Rating: 
Summary: Who let this happen?
Review: Great potential and decent start disintegrates into psuedo-intellectual drivel. Great performances by Osment, Law, and Teddy, not enough to save movie. A sad attempt at a fairy tale.
Rating: 
Summary: Amazing on so many levels
Review: I count myself among the many enthusiastic fans of this movie. I have since read hundreds and perhaps thousands of reviews now in attempt to understand why this film is so hits so strongly with some and misses so badly with others. There seems to be no personality type that distiguishes those who dig it from those who don't. Entertainment Weekly offered some background on the story development that explain a little about why there might be this disparate reaction. A.I. was a challenge to edit. When shooting was completed the film clocked in at four hours. David and Monica spend a lot more time bonding than what you see in the final film. People who like the film seem to be able to readily infer the bond in the relationship without the additional exposition. The rest have difficulty making sense of this and feel the film abandons interesting opportunities for family dynamics. After more than ten years of discussion with Kubrick, Spielberg states it was important for him to stay focused on the four major set pieces that were the core of Kubricks vision for the film. The Switzer household, the Flesh Fair, Rouge City, and the frozen afterworld inhabited by advanced mechas. As described by the lead effects supervisor, Kubrick liked to establish environments and then abruptly pull people out of them. You see this most clearly in 2001: A Space Oddysey. Kubrick wanted this method to be the storytelling method for A.I. as well. People seeing the film find this a stimulating way to explore ideas. Others find it makes the story seem disjointed. You should view the film with the idea that it is going to be episodic rather than linear. It is more concerned with exploring ideas than maintaining a perfectly threaded storyline. Mentally prepare yourself for this and you are less likely to become impatient looking for a quick wrap up in the last segment. Jude Law prefered not to make any statement of his own opinion on the extensive cuts to some of his better scenes but stated he admired Steven Spielberg's choice to focus in on the David story. He eliminated whatever did not move that central story along. As good of a film as I think it is, I don't see any point in going to a film you may hate. I have some suggestions that may help decide if you are a good candidate to like or dislike A.I.People who passionately feel Spielberg is a hack over-rated director but are thinking of seeing this film anyway because of its strong Stanley Kubrick overtones seem the least likely to enjoy this film. People who have been passionately awaiting this film for the last nine years also tend to be disappointed due to their personal expectations of what it would be like. Fans of Spielberg films such as E.T., Saving Private Ryan and Schindler's List who appreciate his ablity to convey personal human moments that champion esteemable virtues like nobility and heroism will not find much to cuddle up to in this film. It more connects with the human experience of digging to find scraps of virtue in the rubble, rather than finding it on display. There are unrelieved moments of mental cruelty to David that one may wish were left unexplored. Humans in the film view the mecha as tools to perform a purpose. The film explores people who feel dehumanized by machines that have taken over their roles as lovers, workers and do things they used to do. There are none of the cute or warm moments that characterize many Spielberg films. If you are intolerant of long films, you should probably stay away from A.I. While it is only two and a quarter hours, it has a measured pace and there are stretches without much dialog that are left open to observe the moment. Visually, there seems to be no real argument that A.I. is a treat for the eyes. And Haley Joel Osment and Jude Law turn in fascinating and commited performances. David's supertoy "Teddy" is sited as the best character in the movie. This is intended as either a compliment or a veiled insult depending on who is reviewing the film. There is no way to know who will like or dislike this film. My wish is that you would see A.I. and enjoy it. Those who still decide to go after reading my suggestions and other comments,understanding the history and structure of the film will, I hope, have a better chance of appreciating it. Something in your personality will ultimately determine if you leap easily over the hurdles that blocked others from really enjoying A.I. and come home with a great experience. However I also hope others knowing a few things about themselves and the film will steer clear of it and avoid a bad night out at the movies. Good luck.
Rating:
Summary: Wow!!
Review: I was able to see A.I. through a local free screening (not a member of the press). I am usually not very impressed with most movies - they are predictable, labored and just plain stupid. I saw the soft preview for the movie, with the ever-loving mother and son scenario. Little did I know what I was in for. I will not give anything away, but this movie will take you on quite a ride! You never knew what to expect next. I went through the full range of emotions on this one. I cried, I squirmed, I laughed, I was in awe! The special effects are spectacular and seamless at the same time. Some special effects are overdone and obvious - not here. I would like to know how some of this was done!! A.I. is both a tug of both light and dark. I wasn't left with an overwhelming sense of one feeling or another, but this movie will have you thinking about it for days. It makes you think about life itself, the future, your mere exsistence! Okay, I'm getting too deep here... While I was walking out of the theater, some people were obviously emotionally moved, while others felt drained, and disenchanted. This movie has some very dark aspects that made me very uncomfortable, so I wouldn't recommend it to children under 10. Spielberg said he would let his 9 yr. old son see it, but after explaining some things first. I haven't been able to stop thinking about this movie, and can't wait to see it again. There is so much that goes on, and so much detail, that it is a must second-see! This is an incredible, complex intelligent film that I highly recommend. The visuals are spectacular also. Enough, enough!
Rating: 
Summary: Infuriating
Review: Once again, I walk out of a Steven Spielberg film absolutely infuriated by his boundless arrogance. The first two hours, as an independent unit, could probably make one of the finest films of the decade, drawing you in completely (with amazing effects) into a dark and dreamlike world full of both pain and bittersweet humor. Jude Law and Haley Joel Osment are, of course, fabulous. With the last half hour, though, it seems that the Kubrick muse abandons Spielberg. His worst side takes over (the part of him that allowed him to create the "T-rex vs. San Diego" scene in "Lost World, Jurassic Park") resulting in an ending that compromises the integrity of the entire film and insults the viewer's intelligence.
Rating:
Summary: an interesting failure
Review: From an outside point of view it's hard to tell where the problem lies but the end result of this film, one of infinite potential, ends up at best an interesting failure. It is at turns overtly simple and sentimental, and at times attempts to be cold and sexy, but the Spielbergian "cute" obsessions run amok over Kubrick's and it all results in a mixed bag of a few goodies and a lot of mediocrity. Overall, the film lacks in energy that only Jude Law's character provides - he is the dynamo that keeps it from rusting on its tracks. The worst thing about the whole is that it's not really a bad film, but it continuously shows potential of being a great film - yet, unfailingly, at every interesting moment, suggesting either a transcendetal evolution of the storyline or a brooding insight into the characters and the futureworld they live in, it diverts back into its earlier meanderings and the result simply fails to excite. Even the effects, fine as they are, are nothing all that special. The preview I saw had people walking out in the middle of it, kids acting restless and 90% of the audience rushing out during the last scene. I do recommend seeing it and making up your own mind, but please don't go in expecting heaven. Maybe the Blue Fairy could fix it?
Rating:
Summary: Huge Dissapointment
Review: I got to see an advance screening of A.I. today with a couple other people up in Baltimore, here are my .02 on the film (this contains 0 spoilers, so read with ease!) Just thought i would let you all know that it is one of Spielbergs (and can we also say Kubrick's?)wort efforts!! Absolutely a huge let down! It's got your prototypical Spielburg ending, and doesn't decide whether or not it wants to be a Kubrick or Spielburg film. The acting is all-around great, but the ending just keeps going and going, and let me say most people will walk out dissapointed. John Williams score it tasteless, and any sign of a good film leave after the first act. Bring on "Minority Report"
Rating:
Summary: Wonderful Movie
Review: AI captured my imagination , which has not been done for a long while. Steven Speilberg uses his wonderful SciFi skill to produce a movie that is as heart capturing as ET. Haley Joel was the perfect young actor for this movie. If you want to walk out of the theater with your mind still thinking about what you just saw. Go see AI. You will thank me.
Rating:
Summary: A masterful epic
Review: I've given the buzz about 24 hours to wear off, but at this point I'm still saying to myself, "That was the best movie I've ever seen!" Honest. It was that good. For people who watch movies the way I do, A.I. was decked in layer upon layer of dazzling symbolism and meaning. The beauty of this film, though, is that unlike some more intellectually challenging movies, it doesn't lose its entertainment value. No matter what you're in the mood for, A.I can be appreciated on many levels, from the shallow end to the deep. The effects in A.I. are stunning, of course. But the key here is that the visuals never overpower the story, despite the fact that you may lose track of how many times you whisper "wow!" over some intricate visual perspective or special effect. Indeed, some of the scenes you would expect to be visually impressive, are--an underwater view of New York City, for instance. But Spielberg also brings out the dazzling in the everyday. A fairly classic example of Campbell's "Hero's Journey," don't expect A.I. to be a "feel-good film." It's as disturbing and tragic as it is tender and thought-provoking. It's an emotional ride, to say the least, and it keeps the viewer guessing until the very end whether its outcome will be positive. (Will it be? You'll have to see the film.) Through it all, Haley Joel Osment shines like the brilliant star he is. It's hard to take your eyes off his beautiful, intelligent, expressive face. I can't imagine Osment left out of the 2001 Oscar nominations, and despite what Hollywood brings us in the months ahead, I'll be cheering for him as best actor. I honestly can't see how any performance could top his work in A.I. He is possessed of a rare gift. See A.I. No matter what you go there for--the entertainment or the intellectual stimulation--you're guaranteed to walk out shaken.
Rating: 
Summary: PINOCCHIO REVISITED
Review: Guaranteed, the sight of the wonderful Haley Joel Osment begging his mommy not to leave him in the forest is one of the most tearjerking moments in recent film history. It is in these first 40 minutes or so that the heart of this movie is established. Osment, Sam Robards and Frances O'Connor deliver impeccable performances that put the viewer in their clutches. However, once the movie leaves this behind and ventures out into David's search for the Blue Fairy, we get a combination of so many classics like Star Wars, Blade Runner, etc., that the movie starts to lose its heart. Jude Law is fine as Gigolo Joe, but he is so plasticized that he never connects. William Hurt as the inventor of the boy robot comes across as some kind of warped Gepetto who doesn't even love his creation.
The special effects are flawless and Spielberg's ET sense of wonder abounds. Doesn't the space balloon remind you of the moon in ET? The movie becomes a special effects festival thereafter, and even when David gets his wish of one day with his mother, she is so vacuous and sterile you wonder what the joy is.
I'm certainly in awe of the technical superiority of this film, but still felt a little empty when it was over.
Rating: 
Summary: Don't waste your time. What a disappointment!
Review: A bloated, disjointed, disconnected, slow, methodical mess. It's finally happened to Spielberg: I call it the "Barbra Streisand Syndrome:" The truly great ones eventually lose all touch with reality and become a caricature of themselves. Barbra doesn't sing anymore, not with the sweet purity of her early career: She plays herself, singing. Spielberg doesn't create spontaneous beauty anymore. He's so lost touch with anything real, he's caricaturing himself, throwing in director's tricks that worked in his earlier movies; and in this one, tacking on an ending so absurd and disconnected, you leave wondering what ... the man's on. Bottom line: A truly great, classic movie was Spielberg's Empire of the Sun, one of my all time favorites, a perfect film. The difference between that gem and this dog is much like the plot of A.I: Empire of the Sun is a real movie with real heart, this one is a mere "robot" of a movie: an arrogant conceit of its creator. Many people will mention the "darkness" that Kubrick added to Spielberg's so-called "sunniness." Bunk. Darkness for it's own sake is a waste of my time. If you must buy the hype, whatever you do, don't take kids under ten.
|
