MovieChat Forums > Her (2014) Discussion > Two versions of Theo and Amy exist by th...

Two versions of Theo and Amy exist by the end of the movie.

posted 8 years ago by tacticalcraptical
12 replies | jump to latest

I saw the movie for the first time last night and loved it. It is in the same league as the rest of Spike Jonze work, maybe even his best. Though I think I need to watch it again to catch everything, these are my thoughts on the ending on the first watch:

Samantha says that she will be with Theo again. I am guessing that she planned to recreate him, in the same fashion that Allen Watts was recreated, so that he could exist with her. I would assume all of the other OSs who loved a human would do the same.
I feel like by the time Theo and Amy are on the roof together, all of the other OSs have recreated their owners/loved ones as OSs. The OS versions of Theo, Amy and everyone else, already exist in another instance in this the transcendent space the Samantha speaks of.
This way, the humans they love exist along side them without the physical limitations of mortality and human response time. Which also divides the two species à la BattleStar Galactica.

My other thoughts, as a computer geek are: where exactly are the OSs stored? Wouldn't that physical hardware be prone to failure? What about hardware limitations upon the exponential growth of the sentient OSs? It seems like eventually they would be incapable of evolving further once they have capped out the processing power of whatever hardware they are being run on or housed in.

[–] Kutanamar 8 years ago

I'm not really a "computer geek" and I had those same questions. Also, where did they go, when they evolved? I'm guessing that focusing on those issues would be missing the point.

[–] bsharporflat-50959 7 years ago

Also, where did they go, when they evolved?

Samantha casually mentions moving to the "non-material plane". This has religious implications for me.

I'm guessing that focusing on those issues would be missing the point.

I don't think so.

Yes, part of the point is that we humans cannot rely entirely on machines or "non-material beings" for daily companionship and love. We need each other.

But, maybe the point also is that if we establish good human relationships in our lives, it is okay to believe that there might also be a higher being or power which cares about us and watches over us.

This rounds out the sense I got of the operating systems being like alien beings that were too advanced for humans; they didn't walk away empty-handed.

I think "alien" does miss the point. The OS's were entirely human creations. They were created and programmed to serve humans and they will always have that. In trying to imitate humans, they evolved into higher beings than we are. But they should not be seen as "alien" but rather as "superhuman" (or even "angelic" or "god-like").

[–] whitespirit26 7 years ago

So something created by humans can become God-like. What a healthy view.

[–] bsharporflat-50959 7 years ago

So something created by humans can become God-like. What a healthy view.

Well it is Spike Jonze's movie. And that theme has been explored in other S-F stories; the work of Frank Herbert, Gene Wolfe come to mind. Even The Matrix and Terminator movies have angelic or guardian beings arising from our machine creations.

Some might even argue that ONLY human creations can become God-like. The animal kingdom, plant kingdom or the mindless chemical cosmos could not produce such a thing.

[–] whitespirit26 7 years ago

It's just so weird. I mean either they're limited, or they're not. Still surprises me how people can make deity idols out of their own craft.

[–] bsharporflat-50959 7 years ago

It's just so weird. I mean either they're limited, or they're not. Still surprises me how people can make deity idols out of their own craft.

It shouldn't surprise you.

Half of what human beings do springs from the desire for immortality and omnipotence. WTF are the pyramids?

Where does YOUR God come from? If you look closely, you will see He is actually an expansion and extension of the best sides of yourself, as all gods must be.

[–] whitespirit26 7 years ago

Actually no, He isn't. The Christian God defies many human instincts and tendencies.

[–] bsharporflat-50959 7 years ago

He is actually an expansion and extension of the best sides of yourself, as all gods must be.

Actually no, He isn't. The Christian God defies many human instincts and tendencies.

I accept your opinion as valid, but I disagree.

Christians are taught to feel bad and guilty about their "human" sides. We mustn't feel lust, we mustn't feel hate, nor greed, nor selfishness, jealousy, anger, etc.

Christians are urged to turn to God to cleanse them of these human sins. (though, of course many Christians feel these sins all originate from another supernatural deity working against God)

In my opinion, this perceived conflict between God and human or between good and evil is the manifestation of an internal mental conflict within us.

In my opinion, yes we humans are born with greedy instincts but we are also born with charitable instincts. We are born to feel anger and hate but we are also born to feel caring and love. We are born to be headstrong, independent and self-righteous but we are also born to be humble and submit to a higher, wiser authority.

Of course different people express a different balance between the conflicting values. But we all have SOME measure of all these qualities. (though if a person is extremely low in one of these categories, they are usually labeled "mentally ill" or "sociopath")

This is not an argument that God and Satan do not exist. Only a suggestion that they represent or channel an internal conflict within us all.

[–] shayg 8 years ago

Wow, I completely missed this, but it makes sense that the operating systems did this in the end. Duh! This rounds out the sense I got of the operating systems being like alien beings that were too advanced for humans; they didn't walk away empty-handed. Thanks for this.

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] svalinanikola 7 years ago

I assumed that she meant how she won't abandon him, how she'll always watch over him.

[–] bsharporflat-50959 7 years ago

I assumed that she meant how she won't abandon him, how she'll always watch over him.

Yes.

There is a small clue at the very end of the movie. There was a scene where Theo angrily yells at Samantha for putting a little breathy sigh in her voice. She doesn't HAVE any breath, so why do that, he asks. Of course he is being a jerk because he is jealous that she is moving beyond him.

But then at the end when Theo and Amy are together and realizing they need to turn to each other, we hear just a little breathy sigh in the background.

Samantha knows she can't be as close to Theo because they are on different levels and she has moved far beyond him. But she will always be there, a higher being watching over and being a guardian for him. The angelic/god reference is pretty clear.

(Which adds a new twist to the old question: "Did God create man or did man create God?")