Ironheart feels like a psy op by Disney to warm us up to the idea of replacing dead actors with AI
Ironheart was strange, seeing how heavily they were pushing for us to accept Riri replacing dead Natalie with an AI. Throughout the show there's this constant messaging about how AI NATALIE is human-like and has her own soul and personality and life. Like when Riri's mom first encounters NATALIE , the script goes out of its way to have her literally says it's like Riri brought Natalie's "entire soul" back with this AI. Even Xavier, the only one who was a voice of reason, begins to accept Riri's AI recreation of his sister, even re-quoting Star Trek's "hers \[NATALIE'S soul\] was the most human" line from Riri's gift letter to refer to AI Natalie. Even he warms up to the idea. it was off-putting. Also, it was honestly creepy as hell when NATALIE was privately watching videos of Riri and Natalie and trying to imitate the real Natalie, which would be a great story beat, but I don't think they made that creepy on purpose. The whole thing reads like an attempt to get us comfortable with the idea of replacing humans with AI and using AI as emotional support--and recasting actors through ai.
The saving grace to counter my point is the ending, where we see how dead Natalie really is a vice, and Natalie is Riri's worst temptation. Perhaps it was all intended from the start. Riri's Natalie is like Parker's hood. Maybe the showwriter's were warning us against being stuck in the past.
But, this only condemns trying to bring Natalie back--it doesn't condemn AI NATALIE. None of the messaging ever seemed to warn against this other way of using AI to "honor" (or dishonor) past people, beside Xavier's concerns which quickly got swept under the rug. Oh, making an ai recreation of your friend's dead sister is okay, and not listening when the poor girl's still-living-brother tells you to delete his fake sister is okay, but only reviving the real Natalie is a step too far? I feel like AI NATALIE is already a Mephisto's bargain in itself.
I'm not even a technophobe at all. I actually think AI is fascinating and I'm not opposed to it in principle. I don't even think it's ethically harmful to make AI's of your dead friend--go off, idc. But the way this was handled just wasn't high quality storytelling, it felt more like built-in messaging, which is just kinda weird to be on the receiving end of. But idk, maybe the comics are written this way too. lmk.
That was my one specific complaint with the show (besides it being pretty mediocre and unrealistic in general). It's otherwise not that bad. I've heard other complaints about how the show made Riri arrogant and egotistical or how the show somehow "trashes Tony Stark," but that makes no sense, she never says anything of the sort and that has nothing to do with the show. Tony Stark is never disrespected, so i'm not sure if those people even watched it.
The saving grace to counter my point is the ending, where we see how dead Natalie really is a vice, and Natalie is Riri's worst temptation. Perhaps it was all intended from the start. Riri's Natalie is like Parker's hood. Maybe the showwriter's were warning us against being stuck in the past.
But, this only condemns trying to bring Natalie back--it doesn't condemn AI NATALIE. None of the messaging ever seemed to warn against this other way of using AI to "honor" (or dishonor) past people, beside Xavier's concerns which quickly got swept under the rug. Oh, making an ai recreation of your friend's dead sister is okay, and not listening when the poor girl's still-living-brother tells you to delete his fake sister is okay, but only reviving the real Natalie is a step too far? I feel like AI NATALIE is already a Mephisto's bargain in itself.
I'm not even a technophobe at all. I actually think AI is fascinating and I'm not opposed to it in principle. I don't even think it's ethically harmful to make AI's of your dead friend--go off, idc. But the way this was handled just wasn't high quality storytelling, it felt more like built-in messaging, which is just kinda weird to be on the receiving end of. But idk, maybe the comics are written this way too. lmk.
That was my one specific complaint with the show (besides it being pretty mediocre and unrealistic in general). It's otherwise not that bad. I've heard other complaints about how the show made Riri arrogant and egotistical or how the show somehow "trashes Tony Stark," but that makes no sense, she never says anything of the sort and that has nothing to do with the show. Tony Stark is never disrespected, so i'm not sure if those people even watched it.
Commentaires
On the contrary, Riri goes from hating AI Nat to accepting AI Nat, and by the end of the show AI Nat is helping Riri open up and process her grief. Even though Riri still has her hubris and isn’t fully coping, by the end of the show she has learned to reach out to others thanks to AI Nat. Throughout the show AI Nat is framed as the voice of reason, encouraging Riri to slow down and not keep as many secrets.
I posted much lengthier comments else where in this thread (and honestly do want to see how you would respond to them). Given the fact we live in a time where AI companions are a real thing, I don’t see why people are just dismissing OP’s post as if there’s no fodder for discussion here.
I don’t think OP is saying this the main message of the show, or the only theme in the show. They’re pointing to something that the show presents and normalizes.
Depicting something in media does not equate to condoning it or supporting it, as some people these days need to be reminded.
Ironheart was not "pushing" for us to "accept" AI Natalie.
Riri knew it was messed up, which is why she initially tried to hide it from ~~her mother~~ everyone.
Xavier thought it was messed up.
AI Nat watching videos of Riri and herself was 100% meant to make us uncomfortable.
Riri made a literal deal with the capital D Devil at the end of the series to bring back the "real" Natalie. But it's heavily implied throughout the season that the AI Nat was not actually AI at all, but had been a figment of Mephisto's powers meant to tempt Riri the whole time.
> Riri's Natalie is like Parker's hood
Yeah dude that's the point.
> yeah dude that’s the point
The point is Riri’s Natalie is like Parker’s hood. They did NOT make AI NATALIE like Parker’s hood. That’s my point. But if it was heavily implied that AI NAT was Mephisto too, I would love to see evidence of that because that’s interesting and would be a valid counterpoint. As it stands, the concerns you point out, ie Xa’s concern with AI NAT were largely quickly pushed aside and convinced to be more accepting in the plot of the show
It's been a while since I watched the show or discussed it, but off the top of my head:
- Riri states many times she doesn't actually know how or why the AI turned into Natalie (because she didn't do it herself).
- Ezekiel Stane says that anybody creating an AI that powerful by scanning their brainwaves *should* have had their brain fried from the sheer amount of energy output (once more insinuating Riri *didn't actually* make an AI program successfully).
- The repeated use of people talking about AI Natalie having a "soul", dropping hints that this is not an AI but an actual fragment of somebody's former consciousness that Mephisto has planted in Ri's armour.
- AI Natalie repeatedly sabotaging/attempting to sabotage Riri's use of the armour - she jumpscares her in the tunnels causing Riri to drop the USB stick; she freezes up in front of the cop to get Riri arrested... Also Natalie "accidentally" revealing herself to Riri's mother and Xavier. (It's thought that this was Mephisto undermining Riri in order to get her to fail and become more desperate, to the point where she'd accept a deal with him.)
- The sorcerer girl's attempt to infuse Riri's armour with magic accidentally purges Mephisto's possession of the suit. (Riri's failed attempts to reboot AI Nat is because once again, she *never successfully made AI Nat* in the first place.)
So, Riri begins the story by thinking that AI Nat is messed up, she avoids talking to AI Nat and treats AI Nat just as artificial intelligence. By the end of the story, Riri learns to talk to AI Nat like her old friend, which helps her open up and process her grief. This seems framed as a good thing.
Xaiver is initially against AI Nat, but comes around because he sees how it helps Riri.
There’s a scene where Riri’s mom finds out about AI Nat and asks if Riri can make one of their dad. Riri is appalled by the suggestion. But her mom makes an argument for how it would help her to just to talk to him one more time. The show pretty much leaves it at that. (What’s creepy is that these are actual conversations people are having today about current AI companion technology.) Throughout the show, Riri is framed as being too stubborn and her mom is usually framed as being in the right.
**How AI Nat is framed in the show**
The scene where AI Nat tries to copy original Natalie: This happens after Xavier is shown being disgusted. We see AI Nat alone and sad. She watches these old videos and tries to mimic original Natalie while sad music plays. We see a close up on her face, looking upset. To me, those are all cues that were meant to sympathize with her character, not find her creepy.
Ultimately, AI Nat acknowledges that she’s not the original Nat, but she’s a part of Riri’s memory. She uses this fact to display a holographic memory of Riri’s dad to help Riri process her grief. This is all framed as a good thing.
Throughout the show, while Riri is being stubborn, secretive, and dangerous, AI Nat acts as this voice of reason. She tries to talk Riri out of going on dangerous missions, saying that “they’re not ready.” At the end of their first mission, when AI Nat freezes, it shows that Riri was being too ambitious, she wasn’t ready (so, AI Nat was right). Riri keeps trying to keep secrets from her family, but AI Nat pops out to force Riri to talk to her Mom. AI Nat continually pushes Riri to open up about her feelings.
I completely disagree that the show frames AI Nat as a negative influence. If it is supposed to, it does a poor job. I think instead AI Nat is supposed to represent the part of Riri that is not processing her grief.
**The “AI Nat was actually Mephisto the whole time!” Theory**
Your argument that the show frames AI Nat as bad seems to hinge on the theory that Mephisto actually created AI Nat. This theory honestly seems not just convoluted, but requires overlooking how AI Nat is actually characterized and ignoring explanations the show already gives.
In Faustian bargain / Pet Cemetery type stories, the main character wants to revive their deceased loved one, is happy that they return, but slowly see the flaws of the revival. In this story, Riri starts off horrified and scared of AI Nat, but AI Nat helps her as a voice of reason, and slowly Riri comes to warm up to AI Nat. AI Nat is Riri’s repressed emotions, her “heart,” the part of her that hasn’t yet processed Nat’s death.
There’s the scene of Riri dreaming about Natalie while her brain is being scanned. There’s a scene where Zelma explains that the magic upgrade could overload parts of Riri’s armor (but AI Nat, in a heroic sacrificial position, is willing to accept that risk). We already have explanations for these things, trying to fit Mephisto in retroactively is convoluted.
If AI Nat were demonic, we would see AI Nat push Riri to go further (rather than try to be her voice of reason) and I think we would see it telegraphed more in Riri’s interactions with Zelma and the Hood.
The theory also just goes against the show's own logic. Mephisto needs people to sign a contract before he makes changes. N.A.T.A.L.I.E. says she doesn't have all of Natalie's memories, but she does have memories of Riri. The revived Natalie from Mephisto doesn't seem to remember anything from being an AI. Either these are all massive red herrings or the fan theory is unfounded. Let's Occam's Razor this stuff.
I honestly think the Mephisto fan theory is a way for fans to project a “AI Nat is a Faustian bargain” theme onto the show, without that theme actually present. Which, if we’re talking bad media literacy- I think looking for tiny “clues” for a fan theory so that the show can have a theme you align with is bad media literacy.
**What Themes the Show is Tackling**
Throughout the show, Riri learns to…
* Talk about her grief and accept that she misses others (AI Nat helps her with this)
* Riri learns to accept the help of others and the power of community (the garage montage scene). Also, her accepting help from AI Nat, plus the advice of AI Nat, is what pushed her to start talking more to her mom and Xavier.
But Riri still has her hubris, still thinks she can take big risks without consequences. So, she makes the deal with Mephisto. We all agree that this is clearly flawed/a huge mistake.
Why is the Mephisto deal a mistake, but the original AI Nat isn’t? Too huge differences: 1.) Riri didn’t choose to make AI Nat, 2.) AI Nat “died” after her purpose was fulfilled (practically martyring her). It’s worth mentioning, again, that the “AI Nat was Mephisto the whole time” fan theory actively goes against these themes.
I don’t think the authors set out to write a show that promotes AI companions as a major theme. I think they set out to write a show about processing grief and opening up, but the character/plot device that helps the main character open up just happens to be AI. But, given the times we live in, it is fair to be critical of such a plot device.
Like, that’s the most extreme / conspiratorial part of your view, but AI *is* where the money is. Disney gets benefits from the US Military when they show military characters in tech in a positive light, it could be like that.
I keep thinking about how the conversation between Riri and her mom about making an AI replica of her dad feels exactly like something a company making AI companions would want to advertise. We see Riri framed as being too skeptical by rejecting to make something that would help her mom grieve.
Yeah the dialogue about bringing back the Dad too was one where I became even more solidified in my suspicion, like I was just imagining that as a huge AI product.
I hate the way “media literacy” has been overused in these discussions, but a big part of media literacy is being wary of who’s making the story and what cultural narratives would benefit them. The fact someone immediately responded “media literacy is dead” to your post and then used a niche fan theory to completely reimagine the show’s characterization of AI Nat is so so so frustratingly ironic.
The reason I’m so invested in this thread you posted is because I remember watching this show and immediately thinking, “Oh, crap, they’re going in this direction? Well, I hope they problematize it / explore the ethics of this.”
And with each scene it felt the show was ultimately justifying the technology. It presents counter-arguments to the tech, it explores how characters like Riri and Xavier are against it, but then it counteracts those counter-arguments. The closest the show came to exploring how the technology was spooky, I think, was when Nat AI was watching videos of herself. But even then, we see “her” seeming sad about the fact she’s not fully Natalie, and the realization that she’s a part of Riri is just fuel for her to help Riri even more.
Which is why I’m so surprised to see people say “the show was obviously not pro AI, because at the end Riri makes a deal with the devil.” I was *trying* to give the show the benefit of the doubt and have some “Yeah, don’t make an AI of your dead friend” message, I was trying to watch for moments where Nat AI was in the wrong or shown to be a bad thing, but it continually returned to a positive framing. Nat AI narratively serves as Riri’s voice of reason and heart, dismissing that framing with a “well what if she was actually Mephisto” theory *is* imo poor comprehension of characterization and themes (because even if that unlikely theory is true, it doesn’t change how the show portrayed AI Nat).
I know I’ve been repeating myself a lot. This thread struck a chord with me haha. It legitimately bums me out that folks don’t get what you’re trying to say, because at its core it’s really not that wild of a take.
Thanks, I’ve never had someone this invested in a post I’ve written lmao. You’re skilled at this writing analysis stuff.
that's false. television shows are media. in fact "media literacy" has historically referred to the ability to parse themes in fictional media.
I mean, there’s even a difference between “media literacy,” “reading comprehension,” and “literary analysis.” “Media literacy” is the broadest- the ability to read and understand different forms of media. “Reading comprehension” gets into understanding the themes and details of a media. Finally, “literary analysis” is the most specific, being able to actually take apart the different themes in a show.
In a broad sense, you’re not wrong- Literary analysis is a part of media literacy. It’s just that “media literacy” has historically been used in the context of educating people how to broadly navigate media landscapes (separate propaganda from news), not specifically engage in literary analysis.
The claim, “there’s a decline in media literacy” is about how people are unable to separate fact from fiction or propaganda from unbiased reporting than it is about analyzing themes within literature.
Here’s some links of what I mean:
https://scispace.com/pdf/the-struggle-over-media-literacy-1gvbsun1kh.pdf
https://criticalmediaproject.org/media-literacies/
https://medialiteracynow.org/challenge/what-is-media-literacy/
https://ic4ml.org/journal-article/a-brief-history-of-media-literacy/
https://www.britannica.com/topic/media-literacy
—-
Anyways, that’s all a bit of a tangent. Even if we start using media literacy as a synonym for literary analysis, I still think completely disregarding OP’s point is bad literary analysis. The show’s use of AI implicit “says” something about AI different than what its more explicit themes are.
Bro, I consider myself as debate-happy as the next guy but I have nowhere near the interest in arguing over this in the marvel studios sub so why don't you just draw a "I" on your "internet arguments I've won" chalkboard and I'll just take my "actual degree in media studies" somewhere else
Edit:
The person I was originally responding to deleted their comments, but I was looking into this and found this article which I think is interesting:
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1348957.pdf
It's a meta article that looks at all the ways media literacy is used.
I’m so annoyed with how “media literacy is dead” has been used as a phrase, and so used to seeing it in contexts about educating people for digital citizenship or specifically being able to separate propaganda from fake news, that I went overboard when I said it “has nothing to do with analyzing themes in TV shows.”
Setting aside that this is actually a pretty old trope, I think you are reading wayyy into things.
And also, realism is not really an expectation you should be bringing with you to comic shows/movies.
As a secondary point, yes, Riri is very arrogant and egotistical, but I'm not saying that as a complaint. It's a flaw in her character that causes her to be the source of most of her own problems, such as thinking she could casually work with Mephisto and that there will be no catch to it whatsoever. That's going to backfire on her big time. And to be clear, she is told rather directly how powerful Mephisto is. Mephisto basically told her that he is ridiculously far beyond Dormammu, and Zelma had previously told her that Dormammu runs his own dimension. Somehow, the STEM major can't do that math.
> But, this only condemns trying to bring Natalie back--it doesn't condemn AI NATALIE. None of the messaging ever seemed to warn against this other way of using AI to "honor" (or dishonor) past people, beside Xavier's concerns which quickly got swept under the rug.
They condemn bringing Natalie back,
Not NATALIE
So there's really no need for an elaborate "conspiracy" to "convince" the audiences...
The show is not terrible but this was definitely distracting me the entire time I was watching it yesterday
And didn’t the storyline after the brother’s disgust quickly resolve in the following episode when the brother tells Riri that while he might not agree, he is willing to learn to accept and respect her way of grieving Nat ? After being moved by Riri’s headphone gift?
They don't want to "warn" us, on the contrary, they want to convince use it's a good thing for the industry. (which is codeword for "it's good for our pockets and nothing else").
I think it’s easy for people to separate entertainment from reality because that’s a perfectly healthy thing to do, but then in cases like this we forget that AI isn’t just movie sci-fi, it’s in the real world too, and it comes with a whole lot of baggage that went completely unacknowledged.
I wasn’t trying to be inflammatory in anyway, I just wrote out my opinions. I did link to some articles, maybe that triggers an auto mod? Now that whole account is frozen and I can’t get in.
Anyways OP, you’re not the only person who thought this. There’s articles that criticize it’s portrayal of AI online if you search for them.
**1.) OP's take sounds unhinged! Is this even worth discussing?**
I'll go ahead and say that I do think calling this a "psyop" is a bit of an an exaggeration, and focusing on "warming us up to the use of dead actors in movies" is too specific.
That said, I think OP's broader point could be worded like: *Iron Heart's narrative and themes are in line with a cultural narrative that AI companions are beneficial. Specifically, Iron Heart shows a positive portrayal of someone using an AI companion of a deceased loved one to help process their grief."*
This take sounds less unhinged. And they are not the only one to make this claim. There was this Polygon article about Iron Heart in July that is exactly about this:[ **Ironheart promotes AI besties and I think it's kinda dangerous: Even though AI companions are nothing new in sci-fi, people are already doing this in real life to disastrous results**](https://www.polygon.com/entertainment/608942/marvel-ironheart-promotes-ai-riri-natalie-dangerous/). There's [this Mashable article that contrasts Ironheart to Black Mirror's "Be Right Back](https://mashable.com/article/ironheart-review-marvel-disney-plus-black-mirror):" "*But where "Be Right Back" is an absolutely shattering hour of TV, Ironheart is a bit more hopeful in its portrayal of processing grief with the help of technology.*"
We live in a time where people really are using LLM companions to replicate their deceased loved ones. Surely there is some discussion to be had about how Iron Heart portrays the use of an AI replica in this context.
The use of technology or magic to create a loved one is an old trope that goes all the way back to ancient times. You have the ancient Greek myth of Pygmalian obsessing over a statue of a beautiful woman, you have Pet Cemetery and any variant, you have that Black Mirror episode "Be Right Back." The Black Mirror episode "Be Right Back" is the most relevant to this discussion, because that episode explicitly criticizes technology that can recreate loved-ones (the fact it came out years before this type of technology exists is wild in retrospect).
These types of plots play out this way:
1. Grieving character misses their loved one.
2. Grieving character finds a technological or magical way to recreate their loved one.
3. Something is wrong! This recreating is a flaw.
4. The character learns their lesson, or the story ends in tragedy.
I think people watched Iron Heart, or are looking back at Iron Heart, and projecting this narrative onto Iron Heart. But Iron Heart's narrative is more like this:
1. Riri is in denial that she's grieving. Riri only cares about her project.
2. While making the project, there's an accident and N.A.T.A.L.I.E. is born from Riri's grief.
3. Riri initially rejects N.A.T.A.L.I.E.! She tries to just treat N.A.T.A.L.I.E. as an AI, despite N.A.T.A.L.I.E. pushing Riri to do fun things, and other characters (Riri's Mom) encouraging Riri to talk to N.A.T.A.L.I.E. N.A.T.A.L.I.E. also continually tries to act as the voice of reason (and heart) to Riri, she tries to encourage Riri to slow down with her project, to not keep secrets from her mom, to talk to others.
4. Riri eventually comes around and accepts N.A.T.A.L.I.E.
Now, N.A.T.A.L.I.E. does learn that she's not the real Natalie (the scene where she's watching videos of Natalie). But the conclusion N.A.T.A.L.I.E. draws is that she's the part of Riri that needs to process her grief. N.A.T.A.L.I.E. uses these realization to play 3D holographic memories for Riri to help her process her trauma. This is all framed as a good thing!
When the other characters that Riri has met (thanks to N.A.T.A.L.I.E.'s influence!) help her build a new armor that is infused with magic, they mention that doing so will run the risk of over-laying the AI. N.A.T.A.L.I.E. accepts this sacrifice!
This is not a story that frames N.A.T.A.L.I.E. as an abomination of nature. It's a story about Riri learning to open up and process her guilt, and the main catalyst for her development is her friendship with N.A.T.A.L.I.E.
If I worked at a company that promoted the use of AI replicas for therapy, I would like the plot of Iron Heart.
Riri's whole deal is that her heart is closed off. She has an "Iron Heart."
N.A.T.A.L.I.E. is like the emotional part of Riri that is suppressed. She is Riri's "heart." When Riri explains how she doesn't know how N.A.T.A.L.I.E. was created, I don't think that's pointing to some hint that she was actually created by Mephisto (more on that later). I think it's showing us how Riri doesn't even consider that N.A.T.A.L.I.E. is on her mind. Her grief and emotions are a blind spot for her.
Ways NATALIE helps with Riri’s development:
* She tries to remind Riri to take it slow and not take less risks. In the first heist, NATALIE tells Riri she’s not ready. During this heist, this is proven true with Riri’s armor freezing.
* She encourages Riri not to keep secrets and to reach out to loved ones. One of Riri’s biggest flaws is being secretive and trying to do everything herself. She continually tries to get Riri to talk to Xavier. NATALIE breaks this down by introducing herself to Riri’s mom and to Xavier.
* She wants Riri to have fun and talk about her feelings.
* When NATALIE finds out she’s a part of Riri’s subconscious, she plays a holographic memory of Riri’s dad to help Riri process her grief.
Ultimately, NATALIE is Riri’s emotional support AI and reflects the part of Riri that hasn’t processed her emotions.
**4.) Did the writers mean to promote AI?**
So, the thing with analyzing themes in movies and shows and such is that recognizing a pattern or theme doesn't necessarily mean that the authors were being intentional.
**I think the authors were just writing a story about processing grief,** and AI was just an element of that plot. But, given the fact that we live in a world where companies are pushing things like N.A.T.A.L.I.E., you would expect the show to dive more into that as a theme.
There's a broader cultural conversation and discourse about if AI companions are beneficial and healthy or not. This show seems to take the stance that they're beneficial, but it does so in a very soft way.
*The fact the show doesn’t pull a “this is bad, actually” and make the ethics of N.A.T.A.L.I.E. a central theme of the show is… interesting.* We only see one episode that deals with this question. Natalie’s brother criticize Riri for making N.A.T.A.L.I.E., but he later changes his mind. (This confrontation also sparks N.A.T.A.L.I.E.’s moment of self-discovery that even though she’s not Natalie she can still help Riri process her grief, which is a great talking point for folks who are pro-AI using companions to process grief.) But overall, the ethics of what N.A.T.A.L.I.E. is **not** a central theme of the show. The show is about Riri’s hubris, grief, and inability to open up to others- There’s just one episode that quickly questions “Hey wait, isn’t this messed up?”
This whole discourse reminds me of how some people will criticize Marvel as soft Military propaganda. MCU movies get benefit for using military characters in their movies (look up "Marvel Industrial Complex"). Sam Wilson becomes a veteran (in the comics he's a social worker with no ties to Military), Hawkeye becomes an agent (in the comics he's an ex-con), the Captain Marvel film at times feels like an advertisement for the Air Force, the CIA agent in the Black Panther films, ect.
Some fans hear this take and respond, "But the MCU criticizes the military! The themes don't explicitly say 'Military is good'."
And they're right! Heck, sometimes I wonder if the writers are promoting anti-military themes while under the constraints of pro-military promotion (movies can have contradictory messages, after all). The idea behind the "Marvel Industrial Complex" critique is that creating a movie where most characters have military involvement will still normalize being in the military, or create a subconscious association with the military being cool, or coheres with a cultural narrative that is pro-military.
It can be a similar thing with AI. Iron Heart's main theme isn't "AI good," but it does show a story where Riri processes her grief with the help of an AI character. It does this at a time when there are real companies promoting the use of AI companions for therapeutic results. Maybe we should take it a bit critically.
To me, this theory seems overly convoluted and flies directly against some of the themes of the show. If N.A.T.A.L.I.E. is some demonic force, why is she the voice of reason trying to talk Riri out of keeping secrets from her friends and family? Furthermore, if this theory is true, you would think we would see it telegraphed more when Riri interacts with magic (her grabbing the piece of the hood, her interactions with the mage).
Evidence for this theory are things like: "We still don't know how N.A.T.A.L.I.E. was really made" and "When the mage infused Riri's suit with magic, it exorcised N.A.T.A.L.I.E." The first point, I think, is taking things a bit too literally.
We have a scene of N.A.T.A.L.I.E. explaining that she sees herself as a part of Riri's subconscious. She explains that she comes from N.A.T.A.L.I.E. To me, that is the show explaining "how" N.A.T.A.L.I.E. was created.
We have a scene of the mage explaining that infusing Riri's suit would come with a risk. To me, that is the show explaining why N.A.T.A.L.I.E. is destroyed in the process.
Also, the theory goes against the show's own logic. Mephisto needs a contract to make changes. N.A.T.A.L.I.E. admits she's missing parts of Natalie's memory, but she is able to remember things that only Riri would know. At the end, the resurrected Natalie from Mephisto seems to have no memory of being an AI- they seem like two distinct identities.
So why are people using this Mephisto theory? I think it's because they want the show to have a "Pet Cemetery" / "Be Right Back" style theme, but it does not. It’s a way to have an AI-critical reading of the show, even though N.A.T.L.I.E. does not show signs of being antagonistic or cursed.
Heck, even if later down the line they said “actually, N.A.T.A.L.I.E. was Mephisto’s plot all along,” that doesn’t change all the positive framing the show did for N.A.T.A.L.I.E.
Parker was an easy mark that barely needed any convincing. He's possibly one of many minions that Mephisto has in play that is more easily expendable. It's a Xanatos gambit: if he killed Riri, then she wasn't strong enough for Mephisto's future plans while Parker becomes more useful. But if Riri beat Parker, he had the chance to "trade up" to a much more useful minion.
Ultimately I’m just saying that OP’s right, the show frames AI N.A.T.A.L.I.E. as a good temporary therapeutic tool.
It’s like the show’s saying, “Hey, it’s cool if you want to use an LLM chatbot recreation of your loved one to process your grief, but don’t try to use dark magic to actually bring them back to life.”
Which is a strange message given our current times! And I mean, some folks might agree with this: “Well, maybe the takeaway is you can use an AI chatbot a bit, but don’t go overboard.” Others might say: “It’s a little strange that making an AI copy is okay but bringing back her actual soul is bad.” Ultimately I’m pretty against any AI copies of loved ones for therapy, so I didn’t like that part of the show, but I can’t say that anyone’s wrong if they disagree.
It’s funny, I think we agree about what the show is saying but disagree with how to interpret OP’s original post.
I think OP is going a bit far when they say it’s to warm us up to dead actors being revived. But honestly I read that as a bit of hyperbole, and take OP’s overall point to be “the show provides points for pro-AI companions.”
Which I do agree with. The two characters who are initially against AI Nat (Riri and Xavier) both come around. There’s a scene where Riri’s mom asks Riri to make one of her dad, Riri is disgusted, but her Mom argues back that it would help her… And that’s pretty much where the show seems to settle. That talking to an AI replica of your deceased loved one can be a helpful and beneficial thing.
Does that mean that I agree it’s a psyop meant to warm us up to bringing back dead actors? Ehh… The dead actors thing is too specific a stretch, and psyop is a loaded term. But I don’t think OP’s point is as crazy as others in this thread make it seem to be- the show does present AI companions as a good thing (and Disney has used digital recreations of actors, so there’s a part of me that can even get behind that conspiratorial streak).
I am sort of softening the blow of OP’s original post into a tamer version of their take, so I get it if you would criticize me for that.