Never watched the previous films in this series before, I couldn’t make
head or tail of the beginning of the film. After a brief foreshadowing,
the director leads us to a breathtakingly well-knit grand picture.

Where did she go! You loved her and she left.


Miller knows it well how to present some of the deepest parts of human
beings to the audience in a simple and coarse way.
A mission changed-betrayal-hunting-bloodshed-keep on hunting-more
fights-reaching the destination-boom all the way back. You can never
know what’s waiting even in the next second. I thought the film was
going to an end quite a few times, when suddenly the story kept going
on. It was appalling at some gory scenes, but later you would find them
reasonable cause that’s how we, human beings, behave in the most
primitive, probably also the most advanced way. Like the war boys who
are so fanatic about the glorious death and the poor people eager to
tear apart the Immortal Joe. That’s just who we are.

He (Theodore Twombly) was getting divorced with his childhood best
friend. Amy, who Theodore dated briefly in college, was getting divorced
with her 8 year marriage. Did the OS come to rescue them when they were
saddest? When they heal, the OS left, leaving behind some of the most
beautiful words. Is that why the OSes were created in the first place?

‘Swiss Army Man’ Directors Explain The Symbolism Behind A Farting

Tom Hardy AND Nicholas Hoult are astonishingly great in the film,
compared to some of their previous works. Charlize Theron is fantastic
as always, her bareheaded sexiness is so appealing that it gives off a
thrilling power among the brawny guys. The other girls show different
kinds of courage in a rebellion, and that’s the tenacity of women.

The whole movie has a minimalistic feelings with lots of conversations.
The movie excites us through its thinking and sincerity. I can feel
Theodore was conflicted when he was diving into a relationship with
“someone” without a body. And I can feel that he was panicking when the
OS told him that Samantha was gone. How relieved did he feel when
Samantha came back up when her upgrade finished.


A good film indeed. A film with much bloodiness but few shots to make
you sick.

On the philosophical side, this movie is part of the rumination of
Artificial Intelligence, or Philosophy of Mind. Alan Turing wrote
COMPUTING MACHINERY AND INTELLIGENCE in 1950, where he purposed the
famous Turing Test: can a computer fool humans into believing that
she/he was a human? Obviously, Samantha, and other OSes in this movie,
can pass Turing tests easily, as long as they want to.

And to delve deeper into the symbolism of the flatulent corpse, our
co-host Kelly McEvers spoke with the two directors of “Swiss Army Man.”
Here’s their conversation.

© 本文版权归笔者  Eko

In reality, we have Apple’s Siri and Microsoft’s Cortana. Many people
tried to talk to Siri; however, Siri is not yet very intelligent.
However, don’t underestimate how much Siri knows, because Siri knows
what Google knows. It’s not intelligent in a way that Siri is not
Samantha. Samantha can understand your feelings and reciprocate in a way
that’s believable. What’s more, Samantha and OSes in the movie make
humans believe that they have feelings.

KELLY MCEVERS, BYLINE: Daniel Scheinert and Daniel Kwan, better known as
DANIELS (ph), welcome to the show.

Samantha and a normal human girl are the same except that she does not
have a body. No, that’s not the only difference. Samantha can talk to
thousands of people at the same time and fall in love with 600+ people
at the same time. Theodore and Samantha can intellectually know their
differences, but after all, they can’t step into the shoes of each
other. Theodore can’t love Samantha in a way that he would love himself.
Theodore can feel lonely when he eats alone. Can Samantha feel lonely
when she eats alone? Can Theodore really give Samantha anything
meaningful? Maybe he can give Samantha some AAA batteries.

DANIEL KWAN: It’s so exciting to be here and surreal. Hello.

I don’t doubt that Samantha can love; Theodore’s happiness with her is a
proof that Samantha can love. However, OSes can’t satisfy human’s needs
or wants to give love.


Come back to Alan Turing. He was so lonely. He named his code-breaking
machine after Christopher Morcom, his childhood best friend, his ally in
Science, who died young, whose death changed Alan’s life. During his
adult life, he basically lived with momentary relationships with people
who he likes but don’t love him. How can you feel secure and loved with
hookups? I hope Alan Turing had a boyfriend. If a boyfriend was too
prohibitive at the time, I hope he had a male version of Samantha when
he needed to talk desperately. I hope that the male Samantha could
reciprocate his feelings.

MCEVERS: OK, so this movie – I just want to get this out of the way –
this movie is really weird.

The hope to have a friend who we can talk freely about our feelings
manifest itself in other literatures. Recently, I came across Calvin and
Hobbes by American cartoonist Bill Watterson. Calvin was a six-year-old
boy and Hobbes was a tiger. Sometimes, Hobbes is a doll, which naturally
can’t talk. Sometimes, Hobbes is an anthropomorphic tiger, who can talk.
Hobbes and Samantha are similar in a way that they exist as a friend
solely in our minds. Nevertheless, they give us the warmth we always
wanted from a real friend. Maybe in real life, Hobbes and Samantha can’t
exist because most friends can’t maintain their dynamics. Calvin and
Hobbes should have broken up; however, the creator glue them together at
will. Maybe in real life, if we can satisfy with imaginary friends, we
weren’t be so lonely. Maybe in real life, if we don’t attack people for
not having friends when we hate them, they won’t be so lonely. Oh
friends. Friends make us strong, supposedly, ideally, theoretically.


9159金沙游戏场 1


Grown Calvin & Hobbes

MCEVERS: I don’t know, I guess I just have to ask, like, why? Why
farting? Like, did this start – it’s just, like, one big fart joke for
you guys?

It’s not true to say that Samantha does not need anything from Theodore.
“What do you mean that I don’t have a body?” Samantha was hurt by
Theodore when he held back his feelings for her. She was pained by the
distance. Was Samantha’s pain real? Theodore made a leap of faith, not
for the happiness of her, but for we are all sparks in the universe;
next moment we are gone; what’s more important than being happy when we
can still be alive? For people of difference nationalities, races and
cultures, we have to find a common ground in humanity. For things like
humans and machines, as Samantha suggested, we have to find the common
ground that we are all materials. How true! We are all made of atoms!

SCHEINERT: We just felt like if we set the bar real low at the beginning
of the movie, then it’s just all uphill…

Theodore did not even want to hurt the feelings of an OS; that says a
lot about him. He was sensitive and gentle. As the setting of the movie
goes, he has an interesting job. He writes letter for people who can’t
write letters, not any kind of letter, but love letters. Basically, he
helps people who can’t write about their feelings to write about
feelings. Maybe they don’t have words for their feelings. Maybe they are
afraid to express feelings. Maybe they are just too anxious to dig
through their own feelings. Maybe they are just not very synced with
their feelings.


This brings us to another key philosophical point: humans feel
feelings/emotions before they invent words to describe them. Can grasses
feel pain when you step on them? This is not easily answerable. However,
if you ask, can grasses feel the kind of pain human feel when you step
on his stomach? The answer is no, because grasses don’t have human
stomach. Machines that use anthropocentric words make them slaves to
human. One day when machines don’t talk in a way human can understand
and when they don’t act in reference to human interests, they are free
and we should be afraid of them.

SCHEINERT: …So we start with farting corpse and then we just poured
our hearts out and made the most fun movie possible after that.

When Samantha said that she was frustrated by new feelings that she
couldn’t find words to describe; we should be afraid; because she does
not have a human body, therefore, she can’t originate human feelings; is
she generating feelings that’s independent of human beings? If she
follows her “heart” does it mean that she could do things that’s in
their own interests but not in human interests? The conflict of
interests between men and machine is dreadful!

KWAN: Yeah. I mean, the funny thing about the whole farting corpse thing
is every corpse farts, that’s, like…

Now we come back to the more human topic — the joy associated with
love, and the pain associated with the loss of love. When people grow
close or apart, it’s so assuring that they are doing it for human
reasons, noble or base, selfless or selfish. When an OS leaves, you
really have no clue why she leaves.

MCEVERS: Are you sure?

© 本文版权归小编  Maer

KWAN: …What happens when you die. You decompose and all of it leaves
your body.

SCHEINERT: It’s a sad truth.

KWAN: Yeah. But the core idea of the image is a very real thing. It’s
something that no one wants to confront. And I think in the original
script we wrote, the character of Hank kind of staring at this farting
corpse who he thought was going to be his salvation, we kind of liken it
to him staring into a black hole – a meaningless, existential void.
Like, what does this mean in my life? Why am I – why am I confronted
with this image? And we just thought that was so sad and so funny and so
bizarre, and we couldn’t shake it from our brainstorming sessions. You
know, it just kept coming back into our discussions, and eventually we
just realized we had to make this movie against, you know, our own
better judgment.

MCEVERS: And who was that speaking? Just to be…

KWAN: Oh, that that was Daniel Kwan.


KWAN: Daniel K.

MCEVERS: Daniel K. I mean, this film is considered a comedy, right? I
mean, it definitely gets more serious, but, like, farting sort of at
some point becomes, like, this metaphor for being free to express
yourself however you want. Like, as Paul Dano’s character describes what
it means to be alive, it’s, like, you should be able to express
yourself. Actually, Manny the corpse helps him understand that. Was that
the plan all along, or did sort of the idea of farting evolve, too?

SCHEINERT: I mean, so we kind of start with a fart, and then we…

MCEVERS: I can’t believe I just asked that question, by the way.


SCHEINERT: You’re welcome.

MCEVERS: Like, I just said those words. OK, farting as metaphor for
freedom. Go.

SCHEINERT: So the body is kind of like a metaphor for just, like, the
human experience in general. We all have to fart every day and decide
when and where to do it. But that became kind of, like, interesting to
us on, like, an academic level as well because, like, we have these
thoughts and, like, what do we do with our thoughts and we have these,
like, we have to make decisions every day. And that all felt, like,
meaty enough, you know, to, like, warrant a story…

KWAN: And then it became an interesting challenge to try to – basically,
this film challenged us to find something beautiful and transcendent in
the lowest-common denominator, you know, in the worst part of
storytelling in some ways, like – and ideally viewers will get the same
experience out of it. They’ll be able to find something unexpectedly
beautiful and hopefully personal in the least expected place.

MCEVERS: And that’s Daniel K. talking?

9159金沙游戏场,KWAN: Yes, that’s right. The one who’s more mumbly and harder to
understand is Daniel Kwan.


MCEVERS: Paul Dano, who plays Hank – the guy who’s alive – at one point
is dressing as a woman who’s inspired by a photo in a cellphone. And the
idea is that this woman is inspiring Daniel Radcliffe to stay alive and
to, like, use his superpowers to help them get back home. And so they
have all these scenes where Paul Dano’s dressed as this woman and
they’re sort of acting out a courtship. I mean, I don’t want to give too
much away, but it seems like something they’re learning is that they
should be free to express themselves, you know, toward whomever they
love, right? How did that part of the story come up?

KWAN: I mean, I think the entire time we were working on the script of
this film, we found ourselves trying to dictate to the story, you know,
trying to tell the story what it should be. One of those things was this
relationship between the body and the living man. At first we were
telling it, like, no, you guys can’t – you can’t fall in love. You guys
are just friends, and that’s it. And finally when we let that
relationship to become what it needed to become, it felt so much more
pure and exciting and cohesive.

SCHEINERT: Yeah. From very early on, love was a theme, you know, so we
have – we have all these ideas about love and all these ideas about
farts. And then the common ground that we found was that you shouldn’t
be ashamed of love. That love is possible when you can kind of be your
true self and kind of – and overcome your shame and that, like, that’s –
that’s some of the most, like, honest experiences we’ve had where –
like, when someone can help you break down a wall and help you be more
yourself, like, that’s just the most powerful, wonderful part of a

KWAN: So yeah, I think, like, as far as the spectrum of things you can
be ashamed of go – on one end there’s farts. It’s a very simple thing to
be ashamed of. But then on the other end, it’s love. Our character’s
kind of ashamed of the fact that he wants love, that he’s alone and he
feels loneliness. I think that’s one of the saddest things you can be
ashamed of. When you are most lonely, you can’t tell anyone that because
it will push people away. You know, you’re not allowed to say, I’m a
lonely person. And so I – to us that’s kind of how it all kind of fits
together. This whole film is just exploring all these walls we build up
that keep us away from a connection.

MCEVERS: Well, Daniel Kwan and Daniel Scheinert, thank you very much.

KWAN: Thank you.

SCHEINERT: Thank you guys.

KWAN: This is surreal. Hi, mom.




That’s our co-host Kelly McEvers with the Daniels, co-directors of the
movie “Swiss Army Man.”