Rating: 
Summary: A Failed Attempt at Kubrick Style Intellectual Filmmaking.
Review: Spielberg obviously wants to give us something to think about with A.I., his beyond the grave collaboration with film legend Stanley Kubrick. Unfortunately, the only thing I could think about were the gaping logical gaps and hour long rambling non-ending. There are attempts at philosophy (what makes us human?) but they never rise above Spielberg's usual sugary Hollywood schmaltz in their execution. (what makes us human? Why, we can dream, tra la, tra la.) The film is not without a few saving graces, which is why it got two stars from me rather than one. Jude Law was great as Gigolo Joe, a suave lover-mecha. Teddy, the mechanical bear who plays Jiminy Cricket to Haley Joel Osment's Pinnochio, could have been a lame special effects gimmick, but Jack Angel's voice tlents made the character a real bright spot in an otherwise dreary film. And, of course, Osment was terrific. It's refreshing to see a child star who has attained his fame through acting, rather than just looking cute. But all the bright spots come from the actors and the visual effects. Spielberg's rambling script, with poorly crafted dialogue (loaded to the brim with unneeded and poorly executed expositional scenes) couldn't be saved even by a truckload of Haley Joel Osment-bots. Kubrick can make you sit in a darkened theater for two and a half hours and make it all seem worthwhile. Spielberg should really stick to dinosaurs, or, at if he must venture into "serious cinema" he should avoid such philosophicaly lofty fare.
Rating:
Summary: AI = Avoid It
Review: Big Disappointment. Big Waste of Time.This movie made me and my wife angry. It wasn't good enough to upset me in the proper way...Here are some reasons: 1) Blurry, Smokey, Glaring, Jerky Photography. 2) Stupid Plot. Kinda like a...hybrid between Soylent Green, Wizard of Oz, and Planet of the Apes. Each of these three movies was a masterpiece in its own way, but imagine a hybrid? Yuck! 3) The point of the "quest" came too late, too feebly. 4) Shallow characters, except for David, who was much more human than the humans. Even the goal of the quest, good old "mom", wasn't worth the epic struggle, because she was such a shallow selfish [person]. Good points: 1) Superb acting by Osment, and possibly Jigollo Joe, but nobody else. 2) The last five minutes were touching... Popeye
Rating: 
Summary: More Kubrick than Spielberg and not the hit of the Summer
Review: For the first couple of hours of "A.I." I really thought this was much more of a Stanley Kubrick than a Steven Spielberg film. It was not until the final half-hour of the movie that Spielberg's voice clearly emerges in this story and we are truly touched. The performances by Haley Joel Osment and Jude Law are outstanding; there is a wonderful moment when "David," the young A.I., has his emotional programming activated and his face suddenly becomes human instead of artifical. Law's stylized movements work great and I have to mention Teddy, who steals his fair share of scenes. But I expect a whole lot of moments like that in a Spielberg film and this one just does not deliver until the end. Those who come to see this expecting "E.T." are going to be disappointed by this science-fiction version of Pinocchio while those familiar with androids in science fiction are going to find the human prejudice against and corporate exploitation of the A.I.'s to be nothing new. The character who bothers me the most is played by William Hurt, David's creator. He is not so much a mad scientist as he is a soulless being (i.e., less human than his creation), especially given his model for David and his inability to follow the lead of the Cabbage Patch people and avoid turning out exact copies of his prototype. Ben Kingsley, Robin Williams and Meryl Streep provide some of the voices, so do not be surprised when you recognize them and start elbowing the person you took to the movie (yes, I'm guilty on this score). "A.I." is one of those films where the expectations are so high that only a rare film could succeed. I am sure that if Kubrick had directed this film instead of Spielberg, we would be amazed that the late great director was exhibiting such heart and humanity. What we have here is a good film, not a great film, where the last act redeems the entire work, and when the trailer for "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone" generates more buzz than the movie you went to go see, that is not a good sign.
Rating: 
Summary: A.I. Is 3 Films in One
Review: Saw A.I. yesterday and realized, when it was over that I saw 3 films in one. One was good, one was OK and the 3rd was dark, cold and brooding. Don't read any further if don't want it spoiled. It seemed like Speilberg had his way on the 1st part of the film that introduced and showed the acceptance of the robot boy by the family. The 2nd third of the film where he had to find his own way in a dark world was more Stanley Kubrick and, the last 3rd of the film reminded me of the end of 2001. The movie could have been ended successfully about 30 minutes earlier as it seemed to really drag at the end. Although I like science fiction and feel this movie does make you think a little about enjoying every minute of life, it was too dark and too long. I came away feeling a little empty for spending the 2 and 1/2 hours in the theatre.
Rating:
Summary: A.I.: Big Disappointment
Review: I came out of this movie wishing I hadn't seen it. I like fantasy movies, but this one was full of unbelievable, incongruous, and incompatible segments. I was unable to connect with the behavior and motivation of a single character. Anyone with even a smattering of scientific knowledge will be offended by the sloppy manner in which the dialog tries to make the unbelievable even temporarily acceptable. The film is full of disgusting scenes without any really pleasant ones to balance it. In spite of the promotions, there is no new technology to enchant you, either. Save your time and money. Stay home!
Rating:
Summary: Spoonfed detritus.
Review: Stunning and captivating are two words I'd use cautiosly in describing this movie. Captivating in waiting for the credits to roll, and stunning that it took them 2 1/2 hours to get that far. A highly produced movie which lacked any real substance beyond a set of "that's enough for the audience to figure out what's going on" style clues, it was disappointing to see great acting talent go to waste on something as poorly constructed as this. If you want to be unpleasantly awoken to what the general public will buy on the big screen, see this movie. If you want to maintain a happy outlook on how this movie is, and see what they want you to believe, wait for the trailer to appear on TV, tape it, and watch it over and over. The most interesting parts are there anyway.
Rating:
Summary: Warm & Fuzzy but little else
Review: For what I am about to say about this movie, you would think I'd have given it a lower rating, but the saving grace is actually that much of my disapointment stems from reviews I'd read for the movie saying that Spielberg had taken a darker tone than in other films (rather than the film itself. The film asks for suspension of disbelief and I gladly gave it, expecting that the premise concept would be used for exploration of more complicated themes. But many of the complications go unexplored and the film degenerates immediately into a sentimental fable that's too dark for children. I'm not going to give away any details but I'd say my major problem is that you would think (at least I did) that the problem with the creation of a robot boy capable of "love" would have to do with how the robot understands love and how they act on it. The aspect the film decides to set up (early) and come back to is whether the machine would be loved back. So this shifts the focus of examination from the machine to the humans, who actually disappear in the film, even leavign this more simplistic theme unexplored. On the whole, the robot boy is portrayed as a perfectly created innocent while the critics, telling tales of 'Spielberg's darkest and most thought provoking film' and a film that 'is not at all E.T. despite a purposely similar title', had me looking forward to a complicated story. Keep this in mind when you see the film: If it really isn't just somewhat sappy fable that goes on twenty minutes too long, WHY WITH THE TEDDY BEAR?????
Rating: 
Summary: Kubrick + Spielberg -> A MAJOR DRAG...
Review: ...Just came back from the movie theater...what a disappointment !... only thing i can say is...i am impressed at how hollywood can [get] reviewers to get them to praise a product which is bad in most senses ! (Haley Osment does a good job...but this story takes him nowhere...) ...let Spielberg stay on the adventure / fairy tale movie line... let others take care of making dark productions... this movie gets lost 30 mins into the show... (special effects are good, but nothing you havent seen before...) trying to mix a fairy tale with a dark story...goes WAY bad... it looks stupid as an adult movie... it looks creepy for as kid movie specially the end...what a drag... my recommendation... either forget about all the "false" hype...or rent it on video in some months...you will not regret having saved those bucks...
Rating: 
Summary: Life, Love, Living, and questions.
Review: The story of AI Artificial Intelligence starts when our technology has become good enough to create human-like robots that can think, feel, and live with humans almost like real humans. David is the first robot who is a child and, above all, who can 'love'. The film features a very interesting blend of sub-plots that gets me to both 'think' and 'feel' about technology and humanity. If a robot child really loves his mom, can his mom loves him back as much as he was a real boy? When robots live and work in our society just like humans, how should we treat them? The film shows both the good and the dark sides of humans and robots, who are also created by humans. Not only the story is absorbing, the acting makes it feels very real. Given his performance in the Sixth Sense and in this movie, Osment is the best young actor I've ever known. His acting as child robot gets me feel like David's almost a real child, but not quite. Other actors also did a good job in this movie. The scenes from the future are well taken-care of. You will see living environments that are somewhat more advanced that where we are now, but not so much that it's unlikely to happen. There are certainly a few questions about the story and some of the sub-plots don't fit together that well. But these are minor weaknesses relative to the way the whole story goes. Overall, this is a movie to watch, even if you don't care much about technology. While the technology is certainly interesting, the sentimental and humanity aspects of the story are even more attractive. You'll come out with something to remember and think about, even a long while after the movie ends.
Rating:
Summary: Disgraceful -- 0 spoliers
Review: I won't get into specifics 'cause I don't want to spoil anything for anyone, but this movie was terrible. It started out fine -- not great, but okay, then got very interesting but really dark, then meandered through some pretty okay territory, then turned to utter crap. As stated by another reviewer, Jude Law and Haley Joel Osment are wonderful, each delivering a strong performance. Don't be fooled by the hype -- this movie is nothing like a Kubrick film. The camera shots are excessively mobile and impatient, and there are gobs and gobs of classic Spielberg shots (which would be as expected had it not been for all this "channeling Kubrick" claptrap). The ending is really what makes it so terrible. It's so over the top that it pulled my whole opinion of the movie way, way down. I consider this to be Spielberg's Phantom Menace. Wait for video or cable.
| 
