Yeah, it was pretty retarded not to get the notion that "tens of thousands of us versus two of them" is not a situation that demands "balance".

I see your meaning with regard to defining the nature of criticism, but I don't agree with it. To my mind criticism is always a matter of opinion, and structural analyses such as the ones you mention (plot holes, etc.) are one factor to consider in one's criticism, but "I hated every minute of it" is still a valid…

I'm with you. I don't watch movies in order to feel bad. In fact, I don't do *anything* to feel bad—that will happen on its own from time to time, much to my consternation.

YES. I was so disappointed when that didn't turn out to be the case. the "real world" TOTALLY should have been another layer of the Matrix designed to catch the nonconformists, especially after Smith's revelation that Matrix 1.0 had failed miserably because people realized it was too good to be true, so the machines…

Mmmmwuh? Dibs?

a "cybernetic organism—living tissue over a metal endoskeleton"? A T-2000, perhaps? ;-)

Well, the money has to come from somewhere, right?

Seriously? THAT'S your complaint? Not "Bay directing Twilight Zone"?

"The world does not normally burn coal or oil. "

You mean, like, in climates that were formerly too cold and dry to produce much ice, but now are still subzero but less freezing, and more humid, so that they can? Those kinds of places?

OK, I don't want to offend the faithful—but I'm almost certain to do so with this post—but this is, at its core, *exactly* what frightens me about religion in general: deeply religious people lose the ability to think. (Or maybe people who can't think really latch onto religion).

Dr. Lizardo has it right—think of it as "very-near-future" sci-fi, in that the only real sci-fi element is the existence of a computer system that can actually reliably predict specific crimes. That's definitely in the realm of science fiction for now, though it's certainly not space opera or time travel or anything.

Not every scammer is as transparent as the Nigerian princes, you know. Some might actually be competent at seeming like real people instead of, you know, cancers on society.

I don't think "the 7-year-old girl argument" has anything to do with being age appropriate; the girl's complaint is that the normally heroic character didn't *do* anything. She became a passive, worthless mannequin, which is not really what superhero comics are *for*.

Or massive overcrowding due to population growth makes life cheap, and replicants are no longer in demand because the desperate poor will willingly do the crappiest jobs anyway (and are considered disposable by their corporate overlords).

Oh, calm down. He was saying that his androids will be lifelike instead of stiff and metallic—Roy Batty rather than C3P0. For Cripes' sake, man! I'm pretty sure he's a huge star wars fan, and he did say that Anthony Daniels was, quote, "brilliant". He's clearly just saying his 'bots are smoothy and human-like (as…

Then you are thinking wrong. Think about how many things you used to like to do, and don't anymore. Go back decades if you have to. I know there are plenty. Now imagine of *everything a human being can possibly do* is something that you've done to death and can'rt tolerate anymore.

To me, I honestly think something like suspended animation would be better. I'd love to live (with my friends & family) for, say, maybe 1 year out of every ten—so that every year I lived there would be lots of fabulous and exciting new things to see & learn, and I'd be able to see the distant future quickly coming to…

No, it's really not. It's more along the lines of "eating nothing but hot fudge sundaes six times a day for 75 years straight would suck". Which is very different from "hot fudge sundaes suck", right? It's all just the notion that even good things can come in quantities that qualify as "too much".

Superman has pants (it ain't porn, after all). He just doesn't wear his underoos on the outside anymore. ;-)