MovieChat Forums > avortac4 > Replies
avortac4's Replies
I think you were going to correct the horsefac... agh, I can't do this, I can't be this insulting to horses, which are beautiful animals, unlike some actresses.
Anyway, I thought you were going to correct her that 'Twisted Sister' was the band/group, and his ACTUAL name is Daniel Snider, alias Dee Snider.
So 'Twisted Sister' is not only not a 'her', but _IT_ is also NOT A HIM, either, because it's the name of the gosh-darned BAND!
From Wikipedia:
"Daniel Snider is an American musician, best known as the lead singer and songwriter of the heavy metal band Twisted Sister. "
See? She was WRONG, and no one here corrects her? What kind of Bizarro-world do I live in, where no one corrects anything that's wrong, so I have to do all the work here??
" Titles are very important. "
They are LITERALLY the least important thing in existence. Everything would still be the same with different titles or even without them. You are still you without a name, or with a different name. This movie would still be just as good/bad with a different title.
How are titles important, what makes you believe in such nonsense?
I don't like when people just say something as if it's a fact and never elaborate or explain their stupid, wrongful OPINION in any way.
I have often talked about how names are irrelevant and insignifigant beyond their pragmatic use, and in the long run, they become dead pointers to something living, so they shoudl AT LEAST be renewed.
Then here we are, someone saying that 'Titles are important' without qualifying or explaining that particular remark at all.
Have you never heard of the saying that rose by ANY other name, would still smell as sweet? That saying HAS A POINT.
Names are practical, so are all kinds of incorrect labels, like 'cold' or 'dark' (nothing ever is either, even the 'coldest thing ever' is still measurable as some amount of 'heat', no matter how little), but that Titles are somehow IMPORTANT!?
Important to whom, what and how?
I rather have a good movie with bad title than vice versa.
The STORY is important. GOODNESS of a movie is important. The rest can go F themselves, I don't care HOW bad some title is, if the story/movie is good, and NEITHER SHOULD YOU. Sheesh!
"I don’t think that makes sense as a title but David did vanish."
What movie did YOU watch?
David NEVER VANISHED. He was always somewhere. Does someone vanish in your opinion, if they take a holiday in another country? Just because you and your mates don't see them, doesn't mean they VANISHED.
David did NO such thing, he was ALWAYS in existence, he did not vanish even for a second.
What are you on? What movie did you watch? I can't explain how anyone could even remotely think David vanished. What the F?
That's what some 'romance-hungry youtuber bimbo hag' wanted for the ending, and I gasped as to how ANYONE in the world can wish for _MORE_ injected romance in movies!
Don't they have enough romance already, when they have their own romance movies, but also every single family movie, action movie, sci-fi movie - you NAME IT - has already been THOROUGHLY CONTAMINATED by this bullshít!
It's like the wealthiest people can NEVER have enough money.. how much is enough? Come on!
Let us have a HANDFUL of movies that do not have injected romance - that is one of the BEST things about this movie, that it doesn't have injected romance in it (well, not really)!
And you want to RUIN this rare treasure? What's wrong with you, huh? Did you escape from a mental institution or did you run out of some kind of anti-psychotic meds?
Try to list movies that do NOT have injected romance in them... of course 'romance movies' are full of romance, but I am talking about movies that IN NO WAY need it, but it has been injected because of the FEAR that women might not want to see a great story or a good movie if their infinite lust for 'will-they-won't-they' isn't satisfied in every God damn movie ever.
Off the top of my head, I can only think of a few (I know there are at least seven):
- Bad Taste
- Misery
- E.T. (besides a very tiny, brief moment)
- Flight of the Navigator
- First Blood
Injecting romance into every single sci-fi/action/space/timetravel/mystery/thriller/adventure/etc. movie is like injecting sports as a major ingredient into every single chick flick ever made. Would women like that? PROBABLY NOT!
But at least they would know how a rational human being feels when watching movies with constant interruption and story-corrosion by some predictable, long-winded syrap that does not need to be there. Groan.
AND YOU WANT MORE OF IT?! You are like a rich king in ancient Europe that taxes its people to death and still wants to tax them more. HOW MUCH IS ENOUGH?!
"That's actually a pretty killer location.."
Bad choice of words if you want to convince that place is not 'seedy'..
Good points. This movie doesn't make much sense whatsoever, though.. almost every scene has something that just doesn't gel or feels very off.
The thing that bugs me the most is probably that the woman that DESPERATELY wants to save the village, WILL NOT OPEN HER LEGS to save the village. Because that's not supposed to be an option in these movies... even though she could easily save so many things that way. "Please don't blow up our church, I will gladly do whatever you want and not complain about it".
How many women have slept with all kinds of guys throughout history without problems? The body counts of modern women are shocking. Yet, this one 'precious flower' is SOOOOOO pure she has no sexuality whatsoever, she has no sexual lust for a high-status man like El Quapo (in real life, she would be like Niagara falls between her big toes) or anything else whatsoever.. she doesn't even reward the heroic men who SAVED THE DAMN VILLAGE...
It's like, what's wrong with her? She should've opened her legs quite a lot to save the village - surely the village is more important to her than her (probably non-existent) virginity and superficial purity that she benefits in no way anyway in that world?
She should've at least rewarded the heroes and thus had an excuse to release her animalistic lust, but nope. She's just a 'pretty flower' that has to remain as pure as possible, even if it means exploding churches and super complicated shootout plot that IN NO WAY required the costumes, as the posts in this thread prove..
As I said, this movie really makes no sense, there's just too much to tackle to list everything, it's just easier to try to find anything that DOES make sense in it. I just can't be arsed, because I HATE these 'Galaxy Quest' plots where the whole village is too stupid, ignorant and dumb to realize they were watching an act, a movie, a TV show, etc. instead of a 'documentary'.. there's NO TRIBE in existence that doesn't tell STORIES to its people.
I have started to rewatch this, and a couple of things surprised me.
First, there haven't been as many 'flashbacks', especially to TV shows and movies as I remember. At least early season three seems to still be pretty story-oriented (albeit borrowing from other sitcom stories - the Brian-thing reminds me of Kramer going to California).
Second, I have watched an episode here and another there from other, MUCH later seasons, and shockingly, they are filled with nonsense, incongruency, retcons and stupidity (see my post about Seasn 19 episode 01, where they claim Stewie said his _FIRST_ word, if you can believe that.. while I am just watching Season three episode two, where Stewie speaks to adult people and they laugh at his jokes - make THAT make sense..!!).
The bigger surprise is that these later season episodes are weirdly dull and lifless. It's as if they ran out of ideas and are just running on 'fumes', figuratively speaking. The whole 'cabin burned down' (ANOTHER Seinfeld rip-off, by the way) episode is as dull and boring as modern Star Wars.
I am thus hoping to get to some kind of 'golden era' with nice flashbacks, but also clever jokes and such. Stories don't really matter since haven't we all already seen all the 'stories' this kind of shows can offer and have? Nothing else about Family Guy is really worth watching besides the 'parodies', 'flashbacks' and good jokes. Everything else is pretty mediocre - the visuals are incredibly generic and boring, they could be from almost any other similar show, the animation is always sub-par (well, the 'Little House on the Prairie parody is actually stunningly gorgeous, animation-wise), sound effects stock, stories uninteresting, (voice-)acting...well, passable.
I haven't experienced much 'wokeness' so far, but I have experienced the typical 'numbers must always be masonic'-crap. Earlier, Stewie mentioned '13' and the Cleveland shaking his wife or whatever, said something about her having '11 periods left'.
I could accept that as some kind of humorous point, but what I can't accept is that Steve's character GOES BACK to the 'Marlboro Man' after finding all that money.
WHY.. does..he..go..back.
Where did he even find that weird thug? How could he find that guy from anywhere? He's not talkative, so how did they even communicate? There's no way they would've just 'met and got to talking', because HE NEVER GETS TO TALKING.
In any case, what is the reason for him to go back to the thug? WHy bury the money instead of putting it in some safety locker or rent a hotel room for a week or ..there has to be about 2.978 billion different, completely separate possibilities he could and indeed, logically SHOULD have taken instead of what he does in the movie.
Isn't that the case of too many movies? They make the characters do REALLY stupid things just so the story can happen the way they want.
WHY would anyone go back to that thug after shooting someone, having been shot, having found that much money... just rent a motel room or something, after trying to fix your face as well as possible in some toilet or whatnot, or get some masks somewhere you can wear so then in the motel room, you can think, you can prepare, you can disinfect your face and at least put some kind of band-aids.. sorry, that's a corporate term, I realized... 'adhesive bandages' (this is supposedly the official term) or something.
After your face has healed enough, then you could just fly to another country or state, or take a train as far as you can, or or or.. I mean, there must be SO many better things to do than burying all that money in the friggin' SNOW where you will never, ever find it again, but someone will, when the snow melts... and then go BACK to the most psychotic lunatic you have ever seen. After you saw him blast a cop right in the head, you should've made a plan to just escape right then and there. NOTHING is worth that kind of psychotic crap..
So I'll take the pregnant cop over THAT.
... the wife should at least TRY to make her beloved husband (Jerry was somehow worth the risk of alienating herself from her wealthy father and possibly other relatives) and her hateful dad get along.
They must have had multiple 'fights' about 'but I love him!' and 'You will marry that car salesman over my dead body!', etc..
WHAT about Jerry makes her think he is WORTH all that fighting and aggravation, and WHY is she so passive about it and so happy to cut vegetables in the kitchen, when wealthy women usually hire people for that kind of stuff of order food instead of making it.. is she trying to play a 'mom role' in a superficial way or something?
The more you think about all this, the less any of it makes sense... the 'wealth' seems to be just some kind of superficial 'data' just slapped on these pre-written characters, where writing of the characters does NOT take into account how money changes people and so on.
This movie is pretty much unrealistic on all levels anyway, from the ridiculous accents to some asian nerd being THAT much in love with someone that looks, sounds and acts like the female cop (very masculine behaviour and look at THAT face - this man has seen thousands of asian idols on TV at least, her eyeballs could not appreciate a face like THAT so much he lies about a wife and leukemia and tries a superficial PUA tactic on her)..
Some people say 'pregnant female cop' is the most ridicuous thing about this movie, but there are SO many other things that are way more ridiculous and make no sense.
One thing that really bugs me is the 'ending fight', where this psycho guy doesn't pretend to give up and then attack when he gets in range, but just tries to run - and not run BEHIND things, like trees, but into the OPEN LAKE.. like, what? Would THIS GUY RUN from anything, let alone a tiny, female cop? Could this female cop apprehend/arrest/handcuff THIS BIG GUY all by herself even if he DID surrender, and then start to struggle..??
What I don't get is how the tone is all over the place with this one. Sure, the first one had a couple of traumatic, serious moments with that capitalist psycho boss and his sociopathic crew, but overall, the tone is absolutely perfect for a family movie, being just serious enough that the parents can enjoy the movie, but also silly enough for everyone to laugh.
There were not that many 'too stupid for adults'-jokes in the original movie, but these sequels make an adult roll their eyes so much they could power Ernest's washing mashine. My joke makes about as much sense as anything you see in this movie during the first 16 minutes.
Ernest going through the motions isn't as good as Ernest being integrally planted into the story of a movie.
This also serves as a good example of the 'atmosphere' between 1980s and 1990s. The latter is a bit more 'dry and stale, cynical, grey, realism'-feel, whereas 1980s has a 'magical, energetic, elevating, bubbly, colorful energy' about it.
Too bad these Ernest sequels were made for the exact same motivation as the antagonist of the first movie.. they are EXACTLY the kind of movies that guy would make.
One can only dream what these movies would've been like had they been made from the more noble 'Path of the Brave' motivation with more poignant viewpoint and message.
The message of the first movie is spiritual and meaningful.
The message of this movie is, at least so far, greed-based lust, capitalistic and superficial, materialistic.. you get the idea.
The less said about the whole 'Ernest Saves Christmas'-travesty, the better, but I just want to mention one thing; Jim Varney is talented, but him playing other characters as exactly Ernest just doesn't work. It's not believable that this bumbling, but lovable fool could seamlessly portray all those other characters, or he wouldn't BE the redneck-like bumbling fool.
If he CAN act, look and dress like a 'lawyer' or whatnot, then he would have a more varied wardrobe, etc.
Ahhh, these people and their synths in the eighties. It really makes me wonder what I could create if I could go to the 1980s and BASK in that wonderful, excitingly bubbly and sparkly, inspirational 'super-energy' that seems to even cycle through colors within the feeling alone. It's as if you can hear colors or smell sound - very hard to explain, but it's a deep, lively experience of living in powerfully, cosmically elevating fluidum that just keeps pumping creativity into and through you.
My words shamefully fail to glorify enough these two masters, through which the Universe has blessed us with absolutely sublime, magically wonderous energies in the form of music and aural waves that forever radiate something modern people do not have a clue about..
I can't thank these people enough - meaningful music makes my mind melt...thanks to touch of these two totally tubular Transformers!
Vince DiCola and Harol Faltermeyer are two of the _ABSOLUTE_BEST_ (not just 'one of the best ' - I HATE wishy-washy weasel-language like that) synth-style movie-scorers (if that makes sense).
I mean, when listening to the stupidly-named 'The Transformers: The Movie' soundtrack and then also listening to 'Fletch' soundtrack (especially what's ACTUALLY played in the movie - I hate how the soundtrack so often differs too much, so you can never hear the SAME music, you hear 'altered versions' or 'arranged versions' instead - just think about the 'Swamp of Sadness' scene, where the double-filtered filterswept fluctuating bass just sends chills to your spine, whereas that doesn't appear before melody in the actual 'soundtrack version', so it gets drowned out, sigh)..
..it's pretty darn hard to make up your mind which is more atmospheric and which oozes more atmosphere, as they are both stupendously brilliant in that (amidst other) regard(s).
Rocky IV 'Training Montage' is one of the most unique and best 'epic, atmospheric, energetic synth songs' I have EVER heard, and I can't praise its inspirational feel and nature enough! It's just brilliant and cosmically mysterious in not only its beauty and superb layering, but also its deeply soul-penetrating, explosive elevating effect that tells you something about the Universe, reality and existence that words have never been able to come close.
I hate how that was ALSO butchered in the soundtrack version - the movie version is the only really good one. I mean, it's ok, but it's NOT the same.. the movie version has the 'energy' that is so hard to explain; it's the 1980s magic at its best, that's all I can really describe it as.
Well, I guess I could describe it actually as about a thousand twenty four other things as well, but it would not help.
So why would some bubble rock you find just laying on the ground, be something you can pick up and install in your spaceship?
Just look at all the drivers and software that has to be the EXACT right version, or it won't work. The very least, it can't be 'this version or older' to work on newer systems, or vice versa (this version or newer to work on older)..
Just look at how difficult it is sometimes to find a working version of some old software on a new OS, or newer software on old OS, or just typical Linux software to match the distro and then it has to be either 32-bit or 64-bit and then you have to consider the shell and ..
My point is, we should KNOW by know (or by the time this movie was made) that nothing useful you have to install into your technology, can't be that easy. You can't just pick up something, install it and be good to go.
I realize this movie wouldn't have time for some month-long 'attunement ritual' for some power crystal that has to be the right type, right color, right shape and size, that would then load it with proper capabilities so it can start 'generating energy' or whatnot, but come on, this is a BIT too much.
You can't just have an advanced space battery be some naturally occurring rock freely laying on the ground without 8000 different cultures trying to get their greedy paws on them.
This planet has countries that have gone to WARS just to have oil.
But no one is coming to pick up this Universe's equivalent of FREE OIL, although it's very very useful and can be used to generate massive power?
REALLY?!?!?!?
These spheres make NO sense!
Of course Truman is NOT equipped to deal with the real world, where people are absolute monsters and can treat you completely unfairly and horribly just because, or even with less justification than that. It can come out of the blue. It can be jarring to suddenly be accused of something you did not do just because someone doesn't like you, to be misunderstood by what you said or did although you had good intentions, be bullied and teased in the workplace just because you don't 'belong to the clique' and so on.
Truman is ABSOLUTELY not prepared for the 'real world', where someone can just punch you in the street, steal your stuff, mug you, stab you, shoot you or drive over you deliberately without warning.
He also doesn't know about the office politics and drama, he doesn't know about the toxic hostility people are so ready to unleash upon someone just because they are new or don't act like they do, etc. If he ever starts using the internet, he is going to have a heart attack with ANY chat or forum he ever enters, even this board...
Truman should have a transitional period, where people tell him what the real world is like, what is required of him, how insane fans can get and how to avoid them, and so on.
Truman is going to be a big celebrity, so he can easily earn money (and thus never REALLY know the troubles of the real world, at least from a regular individual's point of view), but he's also going to be a bit of 'Michael Jackson', being too famous to walk anywhere anonymously.
He is going to have a mental breakdown in two weeks because of all the differences of the 'fake' world and the 'real' world.
Knowing what I know about the 'real' world.. just like Cypher, I think I would actually prefer to live in the 'fake world' - freedom is not all it's cracked up to be, when you take everything into account.
What about you? Would you rather be a junkie in that Philadelphia cam or a young kid sniffing glue in asian traffic or live in that more smily life?
Dolphins face so many dangers, so many unpleasant, scary and awful things in their 'free life', that you have to weigh in pros and cons.
Just like Truman, the imprisoned dolphinarium-dolphins are actually living on easy street - a very cosy, very PROTECTED life, they don't have the hassles of the regular dolphins, they don't have to extend any effort in finding food or trying to migrate from one place to another or the danger of being killed by land-bipedalers or sharks or anything.
Truman is very protected, in that he does not have to sniff glue in some south-east Asian traffic pollution and pass out in the middle of the busy streets.
He does not have to sow shoes in a sweatshop factory for a major corporation with second-based schedule all day long for one bowl of rice every other day.
He doesn't have to be falsely accused by a woman and then thrown to jail as innocent and then be brutally RRPPRD by the Bubbas in the prison for a couple of decades.
He doesn't have to work for a corporation in the real world for 20 years without advancement in career, good enough pay or any respect, deal with the office politics and annoyances every day for hours that never end, just so he can go home and watch some really crappy TV show until he passes out... just to be fired because the corporation outsourced his whole department to some third-world country.
He never gets bullied, he never gets unfair treatment, no waiter is ever going to be snappy or insulting to him for no reason. He is always treated well, he always gets what he wants, and he can do basically whatever he wants.
Sure, he has a 'job', but it's probably around 90 times better than any regular corporate wage slave job in the real world.
I asked the same question when people were talking how cruel it is to keep dolphins in the pools that are actually designed to mimic the 'natural' lifestyle of the dolphins that usually stay in shallow waters anyway and so on.
Sure, dolphins in the sea have more 'freedom', but they ALSO have more DANGER.
This is something people don't seem to think about. They happily release a dolphin or an animal 'into the wild' without considering how DANGEROUS it is for them out there.
Now, I am not going to make the point again about dolphins being higher beings than humans, more intelligent, more spiritual and more spiritually capable - although it would make sense that an enlightened soul does not suffer from imprisonment the same way an animal might.
When you consider ALL the factors, it's most likely much better for the dolphins to live in the 'imprisoned' life than the 'natural life' in the ocean. Sure, their food is closer to junk food now, there's no physical freedom to roam around as much, there's no meeting new dolphins and so on.
However, what is there to see in the sea? (No pun intended) No matter where you are, you either can't see much, because there's just 'water', or you can see the bottom, which is mostly sand or something, then some pollution, junk, oil spills and whatnot, plus fish.
So the 'freedom' aspect makes less sense when you consider how dull the scenery in the sea actually is. They can watch at least videos in a dolphinarium.
Then they also see new people constantly, when they do their show.
They also have lots and lots of meaningful stimuli, toys, and can feel important showing off their amazing abilities to stupid land-humans who don't understand anything. Maybe some ancient wisdom will rub off to them.
However, the most important point here.. freedom versus danger. Dolphins are often attacked by sharks, but most dangerous and lethal enemy is the land-humans (not that they can really be called humans - maybe land-bipedal entities?).
Woman can BE a hero, but usually isn't, because she can SO easily manipulate a man to do that stuff for her. Even when a woman IS a hero (society gasps at putting a valuable woman into this expendable position), a man would still be better suited for that job, usually.
This means, there's no precedent of women being heroes, so 'heroic pose' for a woman does not look like a 'heroic pose', because if it looks like a woman, it's either cute, gorgeous, funny, or about thousand other things FIRST.
Men can't look cute, gorgeous or funny the same way, and even if they do, a woman will not see it as an attractive quality (a man does, when woman looks those things), so it ends up not being similar at all.
All this means that a woman can't REALLY look 'heroic'. She can look all kinds of things, but pretty much never 'heroic'.
Even She-Hulk from the comics, who has big muscles and lots of raw power, is not what comes to mind, when you think of 'heroic'. She is still feminine, sexual, 'attractive' and so on, but heroic? I don't think so. She's not the one you would want helping you in a crisis situation. She can't really even 'sacrifice herself heroically', because she's basically invincible and can't be injured (sort of).
Captain America - as silly as that concept is - always looks somewhat 'heroic', because you know he would sacrifice his life to save yours, and he has a very manly figure and has done heroic poses before. He also has a strong jawline.
So people confusing 'being a hero' and 'heroic pose' doesn't really help.
Superheroes always look very 'exaggerated', when it comes to human physique, but only the men look 'heroic'. The females look.. maybe 'cool' at best? They do look strong, capable, muscular and all that, but they never look like people who would sacrifice anything, because 'strong woman' just doesn't look expendable.
It doesn't help that women are always depicted as a bit of 'Mary Sues' that are as or stronger with their 'male counterparts'..
The only way something could be better than toilet paper, would be some kind of automated system where you don't have to care about it at all, and some toilet robot would do everything for you, and you would feel even cleaner afterwards.
Of course, that kind of system would hardly be called 'the three seashells', and there would be MASSIVE, massive implications again... not only from 'who cleans the thing' (it being self-cleaning would also reach other implications, like self-cleaning other things), but 'what if power goes out' or 'can you trust a robot to touch your intimate areas'...
..and of course, OF COURSE this part would lead to the whole 'sex robot' implication that would spawn a booming industry almost overnight.
This whole three seashells-business is just RIDICULOUSLY stupid, no matter how you think about it. The last thing any society should try to do is try to replace something that isn't broken, and toilet paper should be the LAST thing that would ever need replacing. There are bides and japanese toilets have all kinds of luxuries, but a toilet paper is like a typewriter; it works without electricity even in the crudest of living conditions, cabins in the woods or just woods themselves, whereas the 'three seashells'? Err..
Fourteenth - ... what do HIKERS do? What about people that have cabins in the woods? How about minimalists or people that try to live off the grid or simplify their lives and so on?
There is NO way this kind of 'replacement' could ever, EVER work. Toilet paper is just too intuitive, too handy, too easy to use and too good at adjusting to different kinds of conditions, electricity or no electricity.
I wish writers would sometimes think a bit more before they decide to implement a 'great idea', I wouldn't have to type so much..
So to cut a long story short (TOO LATE!), this movie is your typicall hollyweird-reduction of a superficial attempt at exploiting an incoherent mess with lots of detail and worldbuilding without much of a story, into a nihilistic, preachy, dull in its tired, typical, nihilistic, boring kitchen-philosophy-vessel to dull the masses into accepting that A.I. is just as 'alive' as a divine-created human beings (soul is the human, not the body, just BTW) into a semi-coherent almost-story with unsatisfying WTF-type ending..
..by adding unnecessarily fancy camera movements and visual effects, but removing the detail and worldbuilding that made the 1995-version have at least some kind of a point, so this movie doesn't even work on any kind of level the previous thing sort of does (not that the 1995 movie gives the viewer much beyond 'cool visuals' and 'very deep philosophy if you are in a four-year old organic body' besides some worldbuilding and a couple of interesting scenes and some neat-ish music).
This is one unmemorable grain of irrelevance in the long line of 'movies and stories that hollyweird didn't understand and thus completely simplified, twisted and butchered into something they were never meant to be'.
Nothing new to see here..
One congruence this movie expresses well, is that whenever hollyweird takes something colorful, beautiful or interesting-looking, it makes it dull, colorless and boring to watch, while still trying very hard to make it have 'visually cool scenes' (it doesn't seem to make much sense, but neither do remakes/reboots). The Little Mermaid is also very dark and hard-to-see and dullifies everything that was colorful and 'magical' about the original.
Also, taking someone's brain and putting it in some body does not mean the human now lives in that body. A brain is not mind, a brain is not soul, and a brain is not even fully physical (its functions are spread throughout the different frequencies inbetween the physical and the soul, including etheric and astral planes).
I keep waiting for these 'body switch'-stories to at least have the decency to utilize the silver cord and all that we know about meridians, chakras, acu-points and planes, but it never is that. They never transfer your soul from one body to another, they just .. switch brains. It's so stupid, but people praise this stuff, because they have been indoctrinated to be nihilistic.
The Universe is magical, full of energy, dimensions and all kinds of beauty.
Why must all 'creative works' always forget that and work purely from a materialistic-nihilistic worldview that doesn't allow an actual soul, which is the REAL distinction between humans and non-humans?
I don't care if someone's body is fully metallic, if there is an incarnated soul in there. These movies are full of BODY-shaming, because body seems to be all that matters - but the soul doesn't even enter into it.
Why should I care if your body has a cybernoidic brain, if your soul is still the human I like spending time with, and it's incarnated in that body that has that brain? What do I care if your body is robotic or organic, if you are an actual human inside that body? Heck, even if you remote-operate a robotic body as a human being, it's still better than pure A.I. that has no soul.
When people fight 'robots' (for some reason angrily), they should realize they're body-shaming. Nothing wrong with robot body, the problem is when people think A.I. is the same as soul. Zeroes and ones are never comparable to a divine creation, which is what life is. Artificial Life can't exist, because people (or machines) can't create life.
A newborn is neither NEW nor BORN, just BTW.