*******WARNING SOME SPOILERS**********
By the first 20 minutes, I was mesmerized and enthralled by A.I. or "Artificial Intelligence". And my interests continued all the way through despite the Spielbergian sentimentalism and heavy-handedness.
While no one can deny that both Kubrick and Spielberg are supreme masters at their craft, the two are inherently at opposite ends of the artistic spectrum; thus the overall consistency of purpose and vision of A.I. is somewhat mixed. Nevertheless, the end result is still one of the most spellbinding and innovative movies of the summer.
The main problem: Spielberg's undying need to inject emotionalism and optimism at the end, killed the relentless, cold logic of a distinctly Kubrickian first act. (Hey, "2001: A Space Odyssey" is one of the greatest films of all time in my mind.) A similar problem is that A.I. isn't one film, but a gigantic sprawling film of at least three to four highly charged issues that were only superficially explored by the film. There were also a few technical and scientific fluffs (Physics 101 mistakes), but I won't get into that here.
The Ben Kingsley narration, the roaring dog-like motorcycles, the blue fairy stuff, shafts of light, menacing men of authority in silhouette, and other small things are clearly Spielberg. It seemed as though, Spielberg reached into the vault of the past and tried to combine elements of E.T., Close Encounters (third act), and the fairy tale quotient of Hook with some clearly Blade Runner-ish stuff by Kubrick all in an effort to call off questions about A.I. being his film in the final analysis. Still, the film has a lot going for it. The haunting modern score of Williams is on target; the casting of Frances O'Connor as the mother, Osment as the "boy" (Osment was so good that it was scary), Jude Law as the giggolo mecha, and Hurt as the paternal god-complexed scientist was without question flawless; and the production values were top-notch as well as the special effects, of course (this being a Spielberg film).
Clearly, A.I. was a labor of love for both directors. Stanley Kubrick is many a director's director and it is well known that Kubrick is one of Spielberg's favorites, yet Spielberg couldn't help but be Spielberg and completely take A.I. in a zany direction that Kubrick most certainly would not have. For example, David could have somehow self-destructed or de-activated, once he painfully realized that he was not unique, but a mere commodity, an automaton that would never have been accepted by Monica, or most humans for that matter. The point at which he falls off the building would have been perfect for wrapping up the story. Instead, the film CONTINUED with more blue fairy stuff, which wasn't all that bad in of itself, just totally incongruous with the preceding story.
Even so, A.I. is still a wonderful serio-fantasy. I highly recommend it to any Kubrick, Blade Runner, or hard-core sci-fi/fantasy fan. I promise that you will not be disappointed with A.I.'s parts and that you will certainly have a lot to discuss.
And if you don't mind me, I think that I'll go see it again next week.
Ken-202
Rating: 93/100
3.25 stars out of four
By the first 20 minutes, I was mesmerized and enthralled by A.I. or "Artificial Intelligence". And my interests continued all the way through despite the Spielbergian sentimentalism and heavy-handedness.
While no one can deny that both Kubrick and Spielberg are supreme masters at their craft, the two are inherently at opposite ends of the artistic spectrum; thus the overall consistency of purpose and vision of A.I. is somewhat mixed. Nevertheless, the end result is still one of the most spellbinding and innovative movies of the summer.
The main problem: Spielberg's undying need to inject emotionalism and optimism at the end, killed the relentless, cold logic of a distinctly Kubrickian first act. (Hey, "2001: A Space Odyssey" is one of the greatest films of all time in my mind.) A similar problem is that A.I. isn't one film, but a gigantic sprawling film of at least three to four highly charged issues that were only superficially explored by the film. There were also a few technical and scientific fluffs (Physics 101 mistakes), but I won't get into that here.
The Ben Kingsley narration, the roaring dog-like motorcycles, the blue fairy stuff, shafts of light, menacing men of authority in silhouette, and other small things are clearly Spielberg. It seemed as though, Spielberg reached into the vault of the past and tried to combine elements of E.T., Close Encounters (third act), and the fairy tale quotient of Hook with some clearly Blade Runner-ish stuff by Kubrick all in an effort to call off questions about A.I. being his film in the final analysis. Still, the film has a lot going for it. The haunting modern score of Williams is on target; the casting of Frances O'Connor as the mother, Osment as the "boy" (Osment was so good that it was scary), Jude Law as the giggolo mecha, and Hurt as the paternal god-complexed scientist was without question flawless; and the production values were top-notch as well as the special effects, of course (this being a Spielberg film).
Clearly, A.I. was a labor of love for both directors. Stanley Kubrick is many a director's director and it is well known that Kubrick is one of Spielberg's favorites, yet Spielberg couldn't help but be Spielberg and completely take A.I. in a zany direction that Kubrick most certainly would not have. For example, David could have somehow self-destructed or de-activated, once he painfully realized that he was not unique, but a mere commodity, an automaton that would never have been accepted by Monica, or most humans for that matter. The point at which he falls off the building would have been perfect for wrapping up the story. Instead, the film CONTINUED with more blue fairy stuff, which wasn't all that bad in of itself, just totally incongruous with the preceding story.
Even so, A.I. is still a wonderful serio-fantasy. I highly recommend it to any Kubrick, Blade Runner, or hard-core sci-fi/fantasy fan. I promise that you will not be disappointed with A.I.'s parts and that you will certainly have a lot to discuss.
And if you don't mind me, I think that I'll go see it again next week.
Ken-202
Rating: 93/100
3.25 stars out of four