Is this the greatest sci-fi movie that Spielberg ever put out or was it simply one of the best?

Is this the greatest sci-fi movie that Spielberg ever put out or was it simply one of the best?

more like one of the worst

trash flick start to finish

LMAO le reddit robot boy is a robot but a boy

7/10 movie. Nothing more. Nothing less.

Comme si, comme ca.

I hate this movie more than anyone else alive.

Reasoning?

I thought it was underwhelming.

Spielberg has much better sci-fi, like Close Encounters, ET, Jurassic Park.

it's shit

It didn't really work for me. Kubrick was on to some interesting stuff, but Spielberg was too sentimental for it.

spielber basically raped the corpse of kubrick by making this

I would say this movie is the ultimate pleb test. It is absolutely beloved by anyone with a serious interest in film/most critics of worth, but if you ask the average normie about it (ie. the people on this board in terms of film taste) they get so upset. It's hilarious to watch.

But yeah OP, it's Spielberg's best movie and one of the best movies ever made.

Haley Joel Osment would have had a great career if he stayed a kid for a little bit longer. Spielberg was thinking he was a genius making deep films.

Nah, Jurassic Park, ET, Close Encounters, Indiana Jones, Private Ryan, Goonies...all will be watched more than A.I.

Absolutely, a great film.


We're not saying 'most popular', we're saying 'best'.

Spielberg didn't make the Goonies.

And what on earth does that have to do with a movie's quality? Avengers has been watched by way more people than most of the masterpieces of the last 10 years combined. Does that somehow make it better? No.

You had to ruin it with DNA and ayy lmaos.

Thanks a lot, Senor Spielbergo

Can you translate that into non-retard speech?

This fucking terrible bait.

The film is incredibly flawed, and anyone with the most basic understanding of filmmaking and/or film theory knows it.

Best Spielberg? Hardly.

>hasn't seen the definitive version

Yeah ok pal nice opinion

Is that right, eh? Can you explain why people like Rosenbaum (probably one of the best critics of the last few decades) considers it one of the best films of the century? I mean his opinion doesn't mean all that much in the long run but you claim that not a single person with any understanding of filmmaking could love it, and yet, the movie has prominent devotees.

Also, Spielberg has put out a lot of great movies but A.I. is his strongest masterpiece. Are you one of those Spielberg fans that mostly love the Indiana Jones movies, Jurassic Park, and Close Encounters? Aka plebs.

Everything about it is terrible. A mom loses her son and buys an identical robot son and no one seems to realize that this isn't a mentally stable thing to do. Then the kid wanders around doing jack shit and meets a robo prostitute for some reason, there's some more bullshit, and for some reason the whole world gets frozen and aliens give roboboy a wish because he's the main character. It was like this movie was written by a five year old and a pothead. It's hard to believe that Spielberg or Kubrick had anything to do with this.

I love it when somebody types something out that they think is making an argument when really it is just demonstrating their own stupidity.

Good attempt at barely describing the plot and believing that makes for a criticism of a movie though pal.

the ending with the aliens was confusing as fuck though

There is no need to make an argument for why AI is bad, just describing its plot is more than enough.

It's trash. I can't believe some people actually like this movie.

>aliens give roboboy a wish because he's the main character

They weren't aliens. They were highly evolved androids who had replaced humanity.

Like Speilberg's Minority Report, the movie has a trick to it: the boy isn't sentient, he's a "philosophical zombie". Gigolo Joe and Teddy likely ARE sentient, however, and demonstrate empathy and emotional development, assisting David even though he is incapable of being anything other than a puppet on a mission (hence the Pinocchio references).

>have to see an alternate version to be good

Yeah ok pal, nice redditing

Gan yyu dandlate dad do ninnitad spek

Another inability to make an argument.

Also, anyone that highlights plot as a movie's main flaw is generally a pleb. Plot is not very important. A.I.'s plot is incredibly moving though.

>Plot is not very important

This is either bait or you're the biggest pleb of all time.

Plot is literally one of the least important aspects of a movie's quality.

Careful that you're remembering the difference between plot and story.

the worst part of the film is the narration, disjointed and with little flair, I cringed every time the narrator insisted a character "stretched his legs" when they went for a walk.

Nice Bloom reference. Not sure why you made it though.

Imagine how desperate you'd have to be for human connection to bump this thread by witlessly referencing an ancient meme.

I don't even know to argue with a statement this stupid

...

It's okay my man, being a pleb isn't such a bad thing. You'll get through life probably better than the patricians.

Spielberg has never made a film which was not frankly utter dross. Anyone with the least knowledge in cinema understands this without question

lol

It's sad that you have to hide behind the "pleb/patrician" meme to hide your lack of understanding. Aristotle was one of the first to argue that plot/narrative was the most important aspect of a story.

Yes because that's what movies are, stories. Are you aware that mediums are different from one another, and that Aristotle didn't know what movies were.

have you ever been happy

I liked it. Reminds me that Haley Joel Osment is fat nowadays

Plot doesn't suddenly become less important just because it's a movie, most of the stories that Aristotle was talking about were plays anyway so they still had an audio and visual competent. Garbage like AI is what we get when writers and directors ignore the need for creating a good plot for their movie.

>compares plays to movies because they have "an audio and visual component"

surely you must know how stupid this sounds

also the story of A.I. is excellent and incredibly moving.

again though, plot doesn't matter all that much. a lot of the greatest movies are essentially plotless or care little about plot.

You're just a pleb and that's alright mate. Anyone who thinks theater and film are similar mediums isn't really worth having a discussion about film with.

Yes it does, film is a graphic art as well as a dramatic one, and modern drama is not about plot either.

...

it's tonally a mess, pacing is terrible, and you can't relate to any character in it

at least Kubrick didn't put his hands on it giving it his characteristic glacial pacing, all characters acting robotically and letting a scene hold for a minute too long instead of correctly editing it

Rosenbaum ranks it, so it must be good.

actually he summarizes pretty well why the movie doesn't connect with the viewer and gives people expecting a "deep masterpiece" a good idea what they're in for

also you haven't presented any counter argument why it's so amazing, just saying "x liked it so it's grate!"

surely you meant "çïnêmà"

sequel when?

so the robo-boy wasn't programmed to know that real ppl can't breathe underwater? gotcha.

>I would say this movie is the ultimate pleb test. It is absolutely beloved by anyone with a serious interest in film/most critics of worth, but if you ask the average normie about it (ie. the people on this board in terms of film taste) they get so upset. It's hilarious to watch.

100% agreed with you. Every single important critic lauds the movie or at the very least acknowledges how strong it is.

So? He wasn't programmed to know that people don't just eat a shit load of spinach and expect to be okay.

Bicentennial Man was better desu

>Gigolo Joe and Teddy likely ARE sentient, however, and demonstrate empathy and emotional development

Considering their designed roles as comfort machines (one for children, the other for adults) they would also both require a serious working understanding of psychology and emotion within their design in order to operate smoothly with their interactions.
David meanwhile is clearly constricted to the mental state of an actual child, including all of the associated tantrums and social fuck-ups.
> when the sexbots are more free and sentient than the synthetic children are

Never mind the fucked up hidden motive of the company that created David, trying to produce a robot that "could dream"

Yeah because Gigolo Joe already totally didn't dream up an escape plan from the murder-frame he found himself in.

I'll chime in and give my two cents:

Does A.I. have a plot?
Is this plot exempt from criticism?
Does it make you a pleb for disliking grave issues within a plot?

What trick does Minority Report have to it?

Not an argument bub.

It's mint...

Until the ending.

How's his sister doin?

came here to post this

exactly. they didn't program him to know that if he loads up on the spinach his face would melt? gotcha.

I always figured Kubrick's script ended with him underwater but then spielberg added the stuff with the future robots/aliens later.