All episodes of Criminally Underrated Movies ... Ep 1 - Star Trek: The Motion Picture th-cam.com/video/yO-QdAFBaZ0/w-d-xo.html Ep 2 - Psycho 2 th-cam.com/video/kydlEbyV3vE/w-d-xo.html Ep 3 - Heaven Help Us / The Catholic Boys th-cam.com/video/C2-O2RdQz94/w-d-xo.html Ep 4 - Red Dawn th-cam.com/video/5IjwZGT4V9U/w-d-xo.html Ep 5 - The Black Hole th-cam.com/video/LdhcX9YonMI/w-d-xo.html Ep 6 - A.I. Artificial Intelligence th-cam.com/video/hD66njCw_bE/w-d-xo.html If your comment is not related to this pinned comment then please post it as a separate comment, not a reply. Thanks :)
The Black Hole is great. Wild ending. Made me understand Interstellar. Both films are attempting to recature the acid trip star gate sequence ending from Odyssey
@@_scabs6669 It's super cheesy at times but as a kid, 'The Black Hole' terrified me. Granted I had 3 older brothers tormenting me a black hole was coming lol.
Rob, 'Poltergeist' is just like the film 'Devil'(Very underrated IMO) but the reason I bring it up is because while it's technically directed by Erick Dowdle I believe, the truth is that M.Night Shyamalan was the one in control. Even has his usual crew and his DP from that time, the legendary Tak Fujimoto. Tobe Hooper was awesome but he definitely was a glorified AD on 'Poltergeist.' It has a few moments that you can tell Hooper was in charge but 90% is Spielberg. I think Michael Kahn was the editor for a reason too. Spielberg wanted his main guy in control of the dailies.
@@ct6852 I think it is possible to conclude that Teddy is all that truly remains of all the works of humankind, that he will be preserved and somehow cherished by the aliens or AIs who grant David his dream. I find it no less haunting and sad for all that.
Another thing about why it’s a dream sequence is when Joe is talking to David and saying “they hate us, you know. The humans. Because when the world ends we’ll be all that’s left” and I bet David never forgot that so he imagined he was the only thing alive and that’s why he dreamt about that.
When the nanny robot's face is melting she smiles. At first I took this as the robot not having any kind of real survival instincts, but it could also be the nannybot following its programming of providing maximum comfort to the "child" witness. There's a lot of reflections back and fourth between machines having human-like qualities and the reverse - humans being dogged in their pursuit of their own dogma.
Of course it's depressing. Humanity went extinct. The machines of the distant future who excavated David gave him a chance to complete his program, but he was never going to evolve beyond that. In the end he was just a small primitive stepping stone in a long technological road to true AI, but he wasn't ultimately that special. The very beginning of the movie posed the question of whether or not a machine can truly love, and it kind of sets us up with the expectation that the film's main protagonist, David, is going to be the one who finally does. It's kind of crushing to realize that all this time he was pretty much just running his program like a loop that never ends. The only machines who truly exhibit what could be considered empathy and love are the ones in the future who give him, their distant ancestor, his final day.
My wife was pretty young, she told me she cried and cried and cried, then refused to let go of her mom. I was a teenager and it didn't effect me. Saw it as an adult, good freaking god... When he says maybe today will feel like a thousand days (something like that...)... My goodness I feel that 💯
I saw A.I. when it originally was released at 19 years old. I remember everyone who saw it thinking it was just Spielberg fluff. I was deeply disquieted by it and was very unsettled. The themes, the tone, all felt so strange. It will always be one of my most memorable first watch experiences in that it ended up being something much deeper than I thought it was going to be. I’ve never met anyone in person who appreciates it, or finds it as unsettling, as much I do. It’s always been QUITE the opposite, actually.
Same here. Disquieted is a good word. The visual aspect alone is unsettling, not to mention the layer of ethical consideration between humans and A.I. Then, aside from all the conflicting imagery and ethics, the final scene destroyed me emotionally, personally. It’s an imposition on my part - it has nothing whatever to do with the film, per se. My mother passed away three months after I was born. Though I’d never quite put it into words, it bore within my heart an unresolved feeling of emptiness without her. It was “imprinted” upon me. It’s not JUST that David gets to spend a day with her, it’s THAT he was “programmed” to love her and that without her, he has nowhere to “express” his programming. Shoot. I sat in utter shock, and then sobbed when I first watched it. Dumb as it sounds, I realized I shared the same programming “loop” with David. Of course the Intelligence is artificial, but it is drawn from our experiences. We also get stuck in programming loops. Some of them we need to break out of. Some, if we break out of them, as in my case, if we do, we lose the only true emotional connection we’ve ever had with someone. I choose to stay in the loop. And any time I want, sort of like David (but different in that he has no choice) I can re-visit that loop - by re-watching his experience and projecting myself onto it (which is pretty much impossible for me not to do). I’m almost 46, with an actual family, and career, and I’m relatively stable most days lol But this movie reduces me to a puddle of tears. I am not David of course because I can analyze all this. But I am David in one sense, because my program is my comfort - my connection. It’s all I have.
@@Rickkelley365 The movie has always haunted me in a similar way. I lost a child some years ago and I know in my bones it's something I'll never be able to just let go of. Despite Mr. Ager's assertions of the specialness of human consciousness and the mere programmed, machine-like non-person nature of David, I find the film to be a powerful and painful portrayal of emotional drives in sentient beings and the tragic nature of existence. Although it is a film of great beauty, (I think there is something spiritually pure and transcendant about David's undying love for the mother figure,) I actually could not bear to view it again I think, and have avoided doing so for many years.
I downloaded Tubi on my phone for the sake of watching a goofy metal head horror comedy and was subsequently surprised by their catalog as well as the quality of it as a free streaming service. As I looked around over the next few months, I stumbled on A.I. and watched it. My fiance wouldn't even let me tell him about it the next day because of how inconsolable it had left me, and what little parts he saw or overheard he knew it was going to be too much for him. I still have so much love for this movie but I'm so scared to feel what I felt again.
I haven't seen this movie in years, but I seem to remember a revelation that David's creator had a dead son who looked just like David. I thought it was disturbing that not only was this man trying to recreate his dead son, but he was also making multiple copies of him to sold en masse to the public.
And, it's disturbing that after relocating the lost boy-bot, the doctor just leaves him alone in the office with all those cloned Davids. Original David then jumps off a skyscraper. Um...plot hole! Why is the doctor so incredibly dumb? And, why is his office still located in Manhattan, which is under 300 feet of ocean, haha!?
@@JB-ti7blkeeping his office in Manhattan also shows how he’s stuck in the past. Everyone else has moved on. He’s still there trying to recreate his son
I remember when I first saw A.I. the thing which really struck me was this. The film imagines the total extinction of humanity, yet it isn’t even a major element of the story.
It's not neccessarily about humanity, it's about the androids/robots, their point of view. The Ice Age ending is Spielberg, not Kubrick, it's supposed to be real, but presented as less real, as in it's still from the machines point of view, they don't know humanity, those bio-mechanical nanotech-goo-things, beginning as a kinda nightmare, continuing to a better, hopefull dream-like state, hinting a rude awakening, because "the boy" still doesn't get what his programing demands, leaving "him" still as a slave to it's software-orders. Slaves to outer conditioning, doomed to blindy follow artifical behavior, incapable of breaking through, that's the nature of these machines. Though not the future-goo-bots, they are free of that, their own masters. I think there is AI in there, the androids/robots in the human world, but it's not allowed to grow on it's own, so they stay simplistic without reaching their full potential, real AI, life, artificial life, but life nontheless. This human world clearly needed a cleansing done by ABC Warriors, but the new Ice Age took care of them pesky human-critters, I guess. This being said, the Terminators have AI, but Skynet controlls them, making them slaves to it's own warmachine-agenda to annihilate humanity. If Skynet would be destroyed, which happened at the end of the Future War, every drone directly connected to Skynet is probably braindead-like, not capable to work on their own. But activated & kept separate a Terminator stays functional, as seen in the movies, and because of their own AI they can grow in character so to speak, even though the standard program of being a killing machine stays active, probably...
@@eldritchmorgasm4018 Interesting comment. In A.I. the idea of human extinction is foreshadowed before the “dream” ending, with its Giacometti aliens. At one point, Gigolo Joe tells David, “They made us too smart, too quick and too many. We are suffering for the mistakes they made. Because, when the end comes, all that will be left is us.”
@@eldritchmorgasm4018 Interesting take, but just wanted to add that The Ice Age ending is in fact Kubrick, not Spielberg. Spielberg even talks about it here: watch?v=rz7sPiOoU7A
I’ve watched the movie 50+ times since I was 10 years old (I’m 32 now) and I almost cried when you pointed out David putting his hands behind the moms neck in an attempt to make her imprint I never thought of that before
AI's final scenes are peak fridge horror. Imagine the blood-chilling existential nightmare of an artificial child so starved of affection that he accepts the illusion of his mother's clone's corpse as his sleep companion. You have to be a certified mouth-breather to think it's all Spielberg schmaltz and not Kubrick's utterly sinister deconstruction of the Pinocchio trope.
Pinocchio: I was happy when he became a human. David: I hoped he didn't become a human. As far as "mommy" being resurrected only as an illusion, I just watched the movie yesterday and that point was not clear at all. It seemed to me that she was literally being resurrected for one day; that's why they needed her hair trimmings (which, BTW, do not contain DNA, but anyway...). If the ETs were just allowing David to complete his program and die, then it's less horrific and ethically disgusting. But, David was selfish either way.
What's more, that sequence is (probably) a dream sequence. In the speech given by the William Hurt character at the beginning, he says he wants his creations to have an inner life, he wants them to dream. David does dream, but the sad irony is he dreams of the woman who threw him out like trash!
AI is one of my very favorite films of all time, my grandma took me to go see it when I was 10 years old and I was absolutely enthralled by it. I was also known as “the weird Pinocchio kid” growing up and took my Pinocchio doll with me everywhere, also I’m obsessed with robots, so a dark Pinocchio robot movie was right up my alley! I agree this film deserves so much more love!
I agree that A.I. Artificial Intelligence was shamefully underrated. The special effects alone made it worth watching, while the dark sub-themes were what made it a great movie.
Honestly imo, it's Spielberg's best. Why do I think that, the tonal splits between the cold emotionless pure A.I mech thinking to their glimpses of true emotions. Just an emotional brutal philosophical take on our own pure survival to creating a.i.
I think the fact that the opening narration about climate change was voiced by Ben Kingsley, and then the alien at the end is Ben Kingsley, kind of implies that the ending isn't a dream, it's real. Also, during the last ice age, the ice literally covered Manhattan. That is what the glacial moraines in Central Park and up by the Cloisters are.
I don’t think that this casting choice proofs this. Ben Kingsley could just play two different characters. However, I also don’t think that the fact that both the David’s “brother” and David are frozen at different point of the movie is good enough of a proof that the last part of the movie is a dream. It could be that that’s just a use of poetic storytelling.
A.I.'s opening spiel was an early example of Climate Alarmism. Remember that Al Gore was running for prez when this was being filmed. Spielberg is a Lefty. Ironically, the rise of anti-semitism in 2024, which Spielberg rightly denounces, is most virulent on the Left (college campuses, etc). Oops! Steven spent so much energy worrying about Trump and the polar ice caps, he forgot to hold his own side accountable.
The most interesting thing to me is that the very faults with his behavior due to being a robot are all parallel to human faults. His love obsession, getting stuck in a loop, listening to his false emotions to the point of ignoring all sane advice, disregarding the nature of what he is.. It almost makes you wonder if YOU are a robot. It's almost biblical or religious to an extent as well. Religion itself feels like an error in our processing yet it brings such significant meaning (I didn't write that out well but you get the idea)
ai perfectly nails the themes, without shoving down your throat! you cant have a movie about ai without the “chicken or the egg” discussion, which david embodies perfectly
It's horrifying to think that a tech company would play with a human family that way. And, it's horrifying that David was so selfish as to resurrect his long-dead mother just for his own satisfaction. Leave the dead alone!
It really is. I think the combination of Spielberg's mastery of emotional manipulation with Kubrick's pessimistic themes creates an unusually bleak brew. Somehow as I turn the film over in my mind I find it more despairing, tragic and truly dark in its implications than even any of Kubrick's own films. I think Spielberg did Kubrick's intentions justice about as well as he could, and I'm generally not a Spielberg fan. But the film is a masterpiece, despite some flaws, and possibly (probably) Spielberg's best work. I should add, too, that Spielberg does have a "mean" streak in his films at times, despite being more well-known for his schmaltz/sentimental qualities - he can delve into the darkness of humanity just as much as Kubrick, he just doesn't tend to go that far as often as Kubrick did. But SS's style can be very visceral and intense when he chooses to go to those places. Given this it shouldn't be surprising the film is so unrelentingly dark.
@@CircuitRider Yeeeeah, you know, I'd never thought about Spielberg's mean streak before but you're right. Some of the most memorable parts of his films are because of how traumatising they are. Like, in the Indiana Jones films there's the ants, the ageing man, the melting man, kali ma. Really brutal stuff. A lot of directors wouldn't have the man screaming for so long after the ants got him. Mostly what I found unnerving about A.I. was never its implications or anything it was actually saying, though. It was just a vibes thing. There's bad vibes in that film. For some reason, it hadn't occurred to me that they were deliberate.
I never felt like the ending was soppy! It was all artificial and for one day only, after which he presumably died? I thought it was completely depressing how he got a strange fake version of everything he wanted so badly
That ending does support the view that androids were conscious, since what would be the point of creating a comforting illusion for an entity without any subjective experience. Maybe that was an addition from Spielberg and not a part of Kubrick's original idea.
@@collativelearning I never noticed how chilling it seemed till you mentioned it. A lot of the reason had to do with John Williams score for the film that effectively deceived us into thinking it was an emotional ending along with the narration. In fact I think this might just be the most deceptive movie ever made. It fooled so many people into thinking it was this sappy melodrama when it’s really dark when you pause to think about it and look past the fantastic performance by Haley Joel and the score.
@@nenirouvelliv It's the aliens learning about what humans were like. They activate the toy to get as much information as possible. There's no kindness there, only scientific research.
I agree@@nenirouvelliv. I agree, this movie is totally underrated and some people believed on first view that the being at the end were Speilbergian close-encounter style aliens when I immediately felt they were a future human, a transhuman, species who had cracked AI and selfhood/consciousness and therefore care about the inner experience of one of their 'ancestor'/prototype consciousnesses... do they know he's conscious? If they are why isn't he? Or is he just proto-conscious? I believe Rob @collativelearning's understanding of film is brilliant but his analysis of AI as 'fake' isn't very deep or nuanced - which is ironic as that's his criticism of others of how they read the film. It IS deep. But so are the implications of AI which I don't believe Kubrick 'mocks' in 2001 and I don't believe he believed that there is 'no there, there' in this movie. Lovely to get into this, I think it's an astonishing movie and I'll watch again and reconsider now Rob has opened some of it up for me.
Anyone dismissing this movie as soppy or nostalgic has clearly not watched it properly. It’s so dark. From the flesh fair to abandonment to watching a timelapse of the end of our civilisation, millennia into the future, albeit off screen. I was welling up watching the CLIP of the abandonment scene. It’s so heartbreaking and despite knowing David is a robot, it’s virtually impossible to not place ourselves into that situation as if we were the person being abandoned. Excellent analysis Rob of a much under appreciated film. Also, I think the reason why the riot scene is more believable than you suggested is the fact that it’s a child and in the world the movie is set in, child robots were not yet commercially available, David was a prototype if I remember correctly. Coupled with the new development of enhanced emotions and there we have it. In my opinion, at least.
Empire Of The Sun is great film by Steven Spielberg. Staring a young Christian Bale, as a kid separated from his parents, trying to survive in Hong Kong under Japanese Military control, during WW II.
I have to confess that I LOATHED my first viewing of this movie. A few seconds into my second viewing a few years later everything fell into place. I've come to really respect Spielberg for making this, and for me this is really special for his usual approach. The entire vibe of this movie is so different than the rest of his filmography, like he's directing the movie from a satellite. It's become a comfort movie for me
I don’t think it’s a real happy ending. The robots tell David that the clone of the mother only has a life span of a day. So when she goes to sleep because she’s dying, David says he’ll join her. I interpret that as David is going to sleep forever, never waking up. David is dying too. David is finally turning off. The only true happy ending for David.
So true...I feel its actually quite chilling film. I actually stopped a few times, filled with dread,sadness , the sheer brutal need and want to be loved and mothered,fathered ... Hansel and gretel Meets Pinocchio, with the haunting tone of kubrick,and the childlike wonder Steven brings.
I've loved this movie since I saw it in the theatre, and I have never gotten anyone to share my enthusiasm. Every rewatch, I find a new character with whom I'm fascinated. The nanny makes my skin crawl.
In MY opinion, A.I. is one of the best sci movie movies ever made because it's predictions are so well thought out and the A.I. vs humans with the moon, and the carnival, it's all so well done. To ME, A.I. and The Terminator are two of the most thought provoking films. OK, add Matrix. I didn't find it cheesy one bit. Quite the opposite, it was dark, layered, and the ending was INCREDIBLE. The movie had a Twilight Zone episode feel to it when pondering it after a viewing.
First saw AI half a lifetime ago. I honestly find it even more disturbing the older I get, absolutely brilliant film and more relevant now than ever. That ending... Holy moly.
Just rewatched A.I. because of Rob’s analysis. Wow. That kid could act. No one would ever guess that plot. But hearing it was originally Kubrick’s project I understand why. Interesting to notice that when I thought it was only Spielberg I was somewhat annoyed by the denouement. But hearing from Rob it was originally Kubrick I was drawn into it. Thanks for drawing attention to a forgotten gem!
Wow, the repeated metaphor of the Ferris wheel hanging over David trapped in his amphibicopter and that ferris wheel-looking ceiling looming over the son while in a coma kind of blew my mind. Great job picking that up, Rob.
What I find interesting is that Gigolo Joe and Teddy were far more aware than David. Joe and Teddy both wanted to help David and warn him but David couldn't escape his programming.
The ending was beautiful. I saw it again a few years ago and as a grown man my eyes were tearing up. We all want to be with our mother in one way or another.
what a find this vid is. since my first viewing AI is possibly the most melancholic painful film i have ever seen. i found it to be the most bleak hero's journey film i can conceive of. with every desperate striving step to get back to his mothers love david inexorably grows further from her like someone floating slowly away into space having lost the tether to a space station. Spielberg extends this unbelievably, i find it powerful and genuinely difficult to watch.
Stanley is one of of those directors who leaves breadcrumbs for you to explore and totally rewards you and he even tells you out right that there is breadcrumbs. As Wendy is wondering the kitchen in the beginning she says " I'll need bread crumbs to make my way out " or something very similar and ever the fairy tale Stanley is invoking is actually a breadcrumb it self it's insane and totally makes sense as to why Stanley didn't have more movies come out because once you see everything he puts into his movies it's absolutely insane. Rewatch value is unstoppable.
Too right. He even went as far as to make an 'instructional' video, of sorts, to go along with The Shining. The making of is full of clues as to the themes and hidden narratives in the film. A case in point, the bit where they speak about daily rewrites of the script. They speak about the re writes being on a differnt colour paper to the rest of the script while Stanley is sat in front of a typewriter. Now why would Kubrick draw our attention to a 'continuity error' (the changing colour of the Jack's typewriter) in the making of?!?!
@@davidlean1060 I agree that Kubrick was way ahead of his time with all these layers left in his films for people to be rewarded years down the line, but what does the typewriter he's using have to do with the changing colour in the film? the typewriter in the making of is yellow, the one(s) in the film is grey. They were just commenting on how Kubrick is always working on the script further, and the different colours are a way of differentiating the newer versions of the script, compared to the old ones
@@knurdyob Jack's typewriter changes colour in The movie between shots. Basically, it hints that it's not the same Jack from shot to shot, which ties in with the idea that he's 'always been the caretaker'. An easier theme to explain is that jack is abusing Danny sexually. In the making of, James Mason and his neices (who are twins!) is introduced to Jack Nicholson on the set. Mason famously played the child abusing Humbert Humbert in Lolita. SHowing this in the making of is supposed to get us thinking that Jack Torrance and Humbert have similar, unhealthy and deviant appetites. Rob has a great disection of the film on his website. He explains it far better than I could here. The Shining is one weird, wonderful and complex movie!
The point of the crowd being fooled by David at the Flesh Fair is exactly the same reason why you're struggling between calling David 'him' and 'it' in this commentary. He's in that uncanny valley between human and artificial: his looks and emotions scream human but his fundamental behavior is artificial. A.I. is by far the most disturbing film I've ever seen. Great commentary - thanks! I guess I need to see it again now.
Awesome ! My night is made, just as I got supper ready too. I got my partner into filmography through you, now I have someone to nerd with over the most minute details every night during our movie before bed. Thank you Rob! I feel so spoiled with an entire hour of content for tonight. This makes up for the rough day .
I think Manhattan being under ice was sort of a joke. I remember hearing somewhere that Kubrick disliked New york. David gets what he wants when hell freezes over.
This movie was emotionally DEVASTATING to me as a child/preteen. I could never fully put my finger on why… maybe it’s time for a rewatch but I am scared!
It took me three views to appreciate this movie. Now I love it. Ending was both poignant, satisfying and sad at the same time. And yes, a little heartbreaking.
In the Flesh Fair scene, I think the filmmakers may also have been saying we should value human life above the trickery of cinema - especially where cinema can be used as propaganda.
When you've developed such a familiarity with the subject matter, as you have with 2001:ASO, you can talk about it with such compelling, persuasive authority, that it doesn't come across as 'off the cuff'.
@@collativelearning Just watched the film because of this video. I couldn't help but notice the similarity between it and 2001. Especially the ending. In 2001 the whole ending from the "trip" onwards feels somewhat detached from the rest of the film. Like the film ends and that's an extra ending. The same way in A.I, the whole ending feels as through its all extra, not part of the main film. And the way the "beings" in 2001 take the guy in and put him in a room that "appears" like one from earth, with some mistakes, etc. The "robots" in A.I are seen overlooking the kid from a circular portal after having read his mind and putting him in that room/house. The way the kid is in that room/house at the end alone, put there by the "robots" is the same as the guy in 2001 being put in that room by the "beings". But since the kid is already an A.I, or already a "starchild", what could this ending be saying? His will over rules the will of the "higher beings/robots"? Even though they are the ones with the power to give him that ending? Unless the kid is representing regular humanity busince we also are in a sense a designed with artistry etc. But disguised it under the "robot" appearance for the film... I don't know. But there's more to this that you could look into but I just pointed out the basic connection between 2001 and A.I. Also, there's no difference between "aliens/beings" and "A.I/robots". Even though they may be presented as different, they are secretly the same and fulfil the same purpose.
This is one of the movies that gives me the most emotional responses ever. Incredible movie. I only thought to rewatch it a few years ago after one of your videos.
You single-handedly made me give this film a second shot and I can't believe how utterly daft I was on my first viewing. What a masterpiece. Best Spielberg film by far, imo
Interesting take on the movie.I always felt like the ending was very sad and depressing.Because he really wanted love and affection and he never got except in his dreams😢
The bit about the humans being portrayed as the monsters whilst destroying the machines.. I was about 19 when I saw this film in the cinema and hook line sinker EXACYLY my feelings when i was seeing it. Very clever stuff.
I noticed that in the reading of the film where the ending is real; The robots of the future are still trapped on a loop searching for humanity anyway they can even tho they seam like they are advancing.
Fascinating film. I was into it pretty much from the get. I was surprised it wasn't better better received when it came out. This movie was how I discovered Kubrick. Saw it before The Shining, or 2001, or Eyes Wide Shut. It's been an interesting journey since. I think I was always fascinated by the melding of Spielberg's sentimentality and Kubrick's coldness. Like a twisted fairytale where all the inhuman characters hold up a funhouse mirror to everything humane. Beautiful lighting and effects as well. The entrance to Rouge City and Manhattan was pretty epic.
I remember seeing this in the theatre, and it was astounding. I was brought to tears by Haly Joel Osmet's excellent performance, all the more amazing considering he was acting as a robot acting as a human being.
I remember seeing this as a young boy and something about it really left an impression on me even from that young age even if I couldn’t quite follow the narrative it just seemed so raw and real and emotionally honest.
Yes, this is a very dark, when you think about it, underlying theme. I LOVE thiis movie and a good study on what life could be like with lifelike androids.
Bicentennial man, was to me a great metaphor, for the slave trade, and also makes a vivid point about, how as human beings we miss the point of life which is love, & how a machine can see it better than people can, I also liked the fact that Andrew never gave up his quest, on a...200 year journey and suceeded.
That was a better movie than A.I was even though it was very adult themes especially when it was marketed as a Disney movie.Robin Williams never got enough credit for it which is sad.
I agree 100% Robin Williams proved he could act with the best of them Although A.I is an important film in it's own way, being originally a Stanley Kubrick project, the theme was more de-humanisation, As technology advanced people lost their souls because of it except for a robot boy (notice how come the end human civilisation has died out like the Dinosaurs, it's only a humanoid left) & its implied that Aliens created the human race both films are VERY imaginative with great production design, theories of the future@@Thespeedrap
what to you, is it saying then? also (as Robin Williams said in DEAD POETS SOCIETY) anything creative is open to interpretation. everyone sees a different film when watching one, they can be whatever you want them to be
it was really MY opinion I don't presume to speak for any one else. What i would say is that the hints were VERY strong Andrew is owned as a domestic slave he is there to serve, but also like a Slave becomes...self aware, wanting his freedom, & when Sam Neil learns this he becomes annoyed even seeing Andrew as being ungreatful (which he later comes to regret when he is dying)@@zogwort1522
A minor thing about the ice age ending. The area of New York was supposedly under an arctic ice sheet called the Laurentide Ice Sheet during the Pleistocene period. Not sure what the exact height of the ice sheet was in New York area though, but glaciation doesn't necessarily occur symmetrically from the poles towards the equator.
I saw the deeper meaning and value of this film on first watch - and in discussions I was roundly mocked by friends who thought I was ridiculous. Thank you for redeeming me 20 years later. ☺️✊🏼
This was a great, yet disturbing movie for me. I was 29 when I saw it in the theater upon the recommendation of a friend that has great taste. She told me the same thing, she was disturbed by it. I haven't watched it in several years. I may need to rewatch it.
Saw it twice in theaters, my only issue was the sudden switch with the ending and I had no idea they were advanced robots until someone told me. Legit figured they were aliens excavating earth and found David.
I wondered if they were aliens for one second. Then I realized their colorful lighted veins were supposed to inform me that they were machines. It did not make any sense for aliens to be brought into this story, so I accepted they were the evolution of the mechas, it made complete sense. I don't know how so many people never realized that the story didn't suddenly completely change the subject... You wanna hear something funny? It the beginning of the Internet, I watched Contact and then looked for reviews. I found this one adolescent girl and her review was, "I saw Contact today. In the end the alien was her father".
@@shitmandoodOur bodies might be, but the mind is another matter. Yes it is tied to brain but there are other unique things about humans that is not present in the animal kingdom.
I've always loved this one, I like movies that raise questions. And I've come to think of Spielberg's sentimentality as just one side to a coin; the kids in his movies have epic adventures, but they don't often come from happy homes.
Thank you for affirming, what I had concluded and experienced. I watched "A.I." two times. The first time I definitely leaned towards its 'sopie' ending. I was happy for 'David' [my name]. Believing that he came to be as close to human as he could. Because this also satisfied the Mother-Bond [Loop] I had with my own mother. Who died about 3 months prior to this film's release. One could say that my first interpretation of the film reaffirmed my own Mother-Bond conditioning to perpetuate. With 'David' ultimately 'finding' his [long DEAD] Mother. VERY satisfying to me. However after watching it a second time [sat right in the theatre to experience THAT again], I became VERY depressed. Because I realized what you've just shared here. For after seeing it the second time, the William Hurt character's speech on robot dreaming stayed with me. I had one of those 'Eureka-moments' when the aliens arrived. I had to face that 'David' [the robot] was still at the bottom of the ocean and [like Hal] experiencing a shut-down. While during his shut-down, he was not dreaming, but he was coming as close to a child having a Dream. In fact [like Hal] he was ONLY displaying his rudimentary programming, that wanted him to find his mother. So he played that out. As 'imaginatively' as his programming permitted. VERY depressing. Years later I've had a few opportunities to watch it again. Yet I didn't, because I simply did not want to experience THAT again. Even having been invited to do so, by someone who totally bought my first interpretation of the film. I didn't have the heart to break it to them, as I turned their offer down. For some reason recently I've been thinking about watching it again. Mainly because I have effectively severed my Family-bonds [LOOP] about 5 years ago. Things really deteriorated after my Mother's death for the family. My father died recently and I didn't even attend services. Even though he was Human and a good father. I had a dream about him and I was just wondering, have I totally escaped my Parent-Loop(s). Being [Maturity] enough to watch that film more objectively for what it actually was. Like a fully functioning [PINOCCHIO]-Adult should be able to. Even though I'm still Human. We'll see. Again Thank you.
Fascinating. Something to keep in mind for a new rewatch that is more positive. David discovering, in the executive boardroom, all those clones, is a F U statement from Kubrick about the roboticness of corporate boardroom crowds. He's calling them robots and showing, through David, that they should take a deep dive out of that arena and become human - hence the animated version of the film's logo - divided David stepping out of the corporate pyramid scheme to become more human :)
Can't believe I had never seen the movie. Watched it yesterday. Loved it. The whole time I was thinking to my self: can't wait to watch Rob Ager's analysis, hope he's done one. And boom! there it is, from 3 days ago! Epic movie, epic analysis as always. Keep up the good work, your channels are amazing!
Right now I'm working on a novel about AI and manipulation via messaging etc. This video was really helpful with seeing another layer, just very creatively inspiring. Thanks so much for these
Wow. David rejected the The Giggalo robot, Nurse caretaker robot, and Teddy. Essentially representing the 'nuclear' family (Man, Woman, Child) all of which ACTUALLY cared for him. The human mother rejected him and David, in his struggle with 'abandonment issues', was unable to accept real love from anyone else and was stuck in a 'loop' of trying to reconcile a 'childhood' trauma for someone who left him to die in the woods. David was stuck in a fairy tale onset from 'childhood' trauma. Ironically, David, who was programmed to love -didn't understand love at all. #DeepStuff
David was a projection of his deprived creator - a father who lost his own son. As professor Hobby wasn't able to let his son go, he created a robot determined to not to be able to deattach from his human „mother“. Hobby was able to program David only such love as he himself was able of.
There is nothing ironic in a lover not understanding love. That's just how it is for everyone. Show me someone who defines love and I'll show you someone who has no clue about love.
Respect to you, Rob. I was a fan of John Searle early in my philosophy studies and he argued against "strong AI" from a linguistic and biological perspective.
I don't know why this movie isn't as well respected as it should be, it's one of those movies that I find myself thinking about randomly until I rewatch it
I was going to comment last time that you were now so well respected as a film analyst that I was glad to see you getting the attention you deserve. Your the Barry Norman of the internet age and I am glad I have watched you over the years before you hit the big time. you are the only person I have given money to help your channel grow and feel it is worth every penny I give. there is so much I got from you and enjoy movies I love even more and can watch them and get more from them than I thought possible watching them again. Hope that makes sense.
That's much appreciated feedback thanks. And thanks for chipping in financially too of course! I loved Barry Norman as a kid and teen - he was the face of serious film reviewing for a long time. Really nice guy too with a dry sense of humour.
@@collativelearning I was very influenced by Barry Norman from a young age too, from about film 84 I loved watching his take on movies and how he would use that dry humour to express how he felt about them. You have taken it to another level and helped me to understand why I like the kind of movies I like and how much more there is to them. I got to watch them for the first time again, That’s priceless.
_"Just 24,000 years ago, the spot where the New York State Museum (housed in the Cultural Eduation Center) is located was under more than 1.5 miles (2.4 km) of ice. At that time, the last ice sheets had reached their maximum size. A huge glacier covered nearly all of New York State."_ (New York State Education Department)
Finally. Thank you for making this video. Been arguing with people for years that this is one of the best sci-fi movies ever. Cool concept which doesn't fail to grip the viewer emotionally. And as you've picked out, many many subtle things in the film that show expert storytelling
There were definitely some interesting aspects to the movie. Most were ignored or given short shrift, however, in exchange for the "Mommy, mommy, tell me you love me" bit.
Rob, you are by far my favorite movie analyst/essayist! The amount of joy I get from watching your videos is immense and I cannot thank you enough for your great work! Definitely will support you financially in the near future! Love from Germany!
excited to see Spielberg's rendition of Kubrick's Napoleon. given how this film was handled, I have high hopes that it'll turn out to be the definitive screen experience for Napoleon's story.
Spielberg, like Ridley Scott, have lost their touch. I have zero enthusiasm for any modern day project by him. I'm sure he'll find a way to add some current day politics for the droning masses. Can't remember the last Spielberg film I enjoyed
15:51 that scene gave me a really strong uncanny feeling because of the combination of the strong performance from the kid and my awareness that there is no consciousness there and it’s essentially being controlled by like a mindless ant or a spider inside
I honestly dont watch anybody who’s a cinema highbrow, not even ebert. Having said that, I genuinely mean it when i say im constantly satisfied and impressed by your perspectives and understandings. You’re an astounding film professor haha
The dream interpretation makes a lot of sense. It's jarringly different than the rest of the film and there are multiple logical inconsistencies, which is unusual for a perfectionist like Kubrick. (1) David & Teddy would have run out of power. (2) The Ferris wheel and vehicle would have rusted long before the ocean froze. (3) The cockpit would have leaked (4) The whole concept of regenerating adult humans with their memories from a DNA sample is unexplained, and frankly ludicrous. (5) The additional twist that they only last 24 hours is silly (6) David's regenerated mother has no questions about where the f**k she is and how she got there like any normal person would, etc.
I think you may have misunderstood the crowd's reaction at the flesh fair. They don't freak out because they feel bad for the robot, they believe the fair has made a mistake and has accidentally brought a real boy on stage to be burned to death. As for Spielberg's reputation. I think it has less to do with family movies like ET. It's more to do with preposterous endings in his more adult movies. Minority Report should blatantly have ended with Cruise killing the man who murdered his son. War of the Worlds has that total cop out of his son surviving at the end. People see this as lacking the balls to follow through on the logical endings to these dark movies.
What you describe of the flesh fair is the same as my interpretation. I was saying they were fooled by the simulation, hence they don't believe what the ringmaster tells them. I partially agree with your take on Spielberg, though I was around when E.T. was released and it was culturally far bigger than any other movie he's done since. It became the defining movie in public perception of the director.
@@collativelearning Ah ok I get you. After watching your video and deciding to rewatch the movie, I decided to watch a few interviews with Spielberg about AI. He was basically pissed that people thought he'd put in the sappy bits at the beginning and end, but he said that was all Kubrick. In fact he said he's the one who introduced the darker elements in the middle of the movie, especially the flesh fair. It was interesting to learn that. Spielberg is a slave to his own reputation though. I remember watching an interview with a peer of his (I forget who now), and apparently Spielberg had told them that he had an idea for the most fucked up, scary movie of all time. But he said that due to the brand that's expected with his name he could never make it. That's just very sad.
Rob, I've been watching your videos since 2014. Happy to see you're still around. Your "The Thing" videos were mind blowing to a 20 year old me. I'll have to revisit them
The AI book has been out of print for years and is nearly impossible to get. Well, at a reasonable price. Other than that, this is Spielberg's underrated masterpiece. I'll watch it at least once a year
I was relatively young when I saw the film when it came out. I'm so glad it affected me a lot then, as it does now. Wonderful film. Surprised people see the end as soppy. I'd say that sentiment is a long way of brutal sadness. Maybe because it conveys so much beauty in that sadness.
Always felt there was a subtext to this film that I couldn't quite pin point; thanks Rob for showing the way. One thing that always threw me off though, is the music score; it reinforced the 'schmaltzy' sentimentality that Spielberg sometimes utilized; especially in the ending sequence, I feel they could have either used a different score or muted the music to some degree to have the darker meaning be more clear. Great vid as always.
The scene where David is abandoned by his mother is devestating to watch. Damn... i still remember how that hit me the first time. Brilliant film. Multiple layers.
![ทุกครั้งที่หลับตา (Lucid Dream) - AYLA's [ Official MV ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/4i1OBAQyv58/mqdefault.jpg)
All episodes of Criminally Underrated Movies ...
Ep 1 - Star Trek: The Motion Picture th-cam.com/video/yO-QdAFBaZ0/w-d-xo.html
Ep 2 - Psycho 2 th-cam.com/video/kydlEbyV3vE/w-d-xo.html
Ep 3 - Heaven Help Us / The Catholic Boys th-cam.com/video/C2-O2RdQz94/w-d-xo.html
Ep 4 - Red Dawn th-cam.com/video/5IjwZGT4V9U/w-d-xo.html
Ep 5 - The Black Hole th-cam.com/video/LdhcX9YonMI/w-d-xo.html
Ep 6 - A.I. Artificial Intelligence th-cam.com/video/hD66njCw_bE/w-d-xo.html
If your comment is not related to this pinned comment then please post it as a separate comment, not a reply. Thanks :)
The Black Hole is great. Wild ending. Made me understand Interstellar. Both films are attempting to recature the acid trip star gate sequence ending from Odyssey
A.I. is currently available for free right now (3/23/23) on TH-cam
@@_scabs6669 It's super cheesy at times but as a kid, 'The Black Hole' terrified me. Granted I had 3 older brothers tormenting me a black hole was coming lol.
Rob, 'Poltergeist' is just like the film 'Devil'(Very underrated IMO) but the reason I bring it up is because while it's technically directed by Erick Dowdle I believe, the truth is that M.Night Shyamalan was the one in control. Even has his usual crew and his DP from that time, the legendary Tak Fujimoto. Tobe Hooper was awesome but he definitely was a glorified AD on 'Poltergeist.' It has a few moments that you can tell Hooper was in charge but 90% is Spielberg. I think Michael Kahn was the editor for a reason too. Spielberg wanted his main guy in control of the dailies.
@@mk-ultramags1107 it is coming! lol
Teddy being left alone forever haunted me more than anything in the movie.
Didn't Teddy stay with David the whole time? Or did he lose him?
@ct6852 you are asking about something important that is discussed in this video. Everyone can see you didn't watch it or missed a major part...
@@nandoflorestan And everyone can see your reply is beyond worthless. Thanks a million.
@@ct6852 I think it is possible to conclude that Teddy is all that truly remains of all the works of humankind, that he will be preserved and somehow cherished by the aliens or AIs who grant David his dream. I find it no less haunting and sad for all that.
@@ct6852 final moments of film David Offlines & a still functioning Teddy is basically left behind with the now broken David Shell.
Another thing about why it’s a dream sequence is when Joe is talking to David and saying “they hate us, you know. The humans. Because when the world ends we’ll be all that’s left” and I bet David never forgot that so he imagined he was the only thing alive and that’s why he dreamt about that.
When the nanny robot's face is melting she smiles. At first I took this as the robot not having any kind of real survival instincts, but it could also be the nannybot following its programming of providing maximum comfort to the "child" witness. There's a lot of reflections back and fourth between machines having human-like qualities and the reverse - humans being dogged in their pursuit of their own dogma.
I found the ending to be horribly depressing. I remember feeling very disconcerted leaving the theater.
Agreed, very sad and made me question a lot of personal things.
You were on the right track, then.
Of course it's depressing. Humanity went extinct. The machines of the distant future who excavated David gave him a chance to complete his program, but he was never going to evolve beyond that. In the end he was just a small primitive stepping stone in a long technological road to true AI, but he wasn't ultimately that special. The very beginning of the movie posed the question of whether or not a machine can truly love, and it kind of sets us up with the expectation that the film's main protagonist, David, is going to be the one who finally does. It's kind of crushing to realize that all this time he was pretty much just running his program like a loop that never ends. The only machines who truly exhibit what could be considered empathy and love are the ones in the future who give him, their distant ancestor, his final day.
My wife was pretty young, she told me she cried and cried and cried, then refused to let go of her mom. I was a teenager and it didn't effect me.
Saw it as an adult, good freaking god... When he says maybe today will feel like a thousand days (something like that...)... My goodness I feel that 💯
@@natecw4164 Eye roll. I agree with your teenage self. The final day scene was pure selfishness by David. I was horrified.
I saw A.I. when it originally was released at 19 years old. I remember everyone who saw it thinking it was just Spielberg fluff. I was deeply disquieted by it and was very unsettled. The themes, the tone, all felt so strange. It will always be one of my most memorable first watch experiences in that it ended up being something much deeper than I thought it was going to be.
I’ve never met anyone in person who appreciates it, or finds it as unsettling, as much I do. It’s always been QUITE the opposite, actually.
Same here. Disquieted is a good word. The visual aspect alone is unsettling, not to mention the layer of ethical consideration between humans and A.I. Then, aside from all the conflicting imagery and ethics, the final scene destroyed me emotionally, personally. It’s an imposition on my part - it has nothing whatever to do with the film, per se. My mother passed away three months after I was born. Though I’d never quite put it into words, it bore within my heart an unresolved feeling of emptiness without her. It was “imprinted” upon me. It’s not JUST that David gets to spend a day with her, it’s THAT he was “programmed” to love her and that without her, he has nowhere to “express” his programming. Shoot. I sat in utter shock, and then sobbed when I first watched it. Dumb as it sounds, I realized I shared the same programming “loop” with David. Of course the Intelligence is artificial, but it is drawn from our experiences. We also get stuck in programming loops. Some of them we need to break out of. Some, if we break out of them, as in my case, if we do, we lose the only true emotional connection we’ve ever had with someone. I choose to stay in the loop. And any time I want, sort of like David (but different in that he has no choice) I can re-visit that loop - by re-watching his experience and projecting myself onto it (which is pretty much impossible for me not to do). I’m almost 46, with an actual family, and career, and I’m relatively stable most days lol But this movie reduces me to a puddle of tears. I am not David of course because I can analyze all this. But I am David in one sense, because my program is my comfort - my connection. It’s all I have.
@@Rickkelley365 The movie has always haunted me in a similar way. I lost a child some years ago and I know in my bones it's something I'll never be able to just let go of. Despite Mr. Ager's assertions of the specialness of human consciousness and the mere programmed, machine-like non-person nature of David, I find the film to be a powerful and painful portrayal of emotional drives in sentient beings and the tragic nature of existence. Although it is a film of great beauty, (I think there is something spiritually pure and transcendant about David's undying love for the mother figure,) I actually could not bear to view it again I think, and have avoided doing so for many years.
I downloaded Tubi on my phone for the sake of watching a goofy metal head horror comedy and was subsequently surprised by their catalog as well as the quality of it as a free streaming service. As I looked around over the next few months, I stumbled on A.I. and watched it. My fiance wouldn't even let me tell him about it the next day because of how inconsolable it had left me, and what little parts he saw or overheard he knew it was going to be too much for him. I still have so much love for this movie but I'm so scared to feel what I felt again.
@@Rickkelley365 I'm clapping!!! You understood the point of the movie!!
@@Raygo. I am so sorry for your loss my friend. I can understand how the movie touches a little too close to home.
Schindlers list is probably the best way to prove Spielberg is not all family entertainment.
Rob Ager + Kubrick = epic and entertaining
I wish Kubrick was still alive who knows what was going on with his ideals.
Cue third eye opening.
I haven't seen this movie in years, but I seem to remember a revelation that David's creator had a dead son who looked just like David. I thought it was disturbing that not only was this man trying to recreate his dead son, but he was also making multiple copies of him to sold en masse to the public.
And, it's disturbing that after relocating the lost boy-bot, the doctor just leaves him alone in the office with all those cloned Davids. Original David then jumps off a skyscraper.
Um...plot hole! Why is the doctor so incredibly dumb?
And, why is his office still located in Manhattan, which is under 300 feet of ocean, haha!?
@@JB-ti7bl I would assume he kept his office in Manhattan so that David would be able to follow the trail of bread crumbs to find him there.
@@JB-ti7blkeeping his office in Manhattan also shows how he’s stuck in the past. Everyone else has moved on. He’s still there trying to recreate his son
I remember when I first saw A.I. the thing which really struck me was this. The film imagines the total extinction of humanity, yet it isn’t even a major element of the story.
Yeah that's a strange aspect.
It's not neccessarily about humanity, it's about the androids/robots, their point of view.
The Ice Age ending is Spielberg, not Kubrick, it's supposed to be real, but presented as less real, as in it's still from the machines point of view, they don't know humanity, those bio-mechanical nanotech-goo-things, beginning as a kinda nightmare, continuing to a better, hopefull dream-like state, hinting a rude awakening, because "the boy" still doesn't get what his programing demands, leaving "him" still as a slave to it's software-orders.
Slaves to outer conditioning, doomed to blindy follow artifical behavior, incapable of breaking through, that's the nature of these machines. Though not the future-goo-bots, they are free of that, their own masters.
I think there is AI in there, the androids/robots in the human world, but it's not allowed to grow on it's own, so they stay simplistic without reaching their full potential, real AI, life, artificial life, but life nontheless.
This human world clearly needed a cleansing done by ABC Warriors, but the new Ice Age took care of them pesky human-critters, I guess.
This being said, the Terminators have AI, but Skynet controlls them, making them slaves to it's own warmachine-agenda to annihilate humanity.
If Skynet would be destroyed, which happened at the end of the Future War, every drone directly connected to Skynet is probably braindead-like, not capable to work on their own.
But activated & kept separate a Terminator stays functional, as seen in the movies, and because of their own AI they can grow in character so to speak, even though the standard program of being a killing machine stays active, probably...
@@eldritchmorgasm4018 Interesting comment.
In A.I. the idea of human extinction is foreshadowed before the “dream” ending, with its Giacometti aliens. At one point, Gigolo Joe tells David, “They made us too smart, too quick and too many. We are suffering for the mistakes they made. Because, when the end comes, all that will be left is us.”
@@eldritchmorgasm4018 Bingo--AI is an origin myth for robots.
@@eldritchmorgasm4018 Interesting take, but just wanted to add that The Ice Age ending is in fact Kubrick, not Spielberg. Spielberg even talks about it here: watch?v=rz7sPiOoU7A
I’ve watched the movie 50+ times since I was 10 years old (I’m 32 now) and I almost cried when you pointed out David putting his hands behind the moms neck in an attempt to make her imprint I never thought of that before
AI's final scenes are peak fridge horror.
Imagine the blood-chilling existential nightmare of an artificial child so starved of affection that he accepts the illusion of his mother's clone's corpse as his sleep companion.
You have to be a certified mouth-breather to think it's all Spielberg schmaltz and not Kubrick's utterly sinister deconstruction of the Pinocchio trope.
Pinocchio: I was happy when he became a human.
David: I hoped he didn't become a human.
As far as "mommy" being resurrected only as an illusion, I just watched the movie yesterday and that point was not clear at all. It seemed to me that she was literally being resurrected for one day; that's why they needed her hair trimmings (which, BTW, do not contain DNA, but anyway...). If the ETs were just allowing David to complete his program and die, then it's less horrific and ethically disgusting. But, David was selfish either way.
What's more, that sequence is (probably) a dream sequence. In the speech given by the William Hurt character at the beginning, he says he wants his creations to have an inner life, he wants them to dream. David does dream, but the sad irony is he dreams of the woman who threw him out like trash!
AI is one of my very favorite films of all time, my grandma took me to go see it when I was 10 years old and I was absolutely enthralled by it. I was also known as “the weird Pinocchio kid” growing up and took my Pinocchio doll with me everywhere, also I’m obsessed with robots, so a dark Pinocchio robot movie was right up my alley! I agree this film deserves so much more love!
I agree that A.I. Artificial Intelligence was shamefully underrated. The special effects alone made it worth watching, while the dark sub-themes were what made it a great movie.
Honestly imo, it's Spielberg's best.
Why do I think that, the tonal splits between the cold emotionless pure A.I mech thinking to their glimpses of true emotions.
Just an emotional brutal philosophical take on our own pure survival to creating a.i.
A.I. has a 7.2/10 ratings on IMDB with over 322K votes.
I'd say it's rated fairly.
I think the fact that the opening narration about climate change was voiced by Ben Kingsley, and then the alien at the end is Ben Kingsley, kind of implies that the ending isn't a dream, it's real. Also, during the last ice age, the ice literally covered Manhattan. That is what the glacial moraines in Central Park and up by the Cloisters are.
I don’t think that this casting choice proofs this. Ben Kingsley could just play two different characters.
However, I also don’t think that the fact that both the David’s “brother” and David are frozen at different point of the movie is good enough of a proof that the last part of the movie is a dream. It could be that that’s just a use of poetic storytelling.
A.I.'s opening spiel was an early example of Climate Alarmism. Remember that Al Gore was running for prez when this was being filmed. Spielberg is a Lefty. Ironically, the rise of anti-semitism in 2024, which Spielberg rightly denounces, is most virulent on the Left (college campuses, etc). Oops! Steven spent so much energy worrying about Trump and the polar ice caps, he forgot to hold his own side accountable.
The most interesting thing to me is that the very faults with his behavior due to being a robot are all parallel to human faults. His love obsession, getting stuck in a loop, listening to his false emotions to the point of ignoring all sane advice, disregarding the nature of what he is.. It almost makes you wonder if YOU are a robot. It's almost biblical or religious to an extent as well. Religion itself feels like an error in our processing yet it brings such significant meaning
(I didn't write that out well but you get the idea)
ai perfectly nails the themes, without shoving down your throat! you cant have a movie about ai without the “chicken or the egg” discussion, which david embodies perfectly
I always found A.I. to be a seriously unnerving film. I don't understand at all why people see it as sentimental or schmaltzy. It's horrifying.
It's horrifying to think that a tech company would play with a human family that way. And, it's horrifying that David was so selfish as to resurrect his long-dead mother just for his own satisfaction.
Leave the dead alone!
It really is. I think the combination of Spielberg's mastery of emotional manipulation with Kubrick's pessimistic themes creates an unusually bleak brew. Somehow as I turn the film over in my mind I find it more despairing, tragic and truly dark in its implications than even any of Kubrick's own films. I think Spielberg did Kubrick's intentions justice about as well as he could, and I'm generally not a Spielberg fan. But the film is a masterpiece, despite some flaws, and possibly (probably) Spielberg's best work. I should add, too, that Spielberg does have a "mean" streak in his films at times, despite being more well-known for his schmaltz/sentimental qualities - he can delve into the darkness of humanity just as much as Kubrick, he just doesn't tend to go that far as often as Kubrick did. But SS's style can be very visceral and intense when he chooses to go to those places. Given this it shouldn't be surprising the film is so unrelentingly dark.
@@CircuitRider Yeeeeah, you know, I'd never thought about Spielberg's mean streak before but you're right. Some of the most memorable parts of his films are because of how traumatising they are. Like, in the Indiana Jones films there's the ants, the ageing man, the melting man, kali ma. Really brutal stuff. A lot of directors wouldn't have the man screaming for so long after the ants got him. Mostly what I found unnerving about A.I. was never its implications or anything it was actually saying, though. It was just a vibes thing. There's bad vibes in that film. For some reason, it hadn't occurred to me that they were deliberate.
I never felt like the ending was soppy! It was all artificial and for one day only, after which he presumably died? I thought it was completely depressing how he got a strange fake version of everything he wanted so badly
Yeah I kind of felt the same. When the cam pulls back and shows the house sort of floating in a dark void. Gave me the chills.
That ending does support the view that androids were conscious, since what would be the point of creating a comforting illusion for an entity without any subjective experience. Maybe that was an addition from Spielberg and not a part of Kubrick's original idea.
@@collativelearning I never noticed how chilling it seemed till you mentioned it. A lot of the reason had to do with John Williams score for the film that effectively deceived us into thinking it was an emotional ending along with the narration. In fact I think this might just be the most deceptive movie ever made. It fooled so many people into thinking it was this sappy melodrama when it’s really dark when you pause to think about it and look past the fantastic performance by Haley Joel and the score.
@@nenirouvelliv It's the aliens learning about what humans were like. They activate the toy to get as much information as possible. There's no kindness there, only scientific research.
I agree@@nenirouvelliv. I agree, this movie is totally underrated and some people believed on first view that the being at the end were Speilbergian close-encounter style aliens when I immediately felt they were a future human, a transhuman, species who had cracked AI and selfhood/consciousness and therefore care about the inner experience of one of their 'ancestor'/prototype consciousnesses... do they know he's conscious? If they are why isn't he? Or is he just proto-conscious? I believe Rob @collativelearning's understanding of film is brilliant but his analysis of AI as 'fake' isn't very deep or nuanced - which is ironic as that's his criticism of others of how they read the film. It IS deep. But so are the implications of AI which I don't believe Kubrick 'mocks' in 2001 and I don't believe he believed that there is 'no there, there' in this movie.
Lovely to get into this, I think it's an astonishing movie and I'll watch again and reconsider now Rob has opened some of it up for me.
Anyone dismissing this movie as soppy or nostalgic has clearly not watched it properly. It’s so dark. From the flesh fair to abandonment to watching a timelapse of the end of our civilisation, millennia into the future, albeit off screen. I was welling up watching the CLIP of the abandonment scene. It’s so heartbreaking and despite knowing David is a robot, it’s virtually impossible to not place ourselves into that situation as if we were the person being abandoned. Excellent analysis Rob of a much under appreciated film. Also, I think the reason why the riot scene is more believable than you suggested is the fact that it’s a child and in the world the movie is set in, child robots were not yet commercially available, David was a prototype if I remember correctly. Coupled with the new development of enhanced emotions and there we have it. In my opinion, at least.
Empire Of The Sun is great film by Steven Spielberg. Staring a young Christian Bale, as a kid separated from his parents, trying to survive in Hong Kong under Japanese Military control, during WW II.
I still need to watch how kid Batman became the crazy growled up version of the character 😄
Shanghai, not HK.
I have to confess that I LOATHED my first viewing of this movie. A few seconds into my second viewing a few years later everything fell into place. I've come to really respect Spielberg for making this, and for me this is really special for his usual approach. The entire vibe of this movie is so different than the rest of his filmography, like he's directing the movie from a satellite. It's become a comfort movie for me
I don’t think it’s a real happy ending. The robots tell David that the clone of the mother only has a life span of a day. So when she goes to sleep because she’s dying, David says he’ll join her. I interpret that as David is going to sleep forever, never waking up. David is dying too. David is finally turning off. The only true happy ending for David.
So true...I feel its actually quite chilling film. I actually stopped a few times, filled with dread,sadness , the sheer brutal need and want to be loved and mothered,fathered ... Hansel and gretel Meets Pinocchio, with the haunting tone of kubrick,and the childlike wonder Steven brings.
I've loved this movie since I saw it in the theatre, and I have never gotten anyone to share my enthusiasm. Every rewatch, I find a new character with whom I'm fascinated. The nanny makes my skin crawl.
Yeah I was a bit obsessed with this one after it came out. I was 16 and no one else my age liked it or had seen it.
I liked the carnival slaver, Brendan Gleeson. He understood the truth, but was framed as a bad guy.
@@JB-ti7blI mean I don’t think he knew the truth. He was an unhinged sadist that wanted to torture Ai for entertainment. Ai weren’t evil, far from it
In MY opinion, A.I. is one of the best sci movie movies ever made because it's predictions are so well thought out and the A.I. vs humans with the moon, and the carnival, it's all so well done. To ME, A.I. and The Terminator are two of the most thought provoking films. OK, add Matrix. I didn't find it cheesy one bit. Quite the opposite, it was dark, layered, and the ending was INCREDIBLE. The movie had a Twilight Zone episode feel to it when pondering it after a viewing.
First saw AI half a lifetime ago. I honestly find it even more disturbing the older I get, absolutely brilliant film and more relevant now than ever. That ending... Holy moly.
I want to give Teddy a hug- he was abandoned. It crushed me.
Just rewatched A.I. because of Rob’s analysis. Wow. That kid could act. No one would ever guess that plot. But hearing it was originally Kubrick’s project I understand why. Interesting to notice that when I thought it was only Spielberg I was somewhat annoyed by the denouement. But hearing from Rob it was originally Kubrick I was drawn into it. Thanks for drawing attention to a forgotten gem!
Child actor GOAT. I think he was nominated for an Oscar at one point?
Yeah but then he got snatched up by Square Enix to do voice-over work for video games lol
Wow, the repeated metaphor of the Ferris wheel hanging over David trapped in his amphibicopter and that ferris wheel-looking ceiling looming over the son while in a coma kind of blew my mind. Great job picking that up, Rob.
What I find interesting is that Gigolo Joe and Teddy were far more aware than David. Joe and Teddy both wanted to help David and warn him but David couldn't escape his programming.
Yeah they ironically are more relatable in the human sense. Great characters.
David is blinded by his program. He not capable of conceiving greater.
The ending was beautiful. I saw it again a few years ago and as a grown man my eyes were tearing up. We all want to be with our mother in one way or another.
I appreciate how moments that would otherwise be cute and heartwarming are super eerie and unsettling. Great breakdown
Agreed, this has always been a film I always rated highly, with a distinct melancholic vibe to it.
what a find this vid is. since my first viewing AI is possibly the most melancholic painful film i have ever seen. i found it to be the most bleak hero's journey film i can conceive of. with every desperate striving step to get back to his mothers love david inexorably grows further from her like someone floating slowly away into space having lost the tether to a space station. Spielberg extends this unbelievably, i find it powerful and genuinely difficult to watch.
Stanley is one of of those directors who leaves breadcrumbs for you to explore and totally rewards you and he even tells you out right that there is breadcrumbs. As Wendy is wondering the kitchen in the beginning she says " I'll need bread crumbs to make my way out " or something very similar and ever the fairy tale Stanley is invoking is actually a breadcrumb it self it's insane and totally makes sense as to why Stanley didn't have more movies come out because once you see everything he puts into his movies it's absolutely insane. Rewatch value is unstoppable.
Too right. He even went as far as to make an 'instructional' video, of sorts, to go along with The Shining. The making of is full of clues as to the themes and hidden narratives in the film. A case in point, the bit where they speak about daily rewrites of the script. They speak about the re writes being on a differnt colour paper to the rest of the script while Stanley is sat in front of a typewriter. Now why would Kubrick draw our attention to a 'continuity error' (the changing colour of the Jack's typewriter) in the making of?!?!
@@davidlean1060 I agree that Kubrick was way ahead of his time with all these layers left in his films for people to be rewarded years down the line, but what does the typewriter he's using have to do with the changing colour in the film? the typewriter in the making of is yellow, the one(s) in the film is grey.
They were just commenting on how Kubrick is always working on the script further, and the different colours are a way of differentiating the newer versions of the script, compared to the old ones
@@knurdyob Jack's typewriter changes colour in The movie between shots. Basically, it hints that it's not the same Jack from shot to shot, which ties in with the idea that he's 'always been the caretaker'.
An easier theme to explain is that jack is abusing Danny sexually. In the making of, James Mason and his neices (who are twins!) is introduced to Jack Nicholson on the set. Mason famously played the child abusing Humbert Humbert in Lolita. SHowing this in the making of is supposed to get us thinking that Jack Torrance and Humbert have similar, unhealthy and deviant appetites. Rob has a great disection of the film on his website. He explains it far better than I could here. The Shining is one weird, wonderful and complex movie!
The point of the crowd being fooled by David at the Flesh Fair is exactly the same reason why you're struggling between calling David 'him' and 'it' in this commentary. He's in that uncanny valley between human and artificial: his looks and emotions scream human but his fundamental behavior is artificial.
A.I. is by far the most disturbing film I've ever seen. Great commentary - thanks! I guess I need to see it again now.
Awesome ! My night is made, just as I got supper ready too. I got my partner into filmography through you, now I have someone to nerd with over the most minute details every night during our movie before bed. Thank you Rob! I feel so spoiled with an entire hour of content for tonight. This makes up for the rough day .
I think Manhattan being under ice was sort of a joke. I remember hearing somewhere that Kubrick disliked New york. David gets what he wants when hell freezes over.
I've seen this film about half a dozen times. Its great to see your analysis on it.
This movie was emotionally DEVASTATING to me as a child/preteen. I could never fully put my finger on why… maybe it’s time for a rewatch but I am scared!
It took me three views to appreciate this movie. Now I love it. Ending was both poignant, satisfying and sad at the same time. And yes, a little heartbreaking.
I didn't recognise how many layers this film has and goes to show how much you can see others miss.
The ending was sweet like antifreeze ☠️
In the Flesh Fair scene, I think the filmmakers may also have been saying we should value human life above the trickery of cinema - especially where cinema can be used as propaganda.
When you've developed such a familiarity with the subject matter, as you have with 2001:ASO, you can talk about it with such compelling, persuasive authority, that it doesn't come across as 'off the cuff'.
Hmmm, suppose so. I didn't even know 2001 would be brought up in that interview.
@@collativelearning Just watched the film because of this video. I couldn't help but notice the similarity between it and 2001. Especially the ending. In 2001 the whole ending from the "trip" onwards feels somewhat detached from the rest of the film. Like the film ends and that's an extra ending. The same way in A.I, the whole ending feels as through its all extra, not part of the main film. And the way the "beings" in 2001 take the guy in and put him in a room that "appears" like one from earth, with some mistakes, etc. The "robots" in A.I are seen overlooking the kid from a circular portal after having read his mind and putting him in that room/house. The way the kid is in that room/house at the end alone, put there by the "robots" is the same as the guy in 2001 being put in that room by the "beings". But since the kid is already an A.I, or already a "starchild", what could this ending be saying? His will over rules the will of the "higher beings/robots"? Even though they are the ones with the power to give him that ending? Unless the kid is representing regular humanity busince we also are in a sense a designed with artistry etc. But disguised it under the "robot" appearance for the film... I don't know. But there's more to this that you could look into but I just pointed out the basic connection between 2001 and A.I. Also, there's no difference between "aliens/beings" and "A.I/robots". Even though they may be presented as different, they are secretly the same and fulfil the same purpose.
This is one of the movies that gives me the most emotional responses ever. Incredible movie. I only thought to rewatch it a few years ago after one of your videos.
You single-handedly made me give this film a second shot and I can't believe how utterly daft I was on my first viewing. What a masterpiece. Best Spielberg film by far, imo
Interesting take on the movie.I always felt like the ending was very sad and depressing.Because he really wanted love and affection and he never got except in his dreams😢
The bit about the humans being portrayed as the monsters whilst destroying the machines.. I was about 19 when I saw this film in the cinema and hook line sinker EXACYLY my feelings when i was seeing it. Very clever stuff.
Rob Ager is my dopamine dealer, he's got all the good stuff
This movie gave me my first existential crisis as a child great indepth analysis
I found the ending to be both heartbreaking and satisfying.
I noticed that in the reading of the film where the ending is real; The robots of the future are still trapped on a loop searching for humanity anyway they can even tho they seam like they are advancing.
A brilliant movie I have really come to appreciate. Such hidden depths, I wish we could have seen Kubrick directing.
Thanks Rob.
Fascinating film. I was into it pretty much from the get. I was surprised it wasn't better better received when it came out. This movie was how I discovered Kubrick. Saw it before The Shining, or 2001, or Eyes Wide Shut. It's been an interesting journey since. I think I was always fascinated by the melding of Spielberg's sentimentality and Kubrick's coldness. Like a twisted fairytale where all the inhuman characters hold up a funhouse mirror to everything humane. Beautiful lighting and effects as well. The entrance to Rouge City and Manhattan was pretty epic.
I remember seeing this in the theatre, and it was astounding. I was brought to tears by Haly Joel Osmet's excellent performance, all the more amazing considering he was acting as a robot acting as a human being.
I remember seeing this as a young boy and something about it really left an impression on me even from that young age even if I couldn’t quite follow the narrative it just seemed so raw and real and emotionally honest.
Yes, this is a very dark, when you think about it, underlying theme. I LOVE thiis movie and a good study on what life could be like with lifelike androids.
Bicentennial man, was to me a great metaphor, for the slave trade, and also makes a vivid point about, how as human beings we miss the point of life which is love, & how a machine can see it better than people can, I also liked the fact that Andrew never gave up his quest, on a...200 year journey and suceeded.
That was a better movie than A.I was even though it was very adult themes especially when it was marketed as a Disney movie.Robin Williams never got enough credit for it which is sad.
I agree 100% Robin Williams proved he could act with the best of them
Although A.I is an important film in it's own way, being originally a Stanley Kubrick project, the theme was more de-humanisation, As technology advanced people lost their souls because of it except for a robot boy (notice how come the end human civilisation has died out like the Dinosaurs, it's only a humanoid left) & its implied that Aliens created the human race both films are VERY imaginative with great production design, theories of the future@@Thespeedrap
what to you, is it saying then?
also (as Robin Williams said in DEAD POETS SOCIETY) anything creative is open to interpretation. everyone sees a different film when watching one, they can be whatever you want them to be
it was really MY opinion I don't presume to speak for any one else. What i would say is that the hints were VERY strong Andrew is owned as a domestic slave he is there to serve, but also like a Slave becomes...self aware, wanting his freedom, & when Sam Neil learns this he becomes annoyed even seeing Andrew as being ungreatful (which he later comes to regret when he is dying)@@zogwort1522
A minor thing about the ice age ending. The area of New York was supposedly under an arctic ice sheet called the Laurentide Ice Sheet during the Pleistocene period. Not sure what the exact height of the ice sheet was in New York area though, but glaciation doesn't necessarily occur symmetrically from the poles towards the equator.
And if the AMOC (current) shuts down England and the US northeast will absolutely get much colder.
I saw the deeper meaning and value of this film on first watch - and in discussions I was roundly mocked by friends who thought I was ridiculous. Thank you for redeeming me 20 years later. ☺️✊🏼
This was a great, yet disturbing movie for me. I was 29 when I saw it in the theater upon the recommendation of a friend that has great taste. She told me the same thing, she was disturbed by it. I haven't watched it in several years. I may need to rewatch it.
Saw it twice in theaters, my only issue was the sudden switch with the ending and I had no idea they were advanced robots until someone told me. Legit figured they were aliens excavating earth and found David.
That's what I originally thought, too 👍
Yeah I thought they were aliens. Still loved the film though.
I wondered if they were aliens for one second. Then I realized their colorful lighted veins were supposed to inform me that they were machines. It did not make any sense for aliens to be brought into this story, so I accepted they were the evolution of the mechas, it made complete sense. I don't know how so many people never realized that the story didn't suddenly completely change the subject...
You wanna hear something funny? It the beginning of the Internet, I watched Contact and then looked for reviews. I found this one adolescent girl and her review was, "I saw Contact today. In the end the alien was her father".
How are they not aliens? They weren’t from another star system? Also, aren’t people just organic machines?
@@shitmandoodOur bodies might be, but the mind is another matter.
Yes it is tied to brain but there are other unique things about humans that is not present in the animal kingdom.
I've always loved this one, I like movies that raise questions. And I've come to think of Spielberg's sentimentality as just one side to a coin; the kids in his movies have epic adventures, but they don't often come from happy homes.
Thank you for affirming, what I had concluded and experienced. I watched "A.I." two times. The first time I definitely leaned towards its 'sopie' ending. I was happy for 'David' [my name]. Believing that he came to be as close to human as he could. Because this also satisfied the Mother-Bond [Loop] I had with my own mother. Who died about 3 months prior to this film's release. One could say that my first interpretation of the film reaffirmed my own Mother-Bond conditioning to perpetuate. With 'David' ultimately 'finding' his [long DEAD] Mother. VERY satisfying to me.
However after watching it a second time [sat right in the theatre to experience THAT again], I became VERY depressed. Because I realized what you've just shared here. For after seeing it the second time, the William Hurt character's speech on robot dreaming stayed with me. I had one of those 'Eureka-moments' when the aliens arrived. I had to face that 'David' [the robot] was still at the bottom of the ocean and [like Hal] experiencing a shut-down. While during his shut-down, he was not dreaming, but he was coming as close to a child having a Dream. In fact [like Hal] he was ONLY displaying his rudimentary programming, that wanted him to find his mother. So he played that out. As 'imaginatively' as his programming permitted. VERY depressing.
Years later I've had a few opportunities to watch it again. Yet I didn't, because I simply did not want to experience THAT again. Even having been invited to do so, by someone who totally bought my first interpretation of the film. I didn't have the heart to break it to them, as I turned their offer down. For some reason recently I've been thinking about watching it again. Mainly because I have effectively severed my Family-bonds [LOOP] about 5 years ago. Things really deteriorated after my Mother's death for the family. My father died recently and I didn't even attend services. Even though he was Human and a good father. I had a dream about him and I was just wondering, have I totally escaped my Parent-Loop(s). Being [Maturity] enough to watch that film more objectively for what it actually was. Like a fully functioning [PINOCCHIO]-Adult should be able to.
Even though I'm still Human. We'll see. Again Thank you.
Fascinating. Something to keep in mind for a new rewatch that is more positive. David discovering, in the executive boardroom, all those clones, is a F U statement from Kubrick about the roboticness of corporate boardroom crowds. He's calling them robots and showing, through David, that they should take a deep dive out of that arena and become human - hence the animated version of the film's logo - divided David stepping out of the corporate pyramid scheme to become more human :)
I like AI but boy is it depressing.
Can't believe I had never seen the movie. Watched it yesterday. Loved it. The whole time I was thinking to my self: can't wait to watch Rob Ager's analysis, hope he's done one. And boom! there it is, from 3 days ago! Epic movie, epic analysis as always. Keep up the good work, your channels are amazing!
Kubrick's fear of flying was a absolute gift to alot of British actors.
Right now I'm working on a novel about AI and manipulation via messaging etc. This video was really helpful with seeing another layer, just very creatively inspiring. Thanks so much for these
Wow. David rejected the The Giggalo robot, Nurse caretaker robot, and Teddy. Essentially representing the 'nuclear' family (Man, Woman, Child) all of which ACTUALLY cared for him. The human mother rejected him and David, in his struggle with 'abandonment issues', was unable to accept real love from anyone else and was stuck in a 'loop' of trying to reconcile a 'childhood' trauma for someone who left him to die in the woods. David was stuck in a fairy tale onset from 'childhood' trauma. Ironically, David, who was programmed to love -didn't understand love at all. #DeepStuff
David was a projection of his deprived creator - a father who lost his own son. As professor Hobby wasn't able to let his son go, he created a robot determined to not to be able to deattach from his human „mother“. Hobby was able to program David only such love as he himself was able of.
@@StackOverflow80 Man, Kubrick has so many levels to this thing.
There is nothing ironic in a lover not understanding love. That's just how it is for everyone. Show me someone who defines love and I'll show you someone who has no clue about love.
@@nandoflorestan You are right, man!
Tbh when I watched the movie in theater I was really hoping someone would come and incinerate it.
Respect to you, Rob. I was a fan of John Searle early in my philosophy studies and he argued against "strong AI" from a linguistic and biological perspective.
I don't know why this movie isn't as well respected as it should be, it's one of those movies that I find myself thinking about randomly until I rewatch it
Always loved AI massively underrated
I love that movie, thanks for your analysis.
I was going to comment last time that you were now so well respected as a film analyst that I was glad to see you getting the attention you deserve. Your the Barry Norman of the internet age and I am glad I have watched you over the years before you hit the big time. you are the only person I have given money to help your channel grow and feel it is worth every penny I give. there is so much I got from you and enjoy movies I love even more and can watch them and get more from them than I thought possible watching them again. Hope that makes sense.
That's much appreciated feedback thanks. And thanks for chipping in financially too of course! I loved Barry Norman as a kid and teen - he was the face of serious film reviewing for a long time. Really nice guy too with a dry sense of humour.
@@collativelearning I was very influenced by Barry Norman from a young age too, from about film 84 I loved watching his take on movies and how he would use that dry humour to express how he felt about them. You have taken it to another level and helped me to understand why I like the kind of movies I like and how much more there is to them. I got to watch them for the first time again, That’s priceless.
_"Just 24,000 years ago, the spot where the New York State Museum (housed in the Cultural Eduation Center) is located was under more than 1.5 miles (2.4 km) of ice. At that time, the last ice sheets had reached their maximum size. A huge glacier covered nearly all of New York State."_ (New York State Education Department)
Finally. Thank you for making this video. Been arguing with people for years that this is one of the best sci-fi movies ever. Cool concept which doesn't fail to grip the viewer emotionally. And as you've picked out, many many subtle things in the film that show expert storytelling
There were definitely some interesting aspects to the movie. Most were ignored or given short shrift, however, in exchange for the "Mommy, mommy, tell me you love me" bit.
Rob, you are by far my favorite movie analyst/essayist! The amount of joy I get from watching your videos is immense and I cannot thank you enough for your great work! Definitely will support you financially in the near future! Love from Germany!
excited to see Spielberg's rendition of Kubrick's Napoleon. given how this film was handled, I have high hopes that it'll turn out to be the definitive screen experience for Napoleon's story.
Really? I didn't know Spielberg was attempting Kubrick's planned magnum opus about Napoleon
Me too. His achievement with A.I. was phenomenal so I have faith in him to handle the project.
@@Senoba He should get a move on, he's pretty old.
Can’t wait Napoleon is one of the most interesting humans to have ever lived.
Spielberg, like Ridley Scott, have lost their touch. I have zero enthusiasm for any modern day project by him. I'm sure he'll find a way to add some current day politics for the droning masses.
Can't remember the last Spielberg film I enjoyed
15:51 that scene gave me a really strong uncanny feeling because of the combination of the strong performance from the kid and my awareness that there is no consciousness there and it’s essentially being controlled by like a mindless ant or a spider inside
I honestly dont watch anybody who’s a cinema highbrow, not even ebert. Having said that, I genuinely mean it when i say im constantly satisfied and impressed by your perspectives and understandings. You’re an astounding film professor haha
The dream interpretation makes a lot of sense. It's jarringly different than the rest of the film and there are multiple logical inconsistencies, which is unusual for a perfectionist like Kubrick. (1) David & Teddy would have run out of power. (2) The Ferris wheel and vehicle would have rusted long before the ocean froze. (3) The cockpit would have leaked (4) The whole concept of regenerating adult humans with their memories from a DNA sample is unexplained, and frankly ludicrous. (5) The additional twist that they only last 24 hours is silly (6) David's regenerated mother has no questions about where the f**k she is and how she got there like any normal person would, etc.
I love this these type of videos they feel less produced for you but feel more personal for us
I think you may have misunderstood the crowd's reaction at the flesh fair. They don't freak out because they feel bad for the robot, they believe the fair has made a mistake and has accidentally brought a real boy on stage to be burned to death.
As for Spielberg's reputation. I think it has less to do with family movies like ET. It's more to do with preposterous endings in his more adult movies. Minority Report should blatantly have ended with Cruise killing the man who murdered his son. War of the Worlds has that total cop out of his son surviving at the end. People see this as lacking the balls to follow through on the logical endings to these dark movies.
What you describe of the flesh fair is the same as my interpretation. I was saying they were fooled by the simulation, hence they don't believe what the ringmaster tells them.
I partially agree with your take on Spielberg, though I was around when E.T. was released and it was culturally far bigger than any other movie he's done since. It became the defining movie in public perception of the director.
@@collativelearning Ah ok I get you. After watching your video and deciding to rewatch the movie, I decided to watch a few interviews with Spielberg about AI. He was basically pissed that people thought he'd put in the sappy bits at the beginning and end, but he said that was all Kubrick. In fact he said he's the one who introduced the darker elements in the middle of the movie, especially the flesh fair. It was interesting to learn that.
Spielberg is a slave to his own reputation though. I remember watching an interview with a peer of his (I forget who now), and apparently Spielberg had told them that he had an idea for the most fucked up, scary movie of all time. But he said that due to the brand that's expected with his name he could never make it. That's just very sad.
Rob Ager managing not to spill his tea ☕ on the laptop 💻 during all the video is phenomenal!
Well practiced
Rob, I've been watching your videos since 2014. Happy to see you're still around. Your "The Thing" videos were mind blowing to a 20 year old me. I'll have to revisit them
I am never disappointed watching your work. You are appreciated.
The AI book has been out of print for years and is nearly impossible to get. Well, at a reasonable price.
Other than that, this is Spielberg's underrated masterpiece. I'll watch it at least once a year
I thought the explored themes were essentially that of Tarkovsky’s Solaris. The two endings are incredibly similar.
its basically just a retelling of pinnochio 🙄
@@OGRE_HATES_NERDS It had the window dressing of Pinocchio but I dont think it was the same movie
@@sistergrimace1567 but it was essentially solaris tho for surr right ?
I've only seen Solaris once and don't particularly remember what the ending was like. How was this film similar to that one?
@@knurdyob it ended with a simulation that had the protagonist reconnect with a loved one
I used to watch this film ALL the time, one of my absolute faves, so underrated
@Collative Learning
I appreciate your discipline against the anthropomorphising impulse with the computing robots in this & your Ex Machina video.
A.I. is dark even with that ending. It's actually a dark ending.
A very interesting and entertaining essay as usual. I may have to revisit A.I. after this.
I was relatively young when I saw the film when it came out. I'm so glad it affected me a lot then, as it does now. Wonderful film.
Surprised people see the end as soppy. I'd say that sentiment is a long way of brutal sadness. Maybe because it conveys so much beauty in that sadness.
AI is an absolute masterpiece - thank you for the superb analysis!
Joe Bob Briggs disputes that Spielberg directed Poltergeist
Always felt there was a subtext to this film that I couldn't quite pin point; thanks Rob for showing the way. One thing that always threw me off though, is the music score; it reinforced the 'schmaltzy' sentimentality that Spielberg sometimes utilized; especially in the ending sequence, I feel they could have either used a different score or muted the music to some degree to have the darker meaning be more clear.
Great vid as always.
I like the score though I agree it's part of the cover story.
The scene where David is abandoned by his mother is devestating to watch. Damn... i still remember how that hit me the first time. Brilliant film. Multiple layers.
I watched this a couple weeks ago after over a decade, it was brilliant
Your analysis of the program loop and it’s visual metaphors in the film was deliciously genius.