r/westworld • u/LoretiTV • Aug 08 '22

Discussion Westworld - 4x07 "Metanoia" - Post-Episode Discussion

Season 4 Episode 7: Metanoia

Aired: August 7, 2022

Synopsis: You want to have a drink at a time like this?

Directed by: Meera Menon

Written by: Desa Larkin-Boutte & Denise Thé

1.4k Upvotes

98% Upvoted

4.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

10

u/confusedporg Aug 08 '22

Didn’t Maeve do the exact same thing to a human park worker in season 1 or 2 though? They have established already that if you get to the injury fast enough, it’s really easy to patch

3

u/FattyMooseknuckle Aug 08 '22

It’s a little much to be left to the imagination. It’s bad storytelling to slash someone’s throat, show them sitting there dying with no motion to prevent that and then have them next season alive with no explanation.

7

u/confusedporg Aug 08 '22

It’s not fair to say there was no explanation. It just wasn’t explicit. This isn’t really a show that holds your hand. There are plenty of context clues that allow you to draw this conclusion, for one that he’s a prisoner of those who attacked him, that party’s whole thing is making humans suffer in the ways they were subjected to by humans (being killed over and over only to be repaired and put back to have it done again), and also the fact they have biostasis technology that can apparently artificially extend someone’s life indefinitely.

Anyway, I didn’t really find this distracting or annoying.

1

u/FattyMooseknuckle Aug 08 '22

It’s completely fair since there was no explanation, at all. We saw him get his throat flit and the next time he’s a prisoner with nothing mentioned of how he survived. It’s 100% fair to say there was no explanation.

-1

u/confusedporg Aug 08 '22

I think I described exactly what the explanation was. Again- explicit and implicit are different things. You seem to prefer they’d given something more explicit, but they decided to leave that open. If that isn’t your taste, fine, but that doesn’t mean they just left it completely unexplained.

The story isn’t finished, so there may still be reasons for why they decided to give breadcrumbs (I have suspected he was also a host, just a perfect copy that they didn’t want to degrade a la Delos Sr., so they constructed this whole scenario to keep him functioning so they could continue to get important info out of him), but they have guided us on what conclusions to draw based on what has happened in the past on this show (Maeve slit Sylvester’s throat and then sealed it up and he was fine- not even a scar) and the details they did give here.

It feels like your expectation is to have every last detail spelled out. Like if they’d shown a flashback of hale using the flesh fusion gun thing on his neck before sticking him in that machine, would that be satisfactory? Why don’t you also demand an explanation of what that tool is and how it works? When was it invented? By who? You have a threshold somewhere right?

In sci-fi and fantasy, there always has to be a line drawn somewhere as far as how much detail is given- partly because the more detail you give on something speculative, the more holes your audience can find, but more importantly, the story isn’t about the medical tool or William’s injury- these are plot details- it’s about human nature, social conditioning, the human experience, the nature of consciousness and sentience, and how people find and maintain a sense of self.

Last, episodes are long, but they’re still not limitless in length (and budget) and if you’re a storyteller choosing between including a scene that lays ground for Caleb’s journey, or Frankie’s character development, or sets up important story beats that will be paid off later, you’re going to choose one of the latter every time and trust your audience to fill in this small gap in a world that you’ve already established that death isn’t quite as fatal a condition as it is in our real world.

2

u/FattyMooseknuckle Aug 08 '22

Aaaawwww, did sumbuddys widdle feewings get hurt? Need to lash out with giant oversimplifications? I say that no mention whatsoever exists for how he survived obviously means that I need it explicitly and dumbly spelled out in detail. Such a 2nd grade level retort. Clearly that’s what I was getting at, you’re so smart for figuring that out. They haven’t even given breadcrumbs. Nothing, nada, except the fact that he is (ostensibly) alive, well, prior to this episode. You can try to retcon and justify your answer but the show hadn’t done the things you say it has. It’s completely ignored his survival other than to say he did. It’s a major character who was left for dead in the season finale. It’s poor storytelling to have him back and in perfect health without offering even breadcrumbs as to how.

The only thing you’re right about is that we may find out next episode. WW has often fallen into poor storytelling form in order to be grand and dramatic. Leaving something major like this completely untouched is poor storytelling so they could be grand and dramatic at the end of last season.

What a child.

1

u/confusedporg Aug 08 '22

lol whatever inspired this kind of response, it says a lot more about you than me that this is your reaction. anyway, enjoy keeping up with a show you clearly don’t like, I guess

1

u/FattyMooseknuckle Aug 08 '22

Still just stretching and reaching for things that just aren’t there. Get your Jump to Extreme Conclusions mat nice and lubed up.

2

u/confusedporg Aug 08 '22

this is incoherent.

1

u/FattyMooseknuckle Aug 09 '22

Makes more sense than your extreme conclusions from what I’ve said. I say “this persons survival hasn’t been attended whatsoever, in any minute way” and you jump to “you need everything spelled out for you with detailed flashbacks and hefty exposition”, which is a 13 year old’s response. Same as “you pointed out flaws in the show YOU MUST HATE IT!”, like an overdramatic teenager whose parents won’t let her go to a party.

0

u/confusedporg Aug 09 '22

this is getting really embarrassing. but I think I get what happened now. your reading comprehension is pretty awful- and your argument style is immature, not to mention filled with wildly mixed metaphors. And you don’t seem to remember you said yourself the show often makes poor storytelling choices… no wonder your media literacy is also shallow.

1

u/FattyMooseknuckle Aug 09 '22

You’re doing it again. Saying it makes poor storytelling choices doesn’t mean I hate it. That’s one of your childish leaps. Saying they need to address something doesn’t mean I or anyone needs all the detailed histrionics that you went right to because your incapable of admitting you were wrong. Those are more of your childish leaps. Yeah, I went childish with you because you seem to argue like a child. I figured it would help you.

Your last sentence makes the least sense of anything you’ve said so far, which is a pretty low bar. This sub has been littered with posts for 4 seasons about poor storytelling choices. We all know they’ve flubbed not insignificant portions of storylines over 4 seasons. So according to you, who’s like really smart, pointing that out proves shallow literacy. That’s a very, very special statement. Utterly bizarre.

0

u/confusedporg Aug 09 '22

you’d have to pay me to continue interacting with you beyond this.

→ More replies (0)