Sci-Fi Fans Only: A.I.

by Maximus 42 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  truman

  I also just saw this movie a couple of days ago on the recommendation of "Newsweek" and Maximus. It is well worth seeing, and very thought provoking as has been noted.

  As Patio said, I too saw David's futile devotion to the blue fairy as a parallel to human prayers. So many pray, and it may often seem even to a person who has faith that God is as mute and unresponsive as the object of David's 2000 year long prayer. And yet his faith was so strong that he was willing to do anything to be able to implore the blue fairy in person.

  I was also intrigued by the scenes in which David discovers his creator's workshop, full of half-completed and ready-to-ship 'Davids' and 'Darlenes', and his response to this knowledge. More of his kind, programmed to seek love, and already prepared for adoption by parents starved for something to love (but you can always send it back to the factory for destruction, if you get tired of it). But David already knew the terrible price of that love. It seemed to me that his dispair at the prospect of endless copies of himself, positioned to suffer the pain he was enduring, was what prompted him to throw himself off the ledge into the oblivion of the waiting waters below. I felt that it was a metaphor for the endless stream of humanity which often suffers through this life. What is the excuse of God for perpetuating it, if he has the ability to prevent it (and killing everybody at armaggedon, is not preventing it).

  Maybe, I am just viewing things from a negative vantage, but I felt that the movie was largely about the futility of the search for ultimate acceptance. David, an artificial boy is programmed, albeit ingeniously, to love his 'mother', and to seek love from her. But, he is rejected, thrown unprepared out into a vicious and exploitative world by the very one he so yearns to love him. Her failure to give him the love he wants, is not his lack, but her own selfish, or human motivations. It cannot be his lack, because he was functioning within his design parameters, but he perceives it as his own failing. If he was lacking, it was not his failure, but the failure of those who created and used him. Even so, he struggles and sacrifices in the hope of obtaining even a few brief moments of love from the source which had rejected him. And yet, he is a constructed machine, and is the love he gives or recieves anything more than an illusion. (kind of like the love the org. gives)

  I also focused on the lines spoken befor the one about God creating man to love him. It was something to the effect of what is the responsibility of a creator to those he has created? To me there is a lot to think about there.

  Well, I guess I will get off my soapbox now. I heartily recommend this movie!
• 

  patio34

  Hi again Truwoman,

  I just posted to your thread about the WT magazine.

  Very good review! There are many parallels to the Bible's view of humans, as you allude to. One of them is the failure of humans to obtain God's love. Being expelled after one sin into death and dismay for endless generations. How dismal.

  The movie definitely had dismal overtones, but the kind that make you think.

  Pat
• 

  Maximus

  OK, I started this when the movie first opened.

  Now that you've seen it,

  Is the whole human race searching, crying, Mommy, Mommy, Mommy,
  Mommy, ...?

  Max
• 

  Introspection

  I knew Wendy is popular around here but the whole world..? That is the blue Fairy in the pic isn't it?

  Well, seriously I don't think the *whole* world is searching for that love, some are offering it. Maybe not many, but they're out there..

  "It is not so much that you use your mind wrongly--you usually don't use it at all. It uses you. This is the disease." -Eckhart Tolle, The Power of Now
• 

  joelbear

  I thought AI was a very good movie. I thought it should have been a much darker movie though. Certainly its message was chilling.

  I do think that of the 3 probably outcomes of humanity: 1) a return to a balance with nature, 2) self obliteration through nuclear war or biotechnology accident, 3) a transformation into manmade technological status with only an electronic memory of life, that number 3 is the most probable and it is the one the movie points to.

  I walked out of the movie saying, "Is artificial love the only love that will last?" I think one important point of the movie and maybe its most important point is that man's need to be able to manipulate everything, including creating manmade love, will be his downfall.

  pensive hugs

  Joel
• 

  ZazuWitts

  Hi All:

  I've definitely got to schedule a matineee to see the movie this week - sounds intriguing, that's for sure.
  Thank you all for your comments...they will probably make me more aware of the 'big picture.'

  I've always been a sci-fi fan - even the very worst of them, haha. Seriously, sci-fi films often have either an obvious, or even hidden message, that starts one thinking and thinking.

  Some of my all time favorites are:

  Forbidden Planet
  Omega Man
  Invasion of the Body Snatchers
  Andromeda Strain
  Planet of the Apes
  The Day the Earth Stood Still

  Better quit listing, too, too, many. :)
• 

  joelbear

  Its really cool to see how many Sci Fi fans are here on the board.

  My top movies include

  The Day the Earth Stood Still
  Close Encounters of the Third Kind
  Soylent Green
  Silent Running
  The Ape Movies
  Time Machine

  My top books are

  Asimov's Foundation Series
  The Dune Series
  Childhood's End by Arthur Clarke
  and more short stories than I can remember.

  hugs

  Joel
• 

  teejay

  Just went to see A.I. and was disappointed. I don't know what I expected, but that wasn't it.

  The first ten minutes of the movie were the most provocative, the remainder of it variations on that theme. As the decision is made to produce a new kind of mecha, the woman states the conundrum of why God created man and making the question relevant to the discussion in the room -- "what's in it for me"? David's quest for his "mother" throughout the movie suggests that either Spielberg/Kubrick were unhappy with their relationship with their mothers (or saw such dissatisfaction on a fairly wide scale) or were on an impossible quest to find SELF acceptance.

  I did enjoy the thoughtful ideas dealing with what love is, what causes it, where it originates. That David came to be imprinted on someone who ultimately cared so little for him -- sending him on a trek worse than death -- as well as a voiceless statue that did nothing for him in real terms makes interesting topics for discussion. Also, the benevolent and caring attention he received from the "heartless" nanny mecha as well as Joe in contrast to the lack of love personally shown him by the Flesh Fair operator (and virtually every other human he encountered) made for obvious commentary on our uncaring world.

  One scene that stood out for me was when the mother went through with the imprinting. I expected her to say something intelligible, like "I am your mother and I'll love you forever" or something like that. That the magic words were UNintelligible was cool, like the equally unintelligible "goo goo, gah gah" that mothers speak to their infants but which are crucial for bonding. The intent in both cases is the same, a promise to love and care for the youngster always. The mother turned out to be a horrible example of motherhood.

  I also thought the scene when he meets his maker, Professor Hobby, was very good at foreshadowing the act that David would eventually commit. Having lived under the delusion of uniqueness and the hope of finding his cosmic center (his mother) his act made total sense. I was almost happy for him when he did it because it became more and more obvious that genuine happiness would always elude him since his approach to "life" was flawed at its core.

  I could go on, but these are the superficial thoughts I had during the movie. As I mentioned, A.I. was over all a disappointment and, for me, didn't match expectations. I'd give it a 6 (out of 10). Btw, Seeker, aliens or robots work equally well at the end, imo. I don't see what difference it makes.

  peace,
  todd
• 

  DCs Ghost

  If You Have Not Seen The Movie Don't Read This IS A Spoiler
  .
  .
  .
  .
  .
  .
  .
  .
  .
  .
  I skipped this thread until i saw the movie cause i did not want to know much about it, nor have any opinions going in so here are my 2 cents on the movie without getting into the deep core issues that the movie provoked after we left the theater. . .

  Teddy was haunting
  Joe was slick
  The mother was an emotional crisis in the making
  David IMO was casted perfectly, no other child actor could have matched his skill,
  the kid is raw talent.
  and here is another opinion of mine. Lucas is god in my eyes, why didn't he cast Haley as young Anakin??? anyone ever wonder that??

  Ok so as to what i thought of the actual film, i was thoroughly entertained and was absorbed by it, it touched the issues raised at the beginning quite superficially but i think the movie was intended to be more on the level of a fairy tale than anything else, actually i would view it again and it definitely will be bought on dvd. . .

  As to some of the comments that i read as far,

  I would have liked to have seen more character development of GiggaloJoe though i understand he was not the focus of the film.

  I have mixed feelings about the ending,
  I feel it would have been much darker had it ended at the bottom of the sea with David wishing to the fairy, much akin to man's prayers to god, and I feel that having him sit at the bottom of the sea for eternity is the build up of the movie, this is where i would have prefered to credits to start rising.

  Patio you made an interesting reference to the bloodthirsty fanaticism of the flesh fair, i felt the same and i saw it as a metaphor for the circus that religion can be

  Now as far as the "aliens", when i sat in the theater i thought that they may be advanced Meccha, as opposed to extra terretrials, here is why. . . they were concerned with keeping David content, so as for them to continue studying him and having a link to their past and origin and further the understanding of why they where created, kind of like man wating to know his own origins and why he was created,
  they told him that he was the only one who had around who had had previous contact with humans. . .
  seems that will always be the question regardless the species, where do we come from?, there are plenty of hints throughout the film in dialogue and such that lead me to stick to this idea rather than believe the other option. . .

  The fish scene reminded me of the whale in pinocchio and having teddy pull out the hair swatch was almost predictable, SK's influence was all over the screen and at times i felt like i could sense where he would have pushed it a little further had he been in charge, a much more bleak version of pinocchio indeed
  obviously SS was in charge and he did what he did to make it family friendly a good film non-the-less but i prefer darker endings. . .

  Maximus
  in answer to your question i believe that the premise was indeed a question concerning our origins, acceptance of our fate and who we are as individuals, it is the unanswered question of ages poked at by man throughout our history. . .
  David was told numerous times throughout the movie that he was one of a kind and unique.
  he was programed to perform a function and he did it a little too well. . . .

  peace
  dc
• 

  teejay

  MORE SPOILERS BELOW..........

  *
  *
  *
  *
  *
  *
  *

  
  D,

  A coupla comments on your comments...

  Young Sir Haley Joel is a very gifted little boy, eh? I remember when he was in Sixth Sense Bruce Willis and others commented on how he could be kidding on the set one minute and within seconds slip into character for his scenes in front of the camera. He astounded many people. I hope Hollywood doesn't use him up like it does so many child actors... he is extra special... very enjoyable to watch.

  I also took note of your comment:

  I feel it would have been much darker had it ended at the bottom of the sea with David wishing to the fairy, much akin to man's prayers to god, and I feel that having him sit at the bottom of the sea for eternity is the build up of the movie...

  I thought the movie might have made a better "statement" ending there, also... the futility of life, unanswered prayers... the coming of inevitable oblivion in the darkness of the sea. Or even earlier when he became so disillusioned that he decided to drop off into the water.

  For me the movie seemed to be trying to say too much, losing its focus, at times. Personally, I think a big part of the problem is that out of respect to Kubrick Spielberg was saddled (or saddled himself) with making someone else's movie instead of filming his own vision like he did with Shindler's List or Saving Private Ryan.

  It's a shame. Like I said, based on things I'd read, including interviews with Spielberg, I expected a more profound message about where human society is headed vs. where it COULD BE headed. Instead, I saw the same ol' "the machines, ie. computers, are taking over" theme that we've seen before as in 2001 and Terminator I and II and others.

  I thought it was interesting that when I first heard "mecha" I thought they were saying "Mecca" (the city), the ultimate goal Hobby's company hoped to reach--the perfect robot.

  Also plays on the symbolism "a bad moon rising" was obvious. <g>

  More later.

  peace,
  todd