What's new

No A.I. Artificial Intelligence DVD Release In 2001? (1 Viewer)

Dan Brecher

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jan 8, 1999
Messages
3,450
Real Name
Daniel
Argh, all this praise for a movie that doesn;t hit the UK until Sept 21st! That's the day before I go to LA for the HTF meet, so I may not even be able to see it until I come back in October!
And, congrats to Dan for having been named an Administrator--this is the first I have noticed. May thou hast no reason to locketh one of my posts!
Pfff, the upgrade happened nearly a month back now, I am going to close one of your threads just for not noticing. :)
Dan (UK)
 

Tom Ryan

Screenwriter
Joined
Apr 1, 2001
Messages
1,044
I liked A.I., but not as much as you guys. It didn't quite compel me to thought.....anyways, Spielberg is my favorite director but Memento blows this one out of the water. Either way, hopefully the DVD will get released this year :).
-Tom
 

wally

Second Unit
Joined
Feb 12, 2001
Messages
473
Gosh folks, I hope I'm not too far down the thread for help, but I think AI was the most disappointing and worst film that I have seen this year.
Carl, you mention that it was "misunderstood". Would you take a few minutes and explain it too me?
I guess the first 20-30 minutes were ok, but after that, nosedive. It made "Bicentennial Man" easy to watch.
The cyberKid can love, but he can't eat or blink? My sister had a doll that could drink and urinate 25 years ago.
I think the Spielberg part of this film ruined it.
Sorry, MHO.
wally
 

Carl C

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Oct 6, 1999
Messages
134
I'll certainly try
wink.gif

First off, "A.I." is entirely a theme-driven film. By that, I mean that almost every aesthetic and technical element of the film serves the THEME, not the plot. It's not meant or designed to entertain... it's trying to TELL you something. That's what theme is all about. This film has it in spades. In fact, if anything it may suffer from too much theme.
wink.gif

What is "A.I." about? Well, a lot of it left purposely ambiguous. It's up to each person to peel away the many layers and examine what's inside.
There is A LOT there.
To me, the film has several themes, but the underlying one is "Man's relationship with God". Several times in the film the moral questions are raised. If man can create a machine with a "soul" that can truly love unconditionally, and a machine that is made in our own image to love us... how is that different than God creating man? And what constitutes a "soul"... organic material? If so, why? Like I said, there is a LOT there.
Many people assume the first 20-30 minutes came from Kubrick and the rest from Spielberg. This is actually not true. Yes, the two of them collaborated on the film for MANY years. But the first 20-30 minutes is really an extrapolated adaptation of the original Brian Aldiss short-story ("Super Toys Last All Summer Long"). The 3rd act (the last 20-30 minutes which seems to confuse MANY people) was actually an idea from Kubrick, not Spielberg. The rest was patched together from the minds of both of them and what is left is what I believe is a perfect amalgam of visions from two of the most important and talented filmmakers of our time.
Technically, "A.I." is a sci-fi film, but it's really MUCH more than that underneath. It's "2001" in reverse... Like that Kubrick classic, this is a film that makes you THINK... a film that is haunting and actually gets better and more profound on repeated viewings... a film that is all about THEME and makes no apologies for it.
If you would like to discuss it in more detail, I'm game.
wink.gif

`Carl
 

Mitty

Supporting Actor
Joined
Jan 13, 1999
Messages
886
I find it interesting that if Spielberg makes a smash success of a movie, he takes forever to release it on video, and if he makes a movie that turns out to be a box office disappointment, he puts off the video release, because, um, well...
 

KDHM

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
May 9, 2001
Messages
185
Location
BERLIN
Real Name
Kim Donald Houde-Martens
The film does not even open in Europe until Sept.-Oct. it opens here in Berlin 13 Sept. (Dan, England's opening is 21 Sept.) and with multi region players, a 2002 release date does not surprise me. The English Language Video store where I rent films in Berlin has a whole section of films released in England on DVD and Tape that have not even come to Germany yet or are still playing in the theaters. I think a lot of films in the future will wait until after most major markets have had an theatrical run before releasing on video, its just too easy on the internet to order a film once it come out on video.
kd
 

wally

Second Unit
Joined
Feb 12, 2001
Messages
473
I would share Tom Ryan's thoughts, "It didn't quite compel me to thought" I couldn't wait to get out of the theater (had to wait for Mrs. Wally), much less consider "Man's relationship with God".
All I kept thinking (between peaks at my watch) was, "Why can't David blink? Why can't David eat?" The Gigolo Joe thing banging his head. The Robin Williams and Chris Rock cameos. It was all very distracting. I don't think they knew what kind of movie they were making. Might explain the poor marketing, they didn't know what kind of film they were marketing.
The end of the movie was a disaster, 20 minutes too long.
Oh well, different strokes. I am glad the rest of you enjoyed the film :)
wally
 

Rich Malloy

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2000
Messages
3,998
I thought the marketing was on-the-nose.
But I think some people were put off by the rather odd tone of the ending - the sentimentality undercut with dark portents of death; the obsessive love of child to mother made explicitly erotic; the soothing narrative tones, like a father telling a bedtime story, but a bedtime story of extinction, death, and desires unfulfilled (or, rather, fulfilled in a manner which disturbs us by its artificiality and pseudo-humaness, made all the more desparate by the fact of the human race's extinction).
It's a puzzling and unnerving ending, and the most brilliant fusion of disparate tones and emotions I've seen all year. It hits me like the final scene in SOLARIS when... Spoiler:Kelvin sees his father through the window of the old dachau - but it's a memory that's been created and distorted by the Ocean's consciousness. It begins to rain, just as it rained that last day back on earth. But now it rains inside the dachau. His father comes to the door, soaked by rain, and Kelvin falls to his knees grasping him around the legs, his carefully-guarded emotions finally spilling out as he sobs, the prodigal son returned... but it's not his father, it's not his dachau, and it doesn't rain inside.
Edited to add spoiler-cloak - sorry, guys! :)
[Edited last by Al Brown on August 16, 2001 at 11:27 AM]
 

Holadem

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Nov 4, 2000
Messages
8,967
Er... Al... while I am not familiar with what you are refering to in your last paragraph, isn't that a spoiler?
--
Holadem - I hope not
 

Patrick Larkin

Screenwriter
Joined
May 8, 2001
Messages
1,759
AI: I loved it and hated it at the same time.
I love the powerful themes that Kubrick created from a very short story. There was many many things which invoked deep consideration. I enjoyed the purely Kubrick scenes - especially Monica leaving David in the woods like a stray cat to fend for himself. Deeply disturbing - totally Kubrick.
I hated what Spielberg did to Kubrick's vision in parts. I'm sure Mr. Kubrick would NEVER have included such a ridiculous Dr. Know or Lollapalooza-like Flesh Fair. Also, its been noted that Kubrick's version of Gigolo Joe was a much darker sinister character. In Spielberg's version, Joe is the lovable wacky sidekick.
SS seemed to try and lighten the movie up. But the film still came from the mind of Kubrick - thematically - and is definitely worth the time to see it.
I would also have to say its the best film of the year. Its rare to find many films released which require a bit of intelligence to view. :)
------------------
Patrick Larkin
Kubrick Multimedia Film Guide
"Something About the Duality of Man"
 

Richard Kim

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2001
Messages
4,385
quote: I hated what Spielberg did to Kubrick's vision in parts. I'm sure Mr. Kubrick would NEVER have included such a ridiculous Dr. Know or Lollapalooza-like Flesh Fair. Also, its been noted that Kubrick's version of Gigolo Joe was a much darker sinister character. In Spielberg's version, Joe is the lovable wacky sidekick.[/quote]
Also, the imagry of the buildings for Rouge City was alot more overtly sexual than what in the film. Funny how Speilberg won't shy away from showing the most brutal, graphic war violence in Saving Private Ryan, but becomes squemish when it comes to depicting sexuality.
That aside, I must agree with the others that in a year dominated by horrible, crappy movies, A.I. is the best film of the year.
[Edited last by Richard Kim on August 16, 2001 at 10:44 AM]
 

Tino

Taken As Ballast
Premium
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 19, 1999
Messages
23,572
Location
Metro NYC
Real Name
Valentino
Jak
I hope by now, the preceding comments praising the film have convinced you to seek it out.Let us know what you think after you have seen it.
BTW, Hoaldem, Although I have not yet seen Solaris, I don't believe Al's comments are spoilers. :)
------------------
Draco Dormiens Nunquam Titillandus.
 

Carl C

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Oct 6, 1999
Messages
134
:sigh:
It's amusing how some folks attribute the "good" stuff to Kubrick and any "faults" of the film to Spielberg.
If you followed the history of the film closely, and read quotes from Spielberg and Kubrick's camp as well, you might be surprised what elements came from whom.
Having problems with the film is fine... but it just comes across as silly when you throw them all on Spielberg's lap and assume the "dark" stuff all came from Kubrick. That's actually WRONG. And the "feel-good" ending (which actually isn't feel-good at all if you really think about it) that most assume came from Spielberg was in fact KUBRICK'S idea. So was the whole Pinnochio/Blue Fairy angle. And some of the darkest elements of the film (the hair scene, the pool scene, David being abandoned in the woods, etc) are from Spielberg. The "Flesh Fair" idea is from both of them, though I won't dispute that it may have been toned down some.
As far as Gigolo Joe. Yes, Kubrick's version of the character would have been very graphical in a sexual nature as well as language. What Spielberg did was take the character and turn him into the perfect foil for David... another Mecha character that actually has more heart and soul and more caring for David than Monica did. It's called irony... and it works. Perhaps a "darker" Joe would have been cool, but I don't see what it would've added to the theme or the story.
In other words, BOTH men brought both "dark" and "light" elements to the film. It is a great blend of BOTH visions. Ultimately, though, it's all really Spielberg's movie since he's the one who finally crafted it in its physical entirety. So, if you want to blame him for the stuff that bothers you then you need to credit him for the rest as well. Especially since I've seen many people get stuff wrong as far as what ideas actually came from Spielberg/Kubrick.
Personally, I think this is a marvelous film and would stand out in ANY year, crummy Summer season or not. Perhaps it's just too carefully layered for some tastes. But, to each his own...
`Carl
[Edited last by Carl C on August 16, 2001 at 11:13 AM]
 

Edwin Pereyra

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Oct 26, 1998
Messages
3,500
Since my viewing of this film, I have read numerous articles about it and interviews from both Spielberg himself and Jan Harlan, Kubrick’s brother in law, the film’s executive producer and one of Kubrick’s long time colleagues. Doing so gives one a better appreciation of the film as to its background and knowing for sure which elements or parts of the film were influenced by Spielberg, Kubrick or both. For the most part, Carl summarizes them rather nicely.
For me, this film is an unqualified success as it tackles so many complex issues without losing its focus. At the heart of the movie is the exploration of the various kinds of human emotions and what it takes for someone to be considered “human”. I was so caught up in its story that I didn’t even know that Chris Rock and Robin Williams provided voices for this film until later. Such elements only become distractions only if you let them be.
~Edwin
------------------
http://www.hometheaterforum.com/uub/Forum9/HTML/005780.html#8
 

GregoryP

Supporting Actor
Joined
Dec 2, 1998
Messages
590
What I'm hoping is that they've pushed back the release date so they can add more suppliments. :) I hope they include EVERYTHING that Kubrick had done especially the storyboards and treatment.
Gregory
 

Carl C

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Oct 6, 1999
Messages
134
Patrick, Unfortunately I don't have a copy... yet. I'm working on it as its proven to be quite elusive so far. I'm also trying to get the "pre-sketch soundtrack" by UK artist Darren Raven. He composed some "A.I." music for Kubrick while he was working on his treatment and storyboards.
So far, I have culled everything together from countless interviews and articles... most from Spielberg, Jan Harlan, etc.
There was a one page REVIEW/SYNOPSIS of Kubrick's EARLIEST draft that I found online somewhere. Here it is:
Spoiler:
The movie begins in a hard-edged future New York. The world has suffered thedisasters of global warming, and New York, as many other coastal cities, is now submerged. This is a time when the world is over-populated and people are not allowed to have but one child. David (Haley Joel Osment) is a one of a new model of robots developed to have emotions. These robots, however, are only programed to love their parental units. The purpose of buying these robots is filling the adult's void when they cannot have children.
David is adopted by the Swintons when their only daughter becomes ill and has to be criogenically freezed in order to be kept alive until a cure for her sickness is found. Monica Swinton tries to love the little robot boy, but she finds it too cold and pointless, and plunges deeply into alcoholism instead. David feels the instant rejection of Monica (who he affectionately reffers to as "Mummy" throughout the screenplay) and suffers because of it. In a vain attempt to make her love him, he prepares his Mummy's alcoholic beverages, without realizing that this just makes Mummy despise him even more. It is obvious that at this stage of the film, David's mother is the emotional centre of the film.
A few years later, scientists find a cure for the Swinton's daughter, and she makes a full recovery. And now that they have their own little girl with them, David has become redundant. In a heartbreaking scene, Monica opens the door for David and instructs him to leave and to never come back unless he becomes a real boy. Hence, Kubrick's repeated jokes about re-titling the
movie "Pinnochio".
David eventually ends in a drowned Manhattan, where he meets Giggolo Joe a man who tries to help him on his quest to become a real boy. Giggolo Joe turns out to be a shape-shifting android, newer than David in design, and also an emotional robot. Giggolo becomes the "blue fairy", so to speak, of David's Pinnochio-like quest. Together, they find a place called Tin City where robots are worked until their parts fall off (sort of like a futuristic robot concentration camp) where Giggolo Joe is regarded as dangerous because of his shape-shifting nature and immediately dismantled.
David becomes a prisoner of this camp, and he works as a slave until his energy battery is worn down, and the rulers of Tin City don't bother to replace it.The following part of the movie takes place thousands of years later, where the human race is nothing but a vague memory in the mind of the new populators of the earth, the robots. During an archeological mission into what was once Tin City, these robots find David, and repare his energy battery to help David recuperate. These robots have great interest in David, regarding him as a link to a past they barely know anything about.
With their technology and using David's memory data, they manage to construct a virtual version of the Swinton's New York apartment. However, this apartment is constructed as David remembers it, or to be more exact, as he wants to remember it. David's father is vaguely there, his face blurred out of his head since he is of very little importance to David, and his stepsister's room is nothing but a hole in the wall. Clearly, nothing will stand in the way of David's happiness again.
We come up to the ending, which is actually two endings. Spielberg could go either way, but knowing him, I think he'll be more inclined for the first ending. In the first version, the movie ends with David walking towards his
Mummy, who sits on a chair, her back to the robot boy, as David brings her a bloody mary, with a smile upon his face. The second version ends in a darker note. The technical shortcomings of the robots make it impossible to keep
David's fantasy alive, and the boy is forced to watch his mother disappear before his eyes.
I'm working on getting a full copy of the scriptment, as well as more recent version(s) which are supposedly even more similar to the final film.
`Carl
 

Robert Crawford

Crawdaddy
Moderator
Patron
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 9, 1998
Messages
67,604
Location
Michigan
Real Name
Robert
Members,
Please, let's get this thread back on track to it's original discussion item which is about the dvd release of this film. If you want to continue to discuss the merits of this film then do so in the official threads located in the Movies section of the forum. Thank you.
Crawdaddy
------------------
 

Rich Malloy

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2000
Messages
3,998
Carl, that is precisely the kind of supplemental material I hope is included on this disc - thanks! :)
------------------
"Only one is a wanderer; two together are always going somewhere."
ver.gif

Link Removed
Al's Criterion Collection
 

Carl C

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Oct 6, 1999
Messages
134
You're welcome, Al!
I agree... I hope Spielberg, DreamWorks, and the Kubrick estate include all of the early Kubrick stuff (outlines, ideas, sketches, treatments, etc) on the DVD.
There has actually been quite a debate within the "A.I." crowd as to what supplements should and should not end up on the disc. Of course, for many it's the more goodies the better. But a LOT of people feel that too many supplements might compromise the integrity of the film in that they might give too much away. So much of "A.I." has been purposely left ambiguous. I can kind of see both sides. But I tend to agree we need these kinds of supplemental materials. Perhaps a Spielberg commentary track would be too much (and it isn't likely anyway as it would be his first ever) but including a nice Documentary, Deleted Scenes (the original cut was over an hour longer!), and the Spielberg/Kubrick Development stuff would be fine for me!
Of course, it will be a DreamWorks disc so we can expect nothing but quality whatever the case. I'm sure Spielberg has final say and what will and won't be included on the disc(s). But I would say a lovely anamorphic transfer, Dolby Digital & DTS tracks, and the 3 trailers and 6 TV spots are all but a given. :)
It's sure to be a great DVD...
`Carl
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Forum statistics

Threads
356,815
Messages
5,123,807
Members
144,184
Latest member
H-508
Recent bookmarks
0
Top