaven :-).

>What it would do to human relations, what it would do to defense
>technology, what it would do to psychiatric treatment, to the
>entertainment industry,  all these were ideas picked up and then
>abandoned.  By rights, this should have been BRAINSTORM I, first of a
>long series to how the world would be completely transformed by this
>one tool.  I do find the at-death experience of some interest, but
>there is so much more that could be done with the premise given time!
>
>				Mark Leeper
>				...ihnp4!ahutb!leeper

Exactly the point.  No doubt there are any number of fascinating ideas that
arise from positing a device like the one in BRAINSTORM, and an exposition
of these might provide material for a good series of speculative articles,
or as material for developing a future world in which to write science
fiction stories.  However...  When it actually comes to writing one of those
stories, you must concentrate on some facet of the phenomenon.  Trying to
cover them all in a series of ten movies is a silly idea.  Further, to make
your movie popular and enjoyable to a wide audience, you'd like to pick a
ramification of the device that everyone can relate to.  You might have a
personal interest in animal psychology (particularly if you teach freshman
computer science :-), but it is unlikely to be as embracing a topic as the
life after death experience, since everyone gives serious thought to that
subject at least occasionally.  All of this isn't to say that you can't
make an interesting movie about animal psychology.  TARZAN, LORD OF THE APES
did that to some extent.  I'm only pointing out that it is a much more
difficult task.  And why complicate your task when you have a better topic
at hand?  I think that the choice to focus on the life after death experience
was the right one, but I also agree that there are many other interesting
ideas inherent in the story.

						-- Scott Turner

tim@cmu-cs-k.ARPA (Tim Maroney) (03/19/85)

The device in Brainstorm did have a number of interesting possibilities.
However, seeing the after-death experience is not one of them, so the
discussion as it stands is moot.  There would be no way for the device to
pick up information once brain-death occurred.  In the movie, it just
blithely continues to record the experiences of her soul.  No doubt this was
made possible by new astral plane technology they didn't bother to tell us
about.  Right.
-=-
Tim Maroney, Carnegie-Mellon University, Networking
ARPA:	Tim.Maroney@CMU-CS-K	uucp:	seismo!cmu-cs-k!tim
CompuServe:	74176,1360	audio:	shout "Hey, Tim!"

hutch@shark.UUCP (Stephen Hutchison) (03/27/85)

< brain death of a line eater >

In article <323@cmu-cs-k.ARPA> tim@cmu-cs-k.ARPA (Tim Maroney) writes:
>The device in Brainstorm did have a number of interesting possibilities.
>However, seeing the after-death experience is not one of them, so the
>discussion as it stands is moot.  There would be no way for the device to
>pick up information once brain-death occurred.  In the movie, it just
>blithely continues to record the experiences of her soul.  No doubt this was
>made possible by new astral plane technology they didn't bother to tell us
>about.  Right.
>-=-
>Tim Maroney, Carnegie-Mellon University, Networking

Well, actually, all the technology has to do is record sensory impressions.
It looked to me like what they are saying is that "you really do go to heaven,
amen, huzzah" but that it's all just a hallucination caused by deteriorating
brain function as the brain slowly dies.

Hutch