This was too funny not to post. On the Daily Show last week, John Oliver posited that the explanation for Cheney’s seemingly contradictory positions is because he’s really a bunch of cyborgs. Whether or not you like or hate the current administration, you’ll probably find this funny. But enjoy it while it lasts, as it gets pulled from Comedy Central at the end of the month, and has already been pulled from YouTube. Truly, I’m sure that ongoing buzz and publicity is bad for a TV show so I certainly understand their desire to get this off the air quickly.

Strangely enough, the “Cheney as Cyborg” mantra seems to be picking up steam as we look around the web. There are pictures, lots of political posts, and even a comment from Scott Adams a number of years back. Hopefully this has more to do with his suspect intellect than just his body replacements. Then again, propping up Dick Cheney as an example of superior cyborg thinking isn’t going to endure the world to transhumanity, now is it?

Sci Fi Wire relays an interview with Lena Headey (in the shot above, from the Brother’s Grimm movie), star of the upcoming Sarah Conner Chronicles, where she mentions that they have just finished shooting its pilot episode. Apparently, the Sarah Connor Chronicles takes place right after T2, and will have male and female terminator characters.

Lena Headey, who stars in the the Fox SF drama pilot The Sarah Connor Chronicles, told SCI FI Wire that the show will begin with a confrontation between Headey’s title character; her son, John Connor (Heroes’ Thomas Dekker); and two new Terminators: a female model, played by Serenity’s Summer Glau, and a male one, which she called Cromartie, played by Owain Yeoman. One is good and one is bad; she didn’t say which is which. (Glau’s character is named Cameron, an apparent nod to Terminator franchise creator James Cameron.)

The pilot, which picks up the story from the end of the feature film Terminator 2: Judgment Day, begins in the desert, and “it ends with them landing in L.A., having run and escaped. Or maybe not,” Headey said in an interview at WonderCon in San Francisco on March 3.

“We just finished [shooting],” Headey (300) said. “We were in Albuquerque [N.M.] for a month. And it was very intense, because TV is crazy. I mean, it’s long days. It’s like boom, boom, boom. You don’t get any respite. But … I think it’s going to be great. I don’t know if its going to be picked up, because it’s only in pilot stage right now. But I learned to shoot many weapons and how to recognize a Terminator. So it was a good experience.”

Even if you didn’t know anything about this, chances are you could guess the plot. Sure enough, its just what you thought it would be:

The pilot “begins, and it’s them basically running, hiding, trying to live,” Headey said. “Trying to carve out a normal life for themselves, but always being watched and trying to locate Skynet, trying to stop [it]. But there are many, many issues in their way.”

Considering the mess of a story in T3, I’m not too worried about continuity issues. And all things considered, I’d probably spot this as a clunker from the start, but, um, it co-stars Summer Glau as the Terminatrix! Any of you brown coats out there will know her River from the most awesome SciFi show Firefly and its companion movie, Serenity (and no, I don’t consider these to be cyberpunk). This alone will have me tuning in to the pilot.

Movie Review By: Dan Swensen

Year: 1981

Directed by: Michael Crichton

Written by: Michael Crichton

IMDB Reference

Degree of Cyberpunk Visuals: Low

Correlation to Cyberpunk Themes: Medium

Key Cast Members:

• Larry Roberts: Albert Finney
• Cindy Fairmont: Susan Dey
• John Reston: James Coburn

Uneven, satirical, and oddly prophetic in its own half-baked way, Michael Crichton’s 1981 film Looker takes place in a terrifying universe of glamour, dehumanization, corporate deception, and Susan Dey hooking up with Albert Finney.

SFAM NOTE: We welcome new reviewer Dan Swensen, who also runs a terrific Sci-Fi blog called the Dimfuture.net. If others are interested in joining the review team, please post a message in the review forum.

Overview: The year is 1981, and pudgy, befuddled plastic surgeon Larry Roberts (Finney) becomes involved in a mystery when one of his models, dissolved in tears, arrives in his office raving hysterically about mysterious people trying to kill her. Hours later, the model inexplicably falls from the window of her high-rise apartment, and evidence of foul play points to Roberts himself. Justifiably concerned, Roberts begins playing amateur detective, teaming up with his patient (the vapid and insecure Cindy Fairmont, played by Susan Dey) to find out what’s really happening to these models, who seem to be dying off in droves shortly after visiting Roberts’ office to be “perfected.”

Mostly relying on the incompetence of the antagonists and the near-complete apathy of the cops, Roberts eventually tracks the clues back to a company called Digital Matrix, a computer graphics and advertising firm that specializes in creating digital replicas of top commercial models. While these models are given lucrative contracts in exchange for their digital likenesses, they seem to mysteriously die shortly thereafter, their handsome royalties left unpaid. It doesn’t take long for Roberts to figure out that Digital Matrix is duplicating these models, then killing them off, as their “digital doubles” will do their job better — and for free.

Machines and Misogyny: In an age where digital replacement and enhancement of actors is now extremely commonplace, Looker seems both surprisingly relevant and woefully dated at the same time. Penned in by Hollywood’s desire for complete perfection, the models of Looker fret over millimeter-sized flaws, consumed with self-loathing over even the slightest imperfection. As the story progresses, the audience finds this to be more than mere vanity — in Crichton’s world, Digital Matrix has reduced human behavior to a set of algorithms, able to determine (and manipulate) the focus of a viewer’s attention with ultimate precision to maximize product exposure and desire.

Because these manipulations require inhuman accuracy, the models themselves soon become not only obsolete, but liabilities to the company. The theme of dehumanization — the models looked upon by the corporations, and themselves, not as human beings but commodities to be used up and thrown away — is very strong in the first half of the film, underlined by a casual misogyny that may or may not have been intentional (it was 1981, after all).

In addition to the prophetic “digital doubles” of the film, Looker’s most science-fiction invention is the L.O.O.K.E.R. device (short for Light Ocular-Oriented Kinetic Emotive Responses), a “light gun” that stuns and paralyzes the target using light. Anyone exposed to this weapon experiences a sort of “missing time” as they stand paralyzed, allowing the weapon’s user to move around, invisible and undetected, for short periods. Digital Matrix uses the device to cover their tracks, making the models’ deaths appear as suicides.

While Looker is more than a bit plodding at times, the film’s use of this device is undoubtedly the most clever effect in the film, as characters find themselves losing time without knowing how or why. (It’s also worth mentioning that the L.O.O.K.E.R. device is the movie’s only real special effect, and provides the film’s most interesting visuals.) The L.O.O.K.E.R. device is a neat little concept, one I wish could have gotten better treatment in a better film.

The Bottom Line: Unfortunately, Looker is a movie with a few good ideas that don’t quite survive the runtime. The last half-hour of the movie is an extended game of “humorous” cat-and-mouse in which the heroes and villains chase each other through a virtual landscape of digitized commercials — the best of which is a genuinely macabre moment featuring digitized kids complaining about their breakfast cereal as a real human lies dead on the prop kitchen table.

While these scenes are mildly funny on a multitude of levels (the style of commercials, for all their “digital” glory, are more akin to something out of the Fifties than anything out of science fiction), they’re out of tone with the rest of the film. Albert Finney is no action hero, and doesn’t even have the charisma necessary to be a good everyman. Susan Dey’s character is too insecure and flat to be anything but an object of pity, and James Coburn’s turn as the villain, while passable, is too brief to be interesting.

That’s not to say that the film can’t be enjoyed as good cheese, however — there are some amusingly inept moments (watch for the car “crashing” into the fountain), and the few special effects are decent enough. Overall, Looker is probably more interesting as a historical piece than as a thriller — though it’s dated badly on a number of levels, the ideas of dehumanization and artifice that it puts forth were, for 1981, surprisingly forward-thinking. It might also be interesting to note that Looker made the first real attempt at a realistic CGI character, as well as the first movie to used 3-D computer shading.

After its release in theaters, Looker haunted the bleak hinterlands of early Eighties cable television for awhile (probably sandwiched somewhere between showings of Krull and The Entity), and is out on DVD now. Oh, and if you care about that sort of thing, Susan Dey is naked in it.

-Dan Swensen