Brave statement, considering his films are actually a bunch of "homages" glued together.
Gotta say though... it's kinda funny to read an article that begins with a statement about how little love have the APS-C models received the past few months, preceded by an A7 picture instead of an A6xxx
I mean... Jurassic Park opens with Muldoon & crew tasing the heck out of a raptor that's eating Jophery. To me, that's precisely an action scene that tells you things will go sideways. It then takes a breath to set us up for awe, which Jurassic World tries as well, but doesn't quite nail it.
Actually, also from the behind the scenes material (read it from the "Making of" book), there's more than just that. The reason why the crane didn't work, and I agree, was because it didn't make much sense to have a story about man's arrogance against nature, only to have a man-built machine win the day. It had to be nature itself.
Doesn't Kickass count?vBoth physics and sex-wise.
I don't really see much confusion in this... those beings are clearly evolved robots; they explain it so themselves... and even Spielberg calls them that in that video above.
Regarding clone or projection... I believe clone is what it means... a projection would be a full simulation that could persist for as long as you want. However, a biologic creature, that's more fragile to build, especially for beings who no matter how advanced they are, aren't familiar with biology, being machines themselves (carbon based vs silicon based, as Spielberg says). And also, it is my impression that they didn't just want to make an exact replica of her body, but to somehow bring back her soul, which would be the main source of that one day limitation, as that energy that comprises her soul has already become something else, 2k years in the future, and can only be borrowed.