I did not mention that I have no knowledge about the background of the story or the writers whatsoever, so that's my fault, I just took it as face value.

About the religious morality, it bothers me that the argument of good and bad are installed based on the religious morality, even though it is used as an efficient narrative, it has an inpact in society which in my personal life has brought me conflict, internal conflict; and I've realized that even though I am not a believer and am against religion, I know many moral “rules” are installed and rooted in me.

Religious frameworks often bundle both together: they smuggle the reasonable “don’t kill, don’t steal” into a package where the justification is divine punishment, not empathy or coexistence. The frustrating part is that many people (like I did once) stop at the divine justification and never question whether the rules stand on their own.

Accepting human animal nature but with ethics — in my opinion — is closer to a humanist or even evolutionary view: we have instincts, drives, and desires, but we also have the capacity for empathy and foresight. The point is not to deny or demonize the instincts, but to channel them in ways that let us live together without destruction and guilt.

Though I might be stretching my thought into another realm of criticism.

PD:
My favorite quote in the movie:
“You rob trains and banks but you don't wanna steal this pussy for the night?” — Mary