A.I. Stinks like a wet dog!!!

spiroagnew-man

Don't be fooled, I was and now I'm 5 quid poorer. A.I. is not all its cracked up to be. It has to be one of the coldest movies I have ever seen. As for that ending...urrrghhh ...to think I wasted 2 and a half hours watching a jumped up calculator with an oedipus complex.
I'm sick and tired of all this fawing over the Kubrick connection. His influence hangs over this movie like a stale fart in a lift and ultimately ruins it.
I reckon its the sheer lack of competition that has evelvated this movie. 2001 a real oddity

Shinji

Or alternatively you could have made some attempt to join in the significantly more balanced discussion on this movie in the existing topic about it... Oh well, better luck next time!

tHE vAGGABOND

His influence hangs over this movie like a stale fart in a lift and ultimately ruins it

Spot the person who knows what he's talking about

ObeyGiant

From that discussion...

originally posted by dadakopf
You probably have the face of a jerk.

originally posted by whitewashman
ZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzwhat
*cough splutter*
sorry you woke me.
oh sorry, i was just trying to get away from your tripe.

One man's "balanced" is another man's "retarded", I guess.

BLITZ_Molloy

Kubrick would have done the film better really. Spielberg was the one who introduced the rather tedious Pinnochio element to the film which was over done and dragged out. The 'feel good' ending any spielberg film must have (Shindlers list excluded ) was awful- very tacked on.

Still AI had a few good points. Haley Joel Osment acted extremely well. The artwork and design was very impressive also- flooded NY ( Did you spot the twin towers?), rouge city.

2.5 out of 5.

whitetrash

i dont think speilberg(?) could have added the pinocchio thing, its pretty integral to the plot, or my understanding of it.

Magwitch

I think we may dismiss Kubricks influence in this film as it was heavily "Speilberged".

Kubrick would not have talken or illustrated the plot Metaphors in the mushy was Speilberg did. The film, by an large was ambitious and held the narative. But this narative was strung accross under developed sub plots and at times thread bare acts and scenes.

I enjoyed the movies premise and some of the performances but I think the grand scope of the plot was missed by Speilberg, who ultimitly was out of his deapth in a project of such complexity. Result? Not a triumph - but at least something dofferent in the movies goven the muck on our screens this summer.

sceptre

Originally posted by whitetrash
i dont think speilberg(?) could have added the pinocchio thing, its pretty integral to the plot, or my understanding of it.

Yup - you're right. Brian Aldiss said as much before the movie was released

(and read his introduction to the Supertoys-titled compilation from early this year to see about Aldiss' original planned ending (written in any case in Supertoys in Other Seasons) and Kubrick's reaction to that)

Noticed the WTC, yeah (but look at the font cover box for Superman 2 - it's the only picture on the box apart from this guy in a blue cape obscuring the view)

strat

watching a jumped up calculator with an oedipus complex.

LOL

i thought the films was terrible, just when u think its going somewhere with the flesh fair thing - it just fizzeles out and gets back to being crap predictable and omg the bit with the aliens i burst out laughing in the cinema it was fucking woeful

WhiteWashMan

im not sure about it being 'spielberged'
nice coinage though!
and to say that spielberg was out of his depth?
hmm, i cant believe that to be honest.

i think the problem is that a lot of people dont like speilberg because he directs films that entertain people. hes very main stream and inoffensive. these days if you dont have a sort of edge, people will just call you boring, out of your depth. etc etc because they like to feel as fi they are contributing something, when all they are doing is going against general consensus.

i enjoyed he movie.
again, theres very few films i dont enjoy.
i would hate to go into a movie and sit down and say to myself, this is a spielberg movie. im not going to enjoy it.
the same way people went to the blair witch projevct, after all the hype and tried not to enjoy it.

the one thing that i didnt like about hte movie, was the invloment of kubrick. ive never been a fan of his. there are about 2 films of his ive enjoyed the rest were too long drawn out and ultimately boring. and this smaked of it.
speilberged?
no rescued somewhat
id say kubricked.....

Goodshape

saw A.I. today and loved it! ...and I'm about as big a Kubrick fan as you would find.

The story was absolutly amazing IMO. Not that it was 100% original (bicentineal man? blade runner?) but its a theme I enjoy - a proper old-style sci-fi flick picking on the publics fears and anticipations of whats to come in any perticular field.

It would have been interesting to see what Kubrick would think of it (lets not forget, he was talking to Spielberg himself about getting him to direct it). If Kubrick had decided to do it himself I'm sure it would be a great film, posobly better, but theres no point dweling on it - the film that was made was perfectly excelent.

To be honest I dont think Kubrick could have handeld some of the emotion in the film (eg. when david is brought to the woods) - but there are other parts that he probobly would have improved (eg. the end, which I liked, and was very Kubricky anyway.. but obviously the man himself would have done it better).

I would definitly recomed the film. It's refreshingly interesting and hard-hitting in a world of American Pie sequels and spoof-horror films.

.Goodshape

SantaHoe

That wet dog smell isn't all that bad.

jaarius

i enjoyed A.I. i thought that involved alot of thinking and in a world of no-brainer, on a silver platter entertainment this just confused a lot of folk. there was a lot of diz-nee stuff in it... but thats okay because it was being told as a fairy tale. i know a lot ofthe flk i went ot see it with were all saying the same thing. ALIENS? were they aliens? or were they evolved bots?

what i most liked about the movie was the ending. not that he got the mother to love him cause it was not the REAL mother but that the on last legacy of humanity and humanities progress was a child love for it mother. in short love and the flowers and candy kind. another thing i like about the movie was that the aliens/evolved bots find the kid. if they were bot(which i think they were) they were not primarily interested in humanity but the boy is what they were interested in. it would be like reanimating somebody found in ice after a couple of thousand years. we could learn so much from them. thats why the bots were so intersted in the kid,not because they wanted him to be happy but because they could learn more about bots from that time.


j

azezil

yep it stinks... too long boreing, unoriginal, predictable then the introduction of aliens oh come on :rolleyes:

BLITZ_Molloy

The whole thing was way to soppy and unoriginal. as i said before though- very good acting and presentation.