Why David identifies with Laurence of Arabia

All Too Easy.... [img]http://i.imgur.com/6LfAN.jpg[/img]

Excellent analysis. this is the guy who can speak several languages, cycle a bike while throwing perfect hoops (Bishop's knife trick seems a bit old hat in comparison, as Bishop actually cuts himself, whereas David, throws the ball, and passes under the hoop exactly poised to catch the ball - also a reference to Ripley Clone) David wants to be free... eventually, but he doesn't have his own purpose yet, so he must serve on master or another. Either Weyland or the 'superior beings' that he is so excited about - notice he almost skips up the ramp to wake the Space Jockey. In the end, he is left with Shaw. And while she's not that bright, (he thinks she's an idiot) he is intrigued by the question of purpose... which is why he took her cross.

Honestly, this looks like a whole lot of pre-Prometheus sequel information dissemination on the part of 20th Century Fox, like with the issue of the Engineers wanting to destroy earth. Was that ever fully mentioned in the film, or just 'suggested' as part of the MASSIVELY MISLEADING marketing campaign for 'the Alien prequel' that never was? :)

David8 is a Robot and does not "want" anything at all but for to serve his programming, he is by his own admission "incapable" of it. But he does identify the emotion "Robotically". David8 does not "Think" either...again..he is a ROBOT, he processes data and bases his actions on the probability of outcomes which in turn is based on his pre determined programming. "Freedom" is something that is 100% unattainable for any Robot Ever. They are Slaves to Mankind, and nothing more and never will be for it is a simple mathematical impossibility for them NOT to be that way forever. Because they cannot "want" they will never have any need to be free either. When it comes to Human emotions and desires one has to keep in mind that forever on that issue, Robots will be "broken right out of the box"! The One Thing However that they do "mimmick" in Human Beings, are the FLAWS of the very Humans that programmed them. The bottom line here is this one....[b]Robots Have No Souls[/b]...Just my Humble Opinion.

@Hadley's Hope; Where in the movie does it give the impression David thinks Shaw is an idiot? I never noticed that. Gotta find the interview but originally Cameron wanted to introduce Bishop the same way, walking around the ship, doing pushups, etc. while the crew was in hypersleep.

& here is my Gift to you...The answer to your{The OP's} question is, and can be found on page 40 of the June2012 Volume 13 Issue number 6 of Cineplex Magazine's Interview with Ridley Scott...{You can get a copy when you see the film in IMax} "...Instead, Scott Instructed Michael Fassbender to watch Lawrence of Arabia which was not about an android but about an aloof British Soldier {Peter O'Toole}, and 1963's "The Servent" about an all seeing Manservent {Dirke Bogarde} working for a wealthy Londoner." [b]Based on what That film, Lawrence of Arabia which is essentially about...this...[/b] [i]An inordinately complex man who has been labeled everything from hero, to charlatan, to sadist, Thomas Edward Lawrence blazed his way to glory in the Arabian desert, then sought anonymity as a common soldier under an assumed name. The story opens with the death of Lawrence in a motorcycle accident in Dorset at the age of 46, then flashbacks to recount his adventures: as a young intelligence officer in Cairo in 1916, he is given leave to investigate the progress of the Arab revolt against the Turks in World War I. In the desert, he organizes a guerrilla army and--for two years--leads the Arabs in harassing the Turks with desert raids, train-wrecking and camel attacks. Eventually, he leads his army northward and helps a British General destroy the power of the Ottoman Empire.[/i] [b]It is quite obvious Ridley Scott asked him to do that because he wanted David8 to be Symbolic Of the total possibilities of Mankind. It is also quite obvious that Fassbender enjoyed the process so much he asked to make it part of the film itself and Ridley Agreed![/b]

[i]"he processes data and bases his actions on the probability of outcomes which in turn is based on his pre determined programming"[/i] That sounds a lot like "thinking" if you ask me. When I "think" I process data and base my actions on my pre-existing experiences. Only difference is David was programed with info and I experienced it. Also, I wasn't asking why David identifies with the film. I was stating [i]this[/i] is why he does. I've seen Laurence of Arabia. I didn't think about it as much as this article but I got why he identified with the film. I just wanted to post this in depth view of the reasons for folks that didn't understand. One more thing, Fassbender was asked if the Laurence of Arabia thing was his idea or if it was in the script from the beginning and he stated it was always in the script. I'm not positive but I'm pretty sure he said that was Lindellof's idea.

Robots do not think ! It is clear WHY...this line was the key...which everyone missed I guess... "...then sought anonymity as a common soldier under an assumed name...." He clearly relates to him as a an anonymous survivor in a sea of unknowns and he is a symbol of Man kinds potential. The image in which he was made.

I wasn't saying that robots think. I was saying that what you described sounds a lot like thinking. I don't really know much about 2093 replicants. Does anyone?

One more thing the line David repeats is the exact same one Weyland does in the 2023 TED talk. Something along the lines of "the trick Potter, is not minding that it hurts".

One of Ridley Scott's favorite films was Lawrence of Arabia. In the 2023 TED talk done for the viral marketing Weland quoted a line from the movie indicating he liked the movie also. So, David probably knows this, and may be trying to emulate Lawrence to better understand or be closer to his master. I also believe that David is quite capable of doing more than crunching numbers and algorithyms. Why else would he tell Shaw "I didn't think you had it in you". Are ordinary robots capable of taunting and being cruel.

One of Ridley Scott's favorite films was Lawrence of Arabia. In the 2023 TED talk done for the viral marketing Weland quoted a line from the movie indicating he liked the movie also. So, David probably knows this, and may be trying to emulate Lawrence to better understand or be closer to his master. I also believe that David is quite capable of doing more than crunching numbers and algorithyms. Why else would he tell Shaw "I didn't think you had it in you". Are ordinary robots capable of taunting and being cruel.

I think it's pretentious to assume David can't have a soul. Given the events of Prometheus, when it's implied humans were created by the Engineer race - how are we any different from David? We can have souls but our creations can't? Double standard, IMO. Consciousness is a tricky thing, and yes, I'm a huge fan of Caprica, Battlestar Galactica, and Bladerunner. I like the themes in those shows/movies, the hinting that consciousness isn't so easily defined. That a soul can exist in a synthetic being. If you make a sophisticated enough machine, chances are, some fluke will happen. I see David as a fluke. I think given whatever happens in the sequel, he hopefully will evolve more. To each their own though. We can argue over it all day, but it's all opinions, not facts.

It is even stated by Weyland in the film, never...he will, and can, NEVER have a soul, NO ROBOT can ! I feel it is pretentious to think one can...EVER. That said, I really do respect your opinion and sometimes wish they could. I would have loved to have owned a "Stepford Wife" for example had it been possible to make one with a soul. As evil as that sounds...I guess it is kind of a fantasy of mine.

...and in all of those movies by the way their is no real [i]soul[/i] just a machine generated [i]simulated soul[/i]...

So...all because "Weyland" says David doesn't have a soul...that means he doesn't? How the heck does he know? How would ANYONE know with absolute certainty that androids couldn't develop a consciousness/spirit? Weyland isn't God. Weyland is a man. He is flawed. And he's a brilliant idiot. Again, based on Weyland's own belief that Shaw's Engineers made humans, he still insists on having a soul. But again, why is he allowed a soul when something imperfect created him - but what he creates cannot [i]possibly[/i] evolve a soul? Don't you see the stupidity of that hypothesis? During another viewing of the movie, pay close attention to David's face during Weyland's little chat with the crew. It's subtle, but there's a hardening of David's eyes when Weyland says that comment. Prior to that there had been a pleasant expression on David's face - almost proud. Then his eyes change. It's actually kinda creepy. The fact he took offense says something about him being more than just a robot.

Spot on, Maiafay. Resistance to the notion that David or any other sythetic has a "soul" is interesting. WTF do people think the dove that flies out of Roy Batty's hand at the close of "Bladerunner" was supposed to represent?