Rating: 
Summary: Thought Provoking And Intriguing
Review: The main reason I give this movie 5 stars is because the movie touched me in a way I didn't think it could. Is it possible to "love" a robot? Yes. If you are one of the many who shed tears at the end of this movie then you will know what I'm talking about. I foud this movie to be extremely intriguing and it raised some very important moral issues that our world is just now starting to get into. Should robots be programmed to have a human heart and soul? Or even more important, should robots even be programmed to look and act like humans at all? After watching this movie my answer is a firm no. The tagline reads "His love is real, but he is not" but who is to judge what is real and what isn't anyway? The movie suggests that only humans are real. However, if the definition of "real" is something that you can see, touch, identify with and love then the character of David is most certainly real. The only problem is, there is no beating heart in his chest, just a computer chip. When you toy with evolution and attempt to create a "perfect" human replica something is bound to go wrong. In this case I think the problem was that David was far too real for people to come to terms with. I never held any doubt during the movie that his "mother" Monica loved him. It was living with loving a robot that bothered her. Her tortured expressions and actions during the scene in the woods confirmed all of this and raised an even larger moral issue; If a robot genuinley loves you, how can you just toss it away? You cant, which is why I think the movie should have stuck to its original storyline having Monica become an alcoholic. David was after all her son. She programmed him, took care of him, and most of all, loved him. Although her emotions in the woods seemed genuine, could a mother really abandon her own child, robot or human, and just simply forget about him? More detail was needed to complete her character and I felt the need to know how on earh she could have been so cold and yet so loving at the same time. Although the ending "attempts" to explain, it leaves you walking out of the theater wondering not only "What if?" but "When...."
Rating:
Summary: JARRING, UNBELIEVABLY TRAGIC
Review: Forever emotionally trapped as a pre-adolescent child with boundless intellectual capacity...
Rating: 
Summary: A.I.: Artistic & Insightful
Review: A.I. is the wonderful sylistic hybrid of two of Hollywood's greatest directors: Stanley Kubrick and Steven Spielberg. For the past twenty years, Kubrick had struggled to bring this story to the big screen. After his death in 1999, Spielberg assumed the mantle and has made this his tribute to his longtime friend and colleague. Set in the distant future, our story details the journey of an android boy's (Haley Joel Osment) search for love and acceptance. Osment, star of The Sixth Sense, is perfectly cast as the young robot child David. He is the first robot programmed to love human beings. Jude Law turns in a dizzying performance as Gigolo Joe, a robot prostitute who accompanies and aids David on his journey. Frances O'Connor is also quite convincingly heartfelt as Monica, the "mother" whose love David yearns to receive.The first act of the film is pure Spielberg as we see David coexist and ultimately exiled from his surrogate family. Spielberg's influence is clearly visible in the scenes between David and Monica. (Think E.T. and Elliott.) The late Stanley Kubrick's hand print is all over the film's second act. In the first scene, Law's Gigolo Joe is front and center as we witness him on a "job". Although his female client is a bit reluctant and nervous, his tenderness and rationale overcome her inhibitions. There is another scene where Joe and David are captured and taken to a Flesh Fair. Here, rabid crowds cheer on as robots, or mechas as they're called, are destroyed on stage for entertainment. Spielberg successfully captures Kubrick's soul during these scenes. The film not only documents the clash between man/machine, but the clash between Spielberg's and Kubrick's ideologies is also evident. The running theme with Spielberg is that, though flawed, humans are basically decent. Kubrick, as shown in his past films: 2001, Clockwork Orange and Full Metal Jacket, forces the viewer to deal with the darker side of humanity. Human beings are not inherently evil, but are more than capable of acting without regard for their fellow man. The final act is one that will cause audiences to either love or hate this film. Spielberg borrows from his own work in Close Encounters of the Third Kind as well as the final act of DePalma's Mission to Mars. To me, it seemed as though Spielberg ended the film this way because he couldn't allow Kubrick's vision to ultimately win. It's as if he tried Kubrick's "acid" and had a bad trip. Evidently, Spielberg's inner-child wouldn't allow audiences to go home completely dismayed. If not for the final act of this movie, I would have given this movie 5 stars. This is definitely a movie that will provoke conversation and re-examination of one's values.
Rating: 
Summary: AI- Absolute Insult
Review: For the love of all that's holy, did anyone turn to Spielburg and simply say .." Um, Steve...do ya think it may be gettin a little long?" I was severely disappointed in this film. I can understand the thought of a continuing this film in a direction as a tribute to Kubrick, but it has been proven that only one man can pull that off and he's no longer with us. This movie while beautiful in each and every scene, lacked character development, empathy and left me with a overwhelming desire to go to a real Flesh Fair.. A Real Live Flesh Fair..! Sorry, but I don't buy the professional reviews. It seems everyone is too afraid to tell this man.." the movie is bad."
Rating:
Summary: Yuck!
Review: I was very displeased with this moral lesson masquerading as a movie. The writing was uninspired, the story was dry, and the moral was beaten into the audience's head so thouroughly that no thought could dare enter. After two and a half hours of having a moral beaten into me, I was exhausted. The movie in no way lives up to the hype. The only redeaming factor was Haley Joel Osment's inspired acting. How he managed to act so well in such a horrendous film is beyond me. I was very unhappy with the movie.
Rating: 
Summary: It's ok if you skip the last half
Review: What a waste of money and time. As the movie started, I had hopes for it. The acting and effects were top-notch, and the premise was interesting. The early part of the movie is a bit predictable but still interesting, and there are some fine moments (both in the plot, and in the cinematics). The first portion has a fair bit of believability - the view of this future world is pretty compelling. But that rapidly unravels as the film goes into the middle portion, and we see something of the world outside of one family's home. Various visual elements that are supposed to give us this dark, fairytale gone wrong feel just wind up looking stupid. Bad guys who are supposed to be creepy, on their glowing beast bikes, looked like Power Rangers to me. This middle portion of the movie is ok, nothing that hasn't been done before, not terribly compelling, and has some good bits (like the gigolo robot character). Could have been a 3 star movie if they had just stopped at this point. If you must go see this film, do yourself a favor and LEAVE after our hero finds what he has been searching for. After about two hours, at a point where they could have just rolled the credits, instead we get this horrible load of drawn out, boring, stupid, sentimental tripe. Great pains were taken to make this tear-jerker ending fit and make sense with the rest of the story, but those efforts fail. The plot aspect of the end of the movie feels incredibly forced and contrived. I'm not against a feel-good or emotional movie, but I found this ending portion to be pure schlock, and the only emotional impact for me was anger that I hadn't walked out of the movie. The special effects at the end are cool, I guess. Overall, though, the last 30-40 minutes of this way-too-long film destroyed what had been a fair to mediocre experience.
Rating:
Summary: NOT QUITE GREAT!
Review: Maybe I went in with expectations a little too high. It is certainly an interesting film. Saw it with a 12 year old that thought it might be the longest film he's ever seen! I thought it was just a little too long, and the end a little dissapointing. Great visuals, although a couple of scenes are disturbing, more for emotional content. Haley Joel Osmond was terrific, and I particularly like a couple of the voice overs (I'll let you be surprised). Worth seeing, if only for the Kubrick/Speilberg mix of emotion, vicseral images and starkness.
Rating:
Summary: Spielberg Flaws a Sure Kubrick Gem
Review: Surely anyone who is a fan of Stanley Kubrick's work, especially "2001," "A Clockwork Orange," and "Full Metal Jacket" would expect a dramatically taught, technically fantastic film, ripe with sexual innuendo and psycho-social commentary. I'm sure the original screenplay that Kubrick never finished would have been his best, and it was probably well on its way. Then Spielberg got a hold of it. Rumor had it that Kubrick was bouncing his ideas off Spielberg through secret discussions on the subject of translating the short story to a screenplay. Speilberg's translation of his friend and colleague's vision is successful visually, but lacks the passion, and underlying tension that was Kubrick's signature talent. Spielberg, a wizard at character development, is successful in building plausible, human characteristics into the automatons that grace the screen. Each model of robot, designed for a specific funtion, has discernable traits. We feel for David(Haley Joel Osment)'s plight to discover love in return for the emotions he is so graciously programmed to emit. Gigolo Joe (Jude Law) is a playful, yet culturally aloof sex toy who becomes David's 'Jiminy Cricket' as the film's thin plot degrades into a futuristic Pinocchio/Blade Runner/Wizard of Oz quest through near-future New Jersey. Visually, the film is breathtaking as the audience is introduced at the top of the film to a world where the polar ice caps have melted, forcing upper class humanity to seek refuge in the 'burbs and mountains as their waterlogged metropolises of ages past go suspiciously abandoned. The film then takes us though David's journey of self-discovery with an adoptive family, soon to become a discarded appliance. This is where Kubrick's vision is clouded by Spielberg. In a scene in which Kubrick would have left us questioning our morals as to why we should feel sorry for a machine discarded by the side of the road, Spielberg lays on the schmaltz and we're left with a moment ripped from "E.T." but without the comfort of knowing that the alien is going home. Tears are flowing in the seats next to me, yadda yadda yadda. David then befriends Joe as the pair are semi-rescued from a modern-day, droid witch hunt staged as a 21st century circus; a cross between a monster truck rally and a heavy metal concert. As David persuades Joe to help him find the Blue Fairy, a character from the story Pinnochio (which David literally translates into a how-to for becoming human), the two venture to Rouge City to consult an oracle that Joe is convinced will help little David find his humanity. After a few stunts and special effects, including an eye-candy filled flyby of a submerged Manhattan, David and Joe are back at front steps of the company that made them. One thing leads to another and David finds himself at the feet of the Blue Fairy; a submerged, ages old (yet pristinely preserved!) theme-park statue at what used to be Coney Island. David is then frozen for 2,000 years as an Ice Age (surprise!) decends and wipes out the rest of humanity. But wait! David is dredged up by aliens who look suspiciously like those from "Close Encounters" and is told he is last and closest surviving relic of human kind. Here's where the story gets REALLY far fetched. Even with this much of a contrived plot, it seems Spielberg was insistant on honoring Kubrick with a harkening to the end of 2001... The aliens, content to study David as a goldfish in a bowl, construct his adpoted home from memories and even clone his LONG-dead adoptive mother (memories intact!) from a hair sample that survived sewn inside a mechanical teddy bear for 2,000+ years for one day of love and devotion. Excuse me Steven, but after making "Jurassic Park," you should know that DNA extracted fron hair is useless for cloning, period! What we are sold on as a Tin Man's search for unattainable serenity, ends in complete obscurity with a contrived and convenient fairy tale ending. Although I knew I'd have to throw out convention while watching this film, Spielberg should know that the best science fiction is derived from science fact. There is none in this film. At best it's a futuristic fairy tale. Nothing more, nothing less. If you must see "A.I." in theaters, enjoy the sound, the imagery, the effects and the acting that Speilberg is so effective at wringing from his resources. If you're interested in witnessing Kubrick's final haunting vision of humanity's last impression on planet Earth, unfortunately, you're stuck with "Eyes Wide Shut."
Rating:
Summary: Love it or hate it, it's a great movie
Review: I went to see A.I. opening night. I went in not knowing what to expect, having stayed away from other reviews and even some of those spoilers that give away the whole film in order to come in as virginal as possible. I'm glad I did. A.I. is not a perfect film, which is why I can't give it five stars. However, it is a very thought provoking movie that some people will not like at all. Actually, after seeing some other people's reviews on yahoo and elsewhere I can see that your either going to love the movie or totally hate it. I could say that Haley Joel Osment is super in this movie, but that isn't a reason to go see this movie. Go see it because it's fine movie making. However, it does ask a lot from its audience. So, if you want to go see a popcorn movie that you can passively watch don't go see this movie. From the very beginning you have to watch intently and carefully. Some of the reviewers who have hated the movie point out supposed plot mistakes, but they are all explained. Granted, the ending was a little out of this world, but it does hold up to what Kubrick was going for. I thought about other possible endings, but any other ending wouldn't have made as much sense in the context of what went on in the film. The running debate in my mind is, is David's love real? Sure, he was made specifically to 'love,' but it's never really a free choice. He sticks to his 'mother' like glue before he was imprinted, but didn't display affection. It wasn't until she imprinted herself into his memory that he turned into this loving robot. Hense, I tend to lean towards the side that David's love is not 'real' in the sense that his mother's love for him eventually is. It is rather a product of his program, one that was designed and written to replicate the outward indications of love. And yet, I also lean to the fact that for David his 'love' is real. He knows nothing else but to give of himself 100%, which in itself may not be classified as love, but rather obsession. He becomes obsessed with being a real little boy, in the hopes that his mother will love him back. Sadly, he doesn't realize that she does love him, until the end of course. However, I think that David is no more than a smart automaton who is hardwired to think only one thing. I cried, but not for him, but for the fact that love is such a precious thing that humans will go to every extream to have it, even to manufacture it. Gigolo Joe was built to fill the physical 'need' in the love equation, David to fill the emotional. I know I'm rambling but the film makes me think of so many things at once... like what is the price we pay for our own hubris? Do we have the right to play god? Just because we can create an artificial being, does it mean that we should? What happens when our creations have a mind of their own? Again, if you want a film that asks that and many other quesions, but will leave it up to you to find the answers, go see A.I.. If you want to see jiggling boobs, car chases and over simplified plots that you could find on a 'Friends' episode, don't, I repeat, don't go see this movie. You will not like it because you have to bring something of your own thoughts into the process.
Rating:
Summary: AI...
Review: This is easily Steven's worst movie to date. I almost left twice. Haley is a good litle actor but you can't expect him to hold the entire movie together. It just doesn't work. Mr. Law's part was so insignificant I don't understand why he took the part. The movie was awful.
|
