Rating: 
Summary: Definitely NOT for children or for that matter anyone!
Review: I would actually give it zero stars if possible. I was extremely disappointed with this latest in Speilberg movies. It involved subject matter that is definitely not suited for children (the dancing lady projected on the young man's crotch, the little robot boy begging his "mother" to not leave him in the woods, and the "Mad Max from Thunderdome" treatment of the damaged robots). I am not sure the subject matter was even suited for me. I went into the theater expecting to be entertained not devastated by the treatment and demoralization of feelings. What does it mean to be human? It wasn't anything I saw in this movie. A definite NO GO!!!
Rating:
Summary: Truly Terrible
Review: If you like Science Fiction, don't see this film. If you like quality drama, don't see this film. If you like suspense or action, don't see this film. If you like coherent storytelling, don't see this film. Thoroughly disappointing, totally muddled, clumsily written, coarsely visualized, and offensively cloying in the grandest hollywood traditions. The only good thing about this film is the teddy bear. Spielberg, stick to the schmaltz. You've lost your touch for fantasy. I really, really wanted to like this film, but I was unable. Episode I is superb relative to this. Oh, yeah... If you liked Titanic, see this film. A demographic bullseye.
Rating:
Summary: A.I. is not for kids or adults
Review: Expecting more from the Spielberg team, I was disappointed with this film. I heard A.I. was the next E.T. Unfortunately much of the film was not suitable for viewing by children. There were violent acts and sexual connotations not appropriate for young viewers (those in attendance looking for an E.T. plot).Also, the story seems to depict the director's view of the world today and what his impression of tomorrow may become given the current status of our nation and our use of resources. This may be probable, but I felt that I was being lectured instead of entertained. Finally, the storyline referenced the (Disney) character of Pinocchio throughout the movie. Is this Katzenberg's way of mocking his former employer?
Rating: 
Summary: Wonderful Imagery... Puzzling Story
Review: Where do I start? A.I., in a nutshell, is truly a puzzling film. There are three distinct flavours in here and that has everything to do with the fact that this was a collaborative effort between Spielberg and Kubrick. For those of you who are sci-fi fans and love to see how filmmakers interpret the future and post-apocolyptic eras (as I am), you'll absolutely love the imagery that Spielberg gives us. The special effects are top knotch. For those of you who are expecting a moral struggle between the love for a child and the love for a robot, this movie may be a letdown. This movie rarely dwells into the human psyche and our ability to love. Rather it is all about the boy and only the boy (played to perfection, I might add, by Haley Joel Osment). As for the three distinct flavours, you'll know what I'm talking about after watching the film. It was a little on the long side and I would have been happy if they had just ended it without the extra half hour-long epilogue. All in all, this movie had me baffled by the time I left the theatre. I don't know if I hated it, but I'm not sure I liked it. This also seemed to be the general consensus in the theatre. As soon as the credits rolled, half the theatre applauded while the other half couldn't wait to get out of there. There were definitely mixed reactions. I gave it 3 stars just for the wonderful futuristic imagery. If you're looking to kill 2.5 hours (be forewarned, it feels more like 5.5 hours), then give A.I. a try. But don't expect to be taken on a crazy ride on the same level as Jurassic Park or Indiana Jones.
Rating: 
Summary: A Disturbing Disappointment
Review: A.I. had great promise as a Kubrick film, and I was excited to learn that Spielberg was picking up where Stanley left off. Nobody doubts Spielberg's genius in screenwriting, directing and vision. However, A.I. left me feeling both disappointed and disturbed. This film attempts to tackle some serious philisophical questions but is problematic in its execution. It's difficult to explain these problems without spoiling the show for first-time viewers; I'll try to keep things general. A.I. uses the bond between a child and his (its) parents to drive home a central point, but because of the emotional intensity of the theme the film fails to carry it out effectively. Jealousy and loneliness are particularly harsh emotions, too harsh to portray with a child. Certain scenes were so difficult to handle that it took away from the message. At some point, the film devolved from a cinematic thesis on human vs. machine (a Kubrickian theme) to a poorly constructed futuristic fairy tale. This first theme is all but ignored to make way for a meandering journey far into the future (where did this come from?). Where pursuit of other more interesting topics could have easily redeemed this film (e.g., the creator's pursuit of the mecha's jouneys, both internal and external), it chose a feel-good path that was a day late and a dollar short, a meager attempt to tie up a few loose ends. The film is not without its merits, the greatest being Haley Joel Osment. Again, Osment proves he is capable of subtle and sophisticated acting that elicits all the right emotions. Hats off to this young and very talented actor. Also, as with more and more films today, the special effects are spectacular; they are characters unto themselves.
Rating: 
Summary: Too much Spielberg, too little Kubrick
Review: The movie is worth it because it is thought-provoking. However, it should end in a pessimistic way, with the main character praying to become a real kid. However, the movie shamelessly goes on for another half an hour, doing amazingly ridiculous tricks in order to allow Spielberg to have a happy ending. What is wrong with you, Steven? Your last good movie was Duel... Why can't Hollywood deal with a sad ending? If you walk by Kubrick's grave and hear some painful noises, you know the reason: Spielberg's A.I.
Rating:
Summary: Did Not Meet My Expectations
Review: A.I. was a disappointment. In a nutshell, I did not find it entertaining. The set was creative and the story thought-provoking, however, the entire 2 & 1/2 hours were VERY GLOOMY. Besides the plot, the lighting and music were equally depressing. If you like serious science fiction and enjoy special effects, then you will appreciate this movie. Those of you who are looking for scenes of light-heartedness & warm, fuzzy moments--it is not ET!!! The actors should be commended for their excellence. Haley Joel Osment is very believable in his role, but Jude Law deserves the award for this film.
Rating: 
Summary: bring kleenex
Review: After seeing the movie and crying through half of it, I said it was a movie I would not want to see again. Now two days later I still can not get it out of my mind. I am infact, going to see it again. At different points throughtout the movie, I found it incredibly sad, touching, heartbreaking, beautiful, shocking and I could go on with the adjectives. Let me say, don't go if you are already feeling down, you do not leave the theatre with a happy glow. It is actually frightning in that (without giving away the story) the events are plausible which makes the movie very disturbing. The movie was excellent. The actors were fantastic. Halley Joel Osment, Jude Law along with the rest of the cast do an amazing job bringing the story alive. I did not look at my watch once nor shift in my seat.(it is about 2.5 hours) You can see both Steven Spielberg and Stanley Kubik in the film. If you are like me the Kubik is the part that would make you hesitate going but I would recommend loading your pockets with kleenex and taking the time to see this movie. Unlike many of the throw away movies that fly through the movie theatre, this is not one that is over when you walk out.
Rating:
Summary: No, it's not for Stanley Kubrick.
Review: I saw A.I. a few days ago, the first day it was screened in Montreal. I've been thinking for a few days, and finally I cannot stop myself from writing this review. I walked in the theatre with so much expectation of how Steven Spielberg would manage Stanley Kubrick's unfinished project. Would Steven be able to catch Kubrick's vision? I couldn't tell. The first part of the film was great, it recalled my memory of Kubrick's style. It was slow-moving and detailed. But after the first part, the film just went down-hill from the second part to the long meaningless ending. This film is a combination of three styles, 1) Kubrick, 2) Kubrick + Spielberg, 3) 100% Spielberg, and the worst thing is that it doesn't work at all. Take a look at Kubrick's films, there are never clear explanations of the quests in them, and that's what makes Kubrick's films so remarkable. In A.I., Spielberg just couldn't stop himself from explaining everything as if all viwers are only seven years old kids. This over-exaplaining narrows down the vision of the film, pushing the viewers to a corner in which they can't come out with a clear idea of what the director intends to explore in this film. A.I. is not a bad film after all. It easily stands out among the movies in this summer (Tomb Raider, Pearl Harbor, etc.) However, it is not a great one. And Stanley Kubrick should be remembered by Eyes Wide Shut instead of A.I. because the latter one does not have much to do with him. I still recommend A.I., as long as you don't take it too seriously because it is nothing but a childish fairy tale which ruins Kubrick's vision of his unfinished project.
Rating:
Summary: I loved it -- no, I didn't - heck, I dunno...(SPOILERS)
Review: I can't stop thinking about what this movie *might* have been. So many provocative questions were raised, but very unevenly addressed. What is love? Can an artificial being experience love, or can it only experience artificial love? What is a human's responsibility, if any, toward a "loving" machine? What happens when a being created as, and used to being treated as, an object begins to recognize that he/she/it might be something more? How does this awakening change him/her/it and others of its kind? Is physicality alone what makes us unique, or is it life experience? Or both? The movie glosses over these deep questions for the most part, generally copping out with displays of maudlin sentimentality. The entire third act seems focused on making the audience cry rather than more profitably spending its time closing off these issues (but since they weren't really addressed in the first place, there wasn't much to close off). I would have been happier if the movie had ended right around Joe's exit and spared us the forced and contrived syrup of the last half hour or so. And oh, that awful Blue Fairy scene! How did *that* escape the cutting room floor?? I find I can deal with the ending -- sort of -- only if I reframe it as a tragedy rather than as the weepy reconciliation Spielberg intended it to be. (And it had to be Spielberg's ending. I can't conceive of Kubrick coming up with something like that.) David couldn't have got his wish. We never saw Monica deal with the emotional repercussions of her act of betrayal. We don't know if she ever grew to love David as a mother would love her own child (one of the big missteps of the film was its failure to show us that). And even if we are to believe that memory patterns are kept intact in DNA, Monica's experience of truly loving David wasn't there. He cut her hair well before those feelings could have been formed. So at best, David's conviction that he is now a real boy because Monica loves him is a false one, an illusion, and there's your tragedy. Unless you buy into the whole "believing makes it so" perspective, which I can appreciate, but it doesn't work for me in this instance. Anyway, the tragic interpretation seems to be more in keeping with the overall tone of the movie. It's a perspective that I imagine Kubrick would have preferred. On the upside, I thought Haley Joel Osment and Jude Law were spectacular. Law's Joe grows subtly and believably, right up until his epiphany about the potential of his own existence is cut short. (How Kubrickian!) He's also funny. Osment is one incredibly talented kid who's got a terrific future in acting if that's what he decides to pursue as he grows up. At several points in the movie, his David broke my heart with nothing more than a fleeting expression. The visual presentation of the movie is extraordinarily beautiful and haunting. Overall, "AI" was imaginative and creatively executed, but in the end its reach greatly exceeded its grasp. What a pity.
|
