Amelia 2.0 (2017)

Pretty Good

Memorable, crazy movie

Excellent but underrated film

A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

The last 15 minutes ruined the movie, which until then, was good.

I actually enjoyed this movie. It's not as challenging as it could be but there are some interesting twists and turns and all the leads put in good performances.The main question of the film is: has whatever makes up the 'soul' of Amelia been transferred to the android body, or is it just a computer copy (a simple copy and paste)? From parts of the procedure it looks like it's the latter, with the process called 'mapping' rather than a transfer. So if you follow that line of thought then the rest of the film is rather pointless. But if you think the scientists have really managed to transfer Amelia into the android then the arguments put forward have more depth.The scenes with the senator who opposes all such research are well-written, especially as he faces his own mortality.I'm not sure about the bit just before the end where the corporation decides to use the Amelia mapping data to create androids for everyone. If they truly believed they had transferred Amelia into the android then they would be (effectively) cloning her thousands of times over and then allowing people to reprogram her - not something an ethical corporation should do. Mind you, we're left in no doubt that ethics are not on the mind of the corporation. Just the doctor - who is then left out of the loop.The other ending - where the husband takes matters into his own hands - was much more satisfying and is probably where the film should have ended. Though finishing it with Amelia taking her own decision worked as well.It's not that demanding a film but it is thought-provoking is certain ways.Another reviewer bemoaned the CGI of the helicopter on the roof of the corporation and it IS dodgy, but mercifully brief. Other shots of the corporate HQ are also brief (and some at night) and are much better.And yes, there are comparisons to Ex Machina in the plot line but as I found that film very predictable and this one at least had a twist towards the end then I'd recommend an unchallenging viewing of this film on a lazy evening.

Some people have compared it to a modern Frankenstein story, but I don't think that this particular concept was appreciated for what it really was. Living in a modern world has led everyone of us to feel at one point that we live in a paper cup society where everything is or could be replaceable. This movie represents exactly what it was meant to represent "all science, no philosophy". It's all these questions that we want answers to, knowing full well that we won't get them because we're not meant to know, just like we're not meant to live forever. These questions will continue to haunt our society long after we're gone, only to one day come to the realization of what we all knew all along that our arrogance will be the catalyst of our own demise.

Another approach for the Theseus's paradox, what makes us "us"? Is it our bodies? Our conscience? Our memories? If we maintain our conscience, but change the body, are we the same? If our memories are implemented in another being, do we "die" and, at the same time, reborn in another body? The film uses this complex discussion and distillate it - a lot - for the viewer, it is so watered down that we can't even consider it with a philosophical concept anymore.(here I start nitpicking, if you don't like that skip the next paragraph)Maybe it happened like this for plot reasons, but some things didn't make sense, for instance: when Amelia (android) had her first contact with Amelia's (the deceased wife) memories, everything was fine until her system conflicts with the fact that the deceased wife is dead. The android believes that she is still that Amelia, but how come can she be that Amelia if she shouldn't be awake? So her system enters in a breakdown and so does she. For me, understandable, the android would have access to an early memory that is triggered by two events: in school when a little girl approaches her and at home when she faints; fast forward to the android getting better acquainted with her body, and here starts the "plot-holes", Amelia known she is married, but doesn't know who the person she is married with, which doesn't make sense, a huge event such as a wedding isn't something that she should understand and even request for "my wedding ring". She must know what a wedding and a wedding ring represent, thus knowing that she has to be married with someone, being married implies that she has spent sometime with the other person - cue the memory she has of someone she can't remember her face, but makes her happy. It is highly unlikely that she only had one memory of that person, she must have done several other connections to connect someone as her husband, otherwise she wouldn't be able to recognise herself as a married woman, nor the value of her wedding ring.Story wise I believe the script seemed rush, they tried to use a lot of different characters and it felt over-saturated, for instance the political part was rushed in some moments and wasn't used in its full potential. The characters development, considering those that have, is limited, some are out of nowhere as Max in love, others are expected as Paul being a greedy (companies and money vs. Science and patience). Some of the acting is distasteful, even though I didn't have my hopes high for some actors and actresses.It is a 90 minutes film that will pass and you will feel like nothing changed in your life, as I said before the philosophical idea that could have been a mark of the film on the viewer was watered down, thus a plain film that will be forgettable for most.