An Exhaustive Review of Alex Garland's TERRIBLE Sci-fi Miniseries, "DEVS" - Episode 4

Hugh and Jamie embark on an in-depth breakdown and critique of one of the most frustrating and confounding TV shows they've ever come across, Alex Garland's "Devs". (4/8)
If you'd like to support the channel, you can do so here:
www.subscribes...

[@killian9314]

It's funny how Alex Garland's career literally ended in the time it took to get this out.

[@WTHFX]

It was predetermined.

[@mattgilbert7347]

He doth warred with himself and OMG Journalism Lost.

[@ManiacalForeigner]

Well worth the wait. See you guys in 2027!

[@TheMegaOne1000]

Can't wait to see the season finale in 2036!

[@Donaldsangry]

When's episode 5?

[@Hasslocha]

How did you comment on this 6 days ago?

[@Donaldsangry]

​@@HasslochaI'm the truest fan

[@NoahSprague]

I'm sure when we are all fifty we will finally know how devs ends

[@CC3GROUNDZERO]

@@Hasslocha Are you from Hassloch, Germany?

[@Hasslocha]

@@CC3GROUNDZERO Yes I am

[@DKFlip]

This gives me hope for Winds of Winter release

[@Dr.Metalblood]

I'm glad I just discovered these reviews today and didn't have to wait three years...yet.

[@Sokko325]

"If you didn't know it with the russian kid" So the whole dev team knows he killed sergei? Either that or he's somehow threatening them with suicide?

[@CapitalOOpinions]

Holy shit, I can't believe we didn't notice that. That's hilarious.

[@fastenedcarrot9570]

I just assumed that he meant being fired. As they don't know about either the spying or the killing. Although I'm only going on what I've seen in these videos.

[@joshua11734]

I’d like to think the time between episodes was spent on getting PhDs in Quantum Mechanics (purely out of spite of course). In any case, it was well worth it! :)

[@michaelguenot6177]

You guys hit the nail on the head with your physics review. Even if you were to know precisely everything there is to know in the hidden variables behind De Broglie Bohm pilot wave theory, it’s still just way too many variables to store in one place. The amount of information you’d need to store exactly would likely require the formation of a black hole. Otherwise, approximations are just not good enough. Chaos theory kicks in. It’s not just mild fuzziness like low resolution or whatever - these are non-linear systems we’re talking about. Think weather / butterfly effect kind of stuff. Very small changes in initial conditions having massive and unpredictable effects. Also, many worlds is deterministic - objectively, in probability space. But it is entirely probabilistic from the point of view of any given observer.

[@michaelguenot6177]

Also lol at “applying kid’s equations from sound waves to light waves” - one is classical and the other is quantum. In fact the idea that light waves can’t be analyzed the way sound waves can be is the whole point of quantum mechanics.

[@michaelguenot6177]

One more thing - the kid thinking he did something impressive is actually really dumb and does not “prove” many worlds in any meaningful way. He basically simulated a possible past. He did the devs equivalent of chatGPT. He should be smart enough to understand this. Also there’s no meaningful difference between the mathematical representations of all these interpretations of QM. That’s why they’re called “interpretations”. The math is all the same, it’s not like any worlds has different wave function equations for pilot wave. As far as I know there’s no real way to test any of them out, they’re equivalent within the experimental framework we have available.

[@mattgilbert7347]

Dr. Strange holding up one finger makes more sense than this show

[@ApophisTw0Thousand6309]

MOM! MOM! GET IN HERE, MOOOOOOOM! NEW DEVS REVIEW IS HEEEEEEERE!

[@bigwinz]

Get the camera!

[@ToriHiragana]

Congratulations you best Winds of Winder, YMS: Lion King 2019 part 2, and The Force Awakens An Unbridled Rage part 5🎉

[@HalbdaemonKite]

11:47 How does she even conclude that from that blurry image? Lily could just be a weirdo who likes crawling around on the floor.

[@hydr3537]

ITS HERE

[@Bronimin]

I was getting a headache from that pulsing office scene for 2 minutes imagine working there every day jesus christ

[@TheThreatenedSwan]

A random projection every time would almost always be so extremely divergent from "our timeline" it woule be a bunch of gibberish like Borges' Library

[@TheAdarkerglow]

If the future is a predictive model, and viewing that predictive model changes a person's behavior, the model ought to adjust to predict the new outcome, since the information of the incumbent events are a new variable for the model to account for. In a sense, the person is at that point not making active decisions, they are reacting to and thus controlled by the predictive model.

[@gottesurteil3201]

Yeah I imagine it would be like pulling on a rope to make it tighter the more information you get leading up to the event.

[@robertlewis6915]

Accurate prediction where the machine is causative would require an infinite recursive loop

[@Bersekr21]

I've not watched this show. I've not watched you reviewing the previous episodes. Still really enjoyed this for some reason lol

[@FeuxF]

That use of the Macarena "cover" on a recorder was genius 😆

[@_Sasha_Sasha]

I've never understood the Many Worlds interpretation of the double slit experiment. If the photons from many universes strike at different points that make up the pattern...then why would I be seeing them all in MY universe? Wouldn't I just see the one point that the photon in my universe made?

[@Gew219]

Definitely worth the wait.

[@rakshal132]

The ending of this video is the most cursed thing I've ever seen you guys say, good job.

[@DoctorDiddler]

I found the little discussion on the double slit problem very interesting. I'd heard of it before but never looked into it. Didn't expect to get a rundown from a TV show breakdown but that's probably just because I can't see the future, or any of its possible variations. Or the one variation that I don't know all the variables to. Whatever.

[@mattgilbert7347]

Addendum: it's just The Merovingian from The Matrix without charisma but with a godlike laptop he *handwaves* for 8 episodes.

[@PunksterOS]

It's been so long, I'd forgotten why the show sucked. Thanks for the reminder.

[@GoosterHiista]

Thank you, I've literally waited years for this video. I no longer remember anything about the show other than the absolute hatred for how stupid it was. Thank you for reminding me and rekindling the hatred that fuels my being.

[@itsliqs]

I'm SO happy you guys are continuing this series. It's extremely cathartic to watch this because when I watched the show, all I could find was praise for it and I was starting to gaslight myself into thinking I missed something. But nope, this show is just complete piss.

[@wingflanagan]

I just watched the series because of a mention in another KZbin video about the nature of reality or something. I have a love/hate relationship with Alex GArland's work. The concepts he comes up with are fantastic. Even in his worst films he managers to come up with one or two transcendently beautiful scenes. In _Men,_ which I otherwise regard as an abomination, there was that one scene where the heroine is walking through the tunnel and harmonizing with the echo of her own singing. It's been enough to keep me watching and hoping for another _Ex-Machina._ There were more moments like that in _Annihilation,_ a film that a lot of people hate, but not me. _Devs_ is a bit of a trainwreck. I knew it was in serious trouble when Garland made the rookiest of rookie mistakes by having the ex-boyfriend take a giant exposition dump about something everybody - including the audience - knew. Holy _shit_ that was bad. And I'm sure KGB agents absolutely talk like that. I kept watching every episode, waiting for one or two of those magnificent scenes that I know Garland is capable of. They never came. Anyway, I can't wait for the rest of these reviews, so I at least know that I didn't suffer alone.

[@CC3GROUNDZERO]

Forrest being only motivated by being reunited with his daughter is a laughably bad premise in itself. But what makes it infinitely worse is that he completely dismisses insights that have been utilized to great effect on Rick & Mortty. So what if it's merely "a" Amaia? There are alternate universes where "a" Amaia lost her "a" Forrest. Wouldn't he be happy to be united with that "a" Amaia and adopt her as "his" Amaia? And the most likely answer is that the buffoon Garrland simply never considered this. Instead, he wrote Forrest to be as simple-minded as that one guy in that Star Trek Voyager double-episode Year of Hell. And Voyager only needed two episodes to finish that line of thought and to rightfully condemn it as narcissistic perfectionism that will never lead you anywhere but to your own doom and destruction. And in contrast to Garland's Forrest, even that guy was capable of learning.

[@gottesurteil3201]

I would think that they could have gone the direction where the pilot wave theory is just a localized version of the many worlds theory and instead of firing the kid who made the discovery Forrest would route his efforts to making the system work through the pilot wave theory.

[@haz4dc394]

“If you didn’t know it with the Russian kid” lol so he’s openly threatening to kill them?

[@Asa-tm9ey]

OMG finally, Devs bless you.

[@ericv00]

WHAT?! I thought DEVS part 4 was a myth!

[@TheThreatenedSwan]

Seeing "the future" would necessitate changing it leading to a paradox. But there are also problems with their materialistic world view where reason and any certitude in literally anything would also not exist. All humans are magical and motivated thinkers, but that's not a particularly interesting observation especially if people think it excludes themselves

[@CapitalOOpinions]

How it would actually work is complicated and paradoxical to think about, but what I feel very confident concluding is that what the show says would happen is nonsense. There is no reason to believe that Katie would be unable to NOT do what she sees her future self doing on screen.

[@Orion_Fritz]

@@CapitalOOpinions The issue is that the computer itself is affecting reality by having a screen, and as a result has ways to change it if the future it might show isn't consistent. The computer doesn't need to show something that can be easily changed. The screen could influence the future in such a way that they lack the ability to change what it shows. For example, it could show a scene of its screen projecting a light so bright that it blinds everyone in the room, then go on to show what they will do. They won't be able to see what they'll do because they've been flashbanged by the computer, and as a result won't be able to change the future. It doesn't even need to be the screen it affects, maybe it keeps searching for a consistent future, until it finds one where the electons in its circuit board bump around in it in just the right way, that a random unintended bitflip happens, crashing it. Point being, there are an infinite number subtly different potential futures that the computer could show/do. But only one of those need to be consistent with the actual future in order to be able to predict the future without humans being able to change it.

[@sammydray5919]

​@@CapitalOOpinions Honestly what would probably happen is that observing the future would it change it but then the projection of the future itself will change because the variables have been altered which is just a whole infinite causality loop lmao

[@kai---runeskin1417]

I feel as though human beings would want to make more creative characters in a show of their own making. Have yourselves a wonderful day, thank you for enduring this show and creating a fascinating and enjoyable video.

[@unfilthy]

I'm halfway through, but I'm gonna need to go back because I've been thinking about cause and effect the whole time. So, you're gonna cross your arms, because everything in the universe up 'til now will cause you to do that. Fine. You see the future, in which you're crossing your arms. This is new information to you, which now needs to be incorporated into the causality chain. If that factor was always there, and so was already calculated, then it means that you being a stubborn ass who refuses to do a basic experiment was already factored in. That's fine. Now put a normal human in this situation, one who would, based on everything that has brought them to that point, do the most basic of low effort experiments in a similar situation. That should be incorporated into the calculation as well, which will cause the most basic bitch of time travel/clairvoyance paradox. If it shows you not crossing your arms/placing them in your pocket, because you'll do the opposite of what you see, then you will cross your arms/not put them in your pocket, but the all knowing machine will know that, and so will show that, and so you'll see it, and so you'll not do that, and so it will show you doing the opposite, and so you'll not do that, ad infinitum. To maintain the physical position that you would've had, had you not known the future and done the expected experiment, the all knowing machine would have to lie to you or prevent you from knowing in some other way, which could be part of the original calculation of state of the world based on causality, only it would entail the all knowing machine being a Kang with a holy timeline to preserve, as opposed to a calculator of all the causality. And if it's a manipulator of events, rather than a foreseer of events, WTF does the show even think it's saying? Because then we're in an entirely different world, with timelines defending themselves, or where any machine capable of showing the future necessarily becoming/being unreliable, because paradoxes can't be allowed, according to whom, in this materialist universe? Anyway, now I'm going back to the beginning to see what the part of my brain that was busy being annoyed by this missed. And then I might go back and rewatch the previous episodes (of the analysis, not the show itself, obviously. I have my limits)

[@deandredunbar9618]

damn I'm watching these videos at work and I'm on this one wondering how the fuck this channel has such low sub count but such a high quality entertaining videos. yall put out 2 videos a year. maybe that's it.

[@mattgilbert7347]

And now we have ChatGBT. As skeptical as I am about "AI", I'd take a ChatGBT over Alex Garland most days. A distinction without a difference, you say? Well, you got me. I understand why you gave up on this. Life's too short. See you in the past. I am a Devs. I am your God. Send money.

[@michaeladove7269]

Are you guys finishing your reviews? I'm really missing them. 😢

[@wilius1428]

Let's gooooo! This was early, I wasn't expecting this for like 8-6 years from now....

[@WTHFX]

Why doesn't the effect of seeing the future effect their actions and thereby change the simulation, which would change their actions, which would change simulation... ad infinitum? If Many Worlds, why doesn't the simulation represent not only an infinite number of possible futures but an infinite set (caused by the updating priors of knowing the future) of infinite possible futures?

[@gottesurteil3201]

To Lily I must say there's nothing halfway about the Iowa way to treat you, when we treat you, which we may not do at all.

[@sixthugger]

It's here

[@bertimusprime7900]

It's an april fools miracle!!!

[@nonya_bidness]

We're so back

[@MasterDecoy1W]

After watching your Civil War review, I decided to look up Alex Garland. On his wikipedia page, I learned that he was involved in the bastardization that is DmC: Devil May Cry. I already hate this man. This might sound hyperbolic, but anybody associated with that trash is not an artist. They are soulless facsimiles. Copies of copies of copies of artists. Whatever worthwhile art they create is most likely accidental. Everything I learn from this review further reinforces this belief.

[@lukew6725]

When episode 5?

[@SumGuy099]

Fucking finally

[@SonnenShades]

please make more of these

[@ThePerson12123]

omg omg omg , it's here

[@TrajGreekFire]

thought it will be much longer

[@CapitalOOpinions]

Sometimes spending more time editing actually means paring things down and trimming the fat... that's the excuse I'm giving myself anyway

[@TheThreatenedSwan]

They're back you guys

[@Orion_Fritz]

The whole idea of seeing one minute into the future and testing whether they'd fold their arms or not is kind of stupid as a test for whether the universe is magical, anyways. Even if they did do the expiriment, and it turned out that they did something different than the prediction, it wouldn't prove that the universe is magical; it'd prove that the machine isn't capable of predicting itself. Which I feel should be obviously impossible, since it'd need enough memory to store both all of its memory and the stuff outside of it. It'd necessarily need more memory than it could possibly have; Unless it somehow has infinite memory I guess. Though what would be interesting would be if they actually tried the expiriment, and the machine actually succeeded at forcing them to fold their arms. By altering the output of the machine sufficiently, such that it necessisarily forced them to fold their arms in some way. (like, for example, somehow the monitor changed things in just the right way, that a pair of hand cuffs quantum tunneled onto their wrists.) (something like this: kzbin.info/www/bejne/f3u0hoWLm5qDiLcsi=jxkWNtaDOc8MYN8H&t=254)

[@TheThreatenedSwan]

Light is light. Whatever helps us make predictions better is fine, but physicists often treat their math and interpretations as if they're now real and go off into not even wrong territory like acting like there are real multiple worlds like a Marvel movie

[@LaputanMachad]

Long have I waited

[@-Azure.EXE-]

On the one minute test. The future isn't the furture until it happens. Until then its just some fugly looking images. If the one minute test has robot lady putting her hands in her pocket instead after watching the future, the 2 minute version of it would show them watching the future of her folding her arms and then putting her hands in her pocket. I dont know why robot lady and bossman believe, seeing a representation of the future wouldn't still be the on the rails. It's supposedly a decision born from their scientific minds. The thing that takes away free will because decisions are a result of many factors present before. Ontop of doing a 1 minute test, them not having considered taking it a minute further is also redacted.

[@zzolm]

I am hyped

[@grandarkfang_1482]

Finally.

[@therealfakecaptain7978]

1:26 PRIMUS SUCKS !

[@Sokko325]

I get why his acting works in something lik the office but I don't get why he gets cast for drama roles, I've never seen him express emotion beyond neutral or angry.

[@SideBurns]

LETS GOOOO

[@fatdumbandangry]

Hell yeah

[@kevo-o-o]

Finally the questions about the episode will stop

[@Donaldsangry]

Wrong my friend

[@kevo-o-o]

@@Donaldsangry I know, I'm being too optimistic

[@LaputanMachad]

All the questions will now be about episode 5

[@robertlewis6915]

I dunno. Did this episode really happen?

[@kevo-o-o]

@@robertlewis6915 have you been using Devs to peer into an alternate future?????

[@hrothgarnogar]

It makes no sense... even if it wasn't "our Jesus" it still means there's many worlds... So it's still the correct theory... If it wasn't the right theory it wouldn't have worked at all.

[@robertlewis6915]

7:30 This is why the machine has to simulate itself in order to simulate the future, meaning it can't. 29:30 Doesn't this success sort-of prove the Many Worlds theory to be real? potentially making the other theory proven false. (I anticipated the critique!)

[@bertimusprime7900]

I've forgotten all the context. I guess I'll need to rewatch all the reviews.