| NAVIGATION |  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quote of the day:
"Only the suppressed word is dangerous." -- Ludwig Börne
|
 |
|
 |
 Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
By Jack on July 2, 2001 11:33 AM
It's hard to review this movie without spoiling it but I'll try.
There's nothing more frustrating than a posthumous work from your favorite film maker that doesn't quite live up to expectations. In this case it's Stanley Kubrick, who had been working on A.I. for over a decade before his death. Unable to figure out what, exactly, to do with the intriguing storyline from Brian Aldiss' story "Supertoys Last All Summer Long," Kubrick passed it off to Spielberg, who originally declined to helm the project, only to reverse his opinion once Kubrick died.
That's not important, or not very important, anyway. What is of note is the fact that what we're left with -- Kubrick or no -- is a muddled, messy disaster of a film, something that seems more like a drastically edited miniseries, cut down to incomprehensible levels with whole sections missing.
This movie was basically what you would get if you were to mix E.T., Close Encounters and Blade Runner with Disney's Pinocchio (that's right I said Disney) into an Outer Limits episode.
The characters were for the most part (in my opinion) cliche', very "hollywoodized" and uninteresting (with the possible exception of Jude Law's character (Gigolo Joe)).
Overall story line was trying so hard to be on "the dark side" that it was funny. It also seemed as it was 3 different stories, all of which were going nowhere. By the end, the audience is practically being spat upon with nonsensical, 2001-wannabe metaphysics and general weirdness that goes on and on without end. Ultimately, what should have been a pleasant fable becomes an overambitious mess that slips from potential greatness into imminent forgettability. For what it's worth, the entire movie evoked laughter and snickering from the audience, but only the last act brought out the real hecklers.
I don't want to knock A.I. down completely. Law is a fantastic supporting player, giving A.I. the levity it needs during Act 2. The effects are fantastic, and while the science of A.I. is dubious, it's future is believable and spooky.
Conclusion: Watching this movie I didn't feel like money was being wasted but rather time (A.I. is 2 1/2 hrs). I give A.I Artificial Intelligence a 6/10 rating.
|
Reader Discussions:
|
|
RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
 reply
|
|
Posted by Jester219 (jester_219@excite.com) on July 2, 2001 12:13 PM
Why oh why??? All this movie was, was the story of Pinnochio set in the year 6000+. I gotta give the props to Stan "the man" Kubrick, but he deserves the bad form sign for passing it to Spielburg. Stevie hasn't impressed me since Schindler's List and I wasn't expecting anything different this time around. Although props should be given to Haley Joel Osment for his stunning acting ability, this movie was just special effects with an old skool fairy tale in the background. I go with Jack and give it a 6/10.
RICHARD (AIM: Jester219)
|
|
|
Posted by A random shemp (No Email) on July 6, 2001 11:24 PM
Dr Know was the Wizard of AI with the Tin man, the Lion and Dorthy trying to get back home.... I wonder, if Pink Floyd's Dark side of the Moon was playing while watching A.I., would we find a hidden message? I left feeling empty and looking for an answer or a hidden message. Maybe that was the point, we live, we love, we lose love we die and find love again... nothing else. I agree with a 6/10, this could have been a masterpiece.
|
|
AI- Almost a Masterpiece
|
reply
|
|
Posted by SciFiGuy (vbprgrmr@yahoo.com) on July 2, 2001 2:59 PM
AI has succeeded in keeping to Kubrick's vision. Watching it, I kept forgetting this is a Spielberg film and not Kubricks. There were elements that reminded me of 2001, especially the cool, almost cold relationships of the people in the film. At times, I thought the mechas had more heart. In spite of its length, the beginning and middle of the film seemed to moved fairly quickly. The ending I had some problems with, reducing it in my mind a bit. But overall it's a thought provoking Kubrick/Spielberg production. (8 out of 10)
|
|
|
RE: AI- Almost a Masterpiece
|
reply
|
|
Posted by FredHater (fred_hater@hotmail.com) on July 3, 2001 6:24 AM
You must be very heavily medicated.
|
|
RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by A random shemp (No Email) on July 2, 2001 5:13 PM
People keep saying how smart the movie is and how it breaks new ground. Anyone who even remotely follows SciFi knows that this is one of the oldest Sci Fi plots out there. It's so boring and predictable. It didn't suprise me once.
|
|
|
RE: RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by A random shemp (No Email) on July 2, 2001 10:15 PM
This movie was really great. Most importantly, it was entertaining as well. SO what if it seemed like it borrowed from other stories. Maybe it wasnt revolutionary as thought. It was still in mind a really well acted movie, and I was impressed with the story. I did not think it ripped off anything either. I think Spielberg did a great job. This movie deserves a 9/10. This is a great movie and no matter what critics or anyone else says, WATCH IT YOURSELF, THEN DECIDE. Its great. Dont miss it.
|
|
|
RE: RE: RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by A random shemp (No Email) on July 11, 2001 1:00 PM
You must be kidding. This was one of the worst movies I've ever seen! Spielberg has lost touch with reality.
|
|
|
RE: RE: RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by FredHater (fred_hater@hotmail.com) on July 3, 2001 6:25 AM
The movie was BORING!!!
Save your money rent it, then thank me.
|
|
|
RE: RE: RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by tiny (anti_tiny@hotmail.com) on July 8, 2001 8:37 PM
You need to open your imagination a little bit. AI had an odd ending, but it was interesting none the less.
|
|
|
RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by JSnoxall (jsnoxall@yahoo.com) on July 2, 2001 11:56 PM
I dont have to know all about SciFi movies too know that dumb people/people with no taste dont get or dont understand metaphor, acting, and just plain amazing camera perspectives. Such as when David falls off the building and it looks like a tear on Joes face...that was amazing, but you people who thought it was boring and mundane probably missed is because you were goofing off, or messing around with friends.
PS - 10/10, Watch the movie next time.
|
|
|
RE: RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by A random shemp (No Email) on July 5, 2001 12:44 PM
people wouldn't be messing around with friends if the MOVIE (not film) had held their interest just a little bit. It had a horrably overacted beginging, a somewhat interesting middle, and a ending that came way too late. As far as I'm concerened the story was too much fariy tail mainly for children, but there is now way in hell a child would sit still long enough to even get anything meaningful out of it.
Yes visually very cool, and there were many many shots like the one you spoke of but that isn't going to help a lame story.
|
|
|
RE: RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by FredHater (fred_hater@hotmail.com) on July 3, 2001 6:30 AM
I'm glad that you are proud of yourself for catching on to a visual metaphor, but that does not equate to entertainment.
The movie had some nice cinematography and some wonderful scenes, but overall it SUCKED.
This is just another oppourtunity for wannabe intellectuals like you to massage their own fragile egos and tell everyone how clever they are.
|
|
|
RE: RE: RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by A random shemp (No Email) on July 8, 2001 2:01 PM
Fred sometimes you can be really intelligent. Other times you rip on movies so much it seems as if you have no life and nothing better to do then to see crappy movies. Seriously get a life or a job.
|
|
|
RE: RE: RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by tiny (anti_tiny@hotmail.com) on July 8, 2001 8:39 PM
I agree,...Freddie needs to GET A f*ckING LIFE!!
|
|
|
RE: RE: RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by Pumpkin Boy (pumpkin_pie_studios@hotmail.com) on July 3, 2001 8:32 PM
Yes, and yet another opportunity for aspiring smartasses to prove, yet again, just how ignorant they really are.
|
|
|
RE: RE: RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by FredHater (fred_hater@hotmail.com) on July 6, 2001 1:44 PM
true pumpkinhead true
|
|
Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by A random shemp (No Email) on July 3, 2001 1:11 AM
First, it was very good. The last 30 minutes though were disappoiting. It does wrap up good and even meshes well with the rest of the movie but..., it is like blade runner with the end of mission to mars spliced on the end. Instead of the whole Rutger Hauer death part, it is cut out and the whole narration bit as they drive off dubbed over the aliens at the end of mission to mars. Definite recommend though. Just too 'pretty' an end.
|
|
RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by Kerouac77 (steve-o) on July 3, 2001 4:16 AM
As I watched this movie I knew that many many people were not going to like it. They either expected a typical Speilberg film or they expected a Kubrick film. This was neither. It was a Kubrickian fairlytale as told by Speilberg. And it was brilliant. Speilberg's homage to Kubrick in the camera work was fantastic. (David's reflection in the table as Monica makes coffee.. the tight facial close-ups, etc.) All of the acting was top notch. Nobody is better at directing kids than Spielberg, hands down. I loved the ending because Speilberg stayed true to Kubrick's feeling that this was to be an ADULT FAIRY TALE.
Time is going to tell with this one as people see it again for some reasn and understand the complexity and beauty of this film.
10/10
|
|
|
RE: RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by FredHater (fred_hater@hotmail.com) on July 3, 2001 6:32 AM
"Kubrickian fairlytale as told by Speilberg"
Can you say, totally talking out of my ass?
|
|
|
RE: RE: RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by A random shemp (No Email) on July 6, 2001 2:43 PM
Okay. You are totally talking out of your ass, Freddy.
|
|
RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by A random shemp (No Email) on July 3, 2001 4:56 AM
The whole movie was s l o w...there was literally no story, the most important element in any storytelling endeavor. The entire "tale could have been told in a fifteen minute short, but instead was dragged out for over two hours.
Everyone was silent where I saw the film, especially afterwards. We were all still waiting for something to happen.
Important points glossed over with one line of narration? What happened to ALL LIFE on planet earth in a mere 2000 years?
Who knows?
Great acting, decent effects, but a waste of time.
Read Pinnochio instead. At least there is a plot.
|
|
RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by A random shemp (No Email) on July 3, 2001 5:59 AM
O.K., I don't know who this "reviewer" is or what sort of weak credentials this person has (your probably a 29 year old living in your mother's basement looking for an Internet job that isn't there!).. AI is a fantastic movie. The film isn't supposed to spell everything out for you. It requires imagination and thought. AI takes you on a journey through the eyes of a machine and asks the most fundamental question in the Universe... "What is love?"
Kubrick, rest in peace, could not have brought the sensibility and insight into David's character. His films were cold, and if you like that sort of thing you might be dissapointed. Personally, I enjoy meaningful films that inspire, and that is exactly what AI did for me.
Go see this movie with friends, your spouse or anyone that likes to have conversations after a movie. You will certainly have plenty of thought provoking discussions about this film.
|
|
|
RE: RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by Jack (jack@dtheatre.com) on July 3, 2001 10:55 AM
Actually that's close, but, I moved out of my mom's basement when I was 14.
|
|
|
RE: RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by FredHater (fred_hater@hotmail.com) on July 3, 2001 6:37 AM
How about this converstation that I had with some of my peers (2 PhDs, 1MFA, an MD and an attorney)
"WOW THAT MOVIE SUCKED."
We are all extremely intelligent people with a great love for cinema. AI was a self indulgent piece of celluloid masturbation compliments of Mr. Speilberg. Boring and self-important...like you.
|
|
|
RE: RE: RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by A random shemp (No Email) on July 3, 2001 7:05 AM
2 PhDs, 1MFA, an MD and an attorney all extremely intelligent people. Boring and self-important. Wow, like what did you get on your SATs? 'Cause your pot calling the kettle black thing makes me think your a dumb ass. You stupid f*ck.
Good movie.
|
|
|
RE: RE: RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by Jack (jack@dtheatre.com) on July 3, 2001 7:05 PM
Pot? You selling?
|
|
|
RE: RE: RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by A random shemp (No Email) on July 5, 2001 12:52 PM
Even pot couldn't have made this crap any better.
|
|
|
RE: RE: RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by FredHater (fred_hater@hotmail.com) on July 3, 2001 8:19 AM
I thought it was a prerequisite to state ones credentials and intellectual level due your propensity for accusing people with opinions that conflict with your weak observations of being untalented basement dwellers.
Yes you were talking out of you ass.
|
|
|
RE: RE: RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by Kerouac77 (steve-o) on July 3, 2001 7:11 AM
"self indulgent piece of celluloid masturbation"
Yet you said I was talking out of my ass?
Your friend's credentials don't make any of you intellegent, so get off yourself.
You make yourself out to be a pretenious, pompous ass, not an intelligent, open-minded film goer.
I respect the fact that you didn't like the film, but using words you probably had to look up to try and make yourself feel smarter when you never have to FACE these people in a true conversation is pathetic.
|
|
|
RE: RE: RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by FredHater (fred_hater@hotmail.com) on July 3, 2001 8:25 AM
All right "Jack," thanks for respecting my opinion.
I understand your weak lexicon requires you to tap into reference materials to make points but don't project your inadequacies on me.
Why on earth would I want to FACE you? Is that some sort of weak threat?
Like I told the shemp, i felt I needed to state some credentials because the popular response to dissenting opinions from wannbes like yourself are "You probably live with your mother." Which in my case is not true.
So do you still want to beat me up tough guy?
|
|
|
RE: RE: RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by A random shemp (No Email) on July 4, 2001 4:44 PM
No no no, Freddy boy, he wasn't saying he wanted to beat you up, he was saying its easier for you to say something bad about a person when you don't have to say it to them face to face. And he was right, those vocabulary words were just squeezed in there. I don't see you using the "big words," so to speak, in any of your other posts. How ironic they suddenly appear when someone calls you a dumbass.
A.I. was good because iit required you to think instead of spelling everything out for you. Very rarely are movies like this well received by the American public, unfortunatly. It doesn't matter how "intelligent" you are, if you're used to having everything spelled out in big bold letters and questions answered for you in films, then that's what you're going to come to expect, no matter what. Ah well.
|
|
|
RE: RE: RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by FredHater (fred_hater@hotmail.com) on July 6, 2001 6:41 AM
I can do low-brow too...bite me dick head.
|
|
|
RE: RE: RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by A random shemp (No Email) on July 6, 2001 2:44 PM
Good for you, Freddy. Do you want a cookie or something?
|
|
|
RE: RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by youract (none) on July 11, 2001 1:08 PM
The only "discussion" we had after the movie was about how truly AWFUL it was in nearly every respect.
|
|
RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by heatzone (honoluluboy@hotmail.com) on July 3, 2001 7:36 AM
I cant say I loved the film. I liked it very much. I also agree that it seamed more a combo film between the two directors. I love the early work of Kubrick, but lets not be confused. His moves are if not for a better word twisted. Not all Kubrick films are to be seen by all. I would not take a 16 year old to see Clock Wk Orange. I would for this film however. I think he wanted to give a lasting, thought provoking image that was open for all (12 - up). This film was dark, a bit slow at times, and I thought the flesh fair was stupid. That could have been done a lot better. I would have liked the original concept of Joe better though. He was to be much more twisted than just a boy scout leader. Over all I like the film and give it
8 - 10 Go see for your self if you have a vcr at home. Dvd holders wait for home viewing.
|
|
RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by A random shemp (No Email) on July 3, 2001 10:43 AM
The movie was brilliant. The acting by Hailey Joel Osmont was again Oscar material. As far as what Jack said about the movie, he obviously does not posses the intelligence to understand the brilliance of the movie. The story was great. The movie was worth seeing. And after you leave, you will have a lot to think about. The Robot is believable because of great acting. Perhaps some day in our future, we will have that kind of sophisticated technology. However, I hope we don’t oops, If I say anymore, it would spoil the movie.
John
|
|
|
RE: RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by Loath (sam@aigraphics.com) on July 3, 2001 3:46 PM
Jack has the intelligence to create this site which gives you a chance to express your feelings and you just had to use that outlet to flame him. Jack doesn't just naturally go with the crowd, or be affected by peer pressure, and assume everything is good just because some random "John" says so since he possesses the intelligence to think for himself and not whine about other people's thoughts. Everyone is entitled to their opinion on any movie and it does not have anything to do with their mental capacity. I tend to agree on Jack's review. I found the movie drawn out, predictable, boring at times and definitely not near either Spielberg nor Kubrick's best work. Attaching other people's opinion to their intelligence is quite immature and does not make you sound any better yourself.
|
|
|
RE: RE: RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by A random shemp (No Email) on July 11, 2001 5:52 AM
It is quite obvious to me that you also have limited intelligence. As Jack so freely gave his opinion, I also gave mine. Everyone is entitled to their opinion including myself. The media often goes too far in expressing their opinion about movies, people and the like. I as one of the people, I am only to happy to express my opinion about the media, which in this case is Jack. Just because you could not understand the movie does not make it a bad movie. It is simply a movie you failed to understand. I still hold my assessment of the movie as fantastic. I give it a 10. I as a writer myself know good material when I see it. You and Jack obviously do not. As for creating websites, I have done many, and I believe most people can create websites in their sleep.
John
|
|
|
Opinions and Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by Jack (jack@dtheatre.com) on July 11, 2001 11:12 AM
I do appreciate and value your opinions, as you would mine if you had any sense of open-mindedness (intelligence). Listening to other peoples opinions (without questioning their intelligence if they differ in any way shape or form from your own) is one of the very best ways to increase your intelligence and create good material as a writer.
Just because you are a "main-stream" American (dumb sheep, lemming, etc..) who easily, systematically and blindly follows the crowd every time any commercial venture ever produced and marketed to make you to believe that there is in fact something to understand and say those who dislike it fail to, does not make it a good movie. Hans Christian Andersen's tale of the king and his "Magic" clothes comes to mind.
I too am a writer, in fact the reason you wrote the above statements is because you read what I have written. Does that mean I too know good material when I see it? Choose the worst movie you've ever seen. It was written by someone so does that mean he or she knows good material too? Just because he is a writer?
As for creating web sites, you are on my web site, I on the other hand probably have never heard of any of yours (as far as I know). Your statement that "most people can create web sites in their sleep" gives me reason to believe that you yourself have never created anything worth seeing or re-visiting. Furthermore, I challenge you to build a web site like this that is both functional and capable of building a community such as this one which I have created. To do it in your sleep would only further prover your point (or mine).
I also have never, ever anywhere on this site said that A.I. was completely bad.
|
|
|
RE: Opinions and Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by A random shemp (No Email) on July 12, 2001 7:57 AM
The world is full of opinions. Everyone has their own opinion about everything. If everyone’s opinion agreed with everyone else opinion, the world would be a dull place. I never had a dispute with other people’s opinions. I do have a problem with the delivery. If you read carefully, that would have been obvious. The media, quite often give their unwarranted opinions about people. They say what they are, what they should do, and how they should do it as it they are capable of achieving better, or perhaps have the notion that they can judge whom they choose. If you are insulted about what I said about your intelligence, imagine for a moment how Steven and the actors would feel about your words about them. To often the media can dish it out, but cannot accept their own medicine. The responses to my words shows the lack of maturity on the part responders not mine. If you are as good a writer as you claim, can you not read the obvious message. As far as website creations, I will not comment on that sort nonsense. I still standby my opinion that websites are easy to create. I know plenty of children that have created websites far more sophisticated than the site these comments appear on. Do not let your small time success go to your head.
It is a fact that knowing good material is gift not possess by everyone. It is also a fact that writing good material and knowing good material when you see it are two different things. Some people have the ability to create great works whereas others do not. A reader can read great material and be unable to create something equally as great. Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. However, that is not absolute. Intelligent people like intellectual stimulating movies. Whereas people of less intelligence prefer movies that do not require very much thought process. If you look at all the comments carefully, it is obvious who the intelligent people are and equally as obvious who the not so intelligent people are. Based on that simplicity, what relevance does any of the comments have in regards to who knows good material. My comment about knowing good material when I see it speaks for itself.
|
|
|
RE: RE: Opinions and Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by Jack (jack@dtheatre.com) on July 12, 2001 11:39 AM
I feel it would be a waste of my time to continue this topic too much further but I will say this:
My review was completely just and fair just. I was indeed (as I said in the review) a little frustrated while writing the review, I was expecting a work of Kubrick and received a very commercialized film, and that hurt me. I am an avid Kubrick fan and I some day hope to work as a director and I am getting fairly close now (with funding and all), I had hoped to be able to use the work of these two great directors (and producers) as further inspiration. This will not be happening.
Even through my frustration I was able to be fair though, i.e.: "I don't want to knock A.I. down completely. Law is a fantastic supporting player, giving A.I. the levity it needs during Act 2...". I also gave it a 6/10 when many of my film making buddies strongly recommended giving it no more then a 4.
I know my comments about web site creation were possibly out of line, but as far as I'm concerned until you show me better that you have done, I feel there is due respect. Yes, I also know plenty of children who have created sites such as these (I worked on this one when I was 17). But, even those children have to maintain a certain level of intelligence to do this much.
|
|
|
RE: RE: RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by Loath (sam@aigraphics.com) on July 11, 2001 11:30 AM
So far all I can gather from you is that anyone without the exact same opinion as you lacks intelligence. You must be entering that stage before adulthood where you believe anything you say as if it were the word of a god. When you're old enough to be "a writer" you will have the mental capacity to comprehend other people's thoughts and not disregard other people's opinions soley because they differ from yours. Another point you might want to realize is a real critic does not give a movie a 10. No matter what you see, there will always be better.
|
|
|
RE: RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by FredHater (fred_hater@hotmail.com) on July 3, 2001 10:53 AM
Though my overall opinion of the movie was negative, I do have to give credit to young Mr. Osmet and Mr. Law for their excellent preformances.
|
|
RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by A random shemp (No Email) on July 3, 2001 1:46 PM
When will humanity learn? It's wrong to make robots that can love. Robots should only be used as terminator style killing machines.
|
|
|
Posted by Azad (eka@dtheatre.com) on July 3, 2001 4:59 PM
Yeah, its the 21st century already.. where's my killer robot police troop?
|
|
|
Posted by Pumpkin Boy (pumpkin_pie_studios@hotmail.com) on July 3, 2001 8:29 PM
Haven't you heard? Lucky Charms has a mail-in offer on the back of the box. Three UPCs and $2.95 S&H; gets you a set of twelve.
|
|
RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by pegasus9112 (pegasus@home.com) on July 3, 2001 5:51 PM
Am I the only one that understands this movie? It's "The Wizard of OZ". Hello, Teddy is Toto, David is Dorothy. We get melted ice caps instead of a Tornado. Momee instead of Auntee. A child that wants to go home. We get a mad scientist instead of the Wicked Witch, a rubber legged brother instead of a strawman? A Tin man we get. Weeping Lions instead of Cowardly Lion. Blue Fairy instead of a pink Glenda. Rouge City instead of Emerald City. Dr. Know instead of the Wizard. And ultimately mythical figures that can answer all your questions and fix everything. All the icons are backward so no happy ending. Take a box of tissues. DON'T TAKE THE KIDS!
Cry for youself ...
As the robot (slave) says when they take him to the colliseum to die "..history repeats itself".
|
|
|
RE: RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by A random shemp (No Email) on July 6, 2001 6:03 AM
very nicely done. An original thought in this thread. Imagine that!
|
|
RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by zakko (anonymous) on July 4, 2001 12:48 AM
Gentlemen, and ladies, please! Enough with the name calling. This film was art, pure art. And art has always polarized people. There are people who would sell their soul to own a Van Gogh, and others would rather patch a fence with it. Personally, I think the film was astonishing, superb, thought provoking and heart-breaking. It spoke deeply to me, but I have to respect that others will hate it. Just as I love Beethoven and the Beatles, others thing they are just knows. So be it. They have the things that speak to them.
AI resonated within my soul for days after seeing it. I still catch myself remembering scenes from the movie. I am haunted by it.
As Kubrick's producer said "This movie is like 2001. You either love it, or you hate it."
2001 is remembered as one of the great works of our time, and I believe that AI will take its place their as well.
|
|
RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by Bantu (No Email) on July 4, 2001 2:48 AM
The movie seemed like each scene was being written just before it was shot. Sort of "what should we do now?" Way too long also. Two bright spots..Jude Law and that teddy bear.
|
|
|
RE: RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by A random shemp (No Email) on July 6, 2001 6:06 AM
Thank you for mentioning Teddy. I thought he was one of the best parts of the movie too. And I love how wicked it was to give him HAL's voice. :)
|
|
RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by mlprice (mlprice@mac.com) on July 4, 2001 10:48 AM
A.I. My Take
- Marvin Price: mlprice@mac.com
Being a filmmaker must be a terribly difficult thing. Consider that like all things, what you get out of a movie is very dependent upon what you bring with you.
Beyond the lowest level of the human condition we are each the sum total of all our life shaping events, combined with our education, culture, and our genetically diverse ability to learn, and make use of that which has been learned. Indeed, we are each an individual culture, with a unique view of the world.
For a film to financially succeed it must appeal to a vast audience. As you might surmise, appealing to a vast number of unique world views is all but impossible. So the filmmaker must inevitably reach for the simplest of shared experiences and emotions.
This is usually referred to as appealing to the lowest common denominator. A filmmaker must be extremely brave to reach beyond the common. To do so invites significant criticism and financial failure.
I remember leaving the theater after seeing 2001 many years ago. I heard comments like “What a piece of %*#@,” and “I didn’t understand it at all,” and “What was the big black thing anyway?” and “What was that stupid baby doing in space?” I felt I had just seen the greatest film of all time and the only thing I didn’t understand was the reaction of others.
Perhaps I brought something different to 2001 than those around me, because what I got out of it was certainly different. 2001 left me filled with hope for all of humanity. It left me feeling less alone and as though I might be part of some great cosmic effort to populate the universe with sentient beings. After 2001 I knew that the future of humanity lay not on this planet but in the stars. I fully believe that we are not alone and that the order we sense in the universe around us, might be far more significant than we currently imagine, even considering our various creation myths and fairy tales.
2001 also left me with a questions about the possibilities of building intelligent machines. It left me with the seeds of an awareness about the wisdom, or lack thereof, of creating something like me, and then treating it as if it were less.
To the movie A.I. I brought these early concepts, along with my 43 years of being a black male in the greatest country in the world. I also brought over 20 years of working in the computer industry, of which 2 were spent happily working in artificial intelligence building expert systems and experimenting with neural networks. I also brought years of reading and enjoying science fiction, and countless nights staring at the stars and quietly speculating. I enjoy thought.
I brought no preconceived notions about Stanley Kubrick, or Steven Spielberg. I brought no expectation to be entertained by typical summer explosions of male hormones on the screen.
What I got out of A.I. was a thoroughly enjoyable examination of ideas and concepts I’ve spent much time contemplating. I’ve listened to people talk about this movie and I’ve read reviews. I know that Spielberg and Kubrick were very brave because they neglected the lowest common denominator with this film. The Pinocchio angle was presumably there to appease that denominator, but I think most people don’t really care about Pinocchio.
When you listen to people talk about the movie, it is fun to think about what they brought to the movie. I’ve heard people attempting to describe it as a cross between Close Encounters, Blade Runner, Disney’s Pinocchio, and an Outer Limits episode. I’ve heard people who become fixated on the William Hurt character’s relationship with his late son and determine that it was a sexual relationship. There are those who’s lives are fairly devoid of any substance and they generally got nothing out of the film.
For me, many concepts were again unleashed. Perhaps because I am a black male, I resonated with the persecution of the artificial beings by humans. I struggled with the question of whether it is truly persecution if they are just machines, until I again accepted that given intelligence, sentience, emotion, and creativity, they are no different than I and therefore I have no right to mistreat them.
I recognized in Gigolo Joe moments in my life when older black people would tell me, “They hate us you know.” I wondered, since it is generally not acceptable to mistreat other human beings, will the drive to create artificial people come from our desire to have something that is like us available to dominate and look down upon? If so, should we ever develop artificial beings at all? After all, sooner or later they would seek equality and eventually they might destroy us.
I was delighted by the relationship between intelligent machines and simple machines through David’s relationship with Teddy. It made me reconsider my own relationship with my pets. Would an intelligent machine adopt another machine as a pet? Ha! Did David love Teddy in the same way that I love my cats? Teddy, like my cats, was not intelligent, though it could display behavior that might be interpreted as intelligent. Teddy certainly knew that David was like him in certain ways, “David. You’ll break.”
I was intrigued by the idea of possibly achieving immortality through our machines. Face it. We are very fragile and don’t last long, but our “Supertoys” may not just last all summer, but an eternity. When Earth is finally visited by others, they may not find humans, but our next level of evolution; intelligent, spiritual machines.
Spiritual? Yes. Consider Gigolo Joe’s final desire (an emotion), was for David to remember him, to remember that he existed, that he “was.”
My point here is that these are the things that I brought to the movie and got out of the movie. The ideas go on and on. The movie was quite long and while that is a criticism as far as some are concerned, there wasn’t a moment in the film when I wasn’t given something to think about. For me, that is the mark of a good movie.
Some movies I would never attempt to review because my life experiences do not overlap with what is depicted in the movie. Most love stories I do not relate to. I simply cannot comprehend the fascination the general public seems to have with organized crime or serial killers. Consequently I may not like such movies and me giving them x out of total stars or a thumbs down would be completely irrelevant to someone who identifies with such films.
This movie I could definitely give 8 out of 10 stars. My biggest criticism would be in the Pinocchio angle. I would have left that out and allowed the audience to realize it by themselves, thereby feeling proud of having made an intellectual connection.
After all, when playing to the lowest common denominator, the trick is to not make them think you are playing to them.
m.
|
|
|
A.I. More of Jack's Take.
|
reply
|
|
Posted by Jack (jack@dtheatre.com) on July 4, 2001 1:06 PM
I think where I went wrong in going to see this movie was that I am such an obsessive fan of Kubrick, I expected too much of the movie, I expected to look at in the way that I did and was let down and disappointed.
I can see where you are coming from in all aspects, while I may not be a black American I was not raised here in the US and I received a fair share of "persecution" in many a country and for that I did appreciate those parts of the movie.
I reviewed this movie because no one else of the Dtheatre.com staff had the balls to do it. Because of the fact that it's a very difficult movie to review. Before I went to see it, I was told by a friend of mine that it was awful. I asked her why she disliked it so and her reasons differ very much from my reasons and that's why I was very careful to insert a occasional "in my opinion". Everyone who enjoyed this movie that has posted I completely respect and understand (except the ones who challenge the intelligence of those who do not appreciate it the way they do).
I could not accept the final piece of the movie with the aliens. I thought it was so bad that it ruined the entire movie. I thought the opening was magnificent. The "Rouge City" parts were entertaining (perhaps excellent especially Jude Law and Teddy) but were already becoming too fairy tale like for my tastes.
As for your opening statements on the financial success of a movie, I believe that any movie done with the intention of "making bank" is made wrong. I worship movies as an art form and wish to someday make money out of my art, but never do I want to be so caught up in the financial aspects of filmmaking that I sacrifice the overall quality of my movie.
Anyway there's more of my opinion.
Jack
|
|
|
RE: A.I. More of Jack's Take.
|
reply
|
|
Posted by A random shemp (No Email) on July 5, 2001 5:22 AM
My take:
Shoulda ended with the kid staring at the blue fairy for all eternity.
|
|
|
RE: RE: A.I. More of Jack's Take.
|
reply
|
|
Posted by A random shemp (No Email) on July 6, 2001 6:09 AM
EXACTLY! Why weren't you in the editing room? What the *&$! was up with those stupid aliens? I literally laughed out loud.
|
|
|
RE: A.I. More of Jack's Take.
|
reply
|
|
Posted by FredHater (fred_hater@hotmail.com) on July 5, 2001 6:33 AM
They weren't aliens, they were the apex of mecha evolution. Trying to glean the meaning of their existence by gaining understanding of the now extinct human creators.
|
|
|
RE: RE: A.I. More of Jack's Take.
|
reply
|
|
Posted by mlprice (mlprice@mac.com) on July 5, 2001 6:00 PM
"...They weren't aliens, they were the apex of mecha evolution...."
Bravo. You're only the 2nd person I know of to mention that.
|
|
|
RE: RE: RE: A.I. More of Jack's Take.
|
reply
|
|
Posted by A random shemp (No Email) on July 6, 2001 6:16 AM
hhmmm..interesting thought. But why would they refer to David as a robot? Also, if I remember correctly, they called him very special to them because he was all that remained of humanity. Oh, I get it. The aliens are really mecha who travel back in time to populate Mars...only to end up populating Earth in Mission to Mars? Arg!
|
|
|
RE: A.I. More of Jack's Take.
|
reply
|
|
Posted by mlprice (mlprice@mac.com) on July 5, 2001 6:01 PM
Don't misunderstand. The "black thang" is simply an angle that I identified with. I personally have never been persecuted.
I just understand it.
|
|
|
RE: RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by A random shemp (No Email) on July 11, 2001 6:02 AM
Out standing
John
|
|
|
RE: RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by FredHater (fred_hater@hotmail.com) on July 6, 2001 6:38 AM
Buddy, you have way too much time on your hands.
|
|
|
RE: RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by CL (No Email) on July 8, 2001 3:11 PM
Nice review. Thanks for taking the time to pass on your thoughts and experiences.
I enjoyed the film on many levels.
|
|
RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by ActorWannaBe01 (ActorWannaBe01@hotmail.com) on July 5, 2001 12:12 PM
I agree with the review, here are some of my thoughts. A.I. went from Unusual to Extremely "Twisted". It had a great amount of Creativity at the begining, but went too dark at the end. The Cast did a great job. Speilberg sure poured-all-out Making the movie Kubrick's brain-child, but thats just it. Eventhough I liked his film of Stephen King's THE SHINING, He (Kubrick) made it look like saying "Stephen Who?"It seemed way too much Kubrick's creation than S. Kings. And with A.I. Speilberg (who I admire for his works)made A.I. Kubricks creation, which it was, but it made it sound like saying "Speilberg Who", which put down everything Speilberg has done. I didn't want to see a single similarity of 2001, which I did.
|
|
Sequil to A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by blujem2000 (blujem2000@yahoo.com) on July 8, 2001 11:50 AM
My wife and I saw this story and saying when is something going to happen, with a chuckle here and there, when it came to the giglo see like him. Its to bad the nanny did'nt live all three could have gone to man hat ten, My wife said It did not finished right, so when is the sequil and will the boy wake up and build a bot of his mom and dad using lost records? huummm?
|
|
|
RE: Sequil to A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by A random shemp (No Email) on July 9, 2001 8:02 PM
Try again. You don't make any sense.
|
|
|
RE: RE: Sequil to A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by Jack (jack@dtheatre.com) on July 11, 2001 5:37 PM
It made sense.. the spelling didn't though.
|
|
RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by RHoyles22 (RHoyles22@aol.com) on July 13, 2001 12:56 PM
A.I. was a real let down. Spielberg never gets to any point in his movies.
The only one I really liked was E.T. and Jurassic Park.
I feel like I wasted my money to see this movie.
It wasn't at all like I expected it to be.
I give 2 thumbs down!!
|
|
RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by joy3 (No Email) on August 1, 2001 1:36 PM
I have a few things to say and like Speilberg I will let you figure out what I am really saying:
named David! IAM! THE BLUE FAIRY..hmm Virgin Mary perhaps! A submerged city..oh somewhat makes you think of Atlantis! David is frozen for 2000 years! 3 part structure! Wizard Of Oz! Come on...IAM!!!!!! There was a lot of stuff in that movie..watch it again and perhaps read some books on Ancient Histiry first!
|
|
|
RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by A random shemp (No Email) on August 13, 2001 5:55 AM
who is this speilberg,
everyone is taking `bout?
|
|
RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by A random shemp (No Email) on August 13, 2001 11:08 AM
AI is a movie that only some people are going to get. There have been a lot of people cutting it down, I believe these people need to read more hard science fiction to understand the concepts involved here.
AI asks several moral and ethical questions. Can a person love a machine? Does a machine have the capacity to love? What obligations do we have to a Artificially Intelligent form of life? Is it morally right to create a "feeling" machine? What can we do if a machine were to in fact become self aware? Do these AI beings have rights? He asks these questions with a sense of responsibility and an awareness of where the human experience is heading. IMHO Spielburg was merely bringing to front these questions that have been asked in many of the sci-fi novels of the golden age that most people today have never experienced. Asimov's I-Robot, Heinlein's Time Enough for Love, Bradbury's 2001...the list goes on and on.
Much like human cloning, we have an obligation to preserve the humane treatment of ANY sentient being that has the capacity to feel and is self aware. These are the questions that Speilburg poses and if you didn't like it, well, you probably just don't get it. Go read a book for a change, maybe your narrow minded little world will open up for you some day.
With the help of the original author, the visionary teachings of Kubrick and the volumes of concepts from the sci-fi authors of old, Spielburg will beat you over the head and pierce your heart with your love for your machines. Your car, your computer, your TV. Do you not love your machines?
|
|
|
RE: Review: A.I Artificial Intelligence
|
reply
|
|
Posted by A random shemp (No Email) on August 13, 2001 11:23 AM
Correction to last post:
Sorry that's spelled Spielberg, my bad.
ai@neondream.com
|
Discuss this story
|
|
|
 | Win a copy of Striptease!
|
|
![Digital Theatre [DTheatre.com]](images/logo.gif){kind=logo}
