Rating: 
Summary: Good SciFi Movie
Review: If your looking for a great Sci-Fi movie for the summer, look no further. Although there could have been a better ending, like David waking up from the thing as a dream, the movie was still good.
Rating: 
Summary: Good story and effects, but dialog misses the mark...
Review: The overall concept and story where very imaginative, but the dialog and execution, I felt missed the mark. There where many parts that dragged and the acting was either over or under played. Where many of the characters were two-dimensional and I don't mean the androids. Haley Joel Osment was good, but I felt the dialog inhibited him from really shinning like he did in The Sixth Sense. So I say eh~. Not bad, but not that great either. I give it an average.To bad! could have been a blockbuster.
Rating: 
Summary: A celebration of human intelligence
Review: One of the purposes of art and literature is to allow one the opportunity to participate in an event or a scenario that is not currently realized. It allows individuals to project their hopes and dreams via the vehicle of fantasy. In the movie A.I., one can participate in an adventure that will no doubt be realized (hopefully) in the near future. The focus of the movie is on the relationship between synthetic humanoids and real humanoids, a distinction that is somewhat clearcut in the movie if one removes the main character, an android manufactured to look like a boy, and love like one. Both Kubrick and Spielberg have done a brilliant job in this movie, as it brings out the issues that a society of "Mechs" and "Orgs" would be facing. The behavior of the synthetic humanoids in the movie makes them "easy to spot", with the exception of the boy, who was made to take on the more emotional aspects of human intelligence. The acceptance of the boy and his eventual rejection by the family who takes him in motivates the boy to search for a way to become a real boy. This Pinochio theme may have bored some moviegoers, but I think it verifies exactly what one would expect if a machine were to attempt such an endeavor. The point of this part of the film was to show how a mechanical but intelligent being, not needing sleep or food, would behave if it were "programmed" to have the emotional development of a young boy. Indeed, the film encourages the viewer to understand how such a being, not burdened with biological needs, but still basically a child, would reach his goals. The sense of desperation and the pain and sorrow that go with the attempt of the boy to become human, coupled with his view of the world that is no different from a modern boy indulging in computer games and Pokemon, makes the movie one of the most thought-provoking in many years. But even some of the scenes which take only a few seconds of film, such as the beautiful feminine student android who takes out her compact and puts on lipstick, or the toy robot-teddy-bear who struggles to get out of a garbage can, convince the viewer that it is purposeful activity that makes these machines intelligent. Human intelligence does not like to be confined, it gets bored with rigidity, and it loves to be playful and free. Problem solving utilizes pattern recognition, induction and deduction, but also a sense of adventure. Its goals are checked by the emotions, which work as kind of a signal, as a monitor of progress. These attributes of human intelligence are carefully worked into the dialog of the characters in the movie, making them believable, and leave the viewer more convinced that the movie is actually a glimpse into our future. It is a magnificent celebration of the genius and creativity of human intelligence.
Rating:
Summary: Blazing the Kubrick trail
Review: I just got back from the theatre after seeing A.I., and boy, was I surprised. It was a lot different than I thought it would be, but in a good way. Reviewing this movie involves observing how well this movie blazes the "Kubrick trail", the trail that Steven Spielberg is trying to navigate in the form of this movie. Here is my take on just how well he did. The beginning of the movie gets Steven on the right start down the trail, because it's very well-crafted, and the right mix of drama and suspense. The suspense mostly involves what happens when David settles in with the Swinton family, after he learns to love when he is activated. And I'll say it right now: some of it is not pretty. By this, I am talking about how the Swintons' flesh-and-blood son, Martin (who was on the verge of death when his parents got David) is influencing David to make his parents think David has gone haywire, completley by accident. This prompts his parents to abandon David in the woods, after an emotional parting scene. After that, comes the middle of Steven's journey down the Kubrick trail. This is where he gets lost. The middle of this movie is mostly an unnecessary innuendo-fest, with a too-close-for-comfort look at Gigolo Joe's career, the "Flesh fair", and everything in between. Hell, even Chris Rock cameos in this part, something Stanley Kubrick would probably not appreciate. I must admit this part is necessary for the movie to function properly, but Spielberg didn't have to go this far. After this part, there is a brief moment where the movie turns, well, stupid, which is a very unnecessarily cartoony visit to the "Dr. Know" machine. But after this, Steven somehow gets back on the trail. And, during the ending, Steven blazes the rest of it with flying colors. Mark my words: only tough-as-nails truckers won't be touched by this marvelous ending that will make you shed tears of sorrow, and then joy, for David Swinton. (By the way, Haley Joel Osment is PHENOMENAL playing this character. I smell an Oscar coming his way already...) So, to end this review, Steven didn't blaze the Kubrick trail as well as one would think, but he blazed it none the less, thanks to a creative beginning and a powerhouse ending, it's just the middle that was his one mistake.
Rating:
Summary: Remarkable Film
Review: A.I. is not a film that allows the viewer to sit back and be passively entertained. Quite the opposite the movie demands attention to both sweeping moral and ethical questions as well as attention to detail. This is not the typical Steven Spielberg film but an amalgam or collaboration of Stanley Kubrick and Steven Spielberg. The movie's look is again a credit to George Lucas and his wizards at Industrial Light and magic, and John Williams again has produced a musical score that while not as immediately recognizable as his others, in some respects may be his best. Jude Law does a brilliant portrayal of a facilitator for women who find no happiness with the carbon-based counterparts he replaces. His performance includes precise and nimble movement that pays homage to the likes of Gene Kelley. Haley Joel Osmint can safely be short listed for his second Academy Nomination in his young life. While not as diminutive in stature as when he owned the screen in, "The Sixth Sense", this young actor once again rightfully takes the focus of attention from those who share the screen with him. Jude Law is not on screen for as long, however matched moment for moment his performance is the only other that approaches the young Osmint. Law too could be among those honored when envelopes start opening. William Hurt's character is not meant to be passionate. Even when he tries there just is nothing there, the part of the tale he relates is cliché and bland, however I doubt it was intended to be as flat as it was. There is another Actor who plays a pivotal role as the voice of, "Dr. Know". You cannot help to wonder if he should have played the role given to Hurt, however that may have taken the part too far to the other extreme. As the voice of a holographic computer interface with the appearance of a slightly more hip Einstein, this vocal performance is excellent. I can't spoil anything with this actor's name. The movie paid tribute to Mr. Kubrick's 2001 legacy with sets that had the same emotive feel of his science fiction classic. The classical music was not there, however both Spielberg and Lucas made sure it was clear that Kubrick's imprimatur was firmly etched on this work. Mr. Kubrick felt this film should be done by Spielberg, as it was lighter than the movies he generally created. The opposing can be said for Spielberg, for while he has documented Humanity's' dark side with, Schindler's List, this is science fiction which is not only dark, it is violent and a child is at its center. The film is definitely not for children. Suggesting an age that is appropriate is absurd as no two children are the same. Erring on the high side of age would probably be best, for the violence of, "The Flesh Fair", cannot be explained away with a comment that this is just a movie. This is not the only painful event, there are others that would scare younger viewers because they are all too real, and not science fiction. The victims of The Flesh Event recall the grisly scenes of Rome's Coliseum and are very graphic and too real. For while a victim may be clearly non-human from one view, from others these are people's faces and voices layered on technology, and not machines that suffer the modernized crucifixion and dismemberment. The film is a remarkable achievement. The allegory and symbolism that are presented or implied will fuel intelligent debate for as long as people choose to invest time in the topic. There are the obvious questions of what is Humanity is and what will it could become. However there are also brief pieces that take an issue that exists today, extrapolates it to a far distant form and the answers are not so simple. When a person is replaced by the presence of another are crimes of passion possible? When does a simple substitute cross the line and become a threat to a human? The movie is filled with these conundrums and all those involved deserve great praise. There is great fun to be had with Summer Movies that allow you to sit and be entertained. A.I. is not such a movie. This film demands your attention, forces you to deal with fundamental questions, and pursues you well after you have left the theater.
Rating:
Summary: Incredible and Inspiring Film, Here's Why:
Review: ...I’ve seen the movie, and I thought it was excellent and inspiring, the most ambitious and challenging film ever made. Here are my reasons. The majority of viewers agree that the acting in A.I. was Oscar-rate. Haley Joel Osment’s performance as David was incredible; the level of complexity and emotion he gives to the robotic character is unparalleled. Jude Law’s character as Gigolo Joe is likewise well performed. He makes us laugh, but at the same time, adds a sadness because of his position as mentor of David, as well as his eventual and inevitable fate. In short, their acting is one reason that A.I. an incredible film. Next, the combination of Spielberg and Kubrick’s visions was likewise masterful. Spielberg is supreme when it comes to creating high levels of emotion in conflict, like in Saving Private Ryan, only in A.I. he achieves it with a young child, making all the more powerful. It is all the viewer can do not to reach out and console the suffering David. Kubrick’s additions take an appropriate turn for the darker side of this story, from David’s abandonment to the Flesh Fair horrors where the heartless crowd satisfies their sadism by seeing robots tortured and destroyed. Because of Kubrick, the audience is feeling fright and anticipation for a great deal of the film. Spielberg’s ending has received its share of controversy. Had A.I. concluded a half-hour earlier, it may have seemed appropriate, but many issues would have been unresolved. The theme of immortality, of life and love, would have remained open and unconcluded, without any realization at all. Instead, by ending this film in a unique and unexpected way, Spielberg manages to explore a great deal more about these themes. Throughout the movie, David’s love for his mother is eternal. It never wavers for one second, and it is this feeling which drives him always. On the other hand, the love others feel for him is never full, but rather, incomplete and tentative. Yet despite the lack of love from others, David maintains his own love. This concept is truly fascinating. By ending the film the way he did, Spielberg confirms that the boy’s love is eternal, even after countless years, instead of creating speculation as to whether David’s love is just like everyone else’s, that it can fade. That is the main idea of the movie, and to ignore it at the end would be artistically incorrect. Secondly, the motif of everlasting life is one which the ending similarly addresses. The mechas are built immortal, designed to last forever; this is so incredibly strange because their creators, humans, are anything but immortal – David is frightened when he is told his mother will eventually die, whereas he will last forever. Most people wish to live for all time. Yet David’s only wish is to become a real boy, flesh and blood, so that his mother will love him forever just as he loves her. In exchange, he is willing to become mortal. What an incredible and thought-provoking concept Spielberg presents us! To gain love, must one give up life? And, conversely, to gain immortality, must one give up love? These are deep questions that Spielberg raises for us, hidden within the masterpiece of a film he has made. If only people can see past the surface, they can learn a great deal. Instead of saying ‘That doesn’t look like how I expected or wanted,’ people should look at the film as it was made, and instead of condemning it at first glance just like the rioting crowd at the Flesh Fair, they should try to absorb what Spielberg offers us.
Rating: 
Summary: Artifice Intensified
Review: Certainly not what I would call heart-rending. Left me cold. Not once was I tempted to get out the hanky. Not what I would call original. Seemed like every plot twist was predictable and mostly the least humane, intelligent, and interesting of the possible choices from all the movies being chopped up and rehashed for this interminable pot-boiler. There were some interesting questions...but mostly they weren't the ones being asked by the film. And if by chance they were asked, they were immediately deserted in the forest...a forest full of unkind characters and overwhelming special effects (some of which, like the opening of the face on the robot in the first scene, were pretty amazing). And the portrayal of that future world left me with lots of questions. I could go on and on and on and on...but I don't want to make the same mistake the movie did. I didn't laugh. I didn't leave (though I was tempted a few times). I don't recommend it...unless you really like special effects or dark depressing futurescapes enough to make up for the lack of anything else. Then again, you may love it and think it incredibly deep...there was one person nearby who was profoundly moved...can't say I understand what it could have been...
Rating: 
Summary: What might have been
Review: I wish for what this movie might - and rightly should have been. The special effects and futuristic props are perfect. The movie was shot with care. The details are all there but the plot and the cutting of this film are worthy of a politician's speech- they make up for a lack of substance with quantity and in the end you're left with nothing but sound bites and no meal. Notes, without a symphony. It's a beautiful mess. What a shame. It's worth watching for the beautiful details but that's it.
Rating:
Summary: Read Pinocchio again and see if you don't like AI better
Review: I had a lot of mixed feelings about this movie. I went into it knowing that there was some sort of Pinocchio connection, but I wasn't sure how it would play into the movie. Then I "experienced" the movie, enjoying, as many others seem to have, the first 2 hours as a visual, technical, and conceptual feast and feeling dissatisfied with the last half hour or so and what I considered to be a kooky and overblown ending. But it wasn't until I got home after the movie, and, intrigued by the Pinocchio connection, reread the traditional fairy tale penned by Italian journalist Carlos Collodi and refamiliarized myself with its more famous Disney incarnations. And that's when I discovered that this movie really shines at what it's trying to do, which is to retell Pinocchio in the context of a robot boy. I believe a lot of people who see this movie don't understand that Pinocchio isn't just a recurring theme in A.I., Pinocchio IS A.I. I'm not just talking about the "struggling to be a real boy" bit, I'm talking about how the entire plot of A.I. and the ordeals that David (Osment) goes through closely mirror what happens to Pinocchio in the fairy tale. This fact especially gets lost because of the way the movie has been marketed: contrary to what it may seem, this movie is NOT about robots, it's NOT about the future, and it's NOT about class struggle, although these are all (deliciously interesting but unfulfilled) concepts that are introduced in the course of the movie. Rather, it IS the story of Pinocchio, who gets waylaid by evil intentioned characters, is sold to and escapes from an evil puppetteer who destroys puppets, guided by his friend and moral advisor, banished to an island of sin, and whose only purpose throughout is to find his Blue Fairy "mother", who resurrects him when he dies and has the true power to make him a real boy. All of which happen, not so coincidentally, to David in A.I. From the more obvious analogies between Geppetto and William Hurt's inventor character, and Jiminy Cricket and Teddy the bear, to the more subtle ones like Terra Magica as "Manhattan", Coachman's Pleasure Island as Rouge City, and Pinocchio's death and resurrection by the Blue Fairy (they are advanced robots, NOT aliens), absolutely everything in this movie is crafted to reflect actual plot events in Pinocchio. Looking at this movie from that perspective, it's much easier to really see what a bold and daring leap it is and to fully appreciate the input of both directors: Spielberg because he can do a fairy tale movie like no other, and Kubrick for his dark edge and wit. Although my reacquaintance with Pinocchio helped me see the brilliance in this movie in retrospect, I have to admit that I wasn't pleased as punch when I got up from my seat. The set designs were a thrill, and the acting by Osment and Jude Law is absolutely first rate. The movie hummed along in near perfection for the first 2 hours until the Manhattan scene caused an implosion. The ending may have worked in the original fairy tale, but it was too contrived and overblown and a bad fit for the overall tone and pacing of the movie, and should have been reworked. With all the creative firepower behind the film, surely there could have been a better way to either realize Pinocchio's fairy tale-like ending or simply scrap it altogether and come up with something less awkward. It's worth noting that I only became aware of the 140+ minute running time when I started to realize that the movie's rhythym had been broken. This is not a popcorn movie, don't go see it if you're looking for a movie where you can leave your brain at the door, because chances are you're not gonna like it. It's a high concept and slightly flawed creation that demands a fair knowledge of the source material and more than one viewing to fully absorb its significance. In this regard, A.I. might be a little bit more "work" than other movies in this summer's slate, but it is infinitely more rewarding.
Rating:
Summary: ok movie
Review: I saw E.T. it was great.As soon as I heard that the director of A.I wast the same as the great movie I saw,E.T. It made me go to the movies. A.I is about a company that wanted to make a robot child.That could love the person who takes care of it.As soon as the boy named, David loved his mom.He started to call her mommy and was a mommy lover.I would't want to spoil your movie so I will stop now. This movie is worth wacthing,but not a second time.
|
