From: Miriam English (miriam@werple.net.au)
Date: Thu Mar 07 2002 - 17:52:22 MST
My first response to anyone who totally pans a movie is to suggest that
they try making a movie. It is *really* hard. It is even harder to do in a
way that affects people, as this one did for an heck of a lot of people.
I am sure Steven Spielberg wasn't making this movie with the intention of
satisfying a small number of people who think the future will be just
peachy-keen (I include myself in that number). I believe that, apart from
making a work of art to play a tune on people's heartstrings, he was trying
to sound a number of warnings. Mary Shelly was wrong about using
electricity to re-animate a dead person, but that doesn't make her warnings
about arrogance and cowardice any less important. Unlike her, I think
re-animation of a dead person is a potentially wonderful event, but her
warnings are still important.
Spielberg's points are similarly important. I don't think humans are very
likely to eliminate themselves, and I doubt emotions could be easily
switched on, but there were a lot of other messages in the film. For
instance, if people become locked into seeing AIs as just tools then we
will be making a big mistake -- they will eventually have a mental life of
their own... even if that life is not really human or some kind of
caricature of humanity, it will still be a valid experience. He shows that
nicely in the little AI-boy's search for the blue fairy. He is stunted at
the stage of a young child forever.
Remember also that this is still art. Although tragic it is still a real
experience for for the AI boy. Think of how Romeo and Juliet suicide -- it
didn't need to happen, it's remarkably unlikely, and while watching it you
don't want it to happen, but it is done for the sake of the story, not so
that you or I can feel good. That is what tragedy is.
As for your comment that in the glittering future presented in the film,
everything remains the same as now, but with tinkering at the technological
edges. I believe that is one of Spielberg's main messages. Look at how
people conducted themselves 1,000 years ago. Much has remained the same.
Yes, much is better, especially technology, but things have remained
largely the same socially. Large parts of the world's population still live
effectively as indentured slaves for their entire lives. We few live as
royalty did. I don't share Spielberg's dystopian view, but it doesn't
reduce its value as a warning, just as George Orwell's 1984, or the
original Rollerball film (wonder what the new one will be like) were very
important warnings.
Condemming Spielberg's vision for having pretty icing doesn't stick either.
He got the topic on the agenda of ordinary folk. It saddens me that he
scared a lot of them... but at least he did get it out there and showed
people how mechanoids could have *real* internal lives. This is important.
Beware of dismissing something simply because it doesn't fit with your own
view or because some technicalities might be awry.
Cheers,
- Miriam
At 07:27 PM 08/03/2002, nanowave wrote:
>Last night I rented the movie A.I. on video cassette. I presume that
>Schpielberg knows more than I about what Joe public is likely to buy, but by
>the end of this film I found myself wanting to string him up by the toenails
>and tap his balls with a cold spoon. Titanic - good, Private Ryan -
>excellent, Schindler's list - bravo, A.I. - come here so I can slap your
>fool head off.
>
> From a Transhumanist perspective, this movie was about as awful as I could
>have imagined - a truly uninspiring waste of magnetic storage media. Shame
>on you Ray Kurzweil for giving it the general thumbs-up that essentially
>inspired me to rent it. I honestly can't reconcile that view with your
>brilliant essay - The Law of Accelerating Returns.
>
> From the opening, I found myself feeling disappointed. Polar ice caps all
>melted - world's low-lying cities flooded, the gap between the have's and
>the have not's widened - eww, Schpielberg's been disasterbating all over my
>television screen - I feel so violated! Ever heard of Julian Simon, Steven?
>Thought not.
>
>Then a conference room full of engineers. "Well boyz, we're making a fortune
>selling these here sex-bots, but I have another idea - let's make a robot
>that can really love - unlike this 'low end' beauty who doesn't even seem to
>get offended when you drive a sharp object through her hand."
>
>Next it's cryonics - called cryogenics of course. See Freezer-Boy packaged
>in a touchingly frosted Plexiglas cryostat thingy - sans the LN2 and
>sleeping bag. And there's his poor tragic mom sniveling away her life in the
>apparent far-fetched dream that her son will get better one day. She uses
>her handy-dandy transducer to play some nice music for the boy who's
>auditory neurons are apparently firing just fine, despite being frozen
>solid.
>
>Dad says hey, got an idea! Let's bring home an ultra high-tech Mecha Child
>to help cheer up depressed mom. She's a bit bitchy at first, but warms up to
>the idea after the creepy little feller - who moves like Kwi Chang Kane,
>jumps out and startles her several times and displays some voyeuristic
>toilet tendencies. She's apparently sold when she finds out he can make a
>great cup of coffee.
>
>Mom utters the magic words that flip on Mecha Child's 'luuuv circuit' and
>things seem real nice for a couple of days. Then, uh oh, Freezer-Boy's been
>cured and he's coming home tomorrow! This is sure to spoil the fun for Mecha
>Child - you can just tell. Apparently we now have A.I. and Nanotechnology,
>but daily life is pretty much same, same.
>
>Freezer-Boy comes home and finds that someone has been sleeping in his bed.
>He decides to make artificial life really difficult for Mecha Child. "Eat
>spinach and did you spawn from hell! Go snip momma's hair while she's
>sleeping, she won't mind a bit. Let's find out who teddy loves more - come
>here Teddy." At first I was puzzled as to why Teddy had to have such a
>coarse, Fred Sanford kind of voice, until I realized that a sweet voice
>would have allowed him to easily steal the show from artificially
>not-so-intelligent Mecha Child.
>
>Next some mean boys at the birthday party terrorize Mecha Child. "Save me
>little brother! Oops, sorry I nearly drowned you in the swimming pool. But I
>panicked - please just love me!"
>
>Dad says - Mecha Child too dangerous now - it's back to the factory for
>destruction. Mom has second thoughts, but eventually caves and abandons
>Mecha Child in the woods. I just knew she was a bitch. Mecha Child - David,
>who now thinks he's Pinocchio in search of the Blue Fairy, if you can
>believe it, just keeps right on loving her just the same - much like a dog,
>or a pet rabbit might be expected to do.
>
>At this point Schpielberg really gets his futuristic rocks off with some
>stunning dystopian and grotesque imagery. Robotic motorcycle goons on the
>rampage round up the poor stupid A.I's who have been living in the wild. I
>though the grinning neon wolf's-head bikes were particularly bright when
>it's later revealed that the A.I.'s haven't even the capacity to fear public
>dismemberment, being fired out of a cannon, or dissolved in acid.
>
>I'll skip forward because this part of the movie didn't seem entirely
>realistic.
>
>David eventually finds the blue fairy, busts up the head of a younger
>version of himself, tries to commit suicide, gets saved by some silver fish
>and a sex-bot named Joe - "hey Joe whaddaya know" - finds another blue
>fairy, gets pinned underwater in a flying police helicopter, and goes
>catatonic after two thousand years of praying to an inanimate object.
>
>The human race dies out, of course. Anorexic decedents of the (sex-bots?)
>revive David and grant his sole wish to bring back his abandoning bitch Mom
>for a day of cutesy bonding. But of course, it can only be ONE DAY because
>two millenniums after acquiring nanotechnology and advanced A.I. no one
>seems to know how to make a cup of coffee strong enough to keep Mom awake
>past midnight. (Hey, but wasn't coffee David's specialty? Oh well.)
>
>David is apparently not interested in spending eternity among the advanced
>anorexic beings, so he cuddles up next to Mom and shuts himself down. What a
>sweet, lovely, deathist ending to a classic piece of cinematic refuse. I
>hope this review hasn't spoiled the movie for any of you who were planning
>to rent it ;-)
>
>Want to see a good movie tonight? Dig up 'Sirens' with Elle Macpherson, Sam
>Neill, and Hugh Grant. A witty, light-hearted romp to lift your spirits.
>
>Russell Evermore
>Independent Researcher/Polymath
---------=---------=---------=---------=---------=---------=------
To the optimist, the glass is half full.
To the pessimist, the glass is half empty.
To the engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.
---------=---------=---------=---------=---------=---------=------
http://werple.net.au/~miriam
http://members.optushome.com.au/miriame
Virtual Reality Association http://www.vr.org.au
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:12:49 MST