• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

San Junipero (Black Mirror S03E04) might be my favorite episode of TV ever

Status
Not open for further replies.

Bigfoot

Member
So this thread gets going again and no one mentions this episode won an Emmy!

Congrats to the people that made it. It is a Fantastic hour+ of TV.
 

bbalde

Member
I absolutely loved it. It felt weird, like I have already been there (had to Google to find out the reason why the scenery was familiar, I live in Capetown).
 

XOMTOR

Member
Because in this scenario, you're not avoiding the termination of a consciousness.

"You're" as in referring to me I assume. Well, what am I? And consciousness to me is but a fancy word meaning information and I'm concerned with preservation of information.

If my consciousness is copied upon my death and uploaded to a glorious paradise in the cloud, I'm not avoiding death at all. A copy of me is in paradise for eternity while I'm very much dead.

If by "you" being dead you mean your physical body no longer exists in the form you recognize, how is that any different than how you live now? Your body now is not even the same one you were born with for all intents and purposes.

So this thread gets going again and no one mentions this episode won an Emmy!

Congrats to the people that made it. It is a Fantastic hour+ of TV.

I don't follow awards shows but very heartwarming to hear. I absolutely adored San Junipero.
 
Thought it was a lame episode and if they had used a hetero couple nobody would talk about it.

The entire choice between
possibly real or fake computer heaven is meaningless as she died anyway and only a copy was sent to the server. It only benefits the living who connect to the dead, not the dead themselves.

Was like the episode where the cookie
is tortured by police after confession, it wasn't the real person who did the crime so what was the point?
 

Arkeband

Banned
Thought it was a lame episode and if they had used a hetero couple nobody would talk about it.

The entire choice between
possibly real or fake computer heaven is meaningless as she died anyway and only a copy was sent to the server. It only benefits the living who connect to the dead, not the dead themselves.

Was like the episode where the cookie
is tortured by police after confession, it wasn't the real person who did the crime so what was the point?

You're missing the entire premise of the technology.

Your consciousness stays intact when you are effectively digitized, which means if you die while you're in there, your consciousness remains in the copy indefinitely (unless the servers are turned off). This makes "fake heaven" actually a verifiable afterlife, whereas "real heaven" is actually eternal but not verifiably existent.

The episode suggests that human beings, in the absence of proof that heaven exists, will inevitably create their own, hence, 'heaven is a place on earth'.
 

davepoobond

you can't put a price on sparks
My issue with the episode was
the black lady had stuck to her morals for so long in the episode and for no reason all of a sudden switched her opinion in the last 2 minutes of the episode. She should have just died without going back in. I learned nothing from the episode other than your philosophy and 40 years of marriage or whatever don't mean anything
 

The Hermit

Member
I was surprised with the light/happy ending, but I though it was one of the most straight forward BM episode.

In the other hand SOMA (PC game) used the same theme and made me very introspective. White Christmas too.
 

firehawk12

Subete no aware
The critical success of this episode and the commercial success of Makoto Shinkai's Your Name has basically convinced me that the easiest way to make it is to just have a sappy ending. lol
 

kewlmyc

Member
Wow, been watching this series and White Wolf fucked me up badly.

Every episode I've seen so far has been great (midway though the 2nd season), except maybe the Pig Fucking one.
 

sibarraz

Banned
My issue with the episode was
the black lady had stuck to her morals for so long in the episode and for no reason all of a sudden switched her opinion in the last 2 minutes of the episode. She should have just died without going back in. I learned nothing from the episode other than your philosophy and 40 years of marriage or whatever don't mean anything

Im still conflicted with this

In one hand I believe that you are right, it felt super weird that she decided to change her 40 years stance in a very quick span (never mind how quick she felt in love with the red haired girl)

But in the other hand, I could see it as she deciding that there is no point of dying with all the sadness that had been with you all your love, and that there is no harm on spending your eternity by finally embracing your sexuality and spending a good time with one person who make tou felt special after a very long time.

But also I felt that the ending was way too scary on how basically a corporation was the owner of your consciense, and thanks to the White Christmas we learnt that they could perfectly decided to sell your memory as an AI for the best bidder

One thing that I could give to San Junipero is that it most be the most gray ending of the whole series, where is very hard to take an stance, while the other episodes are easier to fall in whatever narrative they are trying to push
 

SomTervo

Member
felt like a student project tbh

Came in for the hot takes, wasn't disappointed

GOATV

My issue with the episode was
the black lady had stuck to her morals for so long in the episode and for no reason all of a sudden switched her opinion in the last 2 minutes of the episode. She should have just died without going back in. I learned nothing from the episode other than your philosophy and 40 years of marriage or whatever don't mean anything

She fell in love again in this episode. That's all there is to it.

A common message after loss is to move on and find another.

She did, she just struggled against it for a long time.

No beef.

Thought it was a lame episode and if they had used a hetero couple nobody would talk about it.

The entire choice between
possibly real or fake computer heaven is meaningless as she died anyway and only a copy was sent to the server. It only benefits the living who connect to the dead, not the dead themselves.

Was like the episode where the cookie
is tortured by police after confession, it wasn't the real person who did the crime so what was the point?

You don't get the implications of the technology.

The copy is 100% accurate and brought to life, making it exactly the same as you IRL. It's just a digital, living you. That's the premise.
 

XOMTOR

Member
My issue with the episode was
the black lady had stuck to her morals for so long in the episode and for no reason all of a sudden switched her opinion in the last 2 minutes of the episode. She should have just died without going back in. I learned nothing from the episode other than your philosophy and 40 years of marriage or whatever don't mean anything

She stuck to "her morals" only out of a (misplaced) sense of duty she felt towards her dead daughter and husband. It's a very common thing with us humans; there are people who refuse to have relationships or get married again after their husband or wife dies. Kelly did not for a second believe they were in any sort of spiritual afterlife; they were simply dead. Gone. The end. Period.

In the end, she realized that to not follow her new love to San Junipero would be essentially lying to herself.
 

davepoobond

you can't put a price on sparks
She stuck to "her morals" only out of a (misplaced) sense of duty she felt towards her dead daughter and husband. It's a very common thing with us humans; there are people who refuse to have relationships or get married again after their husband or wife dies. Kelly did not for a second believe they were in any sort of spiritual afterlife; they were simply dead. Gone. The end. Period.

In the end, she realized that to not follow her new love to San Junipero would be essentially lying to herself.

To be able to interpret love for your husband and daughter as misplaced sense of duty is odd to begin with, but even if that was the case that wasn't communicated to us in any profound way in the last 2 minutes of the episode

Are we supposed to forget the ones we love(d) and the experiences that lead you up to that point just to be personally satisfied? That's the message I got from the episode, but it significantly cheapened any sort of philosophical hot take on any of that because it took all of 2 minutes of montage in the episode to flip her belief and 58 minutes explaining why she shouldn't.
 

XOMTOR

Member
To be able to interpret love for your husband and daughter as misplaced sense of duty is odd to begin with, but even if that was the case that wasn't communicated to us in any profound way in the last 2 minutes of the episode

While they're alive, of course not. But only humans go to extreme lengths to linger on feelings after death. Nothing wrong with remembering loved ones but denying yourself new experiences because your dead loved ones may or may not approve is silly. In other words, when/if I die, I won't care if my wife remarries and she shouldn't either. I'll be dead.

Are we supposed to forget the ones we love(d) and the experiences that lead you up to that point just to be personally satisfied?

Forget? Absolutely not. Should we continue living our lives in a way in which we feel our deceased loved ones may or may not approve? Unless the dead can communicate, we'd just be guessing.

That's the message I got from the episode, but it significantly cheapened any sort of philosophical hot take on any of that because it took all of 2 minutes of montage in the episode to flip her belief and 58 minutes explaining why she shouldn't.

I agree that the ending showing Kelly approaching death was a bit rushed but I had no problem interpreting her change of mind. She didn't have a change of heart/change her beliefs; she never believed her husband and daughter were in any sort of spiritual afterlife at all. She mentions that earlier in the episode when talking to Yorkie about her husband and his beliefs.
 

mantidor

Member
Thought it was a lame episode and if they had used a hetero couple nobody would talk about it.

The entire choice between
possibly real or fake computer heaven is meaningless as she died anyway and only a copy was sent to the server. It only benefits the living who connect to the dead, not the dead themselves.

Was like the episode where the cookie
is tortured by police after confession, it wasn't the real person who did the crime so what was the point?

The original script had a heterosexual couple, but Brooker thought a gay couple would fit perfectly the theme of living a life you couldn't, that is, being gay in the actual 80s was very different, LGBT people had to live much more closeted lives. You make it sound like a gimmick when it actually fits perfectly with the narrative and the theme of the episode.

And no, it is stablished their conciousness is not duplicated, it's transferred, this is the premise, BM episodes are self contained besides a couple of easter eggs, what happened in White Christmas is not relevant.
 
Surprised to see so much love for Shut Up and Dance. I found that episode to be a joyless predictable slog. It was basically that Emma Roberts/Dave Franco movie from last summer but taken 100% seriously and with a final twist tacked on.

And I definitely agree with what's been said in this thread about Black Mirror's twists. A lot of episodes feel reverse engineered from their twists which results in some plot gymnastics in the third act.
 
"You're" as in referring to me I assume. Well, what am I? And consciousness to me is but a fancy word meaning information and I'm concerned with preservation of information.

If by "you" being dead you mean your physical body no longer exists in the form you recognize, how is that any different than how you live now? Your body now is not even the same one you were born with for all intents and purposes.

I think the point you're overlooking is that if the transfer of the consciousness from one's body to San Junipero is not seamless and is simply a copy/paste job, there is still a death of a consciousness involved.

If one's goal to avoid death, this doesn't avoid death at all. Because one is dying and losing possession of the consciousness they once had in this scenario.

I mean, if one believes in the concept of heaven, what comfort would one get out of knowing that a copy of you is in heaven - not the consciousness you possess right now? You're still going to die, and all heaven would be is a hard drive where a copy of you is stored.

You end, and another you begins. But it's not you. It's another you.

Again, I bring up The Prestige, and I'll spoiler tag for anyone who somehow still hasn't seen that movie:

Angier (Hugh Jackman) copies himself over and over again, and then kills himself over and over again with each new show. One could view this as a form of immortality, but it's not. It's constant suicide over and over again. There's a disconnect between each form of him that's copied; it's not a seamless transfer between each new body and the next. He dies and he's copied. Dies and is copied. Over and over again. That's not immortality. That's death, over and over again.

I think we're kinda talking past each other, but hopefully what I'm saying makes sense. Sure, I get your point about our bodies' cells being regenerated, but we all contain the same consciousness we were born with. If that consciousness dies, we lose it, even if it's copied and digitally stored in a fabulous paradise.
 

Struct09

Member
So this thread gets going again and no one mentions this episode won an Emmy!

Congrats to the people that made it. It is a Fantastic hour+ of TV.

I somehow missed this. Congrats to the writers, truly an incredible and memorable hour of television.
 

Syntsui

Member
It was definetely a slow burner, at the beginning I was on the verge of sleeping but the twist at the mid point made me interested again.

I can safely say it doesn't hold a candle on Shut Up and Dance though, that is my favorite episode of the entire series.
 
This is also why the ep is actually (in my view) much more bleak and dark than people give it credit for.
For what could be just a fling and the promise of (temporary) instant gratification with a -guaranty- to know where you are going, Kelly renounces her "true love" as she herself described it and the "possibility" of being reunited with him and their child... All that for the whole but guaranteed certainty that eventually they both will end up as emotionless husks of themselves trapped in a parody version of a forever 1980.

The reality of it, in my opinion, is that San Junipero is Limbo, and is the way to Hell (that club we briefly see) which will happen eventually.
But at least they will have some fun for a while on their way there :)

It is bleak and dark eventually. But at the same time I wish for it because I want there to be a way to have decades more with my husband. No responsibilities. Nothing else. Just time to be.

:/
 

XOMTOR

Member
I think the point you're overlooking is that if the transfer of the consciousness from one's body to San Junipero is not seamless and is simply a copy/paste job, there is still a death of a consciousness involved.

If one's goal to avoid death, this doesn't avoid death at all. Because one is dying and losing possession of the consciousness they once had in this scenario.

We don't even know what consciousness is. In the framework of San Junipero, the information transfer takes place while the "patient" is already active on the server. We see it with Yorkie, she's waiting on the beach in San Junipero during her euthanasia.

I mean, if one believes in the concept of heaven, what comfort would one get out of knowing that a copy of you is in heaven - not the consciousness you possess right now? You're still going to die, and all heaven would be is a hard drive where a copy of you is stored.

Well I imagine that's gotta be a tough pill to swallow for religious people like Kelly's husband. But I'm like Kelly and have no proof that any such afterlife exists so I wouldn't forgo a chance at a man made heaven on earth. Which is kinda the point of the movie. It asks each of us what we would choose.

You end, and another you begins. But it's not you. It's another you.

So you're basing this on continuity of consciousness. My sister had a 4 hour surgery a few weeks back. There's a 4 hour gap in her "consciousness". Is she still her? Whatever that means. Last night I slept for six and a half hours. When I woke up this morning, I had no recollection of the time I was asleep except for the dream I had. So in essence, that six and half hour time frame is blank except for memories of events that never took place and things that don't really exist. Strange notion, but I functioned just fine today regardless.

Again, I bring up The Prestige, and I'll spoiler tag for anyone who somehow still hasn't seen that movie:

Angier (Hugh Jackman) copies himself over and over again, and then kills himself over and over again with each new show. One could view this as a form of immortality, but it's not. It's constant suicide over and over again. There's a disconnect between each form of him that's copied; it's not a seamless transfer between each new body and the next. He dies and he's copied. Dies and is copied. Over and over again. That's not immortality. That's death, over and over again.

Every night when you go to sleep or drink yourself stupid or have surgery under general anesthetic, you undergo something similar. If someone switched your body during the night and everything appeared the same when you woke, would you even know? If you did, would you care?

I think we're kinda talking past each other, but hopefully what I'm saying makes sense. Sure, I get your point about our bodies' cells being regenerated, but we all contain the same consciousness we were born with. If that consciousness dies, we lose it, even if it's copied and digitally stored in a fabulous paradise.

How do you prove you "contain the same consciousness" you were born with? I'm certainly not the same physical being I was when I was conceived and I'm mentally much different than I was even a few years ago. Much of my childhood, and in fact, many parts of my life exist only as memories with fuzzy detail. Many of those memories could be replaced with alternate versions and I doubt I'd even notice.

Anyway, I find human obsession with our individuality, on what is "me" and "I" and "self" to be a tad strange so perhaps that's why I have no issues with concepts like San Junipero.
 

Aske

Member
Anyway, I find human obsession with our individuality, on what is "me" and "I" and "self" to be a tad strange

I'm interested in why you find the human fixation on the nature of what makes us "us" to be strange.

If we learned that every time we went to sleep, we "died", only to be "born" again with all the memories we possessed since birth, but there was nothing we could do about it; I imagine we'd all feel a bit horrified, but no more so than we do knowing that each of us is a gestalt formed by two distinct personalities working symbiotically. It would simply be a fact of life.

However, if we created matter transporting technology that we knew would kill us and replace us with copies every time we used it - even in a world in which we knew the same thing happened every time we slept -very few people would be content to jump on in. It's a SOMA situation. If death is inevitable, most of us don't have much objection to the existence of copies; but if we can choose between continuing to live or dying and being replaced by a copy, most of us care a good deal.


Back to San Junipero, it always makes me a little sad to see people ignoring the far more interesting questions posed by the episode in favour of sidestepping them with "no point, just a copy, so stupid". The show goes out of its way to clear this issue up precisely so we can focus on questions far more interesting than "would you use the transporter in Star Trek?".

Would you choose to roll the dice on ancient folklore, accept the reality of oblivion, or continue to live forever in a man-made afterlife that may drive you mad? I forget what the episode specifies about potential enhancements to the technology, but I feel like the madness side-effect is something human intelligence coulde solve; perhaps with some kind of selective memory purging, or even virtual reincarnation if necessary.

Regardless, another incredible thing about Kelly's decision is that in many ways it's a gift to Yorkie. Not that it's completely altruistic, but I think Kelly is more or less content to die, knowing that it will be the end of her existence. She doesn't necessarily want or need a New Game+ that will likely result in madness. But for Yorkie, San Junipero is her first shot at a normal life. I like to think Kelly's ambivalence about her decision might have been tipped by a desire to give Yorkie something akin to the life she already enjoyed with her husband; her own future well-being be damned.
 

Sevenfold

Member
The cells of your body are completely different around every 7 years. In other words, you are made up of completely different material than you were seven years ago. Not one atom is the same.

Ooooh next you'll be telling me I'm my grandma's baby rather than my mum's. Schpoookie.
 

Joeku

Member
There's something to be said for having your thoroughly depressing work end with a bit of joy.

Edit: Please god let that vinyl come to North America.

Oh hey, that vinyl came to North America, at least enough for me to get it for a friend on Amazon for their birthday.

And it's almost encouraging that people still want to find the "out" to get some sort of fucked up-edness out of San Junipero. Almost. At least it means people are thinking critically about what they're watching. But it was set up, it had a premise, it showed the nature of the world, the stakes were set, and it had an ending. That's really it. That's really all it is.

I find myself lucky to see that the happy ending wasn't the twist in and of itself, but rather the episode was a series of minor twists because of the technological reveal.

Please, god, just take a story about two people in love after living differing lives of loss as it is.
 

gamz

Member
I'm interested in why you find the human fixation on the nature of what makes us "us" to be strange.

If we learned that every time we went to sleep, we "died", only to be "born" again with all the memories we possessed since birth, but there was nothing we could do about it; I imagine we'd all feel a bit horrified, but no more so than we do knowing that each of us is a gestalt formed by two distinct personalities working symbiotically. It would simply be a fact of life.

However, if we created matter transporting technology that we knew would kill us and replace us with copies every time we used it - even in a world in which we knew the same thing happened every time we slept -very few people would be content to jump on in. It's a SOMA situation. If death is inevitable, most of us don't have much objection to the existence of copies; but if we can choose between continuing to live or dying and being replaced by a copy, most of us care a good deal.


Back to San Junipero, it always makes me a little sad to see people ignoring the far more interesting questions posed by the episode in favour of sidestepping them with "no point, just a copy, so stupid". The show goes out of its way to clear this issue up precisely so we can focus on questions far more interesting than "would you use the transporter in Star Trek?".

Would you choose to roll the dice on ancient folklore, accept the reality of oblivion, or continue to live forever in a man-made afterlife that may drive you mad? I forget what the episode specifies about potential enhancements to the technology, but I feel like the madness side-effect is something human intelligence coulde solve; perhaps with some kind of selective memory purging, or even virtual reincarnation if necessary.

Regardless, another incredible thing about Kelly's decision is that in many ways it's a gift to Yorkie. Not that it's completely altruistic, but I think Kelly is more or less content to die, knowing that it will be the end of her existence. She doesn't necessarily want or need a New Game+ that will likely result in madness. But for Yorkie, San Junipero is her first shot at a normal life. I like to think Kelly's ambivalence about her decision might have been tipped by a desire to give Yorkie something akin to the life she already enjoyed with her husband; her own future well-being be damned.

Nah. Kelly came on to Yorkie and there's certainly attaction and love. She loved before and why deny it now? It's not so much a gift to Yorkie but a realization that she can love again and why deny her happiness? Basically a second chance at love.
 

Khoryos

Member
Something I think people are missing about Quagmire is that we only have one character's word on it. Has it occurred to you that maybe, just maybe, in a consequence-free environment people like to fight and fuck? I mean, I've been to club nights in reality that were about as fucked up.
 
That episode is all style over substance. There's really nothing interesting in it except very aesthetically pleasing people. It was one of the episodes that felt like Netflix wanted the show to cater to Americans more.

Black Mirror has half a dozen episodes much better.
 

gamz

Member
That episode is all style over substance. There's really nothing interesting in it except very aesthetically pleasing people. It was one of the episodes that felt like Netflix wanted the show to cater to Americans more.

Black Mirror has half a dozen episodes much better.

Sorry you felt like that. There's a ton going on with death, love, loss, second chances, and a very unique spin on the afterlife. Not to mention perfect chemistry between the leads who sell the whole episode.

You are really short changing it and not sure how you get such a simplistic view on it?

Edit:. And you think that Netflix made this to cater to American audiences? Booker wrote it.
 

Aske

Member
Nah. Kelly came on to Yorkie and there's certainly attaction and love. She loved before and why deny it now? It's not so much a gift to Yorkie but a realization that she can love again and why deny her happiness? Basically a second chance at love.

Oh, for sure. I'm just speculating about every facet of Kelly's motivation, since the manner in which she changers her mind seems to be a sticking point for some.
Yorkie is a very new, fresh love. Kelly has probably experienced a few of those in her life, and we know she's experienced long-term, mature love with her husband. Her motivation to keep living absolutely comes from her feelings for Yorkie and all the experiences she knows she can have with her in her new life; but she's wise enough not to just jump in with both feet given her knowledge of what tends to happen to people who continue on in the virtual reality. I just like to think the knowledge that she's giving Yorkie something she might never experience without her might be the x-factor that transcends Kelly's misgivings. Sure, maybe their new life won't end well, but it makes a lot of sense that those concerns would melt away when weighed against giving Yorkie the life she never had before her death.
 

Joeku

Member
Is this series like the twilight zone at all ? Haven’t watched any eps

Since nobody else has answered this:

It's what Twilight Zone would be today if it was made on premium TV. It sets up a sci-fi premise, and delivers a meaning/message in what is usually a fucked-up way in self-contained episodes. All it lacks is the intros and outros explaining the message. You're typically expected to find them yourself (and then fall into a pit of despair).

It just does with budgets what a show in the 60's never could.
 
Sorry you felt like that. There's a ton going on with death, love, loss, second chances, and a very unique spin on the afterlife. Not to mention perfect chemistry between the leads who sell the whole episode.

You are really short changing it and not sure how you get such a simplistic view on it?

Edit:. And you think that Netflix made this to cater to American audiences? Booker wrote it.

I’m sure he wrote it. I don’t think it’s a coincidence he decided to write so many episodes with American leads in s3 compared to the others.

As a black mirror episode there’s nothing interesting about it. Shut Up And Dance is the perfect example of how the show deals with technology. This felt like the black mirror aspect was inconsequential. As a stand alone TV show it’s fine. It’s not an especially good black mirror episode.
 

Joeku

Member
I'm sure he wrote it. I don't think it's a coincidence he decided to write so many episodes with American leads in s3 compared to the others.

As a black mirror episode there's nothing interesting about it. Shut Up And Dance is the perfect example of how the show deals with technology. This felt like the black mirror aspect was inconsequential. As a stand alone TV show it's fine. It's not an especially good black mirror episode.

As far as its "Black Mirror"-ness it was weird because it was a bunch of slow reveals over the first two acts, and then just leaned into it during the climax, y'know, unlike a twist right at the end.

But don't act like the sci-fi aspect wasn't key to San Junipero. During a rewatch, almost every line means something more once you know the reality of the episode.

Edit: Also, if any episode of this earns its American-ness its San Junipero. The music and the pseudo-Miami setting are very particular.
 

rhino4evr

Member
That episode is all style over substance. There's really nothing interesting in it except very aesthetically pleasing people. It was one of the episodes that felt like Netflix wanted the show to cater to Americans more.

Black Mirror has half a dozen episodes much better.

It's probably the most unique episode of black mirror in that it didn't make you feel completely awful after watching it.

Love the show, but no doubt it's really dark.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom