This clip is new as of July 24, 2012 and put here because I'm running out of space on the other pages. The clip quality might be a little degraded, I'm trying to keep these clip files small for bandwidth reasons now.
Previously on the FAQ page I listed
several triggers which install phase 2. One of them was red meat. I gave no reference, proof or evidence whatsoever. Now over 8 months later this movie is the missing puzzle piece for red meat (also see Harolds Going Stiff (2011) below) . Just
because something might not add up or lacks evidence on this web site does not mean it's wrong, it simply means we have not found that piece of the puzzle yet as I will now demonstrate.
This movie is out of South Korea and is not one single movie, instead it is three separate short films with each short being roughly forty minutes in length. What they have done here is brilliant. The first short is
a typical bad zombie apocalypse movie. The second short is about the morals of robots as people, the third is largely irrelevant.
The key is the first short and more importantly its immediate connection with the unrelated second one. I'll explain more below. During a normal day an apple for whatever reason biodegrades wrong
and spawns a virus which turns everyone into zombies. That's the movie; ridiculous on its surface. Now let's take it apart...
In the beginning of the movie and clip they focus on an apple as it rots. He throws it out with the trash as expected (@ 0:30) and the apple degrades wrong (@ 1:00 in and around). Humorous
zombie apple now. They show the apple becoming feed for livestock (shown in the movie but not shown in the clip much other then @ 1:12). They then focus heavily, very heavily on red
meat (@ 1:18 thru 3:29) as people eat it. Specifically as disgusting
as possible complete with a cow being slaughtered at 1:14. This is intentional. Notice at 2:26 he pulls an apple peel out of his mouth. Why? Keep reading. People then get sick (examples @ 3:30 thru 4:00) as they
turn into zombies from eating the red meat contaminated by the zombie apple. They reference a biblical angle (@ 4:00 thru 4:10);
I mentioned before what they are doing is partly biblical, they love to throw the bible out as an excuse to hurt people, even if you have never harmed a fly in your entire life. Then at 4:10 the zombie apocalypse strikes. The two main characters as zombies
now find each other wandering around (@ 4:30). Then they drive it home - the apple as a metaphor (remember when he pulled the apple peel out of his mouth @ 2:26) and contaminant for
red meat becomes symbolic for the trigging of phase 2 through the eating of red meat. Why? How?
She gives the apple to him (@ 5:29) and he eats it. It's intentionally disgusting, you are supposed to be turned off by it [Update: this is a critical concept to explore
so I've elaborated on it below in the Sidebar - Subtle Distraction Psyops].
Then right after he eats the apple they zoom right in on her or a zombie eye - what do they show you? What's in her eye (@ 6:10 thru 6:14)? A chemtrail
nano-fiber. They are clearly showing you. This is the end and climax
of the movie too which doesn't make sense unless you know why. And it's not even the kicker...
The first short then ends (@ 6:33) and in the movie (not the clip) they show a biblical quote (screenshot here)
which essentially translates to God telling Adam not to eat the apple. Because again, from the movie, the apple becomes symbolic of red meat and is thereby telling you
eating red meat is bad (and now via nano-tech will turn you into a robot).
The second short starts, and is about robots. What a coincidence - because very early in this second short (within 30 seconds) the technician from the robot corporation is walking down the hall with the monk and they
clearly and intentionally show his corporate logo on his uniform (@ 6:55 thru 7:04). The corporation name is UR (Robotics). Get it? [You] [are] the robot. They mention the
corporation name a few times in the short and show it on his briefcase too (@ 7:12). Only people that know what is happening will see and bridge the connection from the first short (zombie's representing
phase 2 via nanotech spiked red meat) to the second short (turning you into a complete robot) like this. The fact that they are back-to-back but independent (as in separate) short films
is intentional and a brilliant idea. Note the cover image (screenshot here) on the front page of the site, the robot from
the second short has "UR" stamped right on it.
To summarize, consuming (probably cheap) red meat can (will) turn you into a robot by the installation of phase 2. That is what this movie(s) is telling you. Note you already are a robot with phase 1, but
phase 2 is the full BioAPI and allows for extended functionality such as
manipulation of feelings, direct-to-motor control, etc.
Now I don't know the technical's behind it, whether cheap corporate
red meat is spiked with nano-trigger-bots, or if the BioAPI you have in you now is capable of watching for the ingestion of too much red meat and triggering phase 2 by itself; it's highly probable it's the former.
Also notice the parallel between this clip and Vexille (2007).
Both clearly show you a nano-fiber then shortly after tell you that you are the robot (in the Vexille clip @ 1:26 - 'the virus [cyber-virus/nano-tech] gradually progresses through the body until it finally reaches the brain; at that point we become perfect androids...').
I've said it a few times throughout this site, stay focused, because you are the base model surrogate.
Sidebar - Subtle Distraction Psyops
It is important to note the significance of how disgusting the apple eating was in this clip @ 6:04. Why would they do that? What is the point? It is psychological. The purpose of
instances such as this are to discount the significance of something else during or immediately after what you see. To be clear - you are disgusted by what you see and remember it. You focus on
that because that is what is most prevalent. Your attention is captivated to some degree and you are distracted and thereby unable to notice the significance of what is truly important which
in this clip is the nano-fiber(s) in her eye shortly after. So the viewers perception is being split, most people will give their attention to the apple eating, a few (self thinkers) will not
and wonder what the strange white fibers in her eye are all about. This is the 99% vs. 1% being
playing out right in front of eyes. This is the knowledge over ignorance paradigm.
Another accurate example is how Leonardo DiCaprio mentions insects in the brain in the
Shutter Island (2010) clip; your mind immediately focuses on
how disgusting that concept is and thereby discount the clicking in the brain comment. Then when a clicking sound is heard/felt in your cranium you are much more likely to dismiss it.
Another example is in the movie (not clip) for Black Limousine (2010).
At roughly 1:20:27 in the movie they show Arquette looking out his window watching a very hot women undress (screenshot here)
for a few seconds. Then very shortly after they show the talking gibberish scene.
It is the same principal in action, your mind obviously focuses on the women, even well after the camera pans away; and your attention thereby becomes diminished when they (in this case)
show an example of what they can do in real life which is make people talk gibberish using the BioAPI/nano-implants.
Another less significant example is in the clip for Ultrasonic (2012).
In the nice dog scene the dog only has three legs. Why? What? They couldn't find a normal dog? Again, it's intentional to pull your attention away from the scene in general because it could be one of the most important
scenes in a decade if you know why.
An extreme example can also be seen in Rise of the Zombies (2012) with the baby stomping scene.
Textually, spelling mistakes and insults accomplish the same psychological effect; your simple sheep mind is turned off by speling mstakes and again discount the relevance and accuracy of
the overall message. Most people cannot get by a single spelling mistake whether it's intentional or an honest mistake. Ironically the smarter someone is the better it works on them.