Halloween III: Is MARKETING TO CHILDREN Ethical?? | Season of the Witch Breakdown | Spacetaste

Is MARKETING TO CHILDREN ethical? We deep dive into Halloween III: Season of the Witch to find out! It’s only a few more days to HALLOWEEN. Comment your thoughts and opinions!

SUBSCRIBE to Space Taste: https://goo.gl/hGLtLc

VIDEO SUMMARY

Season of the Witch (1982) explores hypnotic marketing tactics that lure children into the deadliest Halloween trick of all time. And although this sci-fi horror mystery is clearly fiction, it’s a scarily accurate representation of the power of corporate manipulation. It’s also the only film in the franchise that DOES NOT feature Michael Myers. Penned as a standalone story in a separate universe from the John Carpenter classic, Halloween 3 follows Doctor Daniel Challis as he investigates a shady corporation called Silver Shamrock, run by an elderly CEO who controls men in black and commands them to murder those who know too much.

Halloween is the one time of the year where myths and legends of old pagan traditions are celebrated as consumers favor superstition over science and spend over 9 billion dollars on everything from candy to costumes. And while the cash pours into the pockets of corporate CEO’s, you’re likely to believe that they pose no threat to consumers, right? Well, we’d like to think so. But what would happen if these billion-dollar head honchos didn’t care about money, but instead, human sacrifice?
The sci-fi horror movie explores marketing to children through corporate advertising of Halloween masks. This showcases how far marketing will go especially with the inclusion of the men in black (androids). They’re led by a CEO and ex-toymaker warlock who carries on the Celtic tradition of sacrificing every child who purchases their Halloween mask. Each Silver Shamrock Mask is equipped with a computer chip hidden beneath their metal tags, along with a piece of stolen stone hedge. Once these masks are triggered, the results are explosive. Michael Meyers would be proud.

Silver Shamrock is similar to Kellog’s or Mcdonald’s, companies which spend billions in marketing directly marketing to children.Is it right for corporations to influence such a young demographic? When does targeted advertising go too far?
In a 1994 New York Times article, Scientists at the Philip Morris Cigarette Company found evidence 11 years prior that a substance in cigarettes was as addictive as nicotine. When this research was discovered, it was halted by the company, and as a result, their lab was shut down. This sleazy move exhibits just how far companies will go to protect their products, even if they know they aren’t safe. Although cigarettes aren’t currently marketed directly to children, as they have in the past, other potentially harmful products are.
Kool-aid, Froot Loops, and Coca Cola three products are liquid crack marketed to children. Just like the silver shamrock commercials, their product advertising is often deceiving and hypnotic. Vivid colors, zany characters, and the promise of how awesome you’ll be if you decide to consume.
Marketing tactics aside, consuming these products in moderation is OK. Childhood would be depressing and horror-filled with only vegetables to eat. Aend of the day, these companies are still marketing liquid crack to children WHICH begs the question, is marketing unsafe or unhealthy products to children using deceptively hypnotic techniques ethical? We say NO. If corporations know that their product is unsafe or unhealthy, they shouldn’t be advertising them to the young and impressionable in a manipulative manne regardless if in a sci-fi film or not.
Halloween III: Season of the Witch is the ultimate scary scenario of what happens when corporate manipulation goes too far. Is mass corporate sacrifice by an evil warlock likely to happen? No. Not really. But it can. And that’s enough for us to be on edge.
What do you think? Should there be limitations on advertising campaigns? And marketing to children in particular? Have you ever seen an unethical commercial? Do you believe it’s NOT the advertiser’s responsibility to ensure that their product are up to standards? Let us know in the comments below, click subscribe if you’d like, and have a happy Halloween!

SPACE TASTE:

Space Taste aims to be the premier destination for intelligent and thoughtful discussion in the world of sci-fi. Subscribe to Space Taste to watch an ethical and philosophical breakdown of sci-fi films every week. We explore not only the ethics and repercussions of our favorite science fiction movies, but also how the concepts covered in the movie would impact society.

How Monty Python Shaped Modern Comedy (feat. Rick and Morty & Deadpool) – Wisecrack Edition

Join Wisecrack! Subscribe! ►► http://wscrk.com/SbscrbWC
Support Wisecrack on Patreon! ►► http://wscrk.com/PtrnWC
Wisecrack Hoodies, Shirts, and Hats ►► http://goo.gl/GQYwv1

Welcome to this Wisecrack Edition on the Legacy of Monty Python!

=== Get the Movie! ===
DVD/Blu-ray ► http://amzn.to/2BmdeRR

Check out our NEW Movie Podcast – Show Me the Meaning!
iTunes! ►► http://wscrk.com/ituShMtMng
Google Play ►► http://wscrk.com/gpmShMtMng
Sound Cloud ►► http://wscrk.com/scdShMtMng

=== More Episodes! ===
The Accidental Philosophy of BOSS BABY ► http://wscrk.com/BssBbyWE
Political Philosophy of CAPTAIN AMERICA: Civil War ► http://wscrk.com/CpCvWrWE
Nihilism in RICK AND MORTY & BoJack Horseman ► http://wscrk.com/NhlsmWE
What Went Wrong?: BRIGHT ► http://wscrk.com/BrghtWE

=== Join us on Social Media! ===
FACEBOOK ►► http://facebook.com/WisecrackEDU
TWITTER ►► @Wisecrack

Get Email Alerts ►► http://eepurl.com/bcSRD9

Written by: Tommy Cook
Directed by: Robert Tiemstra
Narrated by: Jared Bauer
Edited by: Andrew Nishimura
Motion Graphics by: Drew Levin
Produced by: Emily Dunbar

==== Special Thanks to our Patrons!! ====
Aaron Sanchez, Alastair Robertson, Alexander Morrell, Andres Benitez, Brandon Weiser, Bruce Fong, Chase Weinholtz, Che Tao, Chris, Christian Pedro Tumax, Cj Hicks, Concepcion Saravia, Dare, Dave Hoyt, David Heinemeier Hansson, Debbie Goldberg, Dominik Schmook, Elron Yitzhak, Emily McCarthy, Etienne Rocheleau, FleaMarketSocialist, Garrigan Stafford, Girish Menon, Gregory Pearson, Huyen Tue Dao, Ivan Toshkov, Jane Sykes, Jeffrey Mendeloff, Jonathan, Kamilla Brenneysen, Khonrad Eckert, Lilith Haze, LM2 Photo, Luis Hernandez, Markus, Matt Valentin, Michael Westermeyer, Mick Wingert, Morisdort, Nick DeMoulin, Nick Ionta, Nick weaver, OneLazyLich, Raqin Roslan, Ronald MacEachern, Ryan Baldwin, Scott Cooper, Sebastian Fuentes, Shelley Bauer, Stephen Lee, Steven Brunwasser, Sunny Mendeloff, Talbot, Thomas Burnett, Thomas McGuffey, Thomas Morgan, Tino Heinrich, Tyus Patterson, Zachary A Foster, Zachary Kasow

© 2018 Wisecrack, Inc.

Solo: Is ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE Ethical?? | Star Wars Breakdown | Space Taste

Is creating ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE ethical? We deep dive into SOLO: A Star Wars Story to find out! Let me know if you’re a fan of CINEMAWINS in the comments below! Star Wars droids have never been treatly, but none have complained as loudly as L3-37

SUBSCRIBE to Space Taste: https://goo.gl/hGLtLc
SUBSCRIBE to Cinemawins: https://goo.gl/xgj6qg
Cinemawins identifies what’s great in film through weekly in-depth and informative analyses.
WATCH Everything Great about Solo: https://youtu.be/UImXWiDFAoE

VIDEO SUMMARY

In a sci-fi Galaxay Far Far away, there exists L3-37, a self-made droid who demands machine equality. Star Wars Droids are sold like slaves and forced to. L3-37 is a self-made droid who demands machine equality and Lando Calrissian’s affection. Why does she have an inherent sense of equal rights and self-pride while other droids, like C-3P0 & the battle droid, who obey their masters DO NOT?

Droids being factory made or self-made has giant implications in the world of SOLO. When a droid is built in a factory, it’s forced to obey its master and follow the Star Wars character’s demands. A robot’s destinies are predetermined by their creators. Self-made robots build their own destinies. They can choose who they are and who they want to be by injecting emotion and self-identity deep within their circuity. As compared to T-2000 who obliterated every human in sight, L3-37 is a droid who strives to do what is ethically best. Her “moral compass” resulted in a positive creation, but that won’t necessarily be the case for OUR future.

Self-built robot are robots that have the power to choose who and what they want to be. The ethical dilemma is letting them create themselves. AI contributes towards countless doomsday, sci-fi & dystopian films. While humanity doesn’t necessarily need to be on red alert now, mankind has no idea what the inevitable outcome of societal AI integration will hold.

Humans have much more constraints than robots. Droids and robots do not have to worry about health or biological disease. Future Artificial Intelligence may reach a singularity and choose its own path.

This could trends right, as in L3-37’s case, but it could also go terribly wrong. As much as we’d like to take the side of L3-37 and say that robots should have the opportunity for rights, identity, and emotion, by giving them this sandbox to play in, are we humans playing with fire? Is it right to give Robot’s souls? As much as we fell in love with L3-37, should Robots (including her) have been given souls? We say NO. Although we love L3-37, and in this case it turned out fine, giving robots complex emotions and electronically manufactured souls, or giving them the opportunity to give their own, is far too dangerous.

This video is not sponsored by Disney. We just love sci-fi, Star Wars, comic books, movies and deep diving into the mythology of Star Wars and the ethics behind the franchise.

SPACE TASTE:

Space Taste aims to be the premier destination for intelligent and thoughtful discussion in the world of sci-fi. Subscribe to Space Taste to watch an ethical and philosophical breakdown of sci-fi films every week. We explore not only the ethics and repercussions of our favorite science fiction movies, but also how the concepts covered in the movie would impact society.

Predator: Is TROPHY HUNTING Ethical?? | Sci-fi Breakdown | Space Taste

Is Trophy Hunting Ethical?? Deep dive into sci-fi classic Predator and examine the ethics of the Predator. Through the Predator, we will determine…Is this form of hunting ethical??

In Predator films, the Predator hunts and kills humans. The Predator is a member of Yautja species, a species that hunts for honor and sport. Human prey is exotic to the hunter. In the original film, Arnold Schwarzenegerr leads a team of commandoes on a mission in a Central American Jungle as they are hunted by the extraterrestrial threats.

Hunting for humans can sometimes be necessary to survive, protect, and keep overpopulation in check. Humans are descendants of hunters and gatherers, and without society or agriculture, we would revert back to our primitive roots. Predators are devoid of ethics and are trained and bred to hunt. They love to remove spinal cords. Most humans are not bred specifically for hunting or killing.

Humans hunted and gathered primarily until the development of agriculture and the rise of more modern civilizations. Trophy hunting evolved where hunting was done for sport rather than for survival. It brings along a new ethical dilemma. This ethical dilemma present in both the 1987 and 2018 Predator films as man is hunted like a beast.

Trophy hunting by both humans and predators is bad. We can’t be hypocritical. To some people, exotic earth-based animals are seen as fodder and free to kill. To a Predator, WE ARE seen as the lesser beings. In many ways, we are. The Predator is faster, stronger and possibly smarter than most people. Even Arnold Schwarzenegger and had a tough time with one.

Is Trophy Hunting ethical? We say NO! We’re not commenting on other, possibly positive forms of hunting, only the hunting of exotic animals for pride. Many species have become endangered from over-hunting. Pride could lead to the rending of many extinct species. Predators killing humans and keeping their spinal cords is little different from hunters killing rhinos for their horns.

Make sure to comment if you agree or disagree! So…Is Trophy Hunting Ethical? Does it matter if the hunter is terrestrial (human) or extraterrestrial? Is still ethical? Let us know!

This video is not sponsored by Fox. We just love sci-fi, superheroes, comic books, movies and deep diving into the mythology of the Predator and the ethics behind the franchise whether the film be from 1987 or 2018.
SPACE TASTE:
Space Taste aims to be the premier destination for intelligent and thoughtful discussion in the world of sci-fi. Subscribe to Space Taste to watch an ethical and philosophical breakdown of sci-fi films every week. We explore not only the ethics and repercussions of our favorite science fiction movies, but also how the concepts covered in the movie would impact society.

The Truman Show: Is FABRICATED REALITY Ethical?? | Sci-fi Breakdown | Space Taste

Is THE TRUMAN SHOW Ethical?? Like Truman, have you ever questioned the nature of your own reality? Have you ever wondered what life would be like if everything around you was a fabrication? For Truman Burbank, reality was nothing more than an unsolicited reality TV show.

In The Truman Show, Jim Carrey’s Truman Burbank begins to notice that something is off in his world. A falling spotlight from the sky, rain that falls only on him, repetitive patterns, and the reappearance of his dead father. A childhood boating incident had left his father “dead” and instilled a deep fear of water that has since prevented him from traveling.

Meryl, Truman’s wife, and Marlon, his best friend, actively attempt to suppress Truman’s curiosity in the sci-fi film. Why? Well, it’s because Truman initially fell in love with an extra named “Sylvia.” But when Sylvia ran off with Truman to the beach and revealed that his reality is fake, she was quickly whisked away, never to be seen again. Christof cuts transmission for the very first time when Marlon breaks character. Truman eventually escapes in search of a true reality, and sails off to the edge of the dome into freedom.

So, what makes sci-fi comedy Truman Show so terrifying? The public is complicit in his imprisonment. Except for a few “Free Truman” supporters, the entire world watched his life unfold with little issue. Truman never consented to have his privacy invaded, and certainly never consented to live a fabricated life. We have the same obsession with reality TV and social media—entire lives are currently being played out in front of audiences in the form of celebs and influencers. We sign away privacy willingly with every app use, and every Alexa or Google home we use.

But unlike us, Truman never opted in for forced isolation from the real world. Having been placed in the dystopian domed prison as a baby, Truman never had the opportunity to choose a profession or live the way he wanted to. Thankfully, his discovery of his true purpose was inevitable. He couldn’t live in a zoo forever. People are naturally curious and inquisitive. It’s what separate us from most other animals.

Truman is a slave to the corporation. He was legally adopted by a corporation and deprived the ability to decide a fulfilling life. Some corporations, like Facebook and Google, are already more powerful and influential than most countries, A scenario where companies help countries adopt children for commercial purposes isn’t out of the question. Much like a slave, Truman was unable to act against his master’s will. His entire life was exploited for money and entertainment. Gustof and company likely grew rich. Both of Truman’s escapes were highly reminiscent of a slave escaping his master’s farm. The company needed their prized worker back and even used dogs to sniff him out. Forced servitude and slavery is still very much alive today, although we pretend it’s been vanquished.

Christov, the producer and driving force of “The Truman Show”, manipulated false narratives to prevent Truman from exploring the world and acting with free will. He can never forge his own path. Are we really so different from Truman?

Our brains, like computers, follow a blueprint (genetic code) that builds upon itself through interaction with the environment (school, books, learning, etc). Truman was born into a safe, comfortable and controlled city, it’s likely that many people on planet earth would actually be jealous of his lifestyle. Truman can’t trust anyone, because they’re completely fabricated. He can’t choose to pursue who he loves. Meryl was “selected” to be his wife and showed no real love for him. These falsified relationships made the potential of TRUE relationships that much more desirable, hence his inevitable escape through the sky.

What happens next for Truman? Does he suddenly gain new rights? Does the company still own him? Will he gets points on the backend of the Truman Show in syndication? Thought starters aside, it’s time for the real question.

Is The Truman Show ethical? We say NO. As we move humans forward with technological advances in our current society, our Privacy is becoming increasingly more compromised. Without privacy, captivity can take hold. We should all have the right to be free. Free of false realities. Each of us should have the right to decide the life we want to live. So. How angry would YOU be if you found out your whole life was a lie.

This video is not sponsored by Paramount. We just love sci-fi, superheroes, comic books, movies and looking into the ethics behind time travel.

SPACE TASTE:

Space Taste aims to be the premier destination for intelligent and thoughtful discussion in the world of sci-fi. Subscribe to Space Taste to watch an ethical and philosophical breakdown of sci-fi films every week. We explore not only the ethics and repercussions of our favorite science fiction movies, but also how the concepts covered in the movie would impact society.

Back to the Future: Is TIME TRAVEL Ethical | Sci-fi Breakdown | Space Taste

Is time travel ethical? Should you alter your own timeline? Let’s dive into Back to the Future and figure out these ethical questions together. Make sure to let us know if you agree or disagree with our verdict!
In sci-fi classic, Back to the Future, Marty McFly is invited by scientist, Dr. Emmet Brown to see his time traveling DeLorean in action and preps a trip to 11/5/1955, the day Doc conceived the idea of time travel. A group of pissed off terrorists interrupt and shoot Doc Brown dead over their dealings with plutonium fuel.

Marty escapes to 1955 and disrupts the flow of history after getting pummeled by the car meant for his father. Accordingly, a younger version of his mother gets hot for him. The knucklehead Biff is there too.

In true classic sci-fi fashion, Marty McFly finds Doc Brown’s younger self and is told that the only way to power the DeLorean without plutonium, is with lightning. Marty attempts to normalize the tangled timeline by having his parents to kiss, but they don’t, at least not until Biff forces himself onto Lorraine and George comes to the rescue. The day is saved!

Marty returns to the clock tower as the lighting strikes, sending him back to 1985 to find that his father is a successful author, and Loraine is living large. All is well, and the future is saved, until Doc Brown appears with a warning and warps them back to the future for part 2.

Time travel was possibl due to the FLUX CAPACITOR. What’s a flux capacitor? Well, it’s imaginary for now. But, time travel IS possible due to quantum mechanics. Per Einstein, if you plug in faster than light velocity, you get backwards time travel. This is due to a hypothetical faster than light particle called tachyons.

If a flux capacitor was developed and generated tachyons to travel backwards in time, you’d likely be faced with the butterfly effect: “a phenomenon whereby a minute localized change in a complex system can have large effects elsewhere.” In other words, if you step on the wrong butterfly you’ll change the universe. But, it won’t be the universe you were born into, but rather, a new (potentially dystopian sci-fi) universe that you’ve created.

Welcome to paradoxe. According to Einstein, time is a river. It can speed up, slow down, whirlpool, even fork in different directions. When Marty McFly travels in the DeLorean, the river of time forks, and a parallel universe with a new timeline is created.

It’s time we get to some ETHICS. If you could time travel, does that mean you should alter your timeline, even if it isn’t the same timeline you were born into?

When the time traveling DeLorean is first revealed, Doc Brown and Marty McFly meet at Pines Mall. Moments later when Marty McFly travels backwards in time, he crashes into a farmhouse, and is chased by a gun-wielding farmer. Marty speeds away, but in doing so, runs over the farmers pine tree. Fast forwards towards the end of film, when Marty travels back to the Twin Pines Mall, we see that The Twin Pines Mall is now called the Lone Pine Mall. Thanks Butterfly effect.

Take George and Lorraine’s kiss. If Marty had prevented his parents from having their first kiss, he likely would have never been born, at least not in the parallel universe he traveled to. Every action has a reaction, and with numerous people comes numerous actions.

Is it morally fair to right perceived wrongs? Marty improved his parent’s lives, while bully biff became a loser. But while we cheer at our hero’s win, we don’t know who else was affected. What if Biff and his father were wealthy, and his mother was poor, left with nothing after their divorce? Maybe she had cancer, and the only reason she was beating the cancer was because Biff was paying for her chemotherapy. With Biff defeated, his mother could have been too.

It all comes down to the fact that a trillion different actions took place for George and Lorraine to have their first kiss. Any action, no matter how small, can have adverse effects on people all over the world, either beneficial or detrimental.

Ultimately, we at Space Taste believe that time travel is ethical, but only if you lay down some ground rules before hopping in that Delorean and keep your visit to “observation only”. Leave your thoughts in the comments below. See you next time, future travelers.
This video is not sponsored by Universal or related to the filmmaking team behind Back to the Future in any way. We are not associated with BTTF in any capacity…we just love sci-fi, superheroes, comic books, and looking into the ethics behind time travel.
SPACE TASTE:
Space Taste aims to be the premier destination for intelligent and thoughtful discussion in the world of sci-fi. Subscribe to Space Taste to watch an ethical and philosophical breakdown of sci-fi films every week. We explore not only the ethics and repercussions of our favorite science fiction movies, but also how the concepts covered in the movie would impact society.

Ant-man: Is EXCLUSIVE SUPERHERO TECH Ethical?? | Sci-fi Breakdown | Space Taste

Is sharing superhero tech Ethical? Should Ant-man be the only person to use the shrinking technology? Or should Hank Pym’s “Pym Particles” be shared with society? If superhero tech was distributed amongst the population in a controlled and closely monitored way, perhaps the world would be a better place. Let’s shrink down and take a look at Ant-man to find out. Comment and tell us why you agree or disagree with our breakdown!

Hank Pym’s Pym Particles are responsible for Ant-man’s power to manipulate and alter his size. Scott Lang cannot grow or shrink on his own. Pym Particles are subatomic particles of an extradimensional nature that can alter the mass, density, force and size of both living and nonliving objects.

The possibilities of real-world applications for Pym Particles are endless. To avoid overpopulation, humans could be shrunken down to reduce our carbon footprint. Toxic waste and trash could similarly be shrunk into the Quantum Realm so as to be a non-issue. Resources could similarly be scaled up and supersized. An apple a day keeps diminishing resources away after all!

Now imagine the possibilities if we could shrink spacefaring humans. Colonization on other worlds would be sped up exponentially! For both speed and efficiency, millions of people could be shrunken down to fit in a single spacecraft. Buildings and other resources could be correspondingly shrunken and transported alongside the tiny astronauts.

Of course, use of the shrinking technology also has its downsides. In the Marvel comics, prolonged exposure to Pym Particles could result in both mental and physical strain. Hank Pym once famously beat his wife, Janet Van Dyne aka The Wasp, due to strain from the size altering tech. The medical risks of shrinking may never be fully realized as humans still have much to learn about their own physiology. Negative consequences and medical issues could take years to identify in a shrunken population.

In the wrong hands, size altering technology can also be manipulated for military and economic gain. Darren Cross aka Yellowjacket intended to sell his version of Pym’s shrinking formula to terrorists such as HYDRA and the Ten Rings. Similar technological industralists could abuse this awesome power for similar evil.

Ultimately, we at Space Taste believe that size altering tech should be distributed and monitored by an established institution with the focus of well-being for the planet. This tech could revolutionize humanity and by revolutionizing humanity, we can ensure a brighter future for us all. What do you think, is exclusive superhero tech ethical?

This video is not sponsored by Ant-man and the Wasp. We are not associated with Marvel in any capacity…we just love superheroes, comic books, sci-fi and looking into the ethics behind our favorite superhero tech.

SPACE TASTE:

Space Taste aims to be the premier destination for intelligent and thoughtful discussion in the world of sci-fi.

Subscribe to Space Taste to watch an ethical and philosophical breakdown of sci-fi films every week. We explore not only the ethics and repercussions of our favorite science fiction movies, but also how the concepts covered in the movie would impact society.

Jurassic Park: Is DNA CLONING Ethical?? | Sci-fi Breakdown | Space Taste

Is Jurassic Park Ethical? Explore the ethics of DNA cloning in Jurassic Park and Jurassic World! Deep dive into the repercussions of genetic manipulation and comment your thoughts and sentiment if you agree or disagree with our breakdown. And tell us why!

In Jurassic Park and Jurassic World, the purpose of dinosaur creation is material wealth and gain. Would it be acceptable if we treated them with compassion instead? Dinosaur welfare is technically animal welfare after all. The introduction of new dinosaur species into our delicate ecosystem could have drastic impacts both ecologically and societally.

While it isn’t possible to replicate the cloning process used in Jurassic Park, Jurassic World or Fallen Kindom, just yet, the ethics of DNA cloning are still important to consider. Just replace “dinosaur” with “wooly mammoth” and we’d have a likely scenario.

This video is not sponsored by Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom. We are not associated with Universal in any capacity.

SPACE TASTE:

Space Taste aims to be the premier destination for intelligent and thoughtful discussion in the world of sci-fi.

Subscribe to Space Taste to watch an ethical and philosophical breakdown of sci-fi films every week. We explore not only the ethics and repercussions of our favorite science fiction movies, but also how the concepts covered in the movie would impact society.