A.I. ranks as one of the most infuriating films ever made. On the one hand, the first half of the film is stylish, sinister, thought-provoking - Kubrickian cinema at its awe-inspiring best. Spielberg managed to avoid his usual trick of laying sentimentality on with a trowel, and I was genuinely believing I was witnessing a masterpiece. However, when the motorbikes and taccy Running Man-esque lights appeared, it became apparent that this was not going to be the case. And then it just got worse, and worse, and worse. What on earth possessed the man to morph an eerie psychological drama into an ultimately boring and far-fetched yarn? The film is painfully long. The storyline meanders from mildly unbelievable to utterly incoherent. In the main, the acting was not as convincing as expected, Jude Law began to grate me, and also David's 'father', Sam Robards, flattered to deceive. I began to question my sanity when the film moved into a post-apocalyptic New York. How I wish Spielberg had questioned his.
There are a few positives to be taken from A.I. Haley John Osment's performance brings guile, empathy and intelligence beyond his thirteen years, to a film which (apart from Teddy) is devoid of characters with any depth. His portrayal his character, David, ranks as one of the finest and most haunting performances I have seen. It is such a shame that the ridiculous storyline had me rooting for the conclusion of the film, not for the main character. Aesthetically, A.I is impressive, but with such a large budget, that is only to be expected. David's companion on his ludicrous quest, Teddy, also brought out the child in me and I found myself genuinely concerned for his wellbeing. As unbelievable as his recovery was, the introduction of David's 'brother' was a welcome addition to the film. The relationship between the two is something that was not handled badly, but could have definitely been handled better.
Thus, A.I. left me wanting more. Why couldn't the film have reached a logical conclusion? Why was such a nonsensical and bastardised version of such a stimulating subject matter allowed to have been made? Has Spielberg finally lost the plot? If I were Kubrick, I would be turning in my grave, cursing the time I ever told my 'chum' Steve about a continuation of the HAL concept. I resent the fact that A.I. was made, as this is surely not the conclusion that Kubrick would have reached. If you have not seen A.I., then please go and see it, just to see how good it could have been. But brace yourself for an overtly long, frustrating film of epic proportions that tries to say too much, but ends saying little.
There are a few positives to be taken from A.I. Haley John Osment's performance brings guile, empathy and intelligence beyond his thirteen years, to a film which (apart from Teddy) is devoid of characters with any depth. His portrayal his character, David, ranks as one of the finest and most haunting performances I have seen. It is such a shame that the ridiculous storyline had me rooting for the conclusion of the film, not for the main character. Aesthetically, A.I is impressive, but with such a large budget, that is only to be expected. David's companion on his ludicrous quest, Teddy, also brought out the child in me and I found myself genuinely concerned for his wellbeing. As unbelievable as his recovery was, the introduction of David's 'brother' was a welcome addition to the film. The relationship between the two is something that was not handled badly, but could have definitely been handled better.
Thus, A.I. left me wanting more. Why couldn't the film have reached a logical conclusion? Why was such a nonsensical and bastardised version of such a stimulating subject matter allowed to have been made? Has Spielberg finally lost the plot? If I were Kubrick, I would be turning in my grave, cursing the time I ever told my 'chum' Steve about a continuation of the HAL concept. I resent the fact that A.I. was made, as this is surely not the conclusion that Kubrick would have reached. If you have not seen A.I., then please go and see it, just to see how good it could have been. But brace yourself for an overtly long, frustrating film of epic proportions that tries to say too much, but ends saying little.