Thanks for the memories!

Am i the only one who thinks........Average?

There are better movies of two hours length. I loved the actress'performance.

Let me be very fair here, this is not the best movie in my opinion. But, this movie is fun, it has purpose and is very enjoyable to watch.

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.

At the time I write this review, the average rating is 5.6, which makes my rating of 9 a bit of a reversal for my reviews (I'm demanding in my story-telling and tend to rate films lower than the average audience).This is a highly unusual rating situation for me. On the one hand there is almost nothing truly exceptional about this film. On the other... I almost gave it 10 stars for sheer excellence in presentation.* This movie is slow-moving, intricate, and asks some very difficult questions. I will not spoil any of the plot by discussing precisely why I found this story so engrossing, but there are several elements that make it applaud-worthy: 1. Sensible discussion of the concept of God and contrary opinions to such without overt blasphemy. It simply presents both sides of the viewpoint... quite well in my opinion.2. It discusses the "soul" without becoming dogmatic.3. It addresses ethical issues in regard to reproducing humans in a non-standard manner (again, no spoilers by discussing how. All that I am going to discuss here is what's presented in the summary and trailers.) 4. It really hits the emotions of every single role and does so very well. This is some of the best directing, acting and character portrayal I have seen in a long time.5. It presents a couple of unexpected twists that really tie the story line together very well.This film presents the questions, the arguments, the positions and personal issues of the subject matter in a surprisingly short period of time. This could have been a lengthy mini-series and held together well. That they accomplished what they did within the time allotment of a single film is pretty awesome.In short, this film accomplished what I see so very few films accomplish these days: it told a story and told it very well. It didn't rely on heavy CGI, had almost no "action", and focused almost exclusively on the lives and roles of the people involved. There were no sharks jumped here, no absurdities (which is admirable in itself), no great big plot loopholes where there could have been many. They did surprisingly well in almost every aspect. It came very close to getting 10 stars, which I've given to fewer films than I have fingers. It may be a bit slow and uneventful for the adrenaline junkies of today's generation-- but for those who still appreciate the art of story telling and the morality play, this is a rare gem.* I dropped my rating to a 9 for a single F-bomb which was out of context with the entire rest of the film and unnecessary to the plot. Consequences for directorial stupidity. It would be nice just once to see someone make an entire movie based purely on great story-telling rather than resorting to shock schlock. This movie *almost* made it. Still, worth every bit of the 9 stars I give it.

Not having the critical acuity of Roger Ebert, I judge movies entirely by how much money I want back on the way out of the theatre. Watching Amelia 2.0 was delightful entertainment throughout and I didn't want any money back (though I found the popcorn overpriced). I am not a sci-fi fan. In 1977 I demanded and got my $4 back after a screening of Star Wars (but am still awaiting the public apology). Amelia 2.0 did not put me in mind of Star Wars and all that cgi gimcrackery, but did put me in mind of the 1978 movie Coma, after which I did not want any money back. All I remember about Coma - except Genevieve Bujold - is that it had something to do with malevolent forces and futuristic genetic manipulations and that I was satisfied with it. That's how I feel about Amelia 2.0. Enjoy the movie.

This is a 21st century retelling of the Frankenstein story. The difference is that the body is an android and they have placed the memory of a real human in the system. Amelia had a functional brain but had a condition which paralyzed her. There is an ethic debate over the issue which was done from strictly a theological view point. The ending was messed up and the film slow at times.Mildly entertaining science fiction which concentrated too much on a poorly scripted debate that we had in the 19th century.Guide: no swearing, sex, or nudity.