In this article I consider the failed resurrection of the beloved in “Be Right Back” in conversation with Christian doctrine surroundingChrist’s resurrection. I contend that the resurrected Ash is insufficient for Martha because he is not a “person,” intendingwith that term to evoke the Catholic personalist movement, particularly as outlined by Jacques Maritain. I begin with an outlineof Maritain’s personalism and then discuss the Enlightenment conception of the self that Charles Taylor has called “the ‘punctual’self ” and its relation to transhumanism. These competing accounts of personhood frame a discussion of “Be Right Back,” in whichI contend that the resurrected Ash is a hyperpunctual self and that his lack of personality makes true loving exchange between himand Martha impossible. Finally, I draw on Augustine’s teaching on the Resurrection and the New Testament resurrection accountsthemselves to consider how Christ’s Resurrection affirms the centrality of persons and love, fulfilling the desire for a resurrection ofthe beloved’s person that is implicit in the critiques of a nonpersonalist resurrection in “Be Right Back.”