>Philosophically, the movie did not strike a unified tone, but
>lurched from position to position. We had speeches about the
>benefits of immortality and post-biological man, but then there
>was the one about how uploading can not work because you leave the
>spirit behind with the body. Finally we have the apparently
>positive ending, which is inconsistent with what we have just been
>shown. If the girl lost her humanity by uploading, why won't it
>happen to the guy? Do we need the body, the soul, the spirit,
>or don't we? The movie doesn't address these questions, so the
>ending just looks tacked-on to give something happy. It doesn't
>make any sense in the context of what had been presented before.
>It would have worked better if, after the speculation about the
>need for a body/soul/spirit which is lost by uploading, the other
>character had challenged that explanation, saying that the girl
>had never seemed too stable to begin with, and that the changes
>relating to uploading had simply been too stressful for her to
>handle. He could argue that the basic idea was sound, but that
>you need the right person as a subject, someone with a positive
>mental outlook (namely, himself). This would have at least made
>the ending coherent.
Very well put Hal.
Yes they clearly had Juliet playing the femme fatale bit, if you
remember she supposedly had broken the encryption on the AI's
experiencial database before uploading, and was spying on the
couple via the bedroom mounted camera.
She was warped before uploading, then apeared to experience the
"absolute power corrupts absolutely bit."
Good review Hal
Brian
Member, Extropy Institute