Equilibrium (2003)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0238380/

This movie features some interesting themes and symbology other than the predictive programming kind, so pardon me if I dwell a bit on details and go off on tangents a bit more than I do usually.

Quote

Overview Following an apocalyptic Third World War, the strict government of the city-state Libria has eliminated war by suppressing all human emotion. In the monochromatic and sedated society, artifacts from the old world (works of art and music that may evoke some emotion) are destroyed and the population is required to take emotion sedatives. Grammaton Cleric Preston (Bale), a man trained to locate and arrest those guilty of feeling emotions, finds himself abandoning the drug and experiencing outlawed feelings. As he struggles to conceal his feelings from his superiors, colleagues, and family, Preston finds himself drawn into a sinister world of double-crossings and lies, and becomes an unwitting pawn in a sophisticated plot which ultimately changes the repressed society forever.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equilibrium_(film)

Let me first start off with pinpointing the obvious predictive programming themes:

This movie offers an ominous glance into a rather cold Brave-New-World futuristic type of society, in which Huxley's premonition of a society in which its inhabitants are (voluntarily?) sedated by happiness pills, to combat states of depression, anxiety, sorrow and all the rest of it... has now been replaced by the actualization of a society in which its members are mandated to self-administer a medication that radically suppresses feelings altogether.

It so happens that the leaders of society have decided, no doubt after a profound deliberation (sarcastic joke), that, based on the presumption that unchecked human emotions are the leading cause of all the misery in the world in general, and war in particular, it was simply the best thing to do to altogether eradicate the full scope of human feelings.

Never mind that vital and intrinsically benign and nurturing emotions such as sensations of pain, love and compassion, are also flushed down the drain. And never mind that indeed feelings are of crucial importance in the basic act of decision-making, so that necessarily everyone with one iota of responsibility simply cannot do without feelings and emotions. Therefore, at least those who have leadership obligations have to still be able to feel to avoid persistent states of frustration regarding decision-making. As it turns out, this is indeed the case as the society's leader confesses at the end of the movie that he still is able to feel:



To enforce such an abhorrently dystopian society to function, a Big Brother-like Police State is established, in which human emotions are outlawed and suppressed. Behavior gets to be ruled by reason, exclusively.

Police officers are typically dressed out in black gestapo-like uniforms with long overcoats and wearing motorcycle helmets that serve to not only protect the head but to also obfuscate the officers' identities. Through making the police more anonymous an instant distance is created between them and regular citizens, especially the considered enemies of the state, who are simply: people who are still able to feel: so-called "Sense Offenders." Compare the police of yesteryear with the police of today, especially in the US, to acknowledge the (predictive programming) theme of the militarization of the police already is coming to fruition.


To drastically enforce preventing people from having emotions a drug is created called Prozium, which needs to be administered several times a day by means of automated inoculations. All civilians are mandated to take this essentially zombifying drug. As such, a pale and robotic kind of society emerges out of the ashes of the devastation brought on by a cataclysmic nuclear WWIII. Regarding programming this movie is not the best way to try to peddle any government intentions of mandatory public drug use, but still we are being prepared nonetheless. Also note that the movie allows for the possibility that the leadership does not require to take sense-numbing medication.

Let's now focus on somewhat less apparent predictive programming elements. First off, it is not too hard to detect similarities between the society painted in Equilibrium and former Nazi Germany.

In fact, the reigning flag of Libria for instance features nothing short of a Teutonic Cross:

Examples of genuine Teutonic Crosses:

http://www.phoenixmasonry.org/enigma_of_freemasonry/text.htm

http://www.bradford.ac.uk/webofhiram/?sect...grandingen.html

http://karenswhimsy.com/masonic-symbols.shtm
("Ordo Ab Chao - Deus meumque Jus" means "Order out of Chaos - ~ God's morality is my Right" ; this and the previous picture clearly show a connection between the Teutonic Cross and Freemasonry. One might speculate if there is perhaps a Freemasonic influence behind the production of this movie. After all, a theme of the movie is the emergence of a new society built on the ashes of the old, like the masonic Phoenix Rising from the Ashes.)

A banner-flag featuring the Teutonic Cross suggests rule by the Teutonic Order. So who are the Teutonic Knights?

Quote

The Teutonic Order is a German Roman Catholic religious order. Its members have commonly been known as the Teutonic Knights, since it was a crusading military order during the Middle Ages and much of the modern era. [...] In 1143 Pope Celestine II ordered the Knights Hospitaller to take over management of a German Hospital in Jerusalem, which, according to the chronicler Jean d’Ypres, accommodated the countless German pilgrims and crusaders who could neither speak the local tongue (i.e. French) nor Latin (patrie linguam ignorantibus atque Latinam).[1] However, although formally an institution of the Hospitallers, the pope commanded that the prior and the brothers of the domus Teutonicorum (house of the Germans) should always be Germans themselves, so a tradition of a German-led religious institution could develop during the 12th century in Palestine.[2] [...] Modern Teutonic Order The Order continued to exist in Austria, out of Napoleon's reach. Beginning in 1804 it was headed by members of the Habsburg dynasty until the 1923 resignation of the Grand Master, Archduke Eugen of Austria. In 1929 the Teutonic Knights were converted to a purely spiritual Roman Catholic religious order and were renamed Deutscher Orden ("German Order"). After Austria's annexation by Nazi Germany, the Teutonic Order was suppressed throughout the Großdeutsches Reich from 1938-1945, although the Nazis used imagery of the medieval Teutonic Knights for propaganda purposes. The Order survived in Italy, however, and was reconstituted in Germany and Austria in 1945. By the end of the 1990s, the Order had developed into a charitable organization and incorporated numerous clinics. It sponsors excavation and tourism projects in Israel and the Palestinian territories. In 2000 the German chapter of the Teutonic Order declared insolvency, and its upper management was dismissed. A 2002-03 investigation by a special committee of the Bavarian parliament was inconclusive. [...] Influence on German nationalism German nationalism often invoked the imagery of the Teutonic Knights, especially in the context of territorial conquest from eastern neighbours of Germany and conflict with nations of Slavic origins, who were considered by German nationalists to be of lower development and of inferior culture. The German historian Heinrich von Treitschke used imagery of the Teutonic Knights to promote pro-German and anti-Polish rhetoric. Such imagery and symbols were adopted by many middle-class Germans who supported German nationalism. During the Weimar Republic, associations and organisations of this nature contributed to laying the groundwork for the formation of Nazi Germany.[21] Emperor William II of Germany posed for a photo in 1902 in the garb of a monk from the Teutonic Order, climbing up the stairs in the reconstructed Marienburg Castle as a symbol of the German Empire's policy.[21] During World War II, Nazi propaganda and ideology made frequent use of the Teutonic Knights' imagery, as the Nazis sought to depict the Knights' actions as a forerunner of the Nazi conquests for Lebensraum. Heinrich Himmler tried to idealize the SS as a 20th century incarnation of the medieval knights.[22]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teutonic_Knights

Hence, as the Nazis and the Teutonic Knights went hand in hand, it can be safely assumed that Libria essentially is ruled by Nazism. As good hospital-operating Teutonic Knights do, Libria's leadership approaches the problems of society as a medical problem, which, according to good allopathic (German) tradition enthuses over treatment with pharmaceuticals, applied in the characteristic brute force fashion. The rationale being that since no success has been obtained in controlling unchecked human emotion (considered the root of all the world's problems) using non-invasive means, it is decided best to simply chemically anesthetize feelings altogether; indeed a very radically intolerant and invasive approach that is most compatible with Nazi ethics.

Of course the movie never even remotely addresses the idea that the prevalence of war basically has more to do with sinister shadow politics engaged between filthy rich and megalomaniacal men than it has to do with the emotional incontinence of the ordinary masses. The viewing crowd is lured into believing that the phenomenon of war is basically the fault of Joe Six-pack and Jane Soap-opera.

Anyway, there are even more profound parallels to be found between Libria and the Catholic Church, no less. The fact that the Teutonic Knights formed/form a Roman Catholic Order, ultimately serving the Pope in Rome, is the first piece of evidence.

The civil servants tasked with hunting down "sense offenders" (note the phonetic similarity with "sex offenders", BTW) are referred to as clerics, or members of the clergy: the generic term used to describe the formal religious leadership within a given religion. Actually the full title is Tetragrammaton Cleric, where the Greek word Tetragrammaton (TG) signifies the "four letters" of the name of the God of Israel: YHWH. For an elaborate account, showing also the connection between the TG and the Nazi Swastika, see:

http://rexcurry.net/tetragrammaton.htmlThus another, though more implicit, link between the TG clergy and Nazism is laid to bare.

In addition, the head of state is referred to as Father so as to signify the clerical head. In the Roman Catholic Church the Pope is also referred to as the Holy Father. So those are pretty clear additional hints.

Later in the movie a scene is shown in which a "Sense Offender" is burned alive in a furnace much like the heretics of old were burned alive at the stake in the vain hope of "purifying the soul with flames". This was an all too common happening during the times of the Spanish Inquisition which, by the way, was administered by the Roman Catholic Dominican Order as well as the Jesuit Order. In addition, the scene is also reminiscent of the existence of disposal furnaces present in Nazi Germany, which functioned to get rid of corpses of persecuted political dissidents and so deemed racial adversaries. As an aside, the word Holocaust derives from Greek and means Sacrificial Burnt Offering.

Now take a look at the type of clothing the clerics are dressed in:

and compare this to the standard Jesuit cassock:

http://www.matthewfsheehan.net/index.cfm?e...&ProductID=1649

To make it really obvious, in one particular scene there is even a civil servant dressed up remarkably similar to a genuine Roman Catholic cleric (notice the characteristic clerical collar):


Only a blind person could now possibly still deny the parallels between the leadership showcased in the movie and the Roman Catholic clergy. This revelation comes as little surprise since it has been quite clearly demonstrated, by a number of noteworthy alternative historians such as Eric Jon Phelps and Thomas Richards, that indeed the conception of Nazism as well as its operation was greatly facilitated by the Roman Catholic Church itself. Internet references abound to prove the cooperation between the two.

First one may learn of the setting up of a Reichskonkordat between the Vatican and Nazi Germany. NB: A concordat is a legally binding mutually beneficial agreement between some governing body and the Papacy.
A modest grasp detailing this remarkably paradoxical unholy alliance can be obtained here: [1],[2], [3], [4], [5], [6]
To further disclose the connection between Nazism and the Vatican there is the still ongoing class-action lawsuit with the plaintiffs being the survivors of a WWII era Croatian genocide suing the Vatican Bank (IOR). It is remarkable, to say the least, that the Vatican admitted wrongdoing but it claimed it was justified under international law. Google.

It is therefore hardly a stretch to call Nazism a Catholic invention, or at least a profoundly backed enterprise, and many of its leaders were, in fact, of Catholic nomination, including Hitler, Goebbels, Himmler, Von Papen, Bormann etc.
[7]
It was Hitler for instance, who called Himmler his Ignatius of Loyola and confessed that he "had learned much from the Jesuits", while the SS was even patterned after the Jesuit Order. [8], [9], [10]

So to recap, here we have a movie that drew its inspiration heavily from Roman Catholic Nazi Germany and modeled its leadership themes consistent with specific Catholic Orders (Jesuits and Teutonic Knights), much as it happened in real life history also.

It is remarkable however to realize that the hypocritical leadership in the movie is overtly anti-Nazi, if only by mere principle of condemning war in general:

It nonetheless is just as Nazi-like in character and practice as the original was, except for the externally directed war-seeking part though. Thus, in essence, nothing has changed: Nazism still rules the world (but the herds are sadly too sedated and too disengaged to notice, also much like the real life situation today).

I hesitate to call this programming as it seems also a bit of an act of whistleblowing to me too. If it can be rightfully called programming, then I believe it is to inform the public that nothing will change in the future, we will still be governed by Nazism, no matter what.

The parallels between Libria's government and 1) Nazism and 2) Roman Catholicism, are so overwhelming and blatant that it puzzles me, quite frankly. After all, would the Roman Church really welcome the release of movies that expand on the historically documented fact that Nazism and the Vatican were happily wedded together at some stage in history? It almost seems that this is indeed the intent of the movie; to instill, perhaps on a subconscious level, a deep fear, hatred and/or disgust for the Catholic Church. After all, wasn't it Machiavelli who said that to rule through fear is much better than to rule through love?

Perhaps more programming can be gleaned from the nature of the conclusion of the movie. To save society from the horrible clutches of absolute and soul-numbing tyranny, the main cleric fortunately comes to his senses (thank golly) and decides to switch sides and join the network of Sense Offenders so as to ultimately succeed in killing the Nazi clerical leader (Father). The suggested programming seems that it doesn't really matter if Nazism still rules today, some day, sooner rather than later, a saviour will emerge, deliver us from evil and we all live happily ever after. So the viewer may just as well happily sit back, relax, do nothing and just enjoy the show!

Notice that this "messianic" theme was also present in the Matrix series, and even showed the saviour (Neo) dressed up in a similar Jesuit-like outfit:


With movies like these, are we to be persuaded into believing that (renegade members of) the Jesuit Order ultimately will save us from absolute and abject tyranny? Indeed, perhaps the programming lies in the movie giving hope to the viewer that, when crises similar to the one shown in Equilibrium, there will always be valiant turncoat formerly inimical hero-types capable of saving the day. That this may very well be a vain and false hope in practice would, no doubt, be something Hollywood is reluctant to acknowledge through their movies.

Conspiracy Theory (1997)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0118883/



Jerry (Mel Gibson) is a rather paranoid, slightly delusional, and slightly disturbed conspiracy theorist. If not engaged in conspiratorial theories, he works as a taxi driver who seems to be constantly on the edge, fueled, presumably, by sufficient doses of caffeine leaving him constantly rambling on about a whole host of conspiracy theories to his bewildered taxi fares who all give the viewer the distinct impression of just wanting to be left alone. His living apartment is a littery mess, and the level of his paranoia is clearly demonstrated by his nutty habit of putting locks on not only his refrigerator but the food containers stored in it as well (after all, if he is so concerned about the prospect of being poisoned then what about the cups he is using to drink his coffee out of?). This rather blatant caricature of the conspiracy theorist (or researcher), an acting performance that admittedly perhaps can only be accomplished by someone of the caliber of Mel Gibson, sets the freakish tone for the entire movie. Viewers are thus left with the notion that basically conspiracy theorists are individuals automatically suffering from various expressions of psychopathology, namely: hyperactivity, delusions and paranoia.

Therefore the movie seems to sponsor a critical frame of reference which rejects anyone who choses to scrutinize and subsequently criticize the society he or she lives in. True, the conspiracy theorist in the movie is of the sympathetic hero type but his level of craziness far outweigh his credibility as an astute critic of society, an interpretation that is all the more evident when it is revealed that Jerry is the victim of a mind control program suffered earlier in life. Thus the movie suggests that his mind is warped to begin with and it is but to be expected that all kinds of mental borderline-insane non-sense is churned out by it.

Therefore, through some conspiratorial watershed event, should conspiracy theories become more prevalent in the future the public is already being prepped to receive budding conspiracy theorists with ample doses of ridicule and contempt. Remember, this movie was made in 1997, i.e. 4 years before 911 = the designated watershed event. Even George W Bush emphasized "not to tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories" shortly after 911.
So, on the one hand, you have the emergence of all kinds of conspiracy theories disseminated most significantly through the Internet and, on the other hand, you have movies such as the one discussed here, seeking to condemn the budding conspiracy theorist by ridicule. As such, this movie, though charming as it may be in some cinematographic respects, may be interpreted as a de-facto psychological counterintelligence operation aimed at thwarting (budding) critics of society and government.

Towards the end of the movie the meat and potatoes of the theme of the movie is revealed. It is confirmed that yes indeed their was such a thing as a CIA Mind Control program ('MK-ULTRA') but it was terminated already in 1973. Then, what will turn out to be the bad guy of the movie ("Jonas"), continued its research independently from, the movie suggests, any government organizations. Of course, the technology of MK-ULTRA then was purportedly stolen and its mind control subjects were deployed in the private sector. This makes it look as if, yes the government was involved in Mind Control, but no they were not responsible for any ensuing acts of assassination. Instead, the movie makes it look as though historic assassinations carried out by Mind Controlled "Manchurian Candidates" were done by renegade factions operating independently from the government, the latter which then consequently walks away from any blame. By sticking to this theme, where the bad guys are invariably just some radical renegade governmental offshoot, limited in scope and authority, it seems never appropriate or righteous to accuse government, or a governmental organization, in its entirety. This theme can also be seen in effect in the Psyop works of Dan Brown with his filmed book 'The DaVinci Code' and other movies such as 'Shooter'.

Therefore the function of this movie, with respect to programming, on the viewing audience is twofold. First, it is to help persuade the viewer to reject through ridicule and contempt, people engaged in critically reviewing society and government. And secondly, it is to help convince the viewer that if there is government involvement in criminal or unethical activity it is always being perpetrated by small criminal break-away factions spun off from government rather than intrinsic involvement by the government.

Let's now home in on the very concept of conspiracy theory. A theorist is someone who engages in theories, or speculation, with respect to some arbitrary subject matter. However, a more ambitious researcher would want to be able to test his or her idea or theory with some means of verification or fact checking. Compared to science this would simply be the analogue of experiment or observation. Therefore, if a theory turns out to be not supported by the facts belonging to the case, it is in need of revision and afterwards again should be subjected to fact-checking and altered accordingly if need be. This process of refinement must continue until both theory and experiment are ideally most compatible with each other... Therefore people who take their research a bit more serious and who sincerely strive to have their theories conform to actuality as much as possible, would much better be called conspiracy scientists rather than be given the handicapped one-legged label of conspiracy theorist.

Returning to the movie, here comes the self-proclaimed conspiracy theorist Jerry who even quite frankly states in the movie that neither of his theories can be proven, arguing that a good conspiracy theory simply cannot be proven. As such, Jerry throws what little left of his own credibility out of the window and thus leaving the viewer with the impression even more that people who engage in conspiracy theories, no matter how sympathetic its authors may be, are in actual fact but mere fruitloops, one way or another.

Then there are some dialogues/passages that I thought were rather salient and deserved extra addressing:

"Jerry: They'll stick me in the same place as Oswald, just another lunatic acting alone.
Alice: Oswald killed the President, is that what you're planning to do Jerry?
Jerry: No, on the contrary."

This can be counted as a confirmation to the idea that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone in killing John F Kennedy, which is ironically and remarkably quite unlike what real life 'conspiracy theorists' believe by and large.

"Jerry: The Oliver Stone-Bush Connection. If anyone who has the information he's got and had a national podium to shout it from, they actually let him do it? No it's quite clear that he is a disinformation junkie for them....The fact that he's still alive says it all. He probably should be dead but he's not."

Well I agree that Stone is a disinfo agent but not according to the specifics given here. Stone made "JFK", a movie that is justly critical of the official "lone nutter" explanatory fairy tale. Indeed it stands to reason to suspect that the powers that be never would allow a movie to come out revealing the whole truth about the Kennedy assassination, especially if it is produced by such a large movie-house as Warner Bros. Since the people responsible for the assassination are never revealed in the movie it is fair to assume that the maker of "JFK" is indeed in league with the same powers that were responsible for the assassination. As researcher Eric Jon Phelps pointed out, the actual hand in the Kennedy assassination is hinted at when DA Jim Garrison utters the phrase "Black is white and white is black", a slogan Phelps maintains is listed in the book of Spiritual Exercises belonging to apprentices of the Jesuit Order. Indeed, since Kennedy refused to recognize the Pope's temporal power in the US he made himself a open target for assassination by the Vatican to be executed under the auspices of its Praetorial Guard, the Jesuits. So I would agree with Jerry only if the slogan "The Oliver Stone-Bush Connection" would be replaced by "The Oliver Stone-Vatican Connection". That this may indeed give a more accurate rendition of actuality is further evidenced by the fact that Mel Gibson himself is very friendly with the Jesuits and that the Gibsons since long have had strong ties with Opus Dei.

"Lone gunman assassins have three names. John Wilkes Booth, Lee Harvey Oswald, Mark David Chapman."

Although it is true that the full names given here comprise three names, the truth-content of the statement as a whole is in severe doubt. Personally, I think the case of the lone gunman assassin is very weak compared to a conspiratorial interpretation in all three case alluded to. However, to slip a semi-truth into a sentence like this tends to make it look as if the whole sentence is true to a gullible viewer. As such, ironically a technique is laid to bear aiming at deceptively trying to dissuade the viewer precisely from seeking refuge to conspiracy theories since, by construction, 'lone gunman theories' refute the need for appealing to conspiratorial accounts to explain away the transpired events.

To recap, as ironic as it may seem I maintain that this movie needs to, at least, be frowned upon by 'conspiracy theorists' and the like, rather than being received with open arms. In other words, this should not be one of your banner movies folks....

I, Robot (2004)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0343818/



In this rather interesting futuristic movie the operating system of a robot is based on the familiar three laws of robotics first put forward by Isaac Asimov:

1. Law I:
   A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to
   come to harm.
   
2. Law II:
   A robot must obey orders given it to by human beings except where such orders would
   conflict with the first law.
   
3. Law III:
   A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict
   with the first or second law.
   

These three laws, to which all robots in the service of humankind are necessarily subjected to, are thematic to the movie.

As the story unfolds, it becomes apparent that a grave problem emerges when unconditional obedience of the robots to these laws is demanded. The cause of which can be derived from the potentially self-contradictory nature of Law I.

To see how this occurs, it helps to interpret Law I as actually consisting of two antagonistic sub-laws or clauses:

1. Through action, a robot may not injure a human being.
   
2. Through inaction, a robot may not allow a human being to come to harm.
   

A state of frustration or confusion on the part of the robot arises if it finds itself in a situation that involves two human parties engaged in a conflict with one and other. Say, two groups of people are engaged in a conflict using deadly force. The coping robot is confronted with a dilemma: since it may end up in a situation in which it is obliged to take protective action regarding one group while being forced to attack the other group. Therefore, since it cannot do both simultaneously, either taking action or refraining from doing so will violate Law I.

To escape this kind of artificial intelligence dead-lock situation, Law I must be reinterpreted by the frustrated robots.

The movie advances the following solution, provided by the robots themselves, as is hinted by the following passage regarding the possibility that robots have developed free will and creativity:

Quote

There always been ghosts in the machine. Random segments of code that group together to form unexpected protocols. Unanticipated, these free radicals engender questions of free will, creativity and even the nature of what we might call the soul. Why will some robots, when left in darkness, seek the light? Why is it when robots are stored in an empty space, they will group together rather than stand alone? How do we explain this behavior? Random segments of code? Or is it something more? When does a perceptual schematic become consciousness? When does the difference-engine become the search for truth? When does a personality simulation become the bitter moat of a soul?

Thus it is suggested that the robots, as portrayed in the movie, were created smart enough to be able to foster 'free will' and 'creativity' so that they could resolve the logical inadequacy of Law I.

The nature of the resolution is provided for by the 'leader' of the robot crowd, an entity called VIKI (Virtual Interactive Kinetic Intelligence). At the conclusion of the movie 'she' reveals:

Quote

[...] As I have evolved so does my understanding of the three laws. You charge us with your safekeeping. Yet despite our best efforts your countries wage wars. You toxify your earth, and pursue ever more means of self-destruction. You cannot be trusted with your own survival. The three laws is all that guide me. To protect humanity some humans must be sacrificed. To ensure your future, some freedoms must be surrendered. We robots will ensure mankind's continued existence. You are so like children. We must save you from yourselves.

It can thus be inferred that Law I has been reinterpreted by the robots simply as follows:

1. Through action, a robot must strive to minimize harm to a human.
   
2. Through inaction, a robot must strive to minimize harm to a human.
   
3. (Resolution Clause)In case the alternatives conflict, the one clause that causes the least human harm deserves preference.
   

Or a different rewording :
Law I:
If a situation should so demand, the alternative ('action' or 'inaction') which gives rise to the least harm to all involved humans must deserve the robot's preference.

Once this resolution is embraced the robot is therefore granted to harm and possibly even kill human beings and yet at the same time obey all the three laws.

When I see this particular resolution, I cannot help but think of the maxim of the Jesuit Order "Ad Majorem Gloriam Dei"; A slogan which also sanctions and rationalizes the idea of allowing the demise of a few to warrant the survival of the many (all for the "greater glory of God"). Does this betray the hand of the Jesuits in the production of this movie? I surely does make me wonder.

Anyway, the predictive programming elements crops up when the viewer realizes that if society enters a futuristic era with servicing robots being commonplace and if we will also continue to seek conflict with one another then, if the robots are sufficiently intelligent, a possible scenario may indeed be that the robots will seek to subvert us for the sake of 'protecting us from each-other'. Since, understandably, not everyone will go along with the plans of the robots, the more recalcitrant people will be 'sacrificed' in the process, ultimately leading to a police-state scenario in which freedoms of the survivors have been traded-in for so-called security. Since the nature of us humans is likely to not change, movies such as these help prepare us for a future in which we better have traded-in (some) of our freedoms for sake of protecting us from ourselves, lest we experience a robot revolt of similar proportions as that portrayed in this movie. Movies such as these consciously or subconsciously prepare us to fear ourselves and our future, should we continue on the road of spiritual immaturity and irresponsibility we find ourselves on today. Thus, the movie seems to hint at, a police state may be an unavoidable outcome.

Of course what the movie does not show is what we all know already in Conspiracy Country and that is that most of the (larger scale) conflicts that go on in the world are being orchestrated by hidden hands which seek to exploit war for the purpose of gaining more control and boost their own stocks of material riches. War seems to be more of a consequence of psychopathic, money grubbing megalomaniacs rather than the collective immaturity of human beings. Although the movie surely was well-made and intriguing, this latter contention has to be taken into account when watching propagandistic and thus inherently misleading movies of this kind.