This review is coming out late. Very late.
I saw it the week after its initial release, and it's taken me this long to solidify my thoughts about it.
Before I give my opinion, I want to note that this movie has created a firestorm of debate on various chat boards, and the opinions are pretty much one extreme or the other. Either "A.I." is the worst movie ever made (or was a decent movie made horrible by the ending,) or is one of the best movies ever made. I'm certainly not the first person to note that Stanley Kubrick's "2001" was released to similarly mixed reviews, and in 1968 it was mostly bad or confused. Now it's considered one of the greatest movies of the 20th century.
Stanley Kubrick is responsible for "A.I." even if it was directed by Steven Spielberg. And yes, even the ending was Kubrick's creation (if only slightly altered.) There's really no way I can discuss my thoughts on the movie without giving huge spoilers...so I'll try to give a generic overview, then give a spoiler warning and get in depth.
I can see, though I can't agree with the people who hated the film. It wasn't "E.T.". It wasn't just cute Haley Joel Osmet being a robot wanting to be loved in a wondrous future world. OK, it was that, but as opposed to a lesser movie where that would pretty much be it, "A.I." uses that simply as the premise or setting for a movie much more in depth and thought provoking.
It's a movie that raises questions about the responsibility of love and devotion. In an early scene, when the idea of an android or "mecha" that would be able to truly love is being proposed, someone asks "what responsibilities does that human parent have toward the robot?" Majorly paraphrased there, but you get the idea.
So the movie tries to answer that while at the same time being a hard-core sci-fi film where the concepts of the rights of the mechas in a world that's come to both rely on what they can do for us humans and at the same time resent them for being near-human.
Then of course there's the central theme that Kubrick spent 15 years developing, and that's the fable of the quest of a fake boy wanting to become real. Kubrick made no bones about the fact this was a fable. In fact, for most of those 15 years the movie was being called "Pinocchio." So that's the biggest point I have against people who hate the movie because of the supposed implausibilities with reality. It's a fable. And after I get into the spoiler section, I'll go into that more.
Speaking of which, let me wrap up this non-spoiler section because it's difficult trying to discuss the movie without actually discussing it. Don't go expect a feel-good movie of love and warmth and cuteness, because while there are scenes that may touch you, this is not a cutsey family-fun movie. It's a sci-fi fable that tries to get you to think and consider, and not take things just at face value. I think the reason so many people hated the movie is because they expected to be fed celluloid entertainment with maybe some action, some laughs, some bright lights and special effects, and walk out with the movie already fading to a memory as they left the darkened theater. So many movies now days leave us with nothing more than a few cool images or effects and a story that's not much of one, at least nothing that would take longer than one sentence to explain. For good or bad, "A.I." is not easily forgettable. If a movie can create debate and get discussed, then it did more than entertain. It stimulated thoughts and opinions, and that's more than most movies do these days. So, if you haven't seen the movie yet, don't read on. You really don't want to know some of this stuff before you go in.
OK, so you've seen the movie? You're sure? Well, let's jump to the most controversial part and go right to the end.
I THINK everyone who's seen it should be aware by now that the beings at the end are not aliens, but advanced mecha. Why? Well, let's start with the HUGE plot-point Jude Law's "Joe" gives when he says "And when the humans are all gone, it will be us who's left." And the fact through the translucent skin was circuitry reminiscent of what one sees when a mecha is scanned like was done to "David" in the cage at the Flesh Fair. Then there's the fact they were able to communicate with David non-verbally. If David's a mecha, what but another machine would be able to do that? And finally, and admitantly this is the most tenuous but is still very interesting, when we first see David it's in a high-contrast silhouette in such a way as his body shape heavily resembles that of the mechas at the end.
OK, now that we have that covered, lets jump into the nature of the ending. MANY people say the movie should have ended when David was trapped below the sea pleading with the Coney Island "Blue Fairy" for all eternity to be a real boy. I say that the fact most people expected it to end there is a HUGE reason why not to end it there. At one time bitter-sweet or depressing or shocking endings were...shocking. Surprising. Thought provoking. Risky! Now days, it's expected. It's post-modern and artsy to end a movie "thought provoking" when in fact it's just become the new cop-out ending. People complain "happy endings" are "so Hollywood." I say there's a difference between a happy ending and a cop-out ending so that a happy ending, if it's deserved and logically driven to, is perfectly alright.
But let's hold on a second. Even though it didn't end with the arguably sad underwater scene, it didn't end happily either. This is where the movie goes from interesting and fascinating to brilliant. Yes, brilliant. Now follow me on this one: First we have a movie that has otherwise been very intelligent and logical even in its fantasy. Human behaviors, the science, other than possibly Monica's car, it's all pretty believably applied. Suddenly we have these future-mecha with a tangent about cloning and space-time continuum, etc. Now I'm a big fan of quantum and space-time theories, but I have to admit that the line the mecha gives David regarding cloning Monica for a day seemed pretty far-fetched and out from left-field. Taken at face-value like we so often do anymore, it looks like a cop-out set up for a happy ending. Nuh uh. I believe the mecha was lying to David. He says himself that he's very important to them in learning about human history, and all they want is for him to be happy. All David wants is for his "mommy" to love him back. We already know the future-mecha have created David's old home and are monitoring him remotely, and they created a vision of the Blue Fairy in order to bestow upon him his wish...why not in order to make him happy, give him the illusion of his mom for a day ending with her telling David she loves him? What better way to make him happy? I add as evidence to this theory the fact that from the 2nd time after being found in the frozen amphibacopter when the mecha "touches" David's "mind," the screen goes grainy and color saturated until the end, to me indicating the entire ending is being projected into David's mind by the mecha.
Now, whether you believe that or whether you believe what we're told by the mecha at face value, the reason for the not-happy-ending is the same. We have a fake boy, with a programmed love, loving at the end a fake mommy in a fake environment, given to him by fake "people." When the movie closes on that last scene, I wasn't going "Aww, how sweet, she said she loved him and now he must be a real boy because he can dream for the 1st time now. Happy happy." On the contrary. I walked out of the movie feeling sad and sorry for David and his false situation. The poor creature had no choice in loving his "mommy," he was programmed to. Real children learn what love is, he was forced into loving this human mortal who forever. Even though she loved him back in a way, it was not with the same devotion David had, and she could chose to hide or divert her emotions while David was not capable of it. He was forced onto the journey he took because of how his Creator built him. (Hmmm, what do you know, another thought provoking theme. Bad, bad movie for making us think about our own lives and purposes on the planet.) And the journey culminates into a contrived (by the mecha) environment who can only give him a ghost of his devotion. And even so, he latches onto that figment so utterly and completely it's actually quite sad and pitiful.
Now, if that isn't sad enough, let's add this to the mix. We know the story is a fable...now, whose fable? It's about a mecha boy who wants to be a real boy, and the movie ends with a world populated only by mecha. I say it's a mecha fable. A story mechas have been telling each other and their progeny for centuries. When you consider that there is a society, a lonely world of mecha who have lost their creators (hmmmm yet again) excavating the ice for remnants and answers and fragments of knowledge about these humans who had art and philosophy, searching for answers about themselves, and one of their fables is about mecha boy who is the first of their race to experience real emotion searching for his own humanity...my gawd it's sad. The world ends in coldness, populated by creatures who are artificial, search for the warm flame of "life" and its meaning of being alive, trying in their innocent way to make one of their earliest prophets happy and give him the "life" he's waiting 2000 years to get, it opens up all kinds of spiritual, religious, philosophical themes on top of being emotionally gripping and depressing.
I sincerely believe time will help make "A.I." to be considered a masterpiece in both pure science-fiction and cinema in general. One of the grand purposes of sci-fi is to show us, teach us about our own humanity. Pose questions about where we're going and why we're here. Much like what religion strives to do. And once time allows us to separate our experience with Spielberg creating for our collective-conscience what we consider "standard" alien appearance with "Close Encounters" from the image we're given of the mecha at the end of "A.I.", we can put aside our knee-jerk reaction of incredulousness at the appearance of the alien-LOOKING mecha at the end and see the themes Kubrick and Spielberg were bringing to life.
Well, now that all that's done with, I should touch on some of the movie itself.
Bravo. The movie takes place, if I recall properly, about 2100, and one of the...neatest aspects of the setting is the fact that the movie doesn't LOOK like the production designer was going "Future! We're in the future! We must make the movie look futuristic!" Clothing for example looked very 20th century. No annoying metallic colors or silly designs. The characters looked like they were dressed by themselves and not some production designer. The house looked believable. The furniture, the architecture, the "stage dressing." The only thing that looked somewhat fake and slightly unbelievable were the cars. They sort of reminded me of those promos from the 60's from car manufacturers showing designs of cars we'd be driving at the turn of the century, and they looked like small spacecraft with wheels. Yet alas, our cars still look like...cars. However, I can see how in 100 years transportation design would be likely to change more radically than clothing. In any case....
The filming, the lighting, the filmography is Oscar worthy. The way the camera creates certain images, allows us to see emotion and thoughts when the characters are holding them in, is poetic. And speaking of character emotion, I know if I saw this movie before I became a father I would have a much lesser reaction to the mother's emotions regarding David as a twisted surrogate for her own son. He's real, but not quite real. Kind of creepy but so loveable. And she's still terribly distraught over her son in a coma, all but dead really, and here's this not-really-a-boy full of trust and curiosity. She has a lot of difficulty accepting David, and I could feel that emotional turmoil within her. And Osmet's performance is brilliant. Completely believable as a mecha. He's not a kid playing "robot" with odd affectations, you believe he's a thinking computer in a case resembling a human body. And his transformation from thinking machine, to feeling machine when Monica performs the imprintation sequence is heart-wrenchingly inspired. HJO is absolutely one of the best reacting-actors we have today, and not just as a kid.
To end, I wanted to make a not regarding the online game for "A.I." that's even still currently going on (though winding down as I write this. It may end in the next week or two.) It's a murder-mystery that takes place about 40 years after the movie does. The clues began with the movie trailers, and is unbelievably huge! It covers hundreds of fictitious web sites, mysterious e-mails and phone calls, and clues ranging from word games and puzzle pieces to bio-chemistry and code deciphering...and I can't even begin to give an impression of just how immense and immersive this game is. The reason I bring it up is because if you read the in-game material, it takes the world the movie just gives us a glimpse of and gives it a depth only a series of novels could otherwise accomplish. There's a huge backstory to the creation of Cybertronics (the company ran by William Hurt's "Allen Hobby" who created David,) as well as a lot of info regarding Hobby himself. David's human "brother," Martin is grown up and an architect, and becomes a major character in the game...as does their mom Monica. The conflict touched on in the movie between humans and mecha is given incredible depth in the form of pro-AI and anti-AI groups and even congressional politics. In any case, it's too late to really "play" the game, but the group called Cloudmakers has done a beyond outstanding job in collecting all the game information and making it readable.
www.cloudmakers.org is the main site, www.cloudmakers.org/guide is a FANTASTIC narrative from linear beginning to end of the mystery, www.cloudmakers.org/trail is a database of all the clues and sites and info, etc.
If you liked the movie "A.I.", and would like to know what happens to the characters of Allen Hobby, and Martin and Monica Swinton, and perhaps even why there's an early ice age at the end of the movie, check it out!
Category: Movie
Genre: Sci-Fi
Date Reviewed: 2001-01-01
Pros:
Cons:
Rating: 9