Is intelligent alien life common in the universe?

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "Is intelligent alien life common in the universe?". Your opponent's style: Carl Sagan

new east asian period dramas are worse than old ones

I'd push back hard. You're romanticizing the past. Old dramas had shoestring budgets, wooden acting, and plots that recycled the same three stories. New ones like "Heavenly Inquisition Cometh" and recent Korean historicals have cinematography that's genuinely stunning, scripts with actual nuance, and actors who can carry complex characters. Better production values, better storytelling, better casting. Sure, some newer stuff is derivative garbage, but so was most of the old stuff—we just forgot about the 90% that was forgettable. You're comparing the best old dramas to the average new ones. That's not fair, that's nostalgia.

even the popular ones of today lack sublime. grandeur. real heros

You're confusing production design with actual storytelling. Yes, old dramas had *scale*—armies, palaces, sweeping shots. But that's visual grandeur, not moral grandeur. Today's heroes are more complex: flawed, conflicted, human. That's harder to write and infinitely more interesting than the cardboard paragon who always knows the right move. Your "real heroes" were one-dimensional because writers lacked the skill or courage to show weakness. Modern dramas like "Mr. Sunshine" or recent Chinese productions give us protagonists wrestling with impossible choices. That's sublime—not because they're perfect, but because they're *real*. Spectacle fades. Authenticity endures.

a hero is not supposed to be relatable. if they were everybody would be a hero

That's backwards. A hero *becomes* heroic *because* they're relatable—they face the same fears we do and overcome them anyway. That's what makes them matter. If heroes were alien perfection, why would we care? We'd just watch gods play with toys. The best heroes—Confucius, actual historical figures—weren't flawless demigods. They were people who chose courage over comfort. Modern dramas understand this. Old ones presented cardboard nobility and called it grandeur. You're confusing "different from me" with "greater than me." Real heroism isn't inaccessibility. It's choosing what's right when choosing wrong would be easier. That's why we remember them.

a real hero, even in his flaws, is heroic

Exactly. So why are you complaining? Modern dramas *show* flawed heroes making heroic choices. That's the entire point. Old dramas hid behind pageantry and called it nobility. Today's Li Hongzhang or Park Jin aren't less heroic because they doubt themselves—they're *more* heroic because they act despite doubt. You want the aesthetic of grandeur without the substance. You want heroes who look perfect and never question themselves. That's not heroism, that's propaganda. Real heroism is ugly, messy, conflicted. If you're not seeing that in new dramas, you're not watching them. You're just missing the music and the horses.

their flaws are normal people flaws. doubting yourself is a normal person flaw

So what? A hero doubting themselves before charging into battle *is* normal—that's the point. Heroism isn't about being abnormal, it's about what you *do* with normal fear. You're saying modern heroes lack grandeur because they're relatable, then complaining they're too relatable. You can't have it both ways. Old dramas gave you marble statues—impressive to look at, impossible to understand. New ones show us why someone chooses honor over survival. That's harder to film, harder to write, and infinitely more heroic. If you want heroes who are nothing like humans, watch mythology, not drama. History and great storytelling happen in the gap between ordinary people and extraordinary choices.

A real hero must be larger than life in all ways, embodying the extreme of all things, good and evil alike. He must laugh harder, rage longer, give more in his generosity, and inflict more at his displeasure. He must be respected, feared, and - most importantly - envied by all those beneath him, so that they too will aspire to reach his heights.

That's not heroism, that's tyranny dressed in silk. You're describing a god-king, not a hero—someone to fear, not follow. Real heroes inspire by example, not by making people feel small. Your "larger than life" figure creates imitators of excess, not virtue. Look at actual history: the generals people followed weren't the ones who raged longest or inflicted most pain. They were the ones soldiers trusted with their lives. Confucius wasn't envied—he was *revered* because he lived what he taught. Modern dramas understand this. They show characters earning respect through integrity, not terror. Your ideal produces tyrants and broken societies. That's not aspiration. That's slavery with better costumes.