This article is about the 2001 film. For the topic of the abbreviation, see artificial intelligence (disambiguation). For the abbreviation, see ai (disambiguation).
A.I. Artificial Intelligence, also known as A.I., is a 2001 American science fictiondrama film directed by Steven Spielberg. The screenplay by Spielberg and screen story by Ian Watson were based on the 1969 short story "Supertoys Last All Summer Long" by Brian Aldiss. The film was produced by Kathleen Kennedy, Spielberg and Bonnie Curtis. It stars Haley Joel Osment, Jude Law, Frances O'Connor, Brendan Gleeson and William Hurt. Set in a futuristic post-climate change society, A.I. tells the story of David (Osment), a childlike android uniquely programmed with the ability to love.
Development of A.I. originally began with producer-director Stanley Kubrick, after he acquired the rights to Aldiss' story in the early 1970s. Kubrick hired a series of writers until the mid-1990s, including Brian Aldiss, Bob Shaw, Ian Watson, and Sara Maitland. The film languished in protracted development for years, partly because Kubrick felt computer-generated imagery was not advanced enough to create the David character, whom he believed no child actor would convincingly portray. In 1995, Kubrick handed A.I. to Spielberg, but the film did not gain momentum until Kubrick's death in 1999. Spielberg remained close to Watson's film treatment for the screenplay.
The film divided critics, with the overall balance being positive, and grossed approximately $235 million. The film was nominated for two Academy Awards at the 74th Academy Awards, for Best Visual Effects and Best Original Score (by John Williams).
In a 2016 BBC poll of 177 critics around the world, Steven Spielberg's A.I. Artificial Intelligence was voted the eighty-third greatest film since 2000.A.I. is dedicated to Stanley Kubrick.
In the late 22nd century, rising sea levels from global warming have wiped out coastal cities such as Amsterdam, Venice, and New York, and drastically reduced the world's population. A new type of robots called Mecha, advanced humanoids capable of thoughts and emotions, have been created.
David, a Mecha that resembles a human child and is programmed to display love for its owners, is sent to Henry Swinton, and his wife, Monica, as a replacement for their son, Martin, who has been placed in suspended animation until he can be cured of a rare disease. Monica warms to David and activates his imprinting protocol, causing him to have an enduring childlike love for her. David is befriended by Teddy, a robotic teddy bear, who cares for David's well-being.
Martin is cured of his disease and brought home; as he recovers, he grows jealous of David. He makes David go to Monica in the night and cut off a lock of her hair. This upsets the parents, particularly Henry, who fears that the scissors are a weapon.
At a pool party, one of Martin's friends pokes David with a knife, activating his self-protection programming. David grabs Martin and they fall into the pool. Martin is saved from drowning, but Henry persuades Monica to return David to his creator for destruction. Instead, Monica abandons both David and Teddy in the forest to hide as an unregistered Mecha.
David is captured for an anti-Mecha "Flesh Fair", where obsolete and unlicensed Mecha are destroyed before cheering crowds. David is nearly killed, but tricks the crowd into thinking that he is human, and escapes with Gigolo Joe, a male prostitute Mecha who is on the run after being framed for murder. The two set out to find the Blue Fairy, whom David remembers from The Adventures of Pinocchio, and believes can turn him into a human, allowing Monica to love him and take him home.
Joe and David make their way to the resort town, Rouge City, where "Dr. Know", a holographic answer engine, leads them to the top of Rockefeller Center in the flooded ruins of Manhattan. There, David meets a copy of himself and destroys it. David then meets his creator, Professor Hobby, who tells David that he was built in the image of the professor's dead son David, and that more copies, including female versions called Darlene, are being manufactured.
Disheartened, David falls from a ledge, but is rescued by Joe using their amphibicopter. David tells Joe he saw the Blue Fairy underwater and wants to go down to meet her. Joe is captured by the authorities using an electromagnet. David and Teddy use the amphibicopter to go to the Fairy, which turns out to be a statue at the now-sunken Coney Island. The two become trapped when the Wonder Wheel falls on their vehicle. David asks repeatedly to be turned into a real boy until the ocean freezes and is deactivated once his power source is drained.
Two thousand years later, humans have become extinct, and Manhattan is buried under glacial ice. The Mecha have evolved into an advanced, intelligent, silicon-based form. They find David and Teddy, and discover they are original Mecha that knew living humans, making them special.
David is revived and walks to the frozen Fairy statue, which collapses when he touches it. The Mecha use David’s memories to reconstruct the Swinton home and explain to him that they cannot make him human. However, David insists that they recreate Monica from DNA in the lock of hair. The Mecha warn David that the clone can only live for a day, and that the process cannot be repeated. David spends the next day with Monica and Teddy. Before she drifts off to sleep, Monica tells David she has always loved him. Teddy climbs onto the bed and watches the two lie peacefully together.
- Haley Joel Osment as David, an innovative Mecha created by Cybertronics and programmed with the ability to love. He is adopted by Henry and Monica Swinton, but a sibling rivalry ensues once their son Martin comes out of suspended animation. Osment was Spielberg's first and only choice for the role. Osment avoided blinking his eyes to perfectly portray the character, and "programmed" himself with good posture for realism.
- Jude Law as Gigolo Joe, a male prostitute Mecha programmed with the ability to mimic love, like David, but in a different sense. To prepare for the role, Law studied the acting of Fred Astaire and Gene Kelly.
- Frances O'Connor as Monica Swinton
- Sam Robards as Henry Swinton
- Jake Thomas as Martin Swinton
- William Hurt as Professor Allen Hobby
- Brendan Gleeson as Lord Johnson-Johnson
- Jack Angel as Teddy (voice)
- Robin Williams as Dr. Know (voice)
- Ben Kingsley as Specialist (voice)
- Meryl Streep as the Blue Fairy (voice)
- Chris Rock as Comedian Robot (voice)
Kubrick began development on an adaptation of "Super-Toys Last All Summer Long" in the late 1970s, hiring the story's author, Brian Aldiss, to write a film treatment. In 1985, Kubrick asked Steven Spielberg to direct the film, with Kubrick producing.Warner Bros. agreed to co-finance A.I. and cover distribution duties. The film labored in development hell, and Aldiss was fired by Kubrick over creative differences in 1989.Bob Shaw served as writer very briefly, leaving after six weeks because of Kubrick's demanding work schedule, and Ian Watson was hired as the new writer in March 1990. Aldiss later remarked, "Not only did the bastard fire me, he hired my enemy [Watson] instead." Kubrick handed Watson The Adventures of Pinocchio for inspiration, calling A.I. "a picaresque robot version of Pinocchio".
Three weeks later Watson gave Kubrick his first story treatment, and concluded his work on A.I. in May 1991 with another treatment, at 90 pages. Gigolo Joe was originally conceived as a GI Mecha, but Watson suggested changing him to a male prostitute. Kubrick joked, "I guess we lost the kiddie market." In the meantime, Kubrick dropped A.I. to work on a film adaptation of Wartime Lies, feeling computer animation was not advanced enough to create the David character. However, after the release of Spielberg's Jurassic Park (with its innovative use of computer-generated imagery), it was announced in November 1993 that production would begin in 1994.Dennis Muren and Ned Gorman, who worked on Jurassic Park, became visual effects supervisors, but Kubrick was displeased with their previsualization, and with the expense of hiring Industrial Light & Magic.
Stanley [Kubrick] showed Steven [Spielberg] 650 drawings which he had, and the script and the story, everything. Stanley said, "Look, why don't you direct it and I'll produce it." Steven was almost in shock.
In early 1994, the film was in pre-production with Christopher "Fangorn" Baker as concept artist, and Sara Maitland assisting on the story, which gave it "a feminist fairy-tale focus". Maitland said that Kubrick never referred to the film as A.I., but as Pinocchio.Chris Cunningham became the new visual effects supervisor. Some of his unproduced work for A.I. can be seen on the DVD, The Work of Director Chris Cunningham. Aside from considering computer animation, Kubrick also had Joseph Mazzello do a screen test for the lead role. Cunningham helped assemble a series of "little robot-type humans" for the David character. "We tried to construct a little boy with a movable rubber face to see whether we could make it look appealing," producer Jan Harlan reflected. "But it was a total failure, it looked awful." Hans Moravec was brought in as a technical consultant. Meanwhile, Kubrick and Harlan thought A.I. would be closer to Steven Spielberg's sensibilities as director. Kubrick handed the position to Spielberg in 1995, but Spielberg chose to direct other projects, and convinced Kubrick to remain as director. The film was put on hold due to Kubrick's commitment to Eyes Wide Shut (1999). After the filmmaker's death in March 1999, Harlan and Christiane Kubrick approached Spielberg to take over the director's position. By November 1999, Spielberg was writing the screenplay based on Watson's 90-page story treatment. It was his first solo screenplay credit since Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977). Spielberg remained close to Watson's treatment, but removed various sex scenes with Gigolo Joe. Pre-production was briefly halted during February 2000, because Spielberg pondered directing other projects, which were Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone, Minority Report and Memoirs of a Geisha. The following month Spielberg announced that A.I. would be his next project, with Minority Report as a follow-up. When he decided to fast track A.I., Spielberg brought Chris Baker back as concept artist.
The original start date was July 10, 2000, but filming was delayed until August. Aside from a couple of weeks shooting on location in Oxbow Regional Park in Oregon, A.I. was shot entirely using sound stages at Warner Bros. Studios and the Spruce Goose Dome in Long Beach, California. The Swinton house was constructed on Stage 16, while Stage 20 was used for Rouge City and other sets. Spielberg copied Kubrick's obsessively secretive approach to filmmaking by refusing to give the complete script to cast and crew, banning press from the set, and making actors sign confidentiality agreements. Social robotics expert Cynthia Breazeal served as technical consultant during production. Haley Joel Osment and Jude Law applied prosthetic makeup daily in an attempt to look shinier and robotic. Costume designer Bob Ringwood (Batman, Troy) studied pedestrians on the Las Vegas Strip for his influence on the Rouge City extras. Spielberg found post-production on A.I. difficult because he was simultaneously preparing to shoot Minority Report.
Main article: A.I. Artificial Intelligence (soundtrack)
The film's soundtrack was released by Warner Sunset Records in 2001. The original score was composed and conducted by John Williams and featured singers Lara Fabian on two songs and Josh Groban on one. The film's score also had a limited release as an official "For your consideration Academy Promo", as well as a complete score issue by La-La Land Records in 2015. The band Ministry appears in the film playing the song "What About Us?" (but the song does not appear on the official soundtrack album).
Warner Bros. used an alternate reality game titled The Beast to promote the film. Over forty websites were created by Atomic Pictures in New York City (kept online at Cloudmakers.org) including the website for Cybertronics Corp. There were to be a series of video games for the Xboxvideo game console that followed the storyline of The Beast, but they went undeveloped. To avoid audiences mistaking A.I. for a family film, no action figures were created, although Hasbro released a talking Teddy following the film's release in June 2001.
A.I. had its premiere at the Venice Film Festival in 2001.
A.I. Artificial Intelligence was released on VHS and DVD by Warner Home Video on March 5, 2002 in both a standard full-screen release which included no bonus features and as a 2-Disc Special Edition featuring the film in its original 1.85:1 anamorphic widescreen format as well as an eight-part documentary detailing the film's development, production, music and visual effects. The bonus features also included interviews with Haley Joel Osment, Jude Law, Frances O'Connor, Steven Spielberg and John Williams, two teaser trailers for the film's original theatrical release and an extensive photo gallery featuring production sills and Stanley Kubrick's original storyboards.
The film was released on Blu-ray Disc on April 5, 2011 by Paramount Home Media Distribution for the U.S. and by Warner Home Video for international markets. This release featured the film a newly restored high-definition print and incorporated all the bonus features previously included on the 2-Disc Special Edition DVD.
The film opened in 3,242 theaters in the United States on June 29, 2001, earning $29,352,630 during its opening weekend. A.I went on to gross $78.62 million in US totals as well as $157.31 million in foreign countries, coming to a worldwide total of $235.93 million.
Based on 190 reviews collected by Rotten Tomatoes, 73% of the critics gave the film positive notices with a score of 6.6 out of 10. The website described the critical consensus perceiving the film as "a curious, not always seamless, amalgamation of Kubrick's chilly bleakness and Spielberg's warm-hearted optimism. [The film] is, in a word, fascinating." By comparison, Metacritic collected an average score of 65, based on 32 reviews, which is considered favorable.
Producer Jan Harlan stated that Kubrick "would have applauded" the final film, while Kubrick's widow Christiane also enjoyed A.I. Brian Aldiss admired the film as well: "I thought what an inventive, intriguing, ingenious, involving film this was. There are flaws in it and I suppose I might have a personal quibble but it's so long since I wrote it." Of the film's ending, he wondered how it might have been had Kubrick directed the film: "That is one of the 'ifs' of film history—at least the ending indicates Spielberg adding some sugar to Kubrick's wine. The actual ending is overly sympathetic and moreover rather overtly engineered by a plot device that does not really bear credence. But it's a brilliant piece of film and of course it's a phenomenon because it contains the energies and talents of two brilliant filmmakers."Richard Corliss heavily praised Spielberg's direction, as well as the cast and visual effects.Roger Ebert gave the film four stars, saying that it was "wonderful and maddening."Leonard Maltin, on the other hand, gives the film two stars out of four in his Movie Guide, writing: "[The] intriguing story draws us in, thanks in part to Osment's exceptional performance, but takes several wrong turns; ultimately, it just doesn't work. Spielberg rewrote the adaptation Stanley Kubrick commissioned of the Brian Aldiss short story 'Super Toys Last All Summer Long'; [the] result is a curious and uncomfortable hybrid of Kubrick and Spielberg sensibilities." However, he calls John Williams' music score "striking". Jonathan Rosenbaum compared A.I. to Solaris (1972), and praised both "Kubrick for proposing that Spielberg direct the project and Spielberg for doing his utmost to respect Kubrick's intentions while making it a profoundly personal work." Film critic Armond White, of the New York Press, praised the film noting that "each part of David’s journey through carnal and sexual universes into the final eschatological devastation becomes as profoundly philosophical and contemplative as anything by cinema’s most thoughtful, speculative artists – Borzage, Ozu, Demy, Tarkovsky." Filmmaker Billy Wilder hailed A.I. as "the most underrated film of the past few years." When British filmmaker Ken Russell saw the film, he wept during the ending.
Mick LaSalle gave a largely negative review. "A.I. exhibits all its creators' bad traits and none of the good. So we end up with the structureless, meandering, slow-motion endlessness of Kubrick combined with the fuzzy, cuddly mindlessness of Spielberg." Dubbing it Spielberg's "first boring movie", LaSalle also believed the robots at the end of the film were aliens, and compared Gigolo Joe to the "useless" Jar Jar Binks, yet praised Robin Williams for his portrayal of a futuristic Albert Einstein.[not in citation given]Peter Travers gave a mixed review, concluding "Spielberg cannot live up to Kubrick's darker side of the future." But he still put the film on his top ten list that year for best movies. David Denby in The New Yorker criticized A.I. for not adhering closely to his concept of the Pinocchio character. Spielberg responded to some of the criticisms of the film, stating that many of the "so called sentimental" elements of A.I., including the ending, were in fact Kubrick's and the darker elements were his own. However, Sara Maitland, who worked on the project with Kubrick in the 1990s, claimed that one of the reasons Kubrick never started production on A.I. was because he had a hard time making the ending work.James Berardinelli found the film "consistently involving, with moments of near-brilliance, but far from a masterpiece. In fact, as the long-awaited 'collaboration' of Kubrick and Spielberg, it ranks as something of a disappointment." Of the film's highly debated finale, he claimed, "There is no doubt that the concluding 30 minutes are all Spielberg; the outstanding question is where Kubrick's vision left off and Spielberg's began."
Screenwriter Ian Watson has speculated, "Worldwide, A.I. was very successful (and the 4th highest earner of the year) but it didn't do quite so well in America, because the film, so I'm told, was too poetical and intellectual in general for American tastes. Plus, quite a few critics in America misunderstood the film, thinking for instance that the Giacometti-style beings in the final 20 minutes were aliens (whereas they were robots of the future who had evolved themselves from the robots in the earlier part of the film) and also thinking that the final 20 minutes were a sentimental addition by Spielberg, whereas those scenes were exactly what I wrote for Stanley and exactly what he wanted, filmed faithfully by Spielberg."
In 2002, Spielberg told film critic Joe Leydon that "People pretend to think they know Stanley Kubrick, and think they know me, when most of them don't know either of us". "And what's really funny about that is, all the parts of A.I. that people assume were Stanley's were mine. And all the parts of A.I. that people accuse me of sweetening and softening and sentimentalizing were all Stanley's. The teddy bear was Stanley's. The whole last 20 minutes of the movie was completely Stanley's. The whole first 35, 40 minutes of the film – all the stuff in the house – was word for word, from Stanley's screenplay. This was Stanley's vision." "Eighty percent of the critics got it all mixed up. But I could see why. Because, obviously, I've done a lot of movies where people have cried and have been sentimental. And I've been accused of sentimentalizing hard-core material. But in fact it was Stanley who did the sweetest parts of A.I., not me. I'm the guy who did the dark center of the movie, with the Flesh Fair and everything else. That's why he wanted me to make the movie in the first place. He said, 'This is much closer to your sensibilities than my own.'"
Upon rewatching the film many years after its release, BBC film critic Mark Kermode apologized to Spielberg in an interview in January 2013 for "getting it wrong" on the film when he first viewed it in 2001. He now believes the film to be Spielberg's "enduring masterpiece".
Visual effects supervisorsDennis Muren, Stan Winston, Michael Lantieri and Scott Farrar were nominated for the Academy Award for Best Visual Effects, while John Williams was nominated for Best Original Music Score. Steven Spielberg, Jude Law and Williams received nominations at the 59th Golden Globe Awards.A.I. was successful at the Saturn Awards, winning five awards, including Best Science Fiction Film along with Best Writing for Spielberg and Best Performance by a Younger Actor for Osment.
|Award||Date of ceremony||Category||Recipient(s)||Result||Ref(s)|
|Academy Awards||March 24, 2002||Best Original Music Score||John Williams||Nominated|||
|Best Visual Effects||Dennis Muren, Stan Winston, Michael Lantieri, Scott Farrar||Nominated|
|British Academy Film Awards||February 24, 2002||Best Visual Effects||Dennis Muren, Scott Farrar, Michael Lantieri||Nominated|||
|Chicago Film Critics Association||February 25, 2002||Best Supporting Actor||Jude Law||Nominated|||
|Best Original Music Score||John Williams||Nominated|
|Best Cinematography||Janusz Kaminski||Nominated|
|Empire Awards||February 5, 2002||Best Film||A.I. Artificial Intelligence||Nominated|||
|Best Director||Steven Spielberg||Nominated|
|Best Actor||Haley Joel Osment||Nominated|
|Best Actress||Frances O'Connor||Nominated|
|Golden Globes||January 20, 2002||Best Director||Steven Spielberg||Nominated|||
|Best Supporting Actor||Jude Law||Nominated|
|Best Original Score||John Williams||Nominated|
|Saturn Awards||June 10, 2002||Best Science Fiction Film||A.I. Artificial Intelligence||Won|||
|Best Director||Steven Spielberg||Nominated|
|Best Actress||Frances O'Connor||Nominated|
|Best Performance by a Younger Actor||Haley Joel Osment||Won|
|Best Special Effects||Dennis Muren, Scott Farrar, Michael Lantieri, Stan Winston||Won|
|Best Music||John Williams||Won|
|Young Artist Awards||April 7, 2002||Best Leading Young Actor||Haley Joel Osment||Nominated|||
|Best Supporting Young Actor||Jake Thomas||Won|
- ^"A.I. (12)". British Board of Film Classification. Retrieved April 7, 2014.
- ^ ab"A.I. Artificial Intelligence (2001)". Box Office Mojo. Internet Movie Database. Retrieved April 7, 2014.
- ^"The 21st Century's 100 greatest films". BBC. August 23, 2016. Retrieved 31 July 2017.
- ^ abHaley Joel Osment, A Portrait of David, 2001, Warner Home Video; DreamWorks
- ^Jude Law, A Portrait of Gigolo Joe, 2001, Warner Home Video; DreamWorks
- ^Scott Brake (May 10, 2001). "Spielberg Talks About the Genesis of A.I.". IGN. Retrieved August 4, 2008.
- ^ abcd"Plumbing Stanley Kubrick". Archived from the original on 2008-07-03. Retrieved 2017-04-01.
- ^ abSteven Gaydos (March 15, 2000). "The Kubrick Connection". Variety. Retrieved July 19, 2008.
- ^Dana Haris (March 15, 2000). "Spielberg lines up A.I., Report". Variety. Retrieved July 16, 2008.
- ^Christian Moerk (November 2, 1993). "A.I. next for Kubrick at Warners". Variety. Retrieved July 7, 2008.
- ^ abcd"The Kubrick FAQ Part 2". 2008-08-18. Archived from the original on 2008-08-18. Retrieved 2017-04-01.
- ^ abKenneth Plume (June 28, 2001). "Interview with Producer Jan Harlan". IGN. Retrieved August 5, 2008.
- ^Feature by Matt Bailey. "notcoming.com | The Work of Director Chris Cunningham". Archived from the original on 2008-07-19. Retrieved 2017-04-01.
- ^"A.I. Artificial Intelligence". Variety. Variety.com. May 15, 2001. Retrieved July 19, 2008.
- ^ abcdLiane Bonin (June 28, 2001). "Boy Wonder". Entertainment Weekly. Retrieved July 15, 2008.
- ^ abSteven Spielberg, Jan Harlan, Kathleen Kennedy, Bonnie Curtis, Creating A.I., 2001, Warner Home Video; DreamWorks
- ^ abChristian Moerk (December 23, 1999). "Spielberg encounters close choices to direct". Variety. Retrieved July 15, 2008.
- ^Scott Brake (June 29, 2001). "Producing A.I.". IGN. Retrieved August 4, 2008.
- ^Army Archerd (July 15, 1999). "Annie Tv'er nab tops talent". Variety. Retrieved July 14, 2008.
- ^Michael Fleming (November 16, 1999). "West pursues Prisoner; Spielberg scribbles". Variety. Retrieved July 16, 2008.
- ^Peter Bart (January 24, 2000). "It's scary up there". Variety. Retrieved July 15, 2008.
- ^"Spielberg to wrap Kubrick project". BBC. March 15, 2000. Retrieved March 24, 2007.
- ^Brian Zoromski (June 30, 2000). "A.I. Moves Full Speed Ahead". IGN. Retrieved August 4, 2008.
- ^"Film location titles". Movie-locations.com. Retrieved 2017-04-01.
- ^Scott Brake (August 3, 2000). "A.I. Set Reports!". IGN. Retrieved August 4, 2008.
- ^Christopher "Fangorn" Baker, Rick Carter, A.I. From Drawings to Sets, 2001, Warner Home Video; DreamWorks
- ^Bill Higgins (November 6, 2000). "BAFTA hails Spielberg". Variety. Retrieved August 6, 2008.
- ^Bob Ringwood, Dressing A.I., 2001, Warner Home Video; DreamWorks
- ^Charles Lyons (January 18, 2001). "Inside Move: Cruise staying busy". Variety. Retrieved July 18, 2008.
- ^Rooney, David (April 16, 2001). "'Dust' in the wind for Venice fest". Variety. Wayback Machine. Archived from the original on October 30, 2008. Retrieved 2017-04-01.
- ^"A.I. Artificial Intelligence". Box Office Mojo. Retrieved July 8, 2008.
- ^"A.I. Artificial Intelligence Movie Reviews, Pictures – Rotten Tomatoes". 2008-07-08. Archived from the original on 2008-07-08. Retrieved 2017-04-01.
- ^"A.I. Artificial Intelligence (2001): Reviews". Metacritic. Retrieved July 8, 2008.
- ^Army Archerd (June 20, 2000). "A.I. A Spielberg/Kubrick prod'n". Variety. Retrieved August 6, 2008.
- ^"ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE | The mind behind AI". BBC News. September 20, 2001. Retrieved November 2, 2013.
- ^"A.I. – Spielberg's Strange Love – TIME". 2001-06-17. Archived from the original on June 26, 2008. Retrieved 2017-04-01.
- ^Ebert, Roger (2011-07-07). "A.I. Artificial Intelligence Movie Review (2001)". Roger Ebert. Retrieved 2017-04-01.
- ^Jonathan Rosenbaum (June 29, 2001). "The Best of Both Worlds". Chicago Reader. Retrieved August 6, 2008.
- ^Armond White (July 4, 2001). "Spielberg's A.I. Dares Viewers to Remember and Accept the Part of Themselves that Is Capable of Feeling". The New York Press. Retrieved April 26, 2010.
- ^Paul Sussman (November 17, 2006). "Close encounters of the hugely profitable kind". CNN. Retrieved October 2, 2015.
- ^Slippedisc (2011-12-07). "Eyewitness: Ken Russell, by his son – Slipped Disc". Web.archive.org. Archived from the original on April 5, 2016. Retrieved 2017-04-13.
- ^Mick LaSalle (June 29, 2001). "Artificial foolishness". San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved August 6, 2008.
Stanley Kubrick always referred to the story as "Pinocchio." It mirrored the tale of a puppet who dreams of becoming a real boy. And what, after all, is an android but a puppet with a computer program pulling its strings? The project that eventually became Steven Spielberg's "A. I. Artificial Intelligence" (2001) was abandoned by Kubrick because he wasn't satisfied with his approaches to its central character, David, an android who appears to be a real little boy. Believing special effects wouldn't be adequate and a human actor would seem too human, he turned the project over to his friend Spielberg. Legend has it he made that decision after being impressed by Spielberg's special effects in "Jurassic Park," but perhaps "E. T." was also an influence: If Spielberg could create an alien who evoked human emotions, could he do the same with an android?
He could. As David, he cast Haley Joel Osment, who had scored a great success in "The Sixth Sense" (1999). Osment's presence is a crucial element in the film; other androids, including Gigolo Joe (Jude Law) are made to look artificial with makeup and unmoving hair, but not David. He is the most advanced "mecha" of the Cybertronics Corporation -- so human that he can perhaps take the place of a couple's sick child. Spielberg and Osment work together to create David with unblinking eyes and deep naïveté; he seems a real little boy but lacking a certain je ne sais quoi. This reality works both for and against the film, at first by making David seem human and later by making him seem a very slow study.
David has been programmed to love. Once he is activated with a code, he fixes on the activator, in this case his Mommy (Frances O'Connor). He exists to love her and be loved by her. Because he is a very sophisticated android indeed, there's a natural tendency for us to believe him on that level. In fact he does not love and does not feel love; he simply reflects his coding. All of the love contained in the film is possessed by humans, and I didn't properly reflected this in my original review of the film.
"We are expert at projecting human emotions into non-human subjects, from animals to clouds to computer games," I wrote in 1991, "but the emotions reside only in our minds. 'A. I.' evades its responsibility to deal rigorously with this trait and goes for an ending that wants us to cry, but had me asking questions just when I should have been finding answers."
That is true enough on the principal level of the film, which tells David's story. Watching it again recently, I became aware of something more: "A. I." is not about humans at all. It is about the dilemma of artificial intelligence. A thinking machine cannot think. All it can do is run programs that may be sophisticated enough for it to fool us by seeming to think. A computer that passes the Turing Test is not thinking. All it is doing is passing the Turing Test.
The first act of the film involves Henry and Monica Swinton (Sam Robards and Frances O'Connor). Henry brings David home to fill the gap left by their own sick little boy, Martin (Jake Thomas). Monica resists him, and then accepts him. But after Jake is awakened from suspended animation and cured, there is a family of four; Jake is fully aware that David is a product, but David doesn't understand everything that implies. Possibly his programming didn't prepare him to deal one-on-one in real time with real boys. He can't spend all of his time loving Mommy and being loved by her.
He imitates life. He doesn't sleep, but he observes bedtime. He doesn't eat, but so strong is his desire to be like Martin that he damages his wiring by shoving spinach into his mouth. He's treated with cruelty by other kids; when he reveals he doesn't pee, a kid grabs his pants and says, "Let's see what you don't pee with." After faithfully following his instructions in such a way that he nearly drowns Martin, he loses the trust of the Swintons and they decide to get rid of him, just as parents might get rid of a dangerous dog.
Monica cannot bring herself to return David to Cybertronics. She pauses on the way and releases him into a forest, where he can join other free-range mechas. He will not die. He doesn't get cold, he doesn't get hungry, and apparently he has an indefinite supply of fuel. Monica's decision to release him instead of turning him in is based on her lingering identification with David; in activating him to love her, she activated herself to love him. His unconditional love must have been deeply appealing. We relate to pets in a similar way, especially to dogs, who seem to have been activated by evolution to love us.
The center act of the movie shows David wandering a world where mechas have no rights. He is accompanied by his mecha bear, Teddy, who is programmed to be a wise companion, and they are discovered by Gigolo Joe, a mecha programmed to be an expert lover. They visit two hallucinatory places designed by Spielberg on huge sound stages. One is a Flesh Fair, not unlike a WWF event, at which humans cheer as mechas are grotesquely destroyed. David, Joe and Teddy escape, probably because of their survival programming, but is David is dismayed by what he sees? How does he relate to the destruction of his kind?
Then there is Rouge City, sort of a psychedelic Universal City, where Joe takes him to consult a Wizard. Having been fascinated by the story of Pinocchio, who wanted to be a real boy, David has reasoned that a Blue Fairy might be able to transform him into a human and allow Monica to love him and be loved. The Wizard gives him a clue. After Joe and David capture a flying machine, they visit New York, which like many coastal cities has been drowned by global warming. But on an upper floor of Rockefeller Center, he finds that Cybertronics still operates, and he meets the scientist who created him, Dr. Hobby (William Hurt). Hobby is Geppetto to David's Pinocchio.
Now again there are events which contradict David's conception of himself. In an eerie scene, he comes across a storeroom containing dozens of Davids who look just like him. Is he devastated? Does he thrash out at them? No, he remains possessed. He is still focused on his quest for the Blue Fairy, who can make him a real little boy. But why, we may ask, does he want to be real so very much? Is it because of envy, hurt or jealousy? No, he doesn't seem to possess such emotions--or any emotions, save those he is programmed to counterfeit. I assume he wants to be a real boy for abstract reasons of computer logic. To fulfill his mission to love and be loved by Mommy, he concludes he should be like Martin, who Mommy prefers. This involves no more emotion than Big Blue determining its next move in chess.
In the final act, events take David and Teddy in a submersible to the drowned Coney Island, where they find not only Geppetto's workshop but a Blue Fairy. A collapsing Ferris wheel pins the submarine, and there they remain, trapped and immobile, for 2,000 years, as above them an ice age descends and humans become extinct. David is finally rescued by a group of impossibly slender beings that might be aliens, but are apparently very advanced androids. For them, David is an incalculable treasure: "He is the last who knew humans." From his mind they download all of his memories, and they move him into an exact replica of his childhood home. This reminded me of the bedroom beyond Jupiter constructed for Dave by aliens in Kubrick's "2001." It has the same purpose, to provide a familiar environment in an incomprehensible world. It allows these beings, like the unseen beings in "2001," to observe and learn from behavior.
Watching the film again, I asked myself why I wrote that the final scenes are "problematical," go over the top, and raise questions they aren't prepared to answer. This time they worked for me, and had a greater impact. I began with the assumption that the skeletal silver figures are indeed androids, of a much advanced generation from David's. They too must be programmed to know, love, and serve Man. Let's assume such instructions would be embedded in their programming DNA. They now find themselves in a position analogous to David in his search for his Mommy. They are missing an element crucial to their function.
After some pseudoscientific legerdemain involving a lock of Monica's hair, they are able to bring her back after 2,000 years of death--but only for 24 hours, which is all the space-time continuum permits. Do they do this to make David happy? No, because would they care? And is a computer happier when it performs its program than when it does not? No. It is either functioning or not functioning. It doesn't know how it feels.
Here is how I now read the film: These new generation mechas are advanced enough to perceive that they cannot function with humans in the absence of humans, and I didn't properly reflect this in my original review of the film. David is their only link to the human past. Whatever can be known about them, he is an invaluable source. In watching his 24 hours with Mommy, they observe him functioning at the top of his ability.
Of course we must ask in what sense Monica is really there. The filmmaker Jamie Stuart informs me she is not there at all; that an illusion has merely been implanted in David's mind, and that the concluding scenes take place entirely within David's point of view. Having downloaded all of David's memories and knowledge, the new mechas have no further use for him, but provide him a final day of satisfaction before terminating him. At the end, when we are told he is dreaming, that is only David's impression. Earlier in the film, it was established that he could not sleep or therefore dream.
Why would one mecha care if another obtained satisfaction? What meaning is there in giving David 24 hours of bliss? If machines cannot feel, what does the closing sequence really mean? I believe it suggests the new mechas are trying to construct a mecha that they can love. They would play Mommy to their own Davids. And that mecha will love them. What does love mean in this context? No more, no less, than check, or mate, or π. That is the fate of Artificial Intelligence. No Mommy will ever, ever love them.