MovieChat Forums > 9 (2009) Discussion > Shouldn't, logically speaking...

Shouldn't, logically speaking...


1 be older than 2, technically?

reply

Yeah, when 9 or 1 (I forget who said it) mentioned that 2 was the oldest I was like... what?

~::~::~
The midget I'm dating could be my daughter! ~Denny Crane

reply

Or 2 could have been the oldest after 1. After all, 1 was the leader and wasn't going to give up his position of authority.

reply

Nope. Because they were parts of the scientists soul, he didn't put the oldest in the first doll.


A Tim Burton Fan

reply

Sure he is. So what? They never say he wasn't.

1 said 2 was old, he didn't say older than himself. 9 said 1 shouldn't have sent the 'oldest' because 2 was the oldest of the people 1 might send. He's not going to send himself, obviously.


"I'll book you. I'll book you on something. I'll find something in the book to book you on."

reply

just because 1 was created first doesn't mean he woke up first or maybe he put part of his soul in 1 later

reply

Logically all 9 would be the same age (if #9 had actually been completed and not had the scientist die half way through building him).

#2 just had the scientist's mature traits, just as #1 was leadership, #8 was brawn, 7 was courage, etc.



Ya Kirk-loving Spocksucker!

reply

[deleted]