FX cancels The Bastard Executioner after one season

Bastard-Executioner

When I discovered that FX had cancelled this show I was totally bummed.

It had a great cast, beautiful locations and a some what taboo story but well worth watching. 

This is my take on the cancellation as written at IMDB.  WW~


 

Sir Wilkin BrattleI for one, will miss Sir Wilkin Brattle

Unknown actor Lee Jones excelled in this mystical medieval story which focused on the unknown truth surrounding who exactly Jesus Christ was in a historical context during the dark times of the rule of the Catholic church over all of Christendom in Europe.

I loved the Christ mythology that was presented in the show and applaud Sutter for putting it out there once again for ordinary people to possibly ponder. Even in 2015 most can’t accept any other narrative about Christ other than what is written in the bible which was written by scribes and scholars loyal to the Catholic church.

I’ve said forever, that if Christ did come back to earth again they would still crucify him a second time for still being a heretic.

Seems not much has changed since medieval times which is a damned shame. I would have thought that the modern, more learned than ever human being would have far surpassed the fairy tales of the church by now.

Now we’ll never know what Sutter could have brought to the table regarding this incredible new vision of interpreting who Christ may have really been, which I’ve questioned for a decade myself.

Of course, I will also miss the expanding love interest between Sir Wilkin and Baroness Lady-Love Ventriss and the possibility that they would have produced a child together.

Damn the simpletons and the non-visionaries. You can’t take TBE but you can watch Jax Teller and his compatriots burn their enemies alive in a pit and I guess that’s not so bad.

I beg to disagree.

EPISODE VII: Why We Should Be Very Worried About Luke Skywalker…


Something is wrong with Luke Skywalker. 

That much by now seems evident. The Luke Skywalker we’re going to encounter in  Star Wars: Episode VII  is going to be very different from the hero we’re used to or even from the young man we last knew from those timeless final scenes of  Return of the Jedi.

By the way, possible spoilers ahead; so be warned.

Now that in itself is a fascinating prospect with great potential for new storytelling. The possibility of a brooding, troubled Luke Skywalker, perhaps echoing the troubled Anakin Skywalker of Revenge of the Sith. I think we should be cautious, however. I had already half-written this post a few months ago, after seeing the second Episode VII teaser (in which Luke’s voice features), but had forgotten to publish it. Then I waited for another trailer; and now we’ve had the *final* trailer and Luke Skywalker still isn’t anywhere in sight. More extraordinary, he isn’t even in the official poster that was recently unveiled; Han, Leia and Chewie are, but no Luke.

And as if THAT wasn’t curious enough, the official character posters have also just been put out and there isn’t one for Luke! All of which only adds to the sense of mystery and intrigue; and for some of us, adds to the low-level anxiety over just what the deal is with Luke Skywalker. Seriously, omitting him from both the final trailer and the poster is a serious mind-game being played with us; albeit a very effective one in marketing terms.

star-wars-the-force-awakens-character-posters-released_han-leia

Official character posters are still omitting Luke.

 

It’s worth mentioning, in fact, that Luke hasn’t been in *any* of the two teasers and main trailer; most people feel like he was in the second teaser, but that’s not necessarily the case – we heard his voice (which may have been re-used audio from 1983) and we saw a mechanical arm reaching out to touch Artoo-Deetoo, which we take to depict Luke Skywalker, but we actually don’t know for certain who that’s supposed to be. For one thing, it appeared to be an unadorned mechanical hand, and as far as we know, Luke Skywalker has a synthetic-flesh artificial arm from Empire Strikes Back onward.

All of this omitting of Luke Skywalker is for the most part obviously a very shrewd marketing decision, designed to tease fans and build up intrigue and uncertainty. It’s very clever and is proving highly effective, as no one would’ve imagined we’d be two months from the film’s release, with three teasers/trailers having been watched, and yet no sight of Mark Hamill’s iconic character.

But all of this omission might also signify a deeper meaning.

The omitting of Luke from the final trailer has reignited fears and anxieties over his fate, with a number of articles appearing suggesting again that Luke may have turned to the Dark Side, along with various other theories and speculation (even The Guardian has gotten in on this, publishing an article a few weeks ago).

This is something that’s been vaguely troubling me for some months now.

Dominic Jones on Star Wars Underworld laid out the theory some time ago that the villain of Episode VII may turn out to be Luke Skywalker himself, with most of the talk of other new characters and names (‘Kylo Ren’, for example) being red herrings.

This theory that Luke has either turned to the Dark Side or gone off the rails in some other way has started to gain currency among numerous fans and spoiler-hunters. Some are insisting that the mysterious villain ‘Kylo Ren’ is in fact Luke Skywalker in his new form. While this would present us with fascinating story potential, and while it would also thematically resonate with the themes of all the existing Star Wars movies, I tend to doubt this is true (and sincerely hope it isn’t).

I’d like to think it isn’t true, because I’d like to think the new custodians of the Star Wars legacy wouldn’t be so radical as to take the hero of the Original Trilogy and make him a villain. Having said that, Abrams was pretty radical with the 2009 Star Trek reboot, killing off the entire Vulcan planet (and the species, pretty much) and setting up a whole new timeline. So he’s shown his willingness to break with tradition and try to impose his own mark on a franchise.

luke-skywalker1

But would those handling George Lucas’s world really do that with Star Wars?

It would certainly be messing with expectations. It would also be messing with the legacy of Star Wars – but then I always said that’s exactly what this whole new enterprise was in danger of doing in the first place. Return of the Jedi is, to me, the perfect, decisive ending to the ‘Star Wars Saga’; and going beyond that ending is a dangerous pursuit, particularly if it concerns the canon of Luke Skywalker, because Luke already has the perfect closure. You cannot have a better ending for Luke Skywalker’s character than what we saw in Return of the Jedi – it was thematically and emotionally the only fitting conclusion and it has resonated for decades. Since I was six years-old (and to this day), I still get a little emotional when I think of that climax to ROTJ and the Skywalker saga.

In a moment I’ll explain why having Luke ‘go Dark’ is a terrible, terrible idea that would gut the entire Star Wars saga; but first, just a quick look at some relevant information.

The ‘Spoiler Boy’ alleged inside-leak from a while back, which described Lawrence Kasdan’s Episode VII screenplay as “too good for Abrams”, also claimed to reveal the following; that ‘the original Luke went into seclusion for 20 years…’, suggesting something went wrong after Return of the Jedi. That Luke might’ve been in a grim state following ROTJ isn’t necessarily surprising, given that he’d just killed his father and come very close to turning to the Dark Side, but the implication of course is that a lot more has also happened since.

But the leak also added that ‘he has a purpose and a plan behind his decision…’ This could set up Luke as more of an Obi-Wan type figure in this new trilogy; a recluse in hiding, biding his time (for what, we don’t know) and waiting for the right moment to fulfil his ‘plan’, whatever that may be. This too would be an interesting direction, echoing Obi-Wan in the first Star Wars. George Lucas often said of the way he wrote the stories for the existing films that he liked the idea of one story mirroring or echoing the other; characters go through the same challenges, the same repeating motifs, in what Lucas called “an epic, repeating poem”.

returnofthejedi4489157_orig

Luke’s frame of mind after Return of the Jedi is actually something I used to think about a fair bit, even as a child. It was clearly evident from the end scenes of ROTJ that Luke was deeply affected by his confrontation with Vader and Palpatine.

When he comes back down to Endor to join in the celebrations, he isn’t happy, isn’t someone ready to join in the party. He is distant and aloof. He burns the body of his dead father, looking traumatised by it, and even when he comes to rejoin his friends, he doesn’t look present in the moment. Leia has to come and guide him back to the celebrations. This makes sense, of course; he’s just seen his father die mere minutes after having redeemed him from the Dark Side. And he has also just recently learned Leia is his sister.

I always wondered, even as a child, what was going on with Luke in the immediate days and weeks after Endor. Would he come to terms with what had just happened – and with all the truths and revelations he’d just been hit with – or would he be afflicted and distant? Would he be questioning everything? Remember, he was angry at both Yoda and Obi-Wan in Return of the Jedi, because they’d lied to him for so long about his true heritage. The Jedi Masters he’d trusted all this time had been lying to him. Could his anger at Obi-Wan and Yoda have continued? And, combined possibly even with anger towards his father for having fallen to the Dark Side in the first place and how died and left his son alone, would Luke have become more and more depressed at this point in time?

luke_end

And not just depressed, but more and more distant and aloof too, as was already evident in the final scenes of ROTJ? After all, he is now the only Jedi in existence and must surely feel very alone. What if his relationships started to break down at this point; he already seemed like he was drifting away from Han Solo in most of ROTJ – could that too have gotten even worse? And maybe he even drifted more from Leia too, particularly given her inability or difficulty in understanding the Force, as evidenced in the Leia/Luke dialogue in ROTJ just prior to Luke setting off to confront Vader.

With all of that borne in mind, it isn’t entirely unrealistic to think that Luke might’ve been set on a troubled path, post-ROTJ. Perhaps even one that, after an additional thirty years, could have ended up with him being someone virtually unrecognisable to us come the events of the imminent  Episode VII  (and especially as we don’t know what events have occurred in that thirty-year interval).

Some of those convinced that the Luke we’re going to encounter in Episode VII is on the Dark Side point to a 2005 episode of the US television show ‘Dinner for Five’, in which Mark Hamill himself pitches the idea of returning as a Dark Side Luke Skywalker (JJ Abrams is also in this video, along with Kevin Smith and Marvel’s Stan Lee).

There is also precedent for a ‘Dark Luke Skywalker’ in the classic 1991 Dark Horse comic-book series, Dark Empire, which portrayed Skywalker (briefly) turning to the Dark Side as an apprentice of a reincarnated Emperor Palpatine. Disney has (rightly) insisted all Expanded Universe material is considered non-canonical and won’t be drawn from; but that doesn’t mean some existing ideas can’t be re-packaged.

starwars-darkempire-scans

So my objection to the possibility of Luke ‘turning Dark’ isn’t about whether it’s realistic or not; it could be conceivable.

No, my objection is that it would utterly wreck the whole point of Luke Skywalker – and with it the entire Star Wars Saga as it presently exists. Here’s why having Luke ‘go dark’, despite its obvious dramatic potential, is a bad idea.

Luke is the ultimate hero of Star Wars. Everything he stands for is as The Good Guy, the one who withstood the Emperor’s seduction, the one who didn’t turn, the one who didn’t repeat the mistakes of his father, the one whose abiding goodness even helped redeem his dark father at the end. Having him go bad in any of the new films would utterly wreck the Original Trilogy, especially Return of the Jedi. All of the power of those utterly compelling ROTJ scenes with the Emperor, all those scenes where Luke comes so close to going dark but doesn’t – all of that would be utterly undermined and gutted were he to be now revealed as having gone down that road.

Besides that, this has all been done already in the prequels with Anakin’s fall from grace – it doesn’t need to be done again. The whole poetry of the six films was that the son did not succumb to the same seduction to the Dark Side that his father did; change that now and you severely damage both the Original Trilogy and the prequels.

Those late scenes in Return of the Jedi are some of the most powerful scenes – and certainly the most thematically important – of the Star Wars mythology.

If the same Luke Skywalker who was able to withstand Palpatine himself has now subsequently turned to the Dark Side anyway, then Return of the Jedi will never be the same again; for that matter, this is the same Luke who resisted Vader on Bespin too – so he twice overcame the seduction of the Dark Side, and his refusal to be seduced ultimately saved Anakin’s immortal Jedi soul and helped topple the Empire and restore freedom to the galaxy. That’s how utterly central to Star Wars Luke’s ‘goodness’ is – it’s not simply a case of me saying ‘hey, you can’t make the hero bad’, but it’s a case of not rewriting a central thematic POINT of the entire saga; in fact, not just a central thematic point, but the central emotional core of the entire saga. Because when all is said and done, the central core of the existing saga is that Anakin fell to the Dark Side and Luke did not.

Luke Skywalker was my childhood hero. There are plenty of dark, gritty ‘heroes’ or anti-heroes around, and some of them are great characters; in some ways, even Anakin Skywalker could be regarded as such, along with all kinds of fictional legends like Bruce Wayne, Tony Stark, etc. But we also need our ‘clean’ heroes; those who are simply the Good Guy, regardless of the world around them.

And Luke Skywalker is the ultimate Good Guy. Indeed, the prequel trilogy, for all the darkness of its conclusion in the lava plains of Mustafar, only served to reinforce and re-emphasise the abiding heroism of Luke Skywalker. Because as we watched Anakin Skywalker fall to the Dark Side, and as we watched Jedi like Obi-Wan Kenobi and Mace Windu have to try to do grim things in desperate times, we were reminded all the while of how Luke Skywalker would later *refuse* to do grim things, refuse to commit the ‘necessary evils’, and how he would ultimately stand firm against all darkness, all temptation, all subversion, in order to be true to the Jedi way and in order to prove that Good would ultimately win, even against all the odds.

star_wars_39793

When a dying Yoda and even the ghost of Obi-Wan both insist that Luke has to kill his father – that this is the only way to win – Luke refuses. And this is a Luke who, at this point in time, has every reason to ‘go Dark’; having just discovered that he’s been lied to his entire life.

Yet even now, he does not succumb. As the only Jedi left alive in the galaxy, he doesn’t give in to his anger or bitterness; he fights the good fight. And in so doing, he not only defeats the Dark Side and redeems his father, but he demonstrates his mother’s dying insistence at the end of ROTS that “there is still good in him”. Padme’s dying conviction that “there is still good” in Anakin Skywalker can only be fulfilled because of the uncorrupted good that is in Luke Skywalker. The good that is in Luke Skywalker is the definition of Luke Skywalker; and is the underlying pulse of the entire Star Wars mythology. Again, if you change that, you not only cheapen both Return of the Jedi and Revenge of the Sith, and you not only severely damage Luke Skywalker, but you irrevocably damage the entire Star Wars saga and mythology and what it’s about.

That is why I object to the idea of Luke ‘going Dark’. And that’s why every Star Wars fan should also object to it; because after all the excitement and short-term glee over the new films and stories has passed, there’s a bigger question of the longer-term Star Wars legacy. I’m not, by the way, trying to spoil the party; I’m very excited about Episode VII, but Star Wars is important to me, and Luke Skywalker is particularly important to people like me.

I asked a fellow blogger and Star Wars fan, Robert Horvat, for his views on this subject. This is what Rob says; ‘When I was growing up, Luke Skywalker was my hero in the Star Wars saga. I will never forget that first scene that introduced Luke Skywalker. It wasn’t dramatic, in fact, it was very mundane; but with every new scene that followed I began to realise that I was a lot like him. From humble beginnings as a reckless farm boy, we watched him go on a hero’s journey of self-discovery and grand adventure, mature into a Jedi, restore freedom to the galaxy and in the process save his father’. And like so many of us who were enchanted by the Star Wars galaxy and the Tatooine sunset as children, Luke wasn’t just a fictional hero but a symbolic figure of personal significance for Rob, as he explains; ‘For a suburban kid like me growing up in the late 70’s and early 80’s, Star Wars was my release from the hardships of growing up in a migrant household. It sounds corny but when Luke Skywalker opened the detention level door to Princess Leia’s cell on the Death Star and said, “I’m Luke Skywalker. I’m here to rescue you,” metaphorically he was speaking to fans worldwide, who wanted to escape with him on his hero’s journey…’

Robert writes the terrific History of the Byzantine Empire blog, by the way, and also this general history/miscellany blog here.

Just what a fantasy hero like Luke Skywalker can mean to people is also summed up very touchingly in this item I recenty came across, in which a US soldier, a veteran of the ‘War on Terror’, was asked to justify all the war and invasions of the post 9/11 era. Daniel Crimmins gave a very poignant, honest reply, but this is part of what he said; “You grew up wanting so bad to be Luke Skywalker, but you realize that you were basically a Stormtrooper; a faceless, nameless rifleman, carrying a spear for empire, and you start to accept the startlingly obvious truth that these are people like you…”

But the point, as far as this particular post is concerned, is that Luke Skywalker himself is an ideal; whether it’s to a yearning farm-boy, an isolated kid in a migrant household or a soldier fighting a war in unfamiliar lands.

Thinking about what Luke Skywalker means to us, I am reminded of what I wrote earlier this year, in response to the death of Leonard Nimoy, about ‘the extent to which our modern, shared mythologies form a huge part of the cultural, even moral or ethical, framework of our lives because they’re such an embedded and such a rich point of reference; the way that people of older generations referred to Bible stories and characters or religious stories, for example, is the same way people like me, and (I’ve discovered) some of my friends, refer to our modern mythologies. I’ll talk about Luke Skywalker in the Dagobah swamp trying to decide whether to confront his father the same way someone else might talk about Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemene…’

And what I wrote about Nimoy in the same post is equally applicable to Luke Skywalker and Mark Hamill; ‘These characters and their epic struggles are to us what the ancient Epic of Gilgamesh must’ve been to young Babylonian men as they grew up or what the Greek demi-gods or Roman myths must’ve been to their respective enthusiasts within those cultures…’

____________________

It is possible of course that all of these suggestions, rumours or theories about Luke will prove untrue. Maybe they’ve even been discreetly encouraged from official sources in order to provoke intense debate and anticipation prior to the film’s release. Clearly, something has gone wrong in the galaxy and something is wrong with Luke Skywalker; but I’m still holding out hope that he’s ultimately still the good guy and that if he is in isolation somewhere it’s because he’s playing out some sort of plan or biding his time, just like Obi-Wan Kenobi was in A New Hope.

Lightsaber-Construction-ROTJ-DELETED-SCENE-luke-skywalker-26013125-500-263

Ironically, given how widespread the belief now is that ‘Luke Has Turned Bad’, it might be that the biggest shock moment of Episode VII is finding out that Luke is in fact still the hero, still the epitome of the Good Side of the Force; and because so many of us might’ve been expecting him to be dark and tortured, that moment will act as a joyous affirmation and will become one of those triumphal Star Wars moments, like the Falcon blowing up the Death Star or Yoda beheading the Clone-Troopers. Imagine that – some grim, hopeless scenario that our younger, new characters are struggling in, where all hope seems lost… and then Luke Skywalker emerges, performs some extraordinary act of heroism and Force-power to save the day.

Wouldn’t that be something wonderful? Wouldn’t that feel like a hundred Christmases all at once?

Or, if it’s the darker stuff we want (since ‘darker’ does tend to make for better drama), the scenario could be simply that one of Luke’s young Jedi trainees has gone off the rails and that might be Kylo Ren. There are all kinds of other possibilities in that, of course; Kylo could be Luke’s son, or could be Leia’s son. The idea that Luke’s attempted training of either his own child or Leia’s child might’ve gone wrong and resulted in a wayward Jedi with a fondness for the Dark Side would also nicely echo Obi-Wan and Anakin. The other theory gaining a lot of traction suggests that Kylo Ren and Daisy Ridley’s ‘Rey’ might be Skywalker/Solo twins. I tend to infer quite strongly from the trailers that Daisy Ridley’s character is a Skywalker and is set up to be the central hero of this new trilogy.

Rey’s line in the final trailer – when she says “no one” to the question of “who are you?” – could indicate her ignorance of her heritage, which would echo Luke and Leia’s own situation in the  Original Trilogy.

This could set us up for a rehash of the classic Vader/Luke “I am your father” moment from ESB, with Luke himself this time being the one saying it. Not only would this play perfectly into the established George Lucas motif of the ‘repeating poem’ that underlies all the existing Star Wars films, but JJ Abrams also has some form with this kind of thing, having consciously recreated key scenes and scenarios from The Wrath of Khan and inverted them for 2013’s Star Trek: Into Darkness. I am, at this moment in time anyway, convinced that Rey is Luke’s child. She just totally looks like a Skywalker. But that remains to be seen.

As for the suggestions that this may be Luke Skywalker’s big send-off, I’m not sure that’s likely. What seems more likely is that Luke will not feature in much of this film and may even only appear at the end (hence his absence from the poster and the trailers). Thinking about it, I can picture a final, climatic scene of Episode VII where Luke appears, and then he’ll probably feature more in Episode 8.

The rumors have of course also been strongly developing that Han Solo may not make it out of Episode VII, however. The idea of Luke or Han (or Leia, for that matter) being killed off as early as Episode VII is almost too distressing to even think about, but those guiding the creative decisions of this new generation of Star Wars may want to do something that radical and make a clean break with the ‘old guard’ in one big send-off movie before handing over fully to the new cast. This idea seems to be reinforced by the trailers, which focus most on the new characters and not the old ones. As I said elsewhere, there’s no guarantee that fans are going to get that magical moment of reunion between Luke, Leia and Han; in which case, the 1983 scenes of them celebrating on Endor with the Ewoks might even remain for all time as the final footage of them together.

20120405-214810-e1333983617562_jedi

But if killing off Luke Skywalker seems like a drastic move, having him turn to the Dark Side is just as much so. Because again, and I can’t state this enough – the whole POINT of Luke Skywalker is that he’s the one who doesn’t turn to the Dark Side. He is the ultimate good, the ultimate innocence. It was Luke’s abiding goodness, his faith in the power of redemption, his belief in Anakin Skywalker, his unwillingness to succumb to the Emperor, his lack of interest in power or greed, that defined him; and it was this that ultimately put things right in the Universe.

So here’s to hoping this is all a clever bluff and that the Luke Skywalker we encounter in Episode VII will in fact still be the ultimate galactic hero we know and love.

 

___________________

Also, don’t want to let the moment pass without marking the sad passing of 32 year-old Daniel Fleetwood, the Star Wars mega-fan, who passed away in the last couple days from a terminal illness. Daniel, who had been given only months to live, had been holding on, wishing to see The Force Awakens before he died and fearing he wouldn’t last long enough.

DANIEL-fleetwood-atbBajaSquad

Thanks to a massive social media push, the studio allowed Daniel to see an unfinished edit of the film, and he died days later, to become One with the Force. The image above is borrowed from @BajaSquad on Twitter and is the only appropriate tribute.

 Source: https://theburningbloggerofbedlam.wordpress.com/2015/11/13/episode-vii-why-we-should-be-very-worried-about-luke-skywalker/#more-26572

Jupiter Ascending : The Olympians 2.0

WW~Notes:  I have to say I am a huge Sci-fi fan mainly because in most films even modern day ones there is little to no sexual situations and very little raw language.  Science Fiction is an endless film industry with infinite possibilities for the future, some dystopian, some magical and some right down draconian and horrific.  Although, I will not be around to witness such things I hope for the best and pray the demons in our midst will be vanquished, eventually.  I am looking forward to seeing this film in the near future.  Here is the review from Vigilant Citizen’s site.

????????????????????????????????????????????????????????Jupiter Ascending, is one of the most expected and ambitious projects of the cinema industry yet, produced, by the Wachowski Brothers, creators of the incredibly successful movie saga The Matrix, Jupiter Ascending , released on the UK, the 6th of February of 2015, is a flamboyant fusion between The Matrix, Star Wars, Princess Diaries, also adding elements of another dystopian works on literature, cinema , as well as certain political elements, that should be analysed. Despite the harsh critics it has received, I think it should definitely be seen, and observed, carefully. Let’s check it out why.

The plot of the movie spins around a young girl, half Russian, half British, nationalized American, called Jupiter Jones (Mila Kunis), she carries an ordinary life cleaning toilets, and taking care of her family; desperate trying to get out, her life , gives a major change, when, at a Medical Clinic, expecting to extract her ovaries, she is almost killed by a breed of Aliens, called The Keepers. Rescued by Caine Wise, a half lycan, half humanoid rogue soldier, she is introduced to the truth, not only on them, but whom she is in reality, the heir to Planet Earth, part of the Royalty.

Then, there it comes the conflict, between our protagonist, and the House of Abrasax, one of the most powerful dynasties, in the whole of the Universe, its three heirs: Kalique, Titus, and the all-powerful Lord Balem, compete, for power, owning entire systems of planets under their grip. The Earth’s true nature is revealed by Caine Wise to Jupiter: Your planet was seeded by Abrasax Industries roughly one hundred thousand years ago. What does this mean? Here it is an interesting connection between Jupiter Ascending as well as Blade Trinity , and the creepy dystopian saga, Unwind, written by Neil Shusterman, the Vampires in Blade trinity, harvest humans, keeping them on a chemically induced coma, to extract their blood, forever; in Unwind, the dream of the ruling class is to achieve immortality by using the fluors of the ‘ expendable ones’. Abrasax Industries hunt humans, kept them, and extract their essence, to produce a special fluor, capable of prolonging time, in other words, the eternal youth, the star product of Abrasax Industries.

Jupiter Jones, perplexed, is given a quasi elitist explanation by Kalique: ‘ Your Earth is a very small part of a very large industry. Right now, Balem is entitled to Earth. Once you claim it, the Earth will belong to you.’ Here is when it comes the major conflict of the movie, the inner power struggle between the Abrasax brothers to fight for the Planet Earth. Another interesting details , come when Stinger Apini, the character, played by Sean Bean, colleague of Caine Wise, tells some quite eerie details of Abrasax Industries , as well as, Planet Earth’s and humanity origin; the origins of humanity was on a planet called Horus: You’ve been taught that birthplace of the human race is Earth, it is not. Abrasax Industries, seeds planets, so they can collect the harvest, humans, to extract their fluor, once they procreate, or they overpopulate, they start, the harvest, to keep the things up.

Here it is an interesting combination of Malthusianism, and Social Darwinism. The first one, pioneered by the venetian monk Giammaria Ortes, then by Thomas Malthus, actualized by The Club of Rome’s 1972 book Limits to Growth , speaking about the dangers of the overpopulation , and the consumption of the natural resources. And then, there is the Darwinist element, the consideration of certain beings, as nothing more , than a cattle to breed, in order to perpetuate the ruling of the elite, the underclass is sacrificed, on behalf of the Oligarchy. One movie character that illustrates this pernicious and savaging nature , is Lord Balem Abrasax, the ruler of Abrasax Industries, the richest , and most powerful of his brothers, among his most highlighted quotes are: Some lives will always matter more than the others’ resembling George Orwell’s work Animal Farm, when Squeeler , the lackey of the tyrant pig Napoleon says: ‘All animals are equal, but some animals , are more equal than others, that is animalism.’ Another quote that illustrates, the ruthlessness of Balem is: I will harvest that planet tomorrow, before I let her, take it from me.’ However, the two most revealing ones are:’ I give life, and I take it ‘, resembling Robert Oppenheimer, one of the fathers of the Manhattan Project grandiloquent statement: ‘Now I have become death, the destroyer of the worlds’, and ‘ Life , is an act of consumption.’ Here it is revealed the psychopathic nature of Balem, quite similar to that of Agent Smith in The Matrix, while torturing Morpheus, depicts the human race as a virus that consumes the resources of the planet, like a plague. For Abrasax Industries, the single, and most valuable commodity, is not oil, gas, or electricity, but time, in some sort of way, the Elite, here, becomes almost like the most vicious parasite, predating on the lives of the others to perpetuate, and prolong theirs, like a modern version of the vampires.

Titus Abraxas, is another very interesting movie character, desperate, to gain control over his brother Balem, arranges a marriage, between him and Jupiter Jones, in order to ‘ protect the Earth’ , but with plans to murder her, and therefore, inhering the earth himself, gaining the upperhand against Balem. We can make an analogy with the chess game, when Titus brought Jupiter under her protection, he put Balem on a zugswang state, but by marrying her, he would have to score a brilliant checkmate, forever. As Titus tells Jupiter in the wedding: Love doesn’t play any role here, it’s a matter of state. This raison d’etat, long before, treated by the French Cardinal Mazarin , disciple of Cardinal Jean Duplessis de Richelieu, on his Breviary for Politicians, and also Machiavelli; it is also shown many times in the popular literary as well as TV series Game of Thrones by George R.R. Martin, the marriage between Cersei Lannister and King Robert Baratheon, Sansa Star, and Tyrion Lannister, Joffrey Baratheon, and Margaery Thyrell, Khal Drogo , and Daenerys Tangaryen, are just a few examples on how marriages, at the uppermost levels, are just power manoeuvrings to seal an alliance, or to incline the balance of power, favouring one side against the other, a classical Realist axiom , International Politics as a Zero-Sum Game. A really good work on the subject , is Alison Weir’s The Marriage Game, analysing the British Aristocratic politics in form of a great novel, another excellent work is Mario Puzo’s The Family, on the Borgia Dynasty and their inner fights in the Italian and Vatican aristocracy. So, here it is a little bit of Game of Thrones, that the Wachowski brothers, have added to this explosive cocktail.

Another interesting feature, that is present all along the movie, is the fact, that humanity is controlled secretly by an invisible, and all powerful race of aliens, always watching and being vigilant, sometimes, caring, sometimes, destroying as they please. According to the Ancient Astronauts theory, the Angels, are in reality Aliens, that visited the earth long time ago, and inbreeded with humans, such as was depicted in the Apocryphal Gospel, the Book of Enoch, describing how a group of angels, called The Watchers, or Grigori, commanded by Semyazza and Azazel, fell in love, with the daughters of the mortals, and inbred with them, originating a destructive race of giants, called Nephilim. The Grigori, were chained and casted to darkness, and the Nephilim, destroyed by the Archangels, apparently, however this idea is nothing new at all, if we take a look at the Norse mythology or, better, the Greek one, we will find examples of Gods, having relationships with humans, these ‘ Gods’ could be Aliens, in fact, the Gods had offspring , demi-gods, such as Achilles, Hercules, or Theseus. What does this has to do with Jupiter Ascending?

Well, the movie, by itself, it’s a depiction of the fight between two Gods, let’s say, the evil, wicked and ruler Balem(Zeus), and the rising, benevolent, and revolutionary Jupiter(Prometheus). Jupiter Ascending is a dystopian futuristic depiction of the Greek gods fighting each other. Why? There is a key scene in the movie, when Stinger Apini, shows Jupiter the incredible advancements of the futuristic technology, Jupiter thinks of all the goodness that it could bring to the human race, and lets it be known to Apini. However, he doesn’t- think humanity is ready for this, and besides, her kind wasn’t keen on sharing things, to what Jupiter says: I do. Prometheus takes the fire of the gods, and teaches the humans all sorts of arts, how to work the metal, in other words, to progress, to what Zeus, angry, chains him to a rock, and sends an eagle to devour his liver each morning, but the liver regenerates itself on the afternoon, so it becomes an absolute an abhorrent torment. This clash between Zeus and Prometheus is shown in Aeschylus’s Prometheus Bound: ‘ You ask why he torments me, and this I will now make clear. As soon as he had seated himself upon his fathers throne- Zeus overthrew his father Kronos, and then became the head honcho-he immediately assigned to the deities their privileges and apportioned to them their proper powers. But of wretched mortals he took no notice, desiring to bring the whole race to an end and create a new one in it’s place. Against this purpose none dare to make stand except me- I alone had the courage; I saved mortals so that they did not descend , blasted utterly to the House of Hades. This is why I am bent by such grievous tortures, painful to suffer, piteous to behold. I, who gave mortals first place in my pity, I am deemed unworthy to win this pity for myself, but am this way, merciless disciple, a spectacle that shames the glory of Zeus.’ Jupiter , as Prometheus, was the only one, to stand for the human race, when Lord Balem, tries to force her abdication, saying: That Planet belongs to me; she answers: not anymore. Jupiter, is trying to make sure, he isn’t gonna do it to nobody else’s. The House of Abraxas, could be called the House of Olympus. The lack of consideration for the mortals, the Hellenic gods feel, shown in The Iliad , when the Gods plan the Trojan war, to restore their status, luring the pathetic prince Paris to take Princess Helena of Menelaus. This is the same as Kalique’s when she’s asked about the harvest: ’ No, but I’ve heard they feel no pain’, these are High-tech humanoids, capable of regenerate , and last for thousands of years, the dream of the Trans humanism gurus, becoming more than a human, a hybrid, fusing machinery and flesh, enforcing the human capabilities up to unimaginable levels; it is, then, when Kalique’s revealing words to Jupiter make sense:’ Time , is the single , most precious commodity’ This idea of time, perpetuating live, and the sacrifice of the unworthy is also present on the 2011 movie In Time, with Amanda Seyfried, and Justin Timberlake; on this film, time isn’t just a commodity, is money, is the only money available, and how much you have, means how long are you going to live, therefore, the rich live forever, and the poor, are left to perish. Jupiter Ascending, is truly a good action movie, with excellent graphics, a quite elaborated plot, and lots of political messages, that deserve to be taken onto consideration.

A change of venue for Pragmatic Witness II

In the beginning, I was aiming for former readers to find my site after losing my domain PRAGMATICWITNESS.COM, which I was informed by WordPress that it was auctioned off after a certain amount of time; time that I did not have to re-establish it.

I had intended on focusing on the same subjects that the original Pragmatic Witness was compiled of (whitewraithe.wordpress.com), that being the truth about America and the ultra-secret Jews that orchestrate our lives from cradle to grave.

hollywood-bannerObviously, I did not get too far with that concept so a few weeks ago I thought, why not focus on the same subject but from a different perspective; the entertainment industry consisting of movies, films, television programs and music.

If you did not know before, Hollywood in all it’s forms and the music industry has been brainwashing and indoctrinating the American people for over a century.

Jewish run Hollywood (not Arabs) have given Americans the ability to lose all their inhibitions beginning with pornography, then denying God, and learning to embrace evil, which basically reduced or devolved us to our basic primal instincts.  And I haven’t even began to talk about what the sports industry has reduced grown men to.

We may consciously behave within society and culture, but in private it’s another story.  We are not the decent Americans of half a century ago.  Now, this has not happened to every American, but a large majority has fallen under the Hollywood spell and a “spell” it definitely is.

Hollywood used to be called Hollywoodland.

hollywoodlandFrom Paganlore.com –

HOLLY
A beautiful white wood with an almost invisible grain; looks very much like ivory. Holly is associated with the death and rebirth symbolism of winter in both Pagan and Christian lore and is important to the Winter Solstice. In Arthurian legend, Gawain (representing the Oak King of summer) fought the Green Knight, who was armed with a holly club to represent winter. It is one of the three timbers used in the construction of chariot wheel shafts. It was used in spear shafts also. The qualities of a spear shaft are balance and directness, as the spear must be hefted to be thrown the holly indicates directed balance and vigor to fight if the cause is just. Holly may be used in spells having to do with sleep or rest, and to ease the passage of death. A bag of leaves and berries carried by a man is said to increase his ability to attract women.
  However, the tree’s main area of power is divination.

Do you now understand why the film industry was named HOLLYWOOD?  Well, it should be obvious.  The industry can hypnotize you in ways you never thought true or even remotely possible, and they’ve done it to each and every American since motion pictures came into existence in 1894.

Turner Classic Movies first televised this 100th anniversary of the motion picture in 1994.

For lack of an exciting, more challenging life I turned to movies and television and then music at a young age to occupy and challenge my mind.  I became a walking encyclopedia of the golden age of Hollywood, and an expert on early rock-n-roll, then hard R&R, then metal music.  However, something miraculous happened.  After years of being indoctrinated by everything Hollywood and the music industry, I walked away from it, and decided that whatever I subjected myself would be on my terms – not theirs.  It’s been that way now for over a decade.

Hollywood has its uses and occasionally makes exceptional films.  Otherwise, shy away from the most potent drug in America – the big idiot box in theatres and the little one in your home.

From establishing the worst Hollywood has to offer these days, I also will post television and movie reviews and news about upcoming films especially the ones I want to see and those you would probably like to pass.

As always, I welcome thoughts and comments about this industry as it does affect us all and in many ways interferes with our daily routines.

Whitewraithe~

“Lucy” : A Movie About Luciferian Philosophy

Luc Besson’s Lucy is a movie about a woman who unlocked the full, 100% potential of her brain power instead of the 10% humans reportedly use. While many viewers were confused by the movie’s odd mix of pseudo-science and action scenes, the core of the movie lies in a whole other realm: It is about the Luciferian philosophy of the occult elite and its futuristic pendant, transhumanism.

leadlucy

Warning : Gigantic spoilers ahead

Lucy is a science fiction movie that combines profound existential questions with a bunch of action scenes involving Asian gangsters. While this dichotomy wasn’t well received by critics, there is an esoteric message hiding behind it all. Lucy is indeed more than a movie in which Scarlett Johanson being a “bad-ass” – it is an allegorical tale celebrating the philosophy of the elite : Luciferianism.

The fact that the main character is named Lucy is the first clue hinting towards the philosophical basis of the movie.  The name Lucy and Lucifer both derive from the Latin word “lux” which means “light”. Lucifer means “light bringer” in Latin, and is considered by Luciferians to have brought divine knowledge (light) to humans after being cast out of heaven by God. In Luciferian circles, Lucifer is perceived as a “savior” who gave humans the knowledge necessary to ascend to divinity. In the movie, Lucy is a human version of Lucifer, as her increased brain capacity allows her to gain the knowledge required to become a god.

Going further than ancient Biblical tales, the movie is also labelled “transhumanist”, which is a modern, futuristic byproduct of Luciferian thought. Transhumanism is about humans reaching another level of development through man-made technology and robotics. To fully understand Lucy, we will need to look further into these two concepts.

Luciferianism and Transhumanism

“Luciferianism” is a word that is rarely used because the word “Lucifer” is associated with Satan in Judeo-Christian theology. It is nevertheless the philosophy that overwhelmingly prevails in the highest circles of society – what we call the occult elite. Interpreted in several forms, Luciferianism can be associated with philosophical currents such as humanism, gnosticism and Kabbalism and is the driving force behind secret societies such as the Rosicrucians, the Freemasons, and many others.

Luciferianism is about humans reaching divinity through human means. This philosophy is symbolically represented with two mythical figures who bear similar characteristics: Prometheus and Lucifer. Both of these figures are considered by some circles to be benefactors of humanity as they brought fire and light (representing divine knowledge) to struggling humans. They gave mankind the means to become gods themselves, through their own means.

From this perspective, Luciferians interpret Biblical tales from a unique vantage point. In Genesis, Luciferians consider the snake who gave Eve the forbidden apple to be a hero, as he is the one who brought humanity knowledge of good, evil and everything in between. The story of the tower of Babel, a human construction meant to reach God in the sky is viewed favorably by Luciferians as it represents humanity’s struggle to reach divinity; the building of this immense tower was, however, stopped by God who is perceived as a jealous demiurge who trapped humans in the physical world.

In the 20th century, a high-tech version of this philosophy appeared as transhumanism, a movement that seeks the use of science and robotics to push humanity to another stage of development. Transhumanism’s admitted ultimate goal is the total merging of humans and robots. While most people who agree with transhumanism probably do not know much about Luciferianism, one of its “founding fathers” clearly sees the connection.

The British philosopher Max More first articulated the principles of transhumanism as a futurist philosophy in 1990 and started a worldwide intelligencia to promote it. One of his essays, entitled “In Praise of the Devil” goes deep in theological territory to connect transhumanism with Luciferianism.

The Devil—Lucifer—is a force for good (where I define ‘good’ simply as that which I value, not wanting to imply any universal validity or necessity to the orientation). ‘Lucifer’ means ‘light-bringer’ and this should begin to clue us in to his symbolic importance. The story is that God threw Lucifer out of Heaven because Lucifer had started to question God and was spreading dissension among the angels. We must remember that this story is told from the point of view of the Godists (if I may coin a term) and not from that of the Luciferians (I will use this term to distinguish us from the official Satanists with whom I have fundamental differences). The truth may just as easily be that Lucifer resigned from heaven.

According to More, Lucifer probably exiled himself out of moral outrage towards the oppressive demiurge Jehovah. He therefore describes the basis of Luciferian thought:

God, being the well-documented sadist that he is, no doubt wanted to keep Lucifer around so that he could punish him and try to get him back under his (God’s) power. Probably what really happened was that Lucifer came to hate God’s kingdom, his sadism, his demand for slavish conformity and obedience, his psychotic rage at any display of independent thinking and behavior. Lucifer realized that he could never fully think for himself and could certainly not act on his independent thinking so long as he was under God’s control. Therefore he left Heaven, that terrible spiritual-State ruled by the cosmic sadist Jehovah, and was accompanied by some of the angels who had had enough courage to question God’s authority and his value-perspective.

What does this all have to do with Lucy? Well, Lucy is about everything above. It is about humanity reaching divinity through knowledge, about using science and technology to break “biological barriers”.

Although all of this might sound positive, there is a troubling, dark side to it all: Only a select few can be “illuminated” by the light of Lucifer. The rest of humanity is perceived as a lesser race with lives of no value. For this reason, Lucy remorselessly kills a bunch of people, including many innocents. This is what Luciferian thought is truly about.

Lucy as a Regular, Everyday Idiot

At the beginning of the movie, Lucy is a young woman who is clearly not a genius. She is manipulated by the douchebag she is dating to bring a suitcase to some person inside a hotel. She ends up getting mixed-up in a high-stakes Asian mob deal – and she’s confused and panicky the entire time.

The first scenes of the movie are intercut with footage of a leopard hunting a prey.

The first scenes of the movie are intercut with footage of a leopard hunting a prey. This is a rather heavy handed way of telling us that regular, un-illuminated humans act like animals in the jungle.

As she gets roughed up by the mobsters, Lucy wears a leopard-skin vest which tells you that Lucy is a regular, animalistic human who have yet to reach a high level of evolution.

As she gets roughed up by the mobsters, Lucy wears a leopard-print vest which tells us that Lucy is a regular, animalistic human who has yet to reach a higher level of evolution.

The mobsters end up turning Lucy into a drug mule. They insert into her body a packet of CPH4, a synthetic drug that is about to flood the European market. After receiving a kick in the stomach, the packet located inside Lucy breaks and her body absorbs the contents of the entire packet. This causes her brain to become increasingly powerful.

At one point, a doctor tells Lucy:

“Pregnant women manufacture CPH4 in the sixth week of pregnancy in tiny quantities. For a baby, it packs the power of an atomic bomb. It’s what gives the fetus the necessary energy to form the bones in its body. I heard they tried to make a synthetic version of it.”

In the philosophical context of the movie, the fact that the drug is synthetic (which means that it was created by humans), is important as it ties in with the transhumanist philosophy of human evolution through science and technology.

Is there any scientific truth to Luc Besson’s premise? Here’s a part of an interview with Besson discussing the science behind Lucy.

Q: Some people are complaining about the fact that the science behind your film — the whole idea that humans only use 10 percent of their brains — is not true. What’s your response to that?

A: It’s totally not true. Do they think that I don’t know this? I worked on this thing for nine years and they think that I don’t know it’s not true? Of course I know it’s not true! But, you know, there are lots of facts in the film that are totally right. The CPH4, even if it’s not the real name — because I want to hide the real name — this molecule exists and is carried by the woman at six weeks of pregnancy.

While the scientific facts behind the movie are nebulous, the symbolic meaning of it all is not. While Lucy is in the process of transforming into a transhuman superhero, Professor Norman (played by Morgan Freeman) gives a presentation about the untapped power of the human brain. His speech quickly turns into an advertisement for transhumanism.

Professor Norman explains that the only aim of cells is to go through time and the only way to achieve this is to either become immortal or reproduce. Lucy did not reproduce.

Dr. Norman explains that the only aim of simple cells is to make the knowledge they’ve acquired go through time. The only ways to accomplish that is to either become immortal or to reproduce … Lucy did not reproduce.

Professor Norman then says something that comes straight from a pamphlet for transhumanism :

“It’s up to us to push the rules and laws and go from evolution to revolution”.

In other words, humans need to reach another stage through technological and scientific advancement, not through natural evolution.

This is exactly what happens to Lucy. Along with acquiring a great amount of knowledge, Lucy develops extra-sensory perception (ESP) and is even able to control matter and other people. But one thing is terribly wrong: As soon as Lucy becomes smarter, she starts shooting and killing people. Why?

Luciferian Lucy: A Representative of the Occult Elite

Someone once said: “It is not about how much knowledge you have, it is about what you do with it”. What did Lucy do when she became the most intelligent person on Earth? Did she cure cancer? Did she find a solution to world hunger? Did she invent an economic system that is fair and profitable for all countries on Earth? Nope. She grabbed a gun a started shooting Asian guys. Even worse, she goes on to cause pain and suffering innocent people.

As soon as Lucy breaks out from her cell, she kills everybody in the vicinity. Is remorselessly killing people a sign of advanced intelligence?

As soon as Lucy breaks out from her cell, she kills everybody in the vicinity. Is remorselessly killing people a sign of advanced intelligence?

While killing those involved with her capture is somewhat understandable (although she probably did not need to kill everybody), the bloodshed does not end there. When she goes outside, she shoots a taxi driver in the leg because he did not immediately comply with her request. Later in the movie, Lucy drives like a crazy person and causes a ten-car pileup.

How many people died and got injured in the wreckage caused by Lucy? Lucy doesn't care.

How many people died and got injured in the wreckage caused by Lucy? Lucy doesn’t care.

The pain Lucy causes is also psychological. When a doctor asks Lucy to prove her powers, she “enters” his brain and reminds him of the death of his daughter in specific detail. She could have told him about the color of his car, but why do that when you can talk about the most painful memory imaginable?

Lucy’s transformation takes a very specific direction and being a “good person” is not part of it. Her metamorphosis caused her to completely lack moral values, compassion and consideration for other human beings. Apparently, being extremely intelligent turns you into an evil transhuman robot. Lucy herself says:

“I don’t feel pain, fear, desire. It’s like all things that make us human are fading away. It’s like the less human I feel, all this knowledge about everything, quantum physics, applied mathematics, the infinite capacity of a cell’s nucleus. They’re all exploding inside my brain, all this knowledge.”

If one examines Lucy’s evolution, one realizes that she turns into exactly what the occult elite represents. She uses her powers to control people and to advance her aims despite the human suffering she is causing. She morphed into something that is not human and, all of a sudden, regular humans are treated by Lucy as lesser beings that are idiotic, manipulable and expandable.

Throughout Lucy's transformation, we see closeups of her eye which keeps changing forms, sometimes looking reptilian which emphasizes the fact that she it not human anymore.

Throughout Lucy’s transformation, we see closeups of her eyes which keeps changing forms (sometimes appearing reptilian) which emphasizes the fact that she it not human anymore.

Lucy also has no trouble use sex (one of human's animal weaknesses) to get what she wants.

Lucy also has no trouble using sex (one of humans’ animalistic weaknesses) to get what she wants.

Also, like the occult elite, she spends a LOT of time controlling and monitoring people’s electronic devices.

Not unlike the NSA, a creation of the elite to completely control the flow of information across the world, Lucy can easily take control of electronic devices.

Not unlike the NSA, a creation of the elite to control the flow of information across the world, Lucy can easily take control of electronic devices.

She can literally visualize and consult the data emitted by mobile finds towards the satellite, like the NSA.

She can literally visualize and consult the data emitted by mobile phones, not unlike the NSA.

Of course, like the elite, she can appear on television and hear what you say in your living room. Interestingly enough, the television in Dr. Norman's hotel room is a Samsung - a brand which was recently discovered that listens to conversations even when it is turned off and sends it to a "third party" (which can easily be the NSA).

Of course, like the elite, she can appear on television. Interestingly enough, the television in Dr. Norman’s hotel room is a Samsung. A recent news story revealed that Samsung Smart TVs can listen to your conversations (even when its off) and send the information collected to a “third party” (which can easily be the NSA).

Like the occult elite, Lucy is not on a pure, noble mission for illumination. There is a dark side to her actions, and, apparently, since she’s the hero of the movie, it’s all good.

Lucy Ascends to Divinity

Towards the end of the movie, Lucy is less a human being than a divine being who sacrifices her terrestrial life to becoming nothing less than a god (I don’t use the term goddess because gods are neither male nor female). Lucy’s meeting with Dr. Norman at La Sorbonne University turns into a strange, high-tech, occult ritual where she transcends space and time to achieve divinity. During the entire ritual, lowly, idiot humans kill each other nearby in a flurry of gunshots.

The ultimate goal of Lucy’s transcendence is to pass on the knowledge she obtained, the same way two simple cells pass on their knowledge through time. However, according to Dr. Norman, this knowledge might be too powerful for mankind.

“But all this knowledge, Lucy. I’m not even sure mankind is ready for it. We’re so driven by power and profit. Given man’s nature, it might bring us only instability and chaos (…). I just hope we’ll be worthy of your sacrifice”.

This is the thinking behind secret societies who “hide” their occult knowledge from the uninitiated behind several layers of symbolism (occult literally means “hidden”). The profane masses are considered too unworthy and primitive to deal with powerful knowledge. In short, Luciferians are extremely elitist.

As Lucy transforms, she emits a great burst of light. As stated above, Lucifer means "light bringer" and, with her chemical enhancement, Lucy brings literal light and figurative light in form of knowledge.

As Lucy transforms, she emits a great burst of light. As stated above, Lucifer means “light bringer”.

She gradually turns into a big, black mass of something I cannot define and creates a super-mega-computer to store her knowledge. Lucy sits in the middle of a ritualistic pentagram to give the process an occult undertone.

Lucy gradually turns into a big, black mass of crappy CGI and uses it to create a super-mega-computer to store her knowledge. Lucy sits in the middle of a ritualistic pentagram to give the process an occult undertone.

Before completing her transformation, Lucy uses her powers to travel through space and time in order to visit various landmarks around the world. She ends up face to face with the Lucy, “first human on Earth”.

Lucy is the name given to the remains of a new species found in 1974 in Ethiopia. Named a new species called Australopithecus afarensis, it is considered by scientists to be a "missing link" between animals and humans.

Discovered in 1974 in Ethiopia, Lucy is the name given to the remains of the “first human on Earth” – a never-seen before species called Australopithecus afarensis. It is considered by scientists to be a “missing link” between animals and humans.

In a symbolic gesture, Lucy points her finger towards the other Lucy.

In this trip back in time, Lucy shows us the Luciferian version of the Genesis. There Lucifer gives the "divine spark" to Lucy which will ultimately separate humans from animals. For the better or the worst.

Lucy goes back a few million years in the past to meet Lucy the half-monkey. We therefore witness a Luciferian version of the Genesis, where Lucifer gives the “divine spark” to Lucy the half-monkey which will ultimately separate humans from animals.

The scene is, of course, a heavy-handed reference to Michelangelo’s mural where God creates Adam. The painting is also briefly shown earlier in the movie when Dr. Norman talks about humanity’s amazing accomplishments despite only using 10% of its brain power.

While this mural depicts God giving life to Adam, the first man on Earth, the scene with the two Lucy's provides a "higher-intelligence", Luciferian version of creation.

Michaelangelo’s mural depicts God giving life to Adam, the first man on Earth. The scene with the two Lucy’s provides a “higher-intelligence”, Luciferian version of Creation.

But today’s humans are still stuck at 10% brain power and still act like morons. While Lucy transcends space and time, a whole bunch of people die a few feet from her.

This is not simply a "cool action scene". It is a way of communicating the Luciferian elite's beliefs : "Non-Illuminated" humans are idiots and deserve to die."

This is not simply a “cool action scene”. It is a way of communicating the Luciferian elite’s beliefs : “Non-Illuminated” humans are idiots and deserve to die.”

During the relentless fire between cops and mobsters, a statue of Robert de Sorbon - the founder of the University is destroyed - symbolically representing ignorant humans destroying knowledge.

During the relentless fire between cops and mobsters, a statue of Robert de Sorbon – the founder of the University is destroyed – symbolically representing ignorant humans destroying knowledge.

After the ritual turning Lucy into an immortal god, she gives Dr. Norman a USB stick containing all of her knowledge, which is pretty convenient.

When a cop barges in the room and asks where is Lucy, he receives a text message that sums up the entire movie.

Lucy has become an omniscient being who transcends time and space. Like a true Luciferian, she achieve god status through knowledge.

Lucy has become an omniscient being who is everywhere at all time. She acquired the qualities of a god. Like a true Luciferian, she achieved god status through knowledge.

The cop then looks towards the sky in admiration, the same way people usually look towards the heavens when thinking of God.

The movie ends with another symbolic scene: The lifeless body of a mobster seen from above, as if it was Lucy overlooking the blood sacrifice that was required to complete the occult ritual.

lucy20

The movie ends with death, the fate of the uninitiated. Above him hovers the immortal Lucy.

In Conclusion

Lucy was bashed by critics for being somewhat nonsensical – but being “sensical” was not the point of this movie. It is a treatise for Luciferian philosophy, and it can only be fully “appreciated” by those who understand this philosophy. For those who don’t, well, there’s a bunch of action scenes peppered throughout to keep them entertained. Meanwhile, they absorb the occult meaning of the movie without even realizing what’s happening. These action scenes were meant to be in sharp contrast with the Lucy’s quest for knowledge because Luciferians perceive a sharp contrast between them and the masses. While Lucy’s busy achieving immortality and turning into a god, a bunch of clueless guys kill each other for no good reason. And nobody cares. Because their lives are considered worthless.

Therefore, beyond the nonsensical premise of Lucy, there is a very “sensical” message, one that is as powerful as it is disturbing: There are two classes of humans on Earth and transhumanism will widen the gap between them. Most of the projects involving transhumanism have been described by observers as “playing God”. But this is not simply an expression: It is exactly what Luciferians are about.

Source: vigilantcitizen.com