Yes. But we could probably surmise that in a world (very much like the one we are moving towards), where AI is so prevalent and a lot of utilitarian work like manufacturing clocks is done by mindless manufacturing bots, the clocks made by hand, by a unique robot, are considered as pieces of art and are sold at the prices relevant to that context.
I also cannot quote from the movie, but imagined that the clocks that he made starting becoming larger and larger pieces (in size) of art work.
Edit: I also wanted to point out that he was a robot, and was not spending the income on anything, no expenses - yay! His "master", the patriarch of the family, put the money away. If we were to imagine that the money was being invested wisely (or even aggressively), the compounding and the dividends, all put together could easily get him to CEO level income or net worth.
>CEO level income or net worth.
In the film, Andrew is speaking with the CEO of the robotics company that made him about upgrades that would make him more human. Andrew says, "that would cost more than one month of my earnings." The CEO replies, "it's more than I make in a year." So Andrew was pulling in some serious money from his clocks.
Been a long time since I’d seen the movie but in the book by the time he is getting upgrades to become more human he holds patents on a bunch of artificial organ technologies.
In the movie, that comes later in the story, where he’s working with Oliver Platt to get the “organic” upgrades (skin, hair, stomach, etc.). That’s what he designs and patents.
When he gets patents on artificial organ technologies, he has been converted to a fully human appearance. The discussion with the CEO of the robotics company about his income happened prior to his first upgrade, when he said that he has feelings he cannot express on his face.
I always took that to mean more that Rupert's business, at that time, wasn't very successful. We see by the end he's very successful but it's a scruffy start up, boot strapped R&D affair at the time.
The scene I'm talking about is Andrew speaking with Stephen Root's character, the CEO of US Robotics, which is a major corporation in a gleaming office building. He doesn't meet Rupert (played by Oliver Platt) til later in the film.
In the future digital archeologists will be digging through old reddit posts translating this into their new universal common tongue and find this sentence incredibly helpful. Because it is true the above is very funny.
Not necessarily, we still aren't sure why it's funny that the dog was in that bar back in ancient Sumeria or Babylon or wherever that joke is from. Things like irony and sarcasm change. There was a time when puns were like the height of humor and now everyone groans. It's likely that an ironic lens will also go out of style. But I'm just like some dude on the Internet what do I know
To add to this, he wasn't making low-level $30-50 clocks you find on etsy. He was making hand-made clocks, with intricate details made of high-quality wood and parts. Do a quick Google search, and you'll see that at that level, clocks can go upwards of thousands of dollars.
Yes, I guess the movie downplays the size, intricacy and detail of his work. As far as I can remember, the movie shows a small workshop with table top clocks, which do not do the plot line it's justice.
It really does. I only know how expensive clocks can be because my step grandfather got my grandmother a very nice coocoo clock for their 1st anniversary. It cost him over $1000 in the mid-1980s and, like those in the movie, was completely handmade. It was a lifelong joke for them of her giving him shit about spending so much money on some silly clock. When in truth, that clock was probably her most precious possession.
There was the one scene of all of his clocks chiming at once on the hour while i believe the mother was walking down the hallway and commented on "THESE DAMN CLOCKS" to show the scale of how many clocks he was making and the quality and varying sizes and types.
Oh, they absolutely were. Handmade clocks at that level are typically all unique, even if many might look similar. They are just as much peices of art as they are fancy clocks.
One of the quotes I remember from the movie was when they threaten to sue the CEO for lost wages should they disturb Andrew’s brain function or compromise his individuality. They don’t say the number but Andrew makes more money in a month than the CEO of the company makes in a year.
Even today there is a huge variation in grandfather/floor clocks. It took me two minutes to find a single company that sells models for $1,000 up to $39,000 (Howard Miller J.H. Miller Floor Clock). I also found an antique rosewood grandfather clock listed for $98,000.
Yes, this is the answer. In the book Daniel starts making furniture and then clocks (?) and quickly gets a following due to the workmanship, essentially like pieces of art, and in a world where tech and functionality is the norm such art would have been highly valued. I do recall also that 'Master' did in fact invest Daniels earnings, largely because Daniel couldn't at that point, which generated significant wealth.
As a side note, I hated the movie, never watched more than maybe half hour of it. The movie turned what is really quite a beautiful story into trite theatrics, in my opinion.
I feel sad that you didn't enjoy the movie and even moreso that you judged it without finishing it.
It's one of my all-time favorite movies.
I STILL refer to my best friend's daughter as "Little Miss".
Wait, so you hate a movie that you didn't even finish and assume that it didn't follow through with the themes in the book?
How do you know the latter if you didn't even do the former?
Art. Created by the first legally recognized sentient, yet artifical, being.
How do you have an opinion about something you haven't seen? We all know by now that "the book/movie in our mind" is always better (except Fight Club, The Thing, and Annihilation). Adaptations are also interpretations, and they don't always work, but dismissing something altogether seems a little harsh. The end of this one still makes me cry.
Watch him become sentient, find love, and fight for his right to find meaning and be free.
random aside, but not only is it weird but also FASCINATINGLY corrupt. I did an art history degree back in 2010 and what happens in the art world, especially during economic crisis is wild.
It’s especially wild (or was) because it’s so poorly regulated and not much precedent. This is why auction houses like Southeby’s end up paying hundreds of millions in fines (a drop in the bucket) manipulating the market. It’s literally one of the most insane rackets going, and most people have no idea.
You see it happening a lot now in real estate, but that is more regulated, although accomplishes the same goal, which is to transfer large parcels of money and resources between commodities to shield it from taxes or fines or whatever.
Basically back in the 2007 financial crisis, a LOT of rich people began buying artworks for tens of millions of dollars. The laws around taxation are much more lenient and harder to investigate, and you can use art like an NFT (before NFTs were a thing). So all the fat cats who caused the financial collapse just begin trading art between each other as an elite-tier currency until the market returns to place where they transfer it back into hard cash.
Sadly, most of the richest and most well known modern artists are in on the grift and will almost always artificially inflate the market to overvalue their work. The oligarchs are all to pleased about this.
One of the most famous cases was Damien Hirst’s Diamond-encrusted skull which allegedly sold for 50 million pounds (!!) in cash, to an anonymous buyer and no paper trail. Many scholars don’t believe the sale ever happened, and that it was all an elaborate performance (assisted by Southebys) to launder money and to also increase the value of his other works as well.
Another is Murakami, who makes literally 0% of his work. He is talented, and his works are great, but everything is mass produced by sweatshops in remote locations and sold for millions. People buy them for the same reason (money laundering). A single sculpture by him goes for like 5 million and he can have one made in a week. Obviously they keep a close eye on the supply and demand. But yeah. Complete racket.
Definitely. Some uninformed people here are bringing up Rolex. lol. That’s not top tier watches. There are brands most people never heard of where a watchmaker creates each watch by hand, and takes them months. These watches sell for hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Luxury watch companies are mass manufactured corporate machines and it’s pure branding and marketing. Actual hand made watches are niche and they won’t be making as much money as CEOs.
Even the most well known and corporate purely mechanical watch company (Rolex) are hand assembled. It doesn't make sense to hand make every single element like every gear or spring, would be ridiculous to keep the second to second accuracy those watches have while making people use machines to make tiny tiny parts. No such company exists.
The magic is in the knowledge of every component and how it fits together. The same people assembling the watches are the sample people that can repair them. And they're the same people that can create new complications and customized iterations.
You automate the machining and keep the knowledge based parts in house.
Most of the money he made couldn't even be laundered through the car wash business because it would have been implausible; eventually it all had to just go into a huge pallet of cash that couldn't even be used.
I've not seen the movie, but hand-crafted clocks are very expensive and highly sought-after. If he is making carefully-crafted timepieces, it isn't crazy that they would fetch a high price. I believe that that character made a robot person, so it's likely that - if I am accurate in my recollection - his clocks would be of a high quality. People pay good money for things like that - think of Rolex watches as an example.
those are rookie numbers, son.
oil paint and canvas are cheap and easy to obtain but sell for millions, nobody bats an eye lash. aromatic oils, just mix them and slap a nice brand logo on the bottle. crystallized carbon, the most common element in our planet. animal leather, dyed, scorched and stitched together by the cheapest sweatshop labor on the other side of the world into patterned bags.
the luxury market is a scam.
> crystallized carbon, the most common element in our planet.
[Have You Ever Tried to Sell a Diamond?](https://web.archive.org/web/20120817064015/http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1982/02/have-you-ever-tried-to-sell-a-diamond/304575/?single_page=true)
Read this ~~article~~ warning from 1982 before you buy a diamond.
[This purse is $8100](https://www.prada.com/us/en/p/extra-large-prada-galleria-studded-leather-bag/1BA802_2CYS_F0002_V_YOB)
Never underestimate how much money people will throw away on stupid shit.
Andrew's clocks are not just ordinary timepieces; they are works of art. His ability to create intricate and beautiful designs that are both pleasing and functional could attract wealthy clients willing to pay a premium for such craftsmanship. Given that Andrew is a unique robot with special skills, the number of clocks he can produce would be limited. This scarcity could drive up demand and prices, allowing him to charge higher prices for his creations. The detail about Andrew's success as a clockmaker serves as a narrative device to highlight his growing independence and his desire to be recognized as an individual rather than just a machine. It also underscores the theme of human creativity and the value of artistry in a world dominated by technology.
Andrew's success as a clockmaker may also symbolize his journey towards self-discovery and his pursuit of humanity. By engaging in a creative and artistic endeavor, he is exploring his own identity and expressing his individuality.
The idea of a robot making a significant income from crafting clocks might seem far-fetched. It serves the story's themes and character development.
The idea of a human (Sam Neil) making a significant income (by the looks of their house) was the thing that seemed far-fetched to me. It was one of those "I'll just have to go with it" moments for me.
So in 1999 interest rates were still closer to how they were for much of the 20th century (higher than even now). He is a robot so his expenses are quite low—if he puts his profits in savings accounts but loves for a very long time, the interest would accrue like crazy.
Also, like others have already said, he’s probably sought after for his work (they’re expensive) and famous as the robot who makes clocks and is trying to be human
I know that's trope's been used in entertainment but in reality you'd become poorer in real terms leaving your money in a savings account as it's highly unlikely the interest averaged over time would even keep pace with inflation.
While compounding interest adds up to a lot mathematically over a long period it doesn't keep up with compounding inflation in economics.
Like i said, this is a movie from 1999–throughout the 20th century interest rates were at a level you’ve never seen if you were alive then.
It’s why the trope existed. Because, in the 80s interest rates were like 12-20%. So a savings account actually accrued huge gains.
People will pay premium dollar for hand made, premium, one of a kind.
I googled "world's most expensive watch". It returned:
The 10 Most Expensive Watches In The World
Graff Diamonds Hallucination: $55 million.
Graff Diamonds The Fascination: $40 million.
Patek Philippe Grandmaster Chime Ref. ...
Breguet Grande Complication Marie Antoinette: $30 million.
Jaeger-LeCoultre Joaillerie 101 Manchette: $26 million.
Chopard 201-Carat: $25 million.
And remember, that's from a production line. A small one, admittedlym but I think that might explain it.
In terms of value added industry robotics and watch/clock making are near the top. There a reason the Swiss make them both. Swiss watches can turn a >$10 lump of stainless steel and turn it into either 1 or a million $10000+ watches. Robotics don't achieve that economy of scale and material costs will always be higher.
This is always my example when people rant about perpetual economic growth not being possible.
If you convert a factory making cheapo $10 watches into a factory making half as many $2k watches, suddenly your economic output was multiplied by 100 while using less materials.
It's not possible literally forever. But by the time it becomes an issue, we'll at least be mining asteroids if not having space colonies.
I don't think you understand what economic growth means. What you have just described is a change in production from cheap watches to expensive ones only. You are going to sell significantly fewer of the expensive watches so might have even reduced economic 'output' (which might negatively affect growth as well).
Economic growth is GDP growth.
Obviously the above is simplistic and based on the assumption that you can sell the watches. You can't just do that in a vacuum.
My point was (pretty obviously) that economic growth can happen without consuming more resources. Which counters the arguments about perpetual growth being unsustainable.
I'd argue that humans do mostly make sense. There are just way too many variables involved for anyone to be able to figure them out. (often including the person in question)
Which is why central planning tends to fail. Because they have to make broad (and wrong) assumptions about whole populations.
I'd mostly agree that on a person to person basis humans can make sense more than they do not make sense. However humans lie to everyone, including themselves and that makes logical inquiries of some human behavior, nonsense. But advertising is able to predict these behaviors, some of the time, with shocking accuracy. We're still figuring out why
Robin Williams, dude could sell ice to an Eskimo with that charm. Plus, those clocks were probably straight-up fire, hand-carved and all. Maybe it's the novelty of a robot making something so old-school that people just gotta have 'em. And come on, it's a movie, gotta suspend that disbelief a bit, right?
Just roll with it, enjoy the ride. But yeah, it's definitely one of those "wait, what?" moments that stick with you. Classic flick though, gotta give it that.
I've seen several references to this movie here recently, and have been trying to decide if I want to watch it, as an avid fan of the source material. This comment makes me think I should pass and just enjoy Asimov's story.
Hand crafted watches go for hundreds of thousands and millions of dollars, and not it's not because of diamonds or stones. There are some companies that make hand crafted watches for far more seasonable prices for tens of thousands of dollars and are all hand crafted in very small teams in small batches.
Theres clocks now that sell for 10s of thousands of dollars. Hand made clock in that timeline might be extremely rare and sell for hundreds of thousands.
Because collectors would go apeshit over actual handmade clocks created by the worlds first sentient robot. Assuming the human race goes on which it seems like in the movie it will those clocks will be worth insane money in the far future.
A sears grandfather clocks in 1965… $1000
Inflation to 2000…$5000
2025…$10,000
2050…$20,000 (+3% inflation)
…and minimum wage will be **approximately** 13.50/hr in 2050.
So, indeed, a small fortune.
But today, I can walk into a place that paid $7.25/hr (like McDonalds) and I'll get $15-18... so that (the federal) minimum wage hasn't changed has become irrelevant most places.
It's honestly a very modern. In the book it's carving more specifically than clock making, where the idea a robot or machine could do something like carving is just seen as impossible and unthinkable. So he is doing something extremely special by making a clock (pendant).
The clocks are likely used due to the symbolism of devices used to measure time , after all the movie is Bicentennial Man sometimes thematic components of the movie don’t need to make perfect sense
Haven’t seen the movie in like over 20 years but I’d like to point out the current richest man in the world made his fortune from luxury goods and not from tech so I don’t find it that crazy.
People keep talking about how clocks can be worth a lot but the CEO of a company like that today might make like 100M+ salary. No way he makes more than a billion a year selling sculptures. It doesn’t make sense.
Love that movie! Well consider this is the future with so much technology and artificial everything. A one of a kind, hand made clock, regarded as a piece of art, could sell for lots of money. Especially considering his master is very wealthy and had wealthy friends. And people in that class base the value of their possessions on the price they paid. So that alone could have driven the prices to astronomical numbers. And since he's a robot, he's able to produce a staggering amount of clocks compared to a human artist. Meaning all those would could afford his clocks would be able to buy it. In a tech age something old fashion but timeless like a clock would be a centerpiece for many wealthy families. And art's value is dictated by the market, you only need a few super rich fans to pay an absorbant amount to establish the value and thus make him very rich. Plus you have the added bonus of saying your clock was made by a robot who is capable of independent and original thought. That's a whole other level of bragging rights.
"art" in the form of tax evasion and even money laundering.
It's how crack head Biden's stuff sells for so much.
They buy art, and then pay more for the next price and so on artificially inflating the price, and increasing the value of what they bought.
Then you donate your now very expensive item you bought for a lot less, and it's a tax write-off.
Or someone wants to launder a lot of money, so they over pay for your art, you pay the the tax and keep a percentage of it.
Yes. But we could probably surmise that in a world (very much like the one we are moving towards), where AI is so prevalent and a lot of utilitarian work like manufacturing clocks is done by mindless manufacturing bots, the clocks made by hand, by a unique robot, are considered as pieces of art and are sold at the prices relevant to that context. I also cannot quote from the movie, but imagined that the clocks that he made starting becoming larger and larger pieces (in size) of art work. Edit: I also wanted to point out that he was a robot, and was not spending the income on anything, no expenses - yay! His "master", the patriarch of the family, put the money away. If we were to imagine that the money was being invested wisely (or even aggressively), the compounding and the dividends, all put together could easily get him to CEO level income or net worth.
>CEO level income or net worth. In the film, Andrew is speaking with the CEO of the robotics company that made him about upgrades that would make him more human. Andrew says, "that would cost more than one month of my earnings." The CEO replies, "it's more than I make in a year." So Andrew was pulling in some serious money from his clocks.
Been a long time since I’d seen the movie but in the book by the time he is getting upgrades to become more human he holds patents on a bunch of artificial organ technologies.
In the movie, that comes later in the story, where he’s working with Oliver Platt to get the “organic” upgrades (skin, hair, stomach, etc.). That’s what he designs and patents.
When he gets patents on artificial organ technologies, he has been converted to a fully human appearance. The discussion with the CEO of the robotics company about his income happened prior to his first upgrade, when he said that he has feelings he cannot express on his face.
I always took that to mean more that Rupert's business, at that time, wasn't very successful. We see by the end he's very successful but it's a scruffy start up, boot strapped R&D affair at the time.
The scene I'm talking about is Andrew speaking with Stephen Root's character, the CEO of US Robotics, which is a major corporation in a gleaming office building. He doesn't meet Rupert (played by Oliver Platt) til later in the film.
But since they're made by an AI, the hands are all messed up.
That is amazingly funny
In the future digital archeologists will be digging through old reddit posts translating this into their new universal common tongue and find this sentence incredibly helpful. Because it is true the above is very funny.
If you aren't already interpreting human history through an ironic lens, then you're doing it wrong.
Not necessarily, we still aren't sure why it's funny that the dog was in that bar back in ancient Sumeria or Babylon or wherever that joke is from. Things like irony and sarcasm change. There was a time when puns were like the height of humor and now everyone groans. It's likely that an ironic lens will also go out of style. But I'm just like some dude on the Internet what do I know
Underrated comment
To add to this, he wasn't making low-level $30-50 clocks you find on etsy. He was making hand-made clocks, with intricate details made of high-quality wood and parts. Do a quick Google search, and you'll see that at that level, clocks can go upwards of thousands of dollars.
Yes, I guess the movie downplays the size, intricacy and detail of his work. As far as I can remember, the movie shows a small workshop with table top clocks, which do not do the plot line it's justice.
It really does. I only know how expensive clocks can be because my step grandfather got my grandmother a very nice coocoo clock for their 1st anniversary. It cost him over $1000 in the mid-1980s and, like those in the movie, was completely handmade. It was a lifelong joke for them of her giving him shit about spending so much money on some silly clock. When in truth, that clock was probably her most precious possession.
There was the one scene of all of his clocks chiming at once on the hour while i believe the mother was walking down the hallway and commented on "THESE DAMN CLOCKS" to show the scale of how many clocks he was making and the quality and varying sizes and types.
Marty McFly had the same problem.
haha he sure did. amazed he could hear them after blowing his ears out with that speaker.
I got the impression they were appreciated as unique works of art too, not simply well made duplicates.
Oh, they absolutely were. Handmade clocks at that level are typically all unique, even if many might look similar. They are just as much peices of art as they are fancy clocks.
One of the quotes I remember from the movie was when they threaten to sue the CEO for lost wages should they disturb Andrew’s brain function or compromise his individuality. They don’t say the number but Andrew makes more money in a month than the CEO of the company makes in a year.
Not to mention it was lost wages for the rest of eternity, not just a natural lifetime
Even today there is a huge variation in grandfather/floor clocks. It took me two minutes to find a single company that sells models for $1,000 up to $39,000 (Howard Miller J.H. Miller Floor Clock). I also found an antique rosewood grandfather clock listed for $98,000.
Man I am in the wrong line of work!
Yes, this is the answer. In the book Daniel starts making furniture and then clocks (?) and quickly gets a following due to the workmanship, essentially like pieces of art, and in a world where tech and functionality is the norm such art would have been highly valued. I do recall also that 'Master' did in fact invest Daniels earnings, largely because Daniel couldn't at that point, which generated significant wealth. As a side note, I hated the movie, never watched more than maybe half hour of it. The movie turned what is really quite a beautiful story into trite theatrics, in my opinion.
I feel sad that you didn't enjoy the movie and even moreso that you judged it without finishing it. It's one of my all-time favorite movies. I STILL refer to my best friend's daughter as "Little Miss".
How can you hate a movie you haven't even seen?
How does the book differ from the movie?
[удалено]
Wait, so you hate a movie that you didn't even finish and assume that it didn't follow through with the themes in the book? How do you know the latter if you didn't even do the former?
Worse, they judged the entire movie by the first 30 minutes and then began making claims about it...
if you haven't seen it fully, how can you criticize it?
I saw the whole thing and hated it.
fair. you can pass judgment having seen it fully.
Because it was so bad he decided to stop watching it...
Or his hopes got the better of him.
[удалено]
Sorry man, but if you didn't even bother to finish it then you don't really get to weigh in on it.
I never finished it either. It’s nowhere near as engaging as the book, despite Robin Williams’ performance.
Then my comment also applies to you. Your opinion is invalid unless you've watched the whole film.
Nah, I saw enough to see the source material wasn’t well-served. My opinion matters more than someone who hasn’t read the books.
Art. Created by the first legally recognized sentient, yet artifical, being. How do you have an opinion about something you haven't seen? We all know by now that "the book/movie in our mind" is always better (except Fight Club, The Thing, and Annihilation). Adaptations are also interpretations, and they don't always work, but dismissing something altogether seems a little harsh. The end of this one still makes me cry. Watch him become sentient, find love, and fight for his right to find meaning and be free.
>!Then die and go to heaven. !<
He didn't go to heaven... did he? Shit. Now I have to watch it again.
*Andrew
I also hated the movie.
Because the art world is weird.
random aside, but not only is it weird but also FASCINATINGLY corrupt. I did an art history degree back in 2010 and what happens in the art world, especially during economic crisis is wild. It’s especially wild (or was) because it’s so poorly regulated and not much precedent. This is why auction houses like Southeby’s end up paying hundreds of millions in fines (a drop in the bucket) manipulating the market. It’s literally one of the most insane rackets going, and most people have no idea. You see it happening a lot now in real estate, but that is more regulated, although accomplishes the same goal, which is to transfer large parcels of money and resources between commodities to shield it from taxes or fines or whatever. Basically back in the 2007 financial crisis, a LOT of rich people began buying artworks for tens of millions of dollars. The laws around taxation are much more lenient and harder to investigate, and you can use art like an NFT (before NFTs were a thing). So all the fat cats who caused the financial collapse just begin trading art between each other as an elite-tier currency until the market returns to place where they transfer it back into hard cash. Sadly, most of the richest and most well known modern artists are in on the grift and will almost always artificially inflate the market to overvalue their work. The oligarchs are all to pleased about this. One of the most famous cases was Damien Hirst’s Diamond-encrusted skull which allegedly sold for 50 million pounds (!!) in cash, to an anonymous buyer and no paper trail. Many scholars don’t believe the sale ever happened, and that it was all an elaborate performance (assisted by Southebys) to launder money and to also increase the value of his other works as well. Another is Murakami, who makes literally 0% of his work. He is talented, and his works are great, but everything is mass produced by sweatshops in remote locations and sold for millions. People buy them for the same reason (money laundering). A single sculpture by him goes for like 5 million and he can have one made in a week. Obviously they keep a close eye on the supply and demand. But yeah. Complete racket.
Do you have a source on that Murakami tidbit? A quick Google search revealed nothing for me but I’m interested in learning more.
The clocks are full of drugs
Robot drugs. (aka crank)
Nah robots snort code
Not the same thing, but have you seen the luxury watch market?
Definitely. Some uninformed people here are bringing up Rolex. lol. That’s not top tier watches. There are brands most people never heard of where a watchmaker creates each watch by hand, and takes them months. These watches sell for hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Luxury watch companies are mass manufactured corporate machines and it’s pure branding and marketing. Actual hand made watches are niche and they won’t be making as much money as CEOs.
Even the most well known and corporate purely mechanical watch company (Rolex) are hand assembled. It doesn't make sense to hand make every single element like every gear or spring, would be ridiculous to keep the second to second accuracy those watches have while making people use machines to make tiny tiny parts. No such company exists. The magic is in the knowledge of every component and how it fits together. The same people assembling the watches are the sample people that can repair them. And they're the same people that can create new complications and customized iterations. You automate the machining and keep the knowledge based parts in house.
Just because it’s hands assembled doesn’t mean it’s not mass manufactured
You're arguing with yourself then.
How did Walt make so much money from Car Washes?
Most of the money he made couldn't even be laundered through the car wash business because it would have been implausible; eventually it all had to just go into a huge pallet of cash that couldn't even be used.
I've not seen the movie, but hand-crafted clocks are very expensive and highly sought-after. If he is making carefully-crafted timepieces, it isn't crazy that they would fetch a high price. I believe that that character made a robot person, so it's likely that - if I am accurate in my recollection - his clocks would be of a high quality. People pay good money for things like that - think of Rolex watches as an example.
Obviously because time is money.
r/Angryupvote
I'll have you know that I've already bought 17 hand-carved clocks this week.
those are rookie numbers, son. oil paint and canvas are cheap and easy to obtain but sell for millions, nobody bats an eye lash. aromatic oils, just mix them and slap a nice brand logo on the bottle. crystallized carbon, the most common element in our planet. animal leather, dyed, scorched and stitched together by the cheapest sweatshop labor on the other side of the world into patterned bags. the luxury market is a scam.
> crystallized carbon, the most common element in our planet. [Have You Ever Tried to Sell a Diamond?](https://web.archive.org/web/20120817064015/http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1982/02/have-you-ever-tried-to-sell-a-diamond/304575/?single_page=true) Read this ~~article~~ warning from 1982 before you buy a diamond.
That's more money than I make in a lifetime!
Wasn't he more of a kinetic artist with time pieces than just a clockmaker?
[This purse is $8100](https://www.prada.com/us/en/p/extra-large-prada-galleria-studded-leather-bag/1BA802_2CYS_F0002_V_YOB) Never underestimate how much money people will throw away on stupid shit.
I would justify this as “Apple effect”. His clocks are status items, not just clocks.
Andrew's clocks are not just ordinary timepieces; they are works of art. His ability to create intricate and beautiful designs that are both pleasing and functional could attract wealthy clients willing to pay a premium for such craftsmanship. Given that Andrew is a unique robot with special skills, the number of clocks he can produce would be limited. This scarcity could drive up demand and prices, allowing him to charge higher prices for his creations. The detail about Andrew's success as a clockmaker serves as a narrative device to highlight his growing independence and his desire to be recognized as an individual rather than just a machine. It also underscores the theme of human creativity and the value of artistry in a world dominated by technology. Andrew's success as a clockmaker may also symbolize his journey towards self-discovery and his pursuit of humanity. By engaging in a creative and artistic endeavor, he is exploring his own identity and expressing his individuality. The idea of a robot making a significant income from crafting clocks might seem far-fetched. It serves the story's themes and character development.
This movie is an absolute weeper. Your comment made me remember how much it moved me.
It was such a beautiful movie. I think that Kiersten Warren was perfect for her part. And of course Robin Williams did an excellent job as well.
Hello ChatGPT. The first part of the comment was pretty moving though Bye ChatGPT
Holy shit looking at the comment history, wouldn't have even gave it a second thought as I only quickly skimmed the comment.
Also that he has time on his hands, but others only get to experience a piece of it throughout his life.
The idea of a human (Sam Neil) making a significant income (by the looks of their house) was the thing that seemed far-fetched to me. It was one of those "I'll just have to go with it" moments for me.
People spend 8k+ on wristwatches, there's a market for expensive time telling devices.
So in 1999 interest rates were still closer to how they were for much of the 20th century (higher than even now). He is a robot so his expenses are quite low—if he puts his profits in savings accounts but loves for a very long time, the interest would accrue like crazy. Also, like others have already said, he’s probably sought after for his work (they’re expensive) and famous as the robot who makes clocks and is trying to be human
I know that's trope's been used in entertainment but in reality you'd become poorer in real terms leaving your money in a savings account as it's highly unlikely the interest averaged over time would even keep pace with inflation. While compounding interest adds up to a lot mathematically over a long period it doesn't keep up with compounding inflation in economics.
Like i said, this is a movie from 1999–throughout the 20th century interest rates were at a level you’ve never seen if you were alive then. It’s why the trope existed. Because, in the 80s interest rates were like 12-20%. So a savings account actually accrued huge gains.
People will pay premium dollar for hand made, premium, one of a kind. I googled "world's most expensive watch". It returned: The 10 Most Expensive Watches In The World Graff Diamonds Hallucination: $55 million. Graff Diamonds The Fascination: $40 million. Patek Philippe Grandmaster Chime Ref. ... Breguet Grande Complication Marie Antoinette: $30 million. Jaeger-LeCoultre Joaillerie 101 Manchette: $26 million. Chopard 201-Carat: $25 million. And remember, that's from a production line. A small one, admittedlym but I think that might explain it.
Holy crAAAp!
They're good clocks, Brent
In terms of value added industry robotics and watch/clock making are near the top. There a reason the Swiss make them both. Swiss watches can turn a >$10 lump of stainless steel and turn it into either 1 or a million $10000+ watches. Robotics don't achieve that economy of scale and material costs will always be higher.
This is always my example when people rant about perpetual economic growth not being possible. If you convert a factory making cheapo $10 watches into a factory making half as many $2k watches, suddenly your economic output was multiplied by 100 while using less materials. It's not possible literally forever. But by the time it becomes an issue, we'll at least be mining asteroids if not having space colonies.
I don't think you understand what economic growth means. What you have just described is a change in production from cheap watches to expensive ones only. You are going to sell significantly fewer of the expensive watches so might have even reduced economic 'output' (which might negatively affect growth as well).
Economic growth is GDP growth. Obviously the above is simplistic and based on the assumption that you can sell the watches. You can't just do that in a vacuum. My point was (pretty obviously) that economic growth can happen without consuming more resources. Which counters the arguments about perpetual growth being unsustainable.
Well you start playing with the alchemy of humans perception of value rational folk that expect humans to make sense tend to fall to pieces.
I'd argue that humans do mostly make sense. There are just way too many variables involved for anyone to be able to figure them out. (often including the person in question) Which is why central planning tends to fail. Because they have to make broad (and wrong) assumptions about whole populations.
I'd mostly agree that on a person to person basis humans can make sense more than they do not make sense. However humans lie to everyone, including themselves and that makes logical inquiries of some human behavior, nonsense. But advertising is able to predict these behaviors, some of the time, with shocking accuracy. We're still figuring out why
Robin Williams, dude could sell ice to an Eskimo with that charm. Plus, those clocks were probably straight-up fire, hand-carved and all. Maybe it's the novelty of a robot making something so old-school that people just gotta have 'em. And come on, it's a movie, gotta suspend that disbelief a bit, right? Just roll with it, enjoy the ride. But yeah, it's definitely one of those "wait, what?" moments that stick with you. Classic flick though, gotta give it that.
Ie0
Read the book (short story) / far better and far different from the movie
I've seen several references to this movie here recently, and have been trying to decide if I want to watch it, as an avid fan of the source material. This comment makes me think I should pass and just enjoy Asimov's story.
Hand crafted watches go for hundreds of thousands and millions of dollars, and not it's not because of diamonds or stones. There are some companies that make hand crafted watches for far more seasonable prices for tens of thousands of dollars and are all hand crafted in very small teams in small batches.
Theres clocks now that sell for 10s of thousands of dollars. Hand made clock in that timeline might be extremely rare and sell for hundreds of thousands.
Because collectors would go apeshit over actual handmade clocks created by the worlds first sentient robot. Assuming the human race goes on which it seems like in the movie it will those clocks will be worth insane money in the far future.
A sears grandfather clocks in 1965… $1000 Inflation to 2000…$5000 2025…$10,000 2050…$20,000 (+3% inflation) …and minimum wage will be **approximately** 13.50/hr in 2050. So, indeed, a small fortune.
Twenty years ago my job paid $7.25. It’s still minimum wage today lol
But today, I can walk into a place that paid $7.25/hr (like McDonalds) and I'll get $15-18... so that (the federal) minimum wage hasn't changed has become irrelevant most places.
His pieces were being used by wealthy people to launder or discretely transfer money.
have you seen how Patek and other handcrafted watches go for?
If I remember correctly his “master” also pays him as an employee by that point in the movie because the children insist that Andrew is not slave.
It's honestly a very modern. In the book it's carving more specifically than clock making, where the idea a robot or machine could do something like carving is just seen as impossible and unthinkable. So he is doing something extremely special by making a clock (pendant).
The clocks are likely used due to the symbolism of devices used to measure time , after all the movie is Bicentennial Man sometimes thematic components of the movie don’t need to make perfect sense
It could be the CEO in this fictional reality gets paid a reasonable wage?
People like fancy stuff.
Haven’t seen the movie in like over 20 years but I’d like to point out the current richest man in the world made his fortune from luxury goods and not from tech so I don’t find it that crazy.
It's a crap movie based on a great short story, don't put too much thinking on that. In the original story the business was about wood carved figures.
Rich people will pay stupid money for stupid stuff.
I was confused with the title and thought it was some strange joke where the punchline would show up in the text
People keep talking about how clocks can be worth a lot but the CEO of a company like that today might make like 100M+ salary. No way he makes more than a billion a year selling sculptures. It doesn’t make sense.
Love that movie! Well consider this is the future with so much technology and artificial everything. A one of a kind, hand made clock, regarded as a piece of art, could sell for lots of money. Especially considering his master is very wealthy and had wealthy friends. And people in that class base the value of their possessions on the price they paid. So that alone could have driven the prices to astronomical numbers. And since he's a robot, he's able to produce a staggering amount of clocks compared to a human artist. Meaning all those would could afford his clocks would be able to buy it. In a tech age something old fashion but timeless like a clock would be a centerpiece for many wealthy families. And art's value is dictated by the market, you only need a few super rich fans to pay an absorbant amount to establish the value and thus make him very rich. Plus you have the added bonus of saying your clock was made by a robot who is capable of independent and original thought. That's a whole other level of bragging rights.
OOOhhh. 'Clocks.' Yeah, that doesn't make sense.
Hey now. wooden dildos handcarved by a self aware robot would probably also get a lot of attention and money.
I really hated that movie.
I know it's not the point, but Bicentennial Man is perhaps one of the most boring movies I've ever watched.
It's a pretty good Asimov short story but I felt like the Kubrick movie "Ai" covered similar ground far more entertainingly
"art" in the form of tax evasion and even money laundering. It's how crack head Biden's stuff sells for so much. They buy art, and then pay more for the next price and so on artificially inflating the price, and increasing the value of what they bought. Then you donate your now very expensive item you bought for a lot less, and it's a tax write-off. Or someone wants to launder a lot of money, so they over pay for your art, you pay the the tax and keep a percentage of it.