Rating: 
Summary: It's a film that makes you say 'was this a good film?'
Review: When A.I. first hit the big screen i was extremely excited. For starters the teaming of haley joel osment and steven spielberg is master filmmaking even though the process hasn't even begun. Next you add in someone like Jude Law and you have a surefire blockbuster...or not. You see this movie is very much a Steven Spielberg movie, only he would come up as lines as 'i love you mommy' or 'do you love me?' and when you are paying respects to a man with a mind of sheer brillance (Stanley Kubrick) and you add the Steven Spielberg (who has a mind of brillance but in his own manner) you get a very odd film. Now don't get me wrong, i was please with the $8.50 i payed at night for this film, thought it was worth every penny. There are parts in the movie that are brilliant, say the flooded New York City and why young David (haley Joel Osment) goes there was just the right touch for this film. But then you have scenes like the "flesh fair' now i thought these scenes were extremely creative in the direction and acting abilities, the only thing i didnt like much was the music blaring (which is a band that Stanley Kubrick himself told Steven to somehow use in the film) the band being Ministry. But although this may have been a point in the film where the band would most likely fit in all it really did for me was give me a headache so i couldnt actually enjoy the flesh fair scenes which were pure Kubrickian in his dark style. Changing gears a little you have David (played beautifully by one of my favorite actors, Haley Joel Osment) and you feel for just about every little thing he does, whether it being the "i want to be special, unique" line to the most innocent of them 'i love you mommy' everything he does makes you want this movie to be 2 hours of him just doing his stuff. Thats another part of the film i didnt like...the length. Running at about 150 minutes you begin to wonder, when will this movie end? But to express everything that you really want to i guess you have to have a movie that clocks in at a long amount of time. The ending of the film makes you wonder about human race and what it means to be prejudice and uncaring, as for in the end of the film there are no humans left, there are alien forms (truely in the creative mind of Stanley Kubrick) and David has survived (i will not tell you how as to that might ruin the film for you). David then asks the aliens to see his 'mother' (played wonderfully by Frances O'Connor). The scene is portrayed in the sense that the viewer wants to be happy for David but you can't help think, why would David go back to this women after she dumps him off in the forest for things he hasn't even done? So when my brother and i walked out of the theater my brother said 'i dont really know if that was a good movie.' and to tell you the truth, neither do i...
Rating: 
Summary: GREAT GREAT !!!!!!!!!
Review: Well, there I was- walking into the theater thinking I'd see another Bicentennial Man-type film. Robots wanting to become real- seen that already. But this was Speilberg- so I just had to see it- and boy did I love this film!! I just sat there for two hours not moving at all- eyes glue to the screen- this movie did something to me!! This, in my mind, is Speilberg's best "drama" movie of all time!! Sure- there's Jurassic Park and all those other great action movies he made- but when it come to drama- this is far beyond the Color Purple. The acting is great by all- the special effects are some of the best I've seen to date- and the music score- that single piano note played over and over again- is so creepy that it adds a whole new level to the film. Jude Law's performace is great!!! I also liked the fact that the "Jimmy Cricket" charactor was played by a robot teddy bear- that's right, incase you didn't know- this movie is based on Pinocchio and it was fun to see all the charactors we remembered from Pinocchio "revisioned" in this film. I want to go in to detail about many things- but don't want to ruin the movie for you. So I'll just tell you this- I manage a video store and watch basically every movie that comes out- but I still can't remember a movie being as great as this one!! This film really is Oscar worthy. I didn't want this movie to end!! Just when I thought the movie -was- over, a whole new "idea" began- and without ruining the ending for you- I'll just say it was weird. I use "weird" in a good way. It's something you'd never expect in this movie's ending- but Speilberg has done movies of that type before- but not quite like this. I was surprised to see the movie go in the direction it did near the end- I guess that was Kubrick's idea? It was a great idea- but I don't think Speilberg would of done it that way would of it not been originally Kubrick's story- you'll know what I mean when you see it- ok that's all- go see the movie now- you'll also like Robin Williams' and Chris Rock's small cameos.
Rating: 
Summary: Way below my expectation.
Review: I understand that the movie tries to deliver a message. I hate this movie not because of the message but the PROCESS it used to deliver the message. I smell something wrong when I got a lecture on artificial intelligence, a robot that can love in the first 10 min. of the movie. This is not you would like to see in a sci-fi movie or any kind of movie.I think the most anonying part is David. I didn't mean Osment did a bad job. It is something to do with that robot boy. I can only feel "artificial" but not "intelligence". All I would say is David is dumb, and that make the movie much less convincing than it should be.
Rating: 
Summary: Big Disappointment
Review: I should say that, i was expecting to see a not-good movie, and that is what happened. As every Holywood movie, this one is also full of unnecessary details, which do not go with the story line. And in fact at some points, this fact is far more exaggerated for AI. Take the scenes where the lover robot enters the story and then leaves out, and you'll end up with the same movie but 45 minutes shorter. It seems like those 45 minutes were added by Spielberg, but were not in the orginal score. Those trailing scenes really do not go with the movies "soft" approach. There are some plausible points though, like he did not flick his eyes even once during the movie. Overall, i think it is not really worth to see it, unless you have too much spare time and money.
Rating:
Summary: One of the most incredible movies I've seen.
Review: Steven Spielberg and Stanley Kubrick's film, "AI-Artificial Intelligence" is one of the most mind-blowing, provocative films I have ever seen in the theater. I am 23 years old, obsessed with films, and, I must say, have watched many mind-blowing films. But, I must add, I've watched most of them on VHS or DVD. I have never had the chance to see "2001: A Space Odyssey" or "Apocalypse Now" on the big screen. I've never seen "The Godfather" or "Jaws" or any classics on the big screen. The last film I can honestly call a "classic," that I saw in the theater, was "E.T." Nothing since has entered the collective, pop culture pantheon as a true classic. Sure, there have been giant blockbusters--there have been hundreds of blockbusters--but none will be remembered like Spielberg's ode to childhood, to magic, to dreams and fantasy. Until now. A lot of people are saying "A.I." is one of the worst films they've ever seen. They are hating with a passion. I don't understand. In fact, I'm baffled. I am an aspiring screenwriter an director, and, honestly, I couldn't find anything wrong with the film. However, I'm not saying the film is perfect. It is a flawed masterpiece, is what I'm saying. But what masterpiece isn't flawed? I pose this question with the knowledge that such "classics" as "Citizen Kane," "It's A Wonderful Life," "The Godfather," "Apocalypse Now," "2001," and many other films on Kubrick's and Spielberg's resume have been critically reviled. Pauline Kael, the famous film critic, despised "2001" on its intial release, as did many others. Spielberg has been burned at the stake by several respected critics, often thought of as the "Peter Pan" of filmdom. It wasn't until "Schindler's List" and "Saving Private Ryan" that he gained the respect he deserved. However, you ask one person you know if they don't like "Close Encounters of the Third Kind," or "Jaws," or "E.T." or the "Indiana Jones" films, and I bet you receive a "Are you kidding?" as an answer. "A.I.," as I have said, is flawed. It is a collaboration, however, of the two greatest directors ever. Yes, I consider Stanley Kubrick and Steven Spielberg to be the two greatest directors ever to work in the medium of film. So I was biased when I heard of "A.I." It was like a dream come true. My expectations for the film were beyond belief. And you know what? Each and every one was fulfilled. Upon seeing the film, I wasn't disappointed at all. In fact, I was thrilled. I felt I had just seen one of the most engaging, intellectually stimulating films I had ever seen. I couldn't talk about it for at least a half-hour after my viewing. I wanted it to sink it, to seep through every part of my being. And isn't that what great films do? Sure, I was a little disturbed by the ending, a little thrown off by the tonal shifts between the stereotypical "Kubrickian" darkness to the "Spielbergian" hopefulness. But how can you "hate" a movie that makes you feel something, even if it isn't what you want to feel? Did anyone want to feel the horror that "Schindler's List" provided? Or how about the gut-wrenching beginning and ending to "Saving Private Ryan" that Spielberg provided. Those aren't "feel good" movies, I must say. And neither is "A.I." It isn't a "kid's" movie, despite the main character being acted by Haley Joel Osment--if he doesn't get nominated for best actor, I'm never watching the Oscars again. "A.I." provides a new generation with something to think about. Watching the news every night, the latest debates about stem cell research and human cloning, I think the film is very topical. It's the age-old theme of man-playing-God. Spielberg has visited it before in "Jurassic Park," but that film is nowhere close to providing the thrill that "A.I." provides. You can say you hate "The Animal" with Rob Schneider, or "Dude, Where's My Car," but never say you hate a film that actually has ideas flowing through its veins. Please. I beg you. For the more people who say they hate "A.I." the more horrible movies Hollywood is going to produce. I know there are intelligent filmgoers out there--please show yourselves. Make this film a classic. I guarantee you, in ten years, people are going to look back and see the groundbreaking film that "A.I." truly is.
Rating:
Summary: I feel sorry for Spielberg
Review: I gess this is the idea Spielberg has of an intelligent movie: full of references and quotations to Kubrick. This is an outrageous offence to any kind of intelligence, Kubrick would be dissapointed if he had to see what has been done in such a hurry with so little care to a project he had worked on for more then ten years. I would say that Spielberg should stick with the kind of stuff he is used to do... And don't even try to raise our mids again, because every time he attempts to do that, it's embarrassing.
Rating:
Summary: Powerful and Depressing: A Warning and a Reprimand
Review: Much like George Orwell's novel '1984', this movie is masks powerful ideas with a relatively simple story. The story is one of a boy, fallen from his mother's grace, on a journey to (re)gain her love. The incidentals are much more. For one, the protagonists in this book are the robots... the artifical intelligence. The antagonist is humanity. Plus, in two millenia, humanity ends. And only our creations remain. Humanity is the only thing marring the world, a neccessary evil needed to create better replacements. The primary anagonist, Professor Hobby, played by William Hurt, exploits love itself for economic gain. He takes the visage of his late son and puts it on a manufacturing line. All the smpathetic characters in the film are mechas. The only time we see humans show compassion is when they believe David is one of their own. Humanity takes it's last breath, and uses it to condemn creations of their own making. I recommend this film without hesitation.
Rating:
Summary: ET meets Clockwork Orange
Review: I'd read a few of the previous reviews, and Robin McDonald seems to have the best background info about this film. Personally, I had read great reviews, and some friends could only tell me how boring it was.Well, if you know Kubrick at all, you know that you can't blink for a minute, no matter how boring it might seem, you're gonna miss something ("Barry Lyndon" was brilliant for ME, tho not others) There are phenomenal things happening all the time. For me, the scenes in Rouge City were most impressive, sets, etc., and the appearace of Jude Law, the perfect oily snake-droid with a bit of heart. I guess the basic idea while watching this film is to let your mind go with the flow and see where it takes you.I can't remember seeing the actress Frances O'Connor, who plays the kid's "mother" but she's absolutely wonderful. I agree with Mr. McDonald, that young Mr. Osment deserves an Oscar nomination, but, to me, William Hurt has become detatched from his characters in recent years, and seems the same here. Jude Law is terrific!The sweetness of "E.T." is noticeable, but the grimness of "Clockwork Orange' is apparent, more than a bit of futility but so many loads of hope and happiness that you can't help be a bit moved. I was. Many weren't. Another reason to see for yourself.
Rating:
Summary: Very depressing
Review: Well, I saw this today, and I was very disappointed overall. There was a sense of hopelessness that never let up, and this picture showed a bleak and dismal future for humanity. What was "David" supposed to do for eternity after his "mom" was briefly re-cloned and then died again?? Why was the scene of the earth frozen solid needed to finish the movie??? Why should we have been exposed to the gory scene with acid drenched robots, as well as robots torn limb from limb??? Why would a TV man have his young daughter at the Flesh Fair?? The movie could have ended bleakly enough with David and teddy trapped in the hover copter, but no, we had to darken the movie further by seeing all of humanity dead and frozen for 2,000 years or more. I guess that maybe I expected too much. Despite the poor plot and ultra depressing story, I still have to give a hearty bravo to Haley Joel Osment, and a decent bravo to Jude Law. Also, John Williams creates a nice but subtle soundtrack. Sadly, this is one Spielberg DVD that will NOT go into my library.
Rating:
Summary: Viewer beware, beware
Review: Just for curiosity I'd like to read the short story by Brian Aldiss that "AI" is based on, but from what I've read about the story, there is little resemblence. In any event I want to pan this terrible movie while the effect is fresh in my mind. I saw it today and it took me a while to recover. It might take a while to find the story. This review is for those who haven't seen the movie, so I'll try not to give too much of the story away. I have liked every one of S. Spielberg's movies except "Jurassic Park," but this is an incredible embarrassment coming from a director involved in great movies like "ET," "Schindler's List," and many others. The first part of the movie is about a company trying to create a robot that is just like a human, particularly in that it can genuinely love. A couple whose child is in a coma gets the first prototype, and this part works well, I felt, depicting the drama of a mother bonding with her "child." When their "real" child miraculously recovers and returns home, the movie starts to fall apart, and it is all downhill from there. The views of the future are not realistic, in my opinion. To the point in the past few years I have started to believe that the negative futures depicted in much science fiction, as in P. K. Dick, Aldiss, and others, is simply not going to happen. Whether or not the AI aspect of this movie is accurate or not (I don't know) is really quite irrelevant, because the dark scenes from the middle of the movie to the end are insipid, drawn out, and each scene, almost always disjointed from prior scenes, demands far more suspension of disbelief than I was willing to allow. Bluntly stated, the movie just gets worse and worse. As one example, imagine a robot with a grossly exaggerated Oedipus complex who waits 2000 years to re-unite with his "Mother!" I am glad I read some of the other reviews for some balance. Jude Law was good, as was Teddy the bear (very good effects work), only the bear was used over and over to fill in plot gaps, to the point of absurdity...
|
