I wanted to but couldn't!

I don't have all the words right now but this film is a work of art.

It's easily one of the freshest, sharpest and most enjoyable films of this year.

Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

Marrying a cutting-edge Sci-Fi concept with the horse opera, best-selling author Michael Crichton's directorial debut feature WESTWORLD is a hybrid high on ideas but woefully inadequate in its modality. In the then-near future (1983 to be specific), those who can afford $1,000 per day, per capita are privileged to stay in the Delos amusement park, which is divided into three distinctively manufactured worlds: Medievalworld, Romanworld and Westworld, peopled with human-likes androids to pander to their clientele's indulgence of every immoral and illegal whim without any consequences, that is a provocative premise to plumb how low humanity can descend to when one's action is no longer curtained by legality, but in Crichton's book, that would be too depressing, so instead, he opts for another direction, what about an inexplicable malfunction (like an endemic virus) befalls on those lifeless robots and turns them to hunt down humans? Admittedly, there is a modicum of prescience concerning our eternal dread of A.I. technology in the design, but little food for thought is left in the final product. Our proxy in this immersive adventure is the Chicagoan lawyer Peter Martin (a mustachioed Benjamin slumming it half-heartedly), a newcomer to the park accompanied by his friend John Blane (a smirky Brolin in a horrid-looking hairdo), who has patronized the place before and they choose to stay in Westworld, where those classic tropes like gunfights, bar brawl, jail break and brothel-dossing are churned out in a slapdash tepidity (one wonders how come they make absolutely no bones about sleeping with a programmed machine, however their verisimilitude of human can fool our eyes, there is something biologically repugnant here has been crassly glossed over), although the pair do cleave to the "make love not war" watchword when a trigger-happy robbery is alternatively proffered. The thrill and spill escalates when insidiously and no less mysteriously, the android revolt takes shape in all three worlds, but in the main it centers on the Gunslinger (Brynner), who is programmed to provoke quick-draw face-off, embarks on a relentless chase to finish off Peter, regardless of the damage inflicted on his physical form, a defining forefather of TERMINATOR, so is Brynner's no-blinking, no-expression stare. It goes without saying that a Sci-Fi project made in the analog era doesn't age pretty well for its ingrown reason, especially the laborious pixelated POV which looks starkly cockamamie and creaky, which explains exactly the raison d'être why its recent small-screen reboot is indeed right on time, WESTWORLD is a seam of ideas and conflicts, what we need is some visionary practitioner to mine it proper.

Peter Martin (Richard Benjamin) and John Blane (James Brolin) enjoy a $1000-a-day vacation at the high-tech Delos amusement park, where it is possible to live out one's fantasies in an environment populated by lifelike robots. The guys opt for Western World, where they get to engage in shootouts with a ruthless gunslinger (Yul Brynner), safe in the knowledge that protocol prevents the machines from harming the guests. Their fun ends, however, when the robots develop a serious fault…It's easier to shoot holes in the plot for Michael Crichton's Westworld than it is to put a few rounds into Yul Brynner's robot gunslinger. Here's just a few of the awkward questions that arise throughout the course of the film:What happens if more than one guest wants to be sheriff? How does Delos ensure the safety of guests during a bar brawl? Is it wise of Delos to allow guests to blow up their property with dynamite? How can Delos ensure that there are no REAL rattlesnakes in the vast expanse of the theme park? Why doesn't the Gunslinger's heat vision detect Peter's body heat when he is lying down in the laboratory?That said, Westworld is a very entertaining film if you can put aside the problems that the script throws up. The first half is an enjoyable light-hearted piece of pure escapism, with buddies Peter Martin (Richard Benjamin) and John Blane (James Brolin) immersing themselves in the Western world, enjoying the basic pleasures of a frontier land: drinking, shooting, and womanising. The second half is gripping sci-fi horror, as the theme-park's mechanical marvels go on the fritz, the gunslinger becoming a relentless killing machine intent on evening the score with Peter (inspiration for James Cameron's The Terminator?).In addition to providing thrills and spills, Crichton's film also throws up all sorts of interesting philosophical and ethical dilemmas to chew over, most notably the moral implications of catering for guests' primal instincts (sex and violence).8/10. Not perfect, but still very good, with a marvellous performance from Brynner.

I have to admit that I love this movie, but then again you have probably already worked that out because of the rating that I gave it. However, one of the reasons that I love it is that while the film is so simple, it is effective, and it also has the cool, 1970s feel about it. In fact I am almost inclined to consider it a low budget movie, though it was probably a big budget film at the time. While they it did spawn some sequels, and a remake, it was until much more recently that somebody has taken Crichton's original idea and given it a revamp (though I have to admit that Crichton himself took the idea and got rid of the robots and added dinosaurs).As I mentioned, the plot is rather simple, and in fact they spend the first half of the movie setting it up. The film is about a theme park where they relive the past, either in the wild west, the medieval times, or Ancient Rome. The thing that sets this theme park apart from others is that they use robots, and the robots are so real that they look human. In fact these robots are so realistic that you can actually have sex with them, or you can shoot them. The problem is that the system suddenly breaks down and the robots start going around killing everybody.The film introduces Yul Brynner as the man (or robot) in black, actually the gunslinger, and suddenly it starts to seem that after their first gun fight, Brynner decides to go and get a bit of revenge. Thus, when all of the robots start going haywire, Yul Byrnner tracks down the protagonist, who killed him the day before, and kills his mate in a showdown in the main street. He then proceeds to chase the other guest across the park. In fact the second half of the film is simply Yul Bryner chasing our protagonist across the park, and for some reason I just love that part. Okay, Brynner doesn't say all that much, but then again he really doesn't need to – he is menacing, dangerous, and you really don't want to get caught by him. It is certainly much different from his role in The King and I.Okay, the film is simple, but in many cases a simple film is an entertaining film. Sure, it does look at the whole idea of our reliance on technology, and the idea that the more reliant we become on technology, the worse it becomes when technology decides to turn on us. Sure, we have this whole idea of Asimov's laws of robots, however the reality is that we haven't actually installed these laws into them. There is also the problem that there may come to a point when we lose control of our robots that the master off switch simply won't work. However, that is all just theorising because in the end the main reason I love this film is because half of it is basically this guy running away from Yul Brynner.

I've watched this 1973 version (again) AFTER watching the 2016 series.And, while it now feels like a 70's-style parody on the 2016 series, I still think somehow it is stronger in its storytelling. You can almost feel the amazement of the Westworld visitors. Fun to watch, ESPECIALLY for those that weren't around in '73 when this cult classic was released.Part of the fun is the way the future machines and computes are pictured. And these sentences are only added since I seem to be obliged to submit 10 sentences or more for a review which is a bit strange since less is more. Why use too many words when you can express what you think in three sentences. Advice: go see this. Especially if you did not see it before and if your interest it raised because you enjoyed the 2016 HBO series.