"Source Code": A Disturbing Type of Rape?

Spoiler Alert

Rape: "to seize, take, or carry off by force"

I just watched the movie Source Code. For those who haven't seen it, a nearly-dead soldier is attached to an 8 minute memory of a man who died in a terrorism attack so he can re-live those eight minutes over and over again to try to track down the terrorist. By the end of the film, he stops the attack, saves the victims and continues to live on through this guy's body.

Aside from the plot complications that come with time travel themes (they never can explain away all of the inconsistencies) there's another aspect of this film that I found disturbing. Make that horrifying.

Am I the only one who noticed that, while the hero goes off to enjoy life in another man's body, the man whose body he now inhabits has been shoved out of the picture? That guy has lost the rest of his life to his new "host". He's been taken over and now ceases to exist. The remainder of his life has been seized, taken by this soldier.

I had the same problem with "Lovely Bones". I didn't see the movie, but in the book, Susie Salmon jumps out of heaven, takes over another girl's body, and has sex with the boy she loved when she was alive.

Rape: "any act of sexual intercourse that is forced upon a person".

I can understand feeling gypped if you left this life without ever sharing intimacy with another person. But did anyone care that the girl whose body she took over gave up her virginity without consenting? What if the teenager had wanted to save herself for marriage? I know it's considered a quaint idea, but the point is she didn't have a choice. She wasn't even there for her first sexual experience.

Most movies and books aim for a feel-good ending, and we grown to care about the protagonists, Colter Stevens and Susie Salmon, but does this negate the rights of other characters? Should rights be governed by popularity contests?

It's a horrifying prospect.