Ok, at the end of A.I. what were those tall slender dealies supposed to be? Aliens, or some fantastic new robot technology?
If robots, why did they need “David” to show them what humans were like? Would they not have been able to tell from other sources? Such as maybe the people who built them?
If aliens, well that was just stupid…
Some space becuase I don’t want people coming at me with hatchets about spoiling the movie.
S
P
A
C
E
I’m pretty sure they were very advanced robots.
At the beginning of the film, when David comes to live with the Swintons and the father is unveiling him to the mother, he first appears behind that door set with a large translucent pane of glass (or something similar). His first image is a somewhat distorted shadow behind the glass, making him appear very like the skinny, bulb-headed things that dig him up.
During their back-and-forthing outside Dr. Know’s, Gigolo Joe tells David that humans hate robots because they know that “when the end comes, we’ll be the only ones left.” As this is film, not the messy world of real life where few things ever truly resolve, I think there’s a good chance that that statement was relevant later on. I’m pretty sure we learn during the last part of the film that in the 2000 years David was under the ice, humans have died out. Thus, Joe was right.
There are allusions a couple of times in the film to humans seeking out those who made them and the answers to existence (such as during the scene outside the chapel in Rouge City). By the end of the film, we’re seeing robots so advanced that they’re doing the same thing, perhaps. I assume if robots can advance this far, they can make other robots even after humans have died out.
There seem to be lights blinking beneath the advanced robots’ ‘skin.’
From here on in, we’re in the realm of me speculating wildly. When they were sharing David’s memories with one another, they needed to touch each other to download them. This, to me, seemed like linking up a computer network.
If they were aliens, that’d totally suck! Even if you don’t like Spielberg as a director, I tend to think even he could understand just how random and pointless that’d make the film. When I think of the creatures at the end as aliens, it makes no sense to me. When I think of them as robots, much of the film comes into sharper focus.
Hope this helps.
Amy
My interpretation is that they are simply very advanced robots built by other robots after all the humans had died, due the rather convenient ice age that happened. David, then, is there only link to humans. That’s why one of them says, “This means he knew living people.”
I keep getting stuck on the fact that, if you think back to the narration at the movie’s opening, it seems the entire story has been narrated by these futuristic Mecha’s.
That changes the film’s thematic meaning in a buncha ways, if you think about it. It also raises some pretty hefty plot holes, but I’ll forgive Steve for those.
I missed the first minute or so of the film (came in just as the Doc was poking the examplemecc’s hand). Can you tell me what was said (or the gist of what was said) during the opening narration? Thanks.
Rhythmdvl
Just saw the movie last night. I read lots of reviews that went both ways on it. I must say, as a big Kubrick fan who, like most people of my generation, grew up on Lucas and Speilberg but am still smarting from Hook and Jurrasic Park, I went into the movie with a mix of trepidation and excitement. But I came out thinking it was great. Is it as good as it could have been had Kubrick done it? Probably not. But it’s a movie that deserves to be made and I think that Steve did a great job. If nothing else, at least he’s TRYING to make a good movie that follows his own aesthetic instead of listening to the marketing folks.
Now, having said that, on to the questions at hand.
The opening narration caught us up on the events that had transpired since our time. The polar caps have melted due to greenhouse gases, flooding coastal cities (Amsterdam and New York are specifically mentioned). Millions starved due to the climate chaos, and the developed countries have imposed draconian laws limited reproduction to one child per couple (negative population growth without genocide) so as not to further strain the dwindling resources. Advances in robotics have allowed mechas to fill many of the jobs that human workers once performed, thus allowing a reasonably good standard of life to be maintained. But although mechas can reason and do just about everything a human can do, they cannot yet experience emotion. That’s where William Hurt comes in…
I would say that you have it right, sdimbert. The story is indeed told by the super mechas of the future. And yes, it does raise lots and lots of thematic issues. Not the least of which is the fact that mechas were made by people, and now the people are being made by mechas!
It also means that the “happy ending” is not a happy ending at all. The robokid gets one day with his mom (don’t get me started on the “time/space pathways”–the weakest link in the film) and then spends the rest of eternity in a zoo like a thawed out Neanderthal. But there’s just no other way it could end. Of course robokid would be of great archeological (“robopological”?) interest to the ultra-evolved mechas. But at least they’re going to treat him with some amount of respect.
So, all in all, I think it was a great movie. Lots of things to talk and debate about after it’s over. And a shitload better than Pearl Harbor for significantly less money.
Ok, I agree now with the first response. When I first saw the future bots, I was so shocked that theymight be alins that I couldn’t think straight.
Personally, I felt that the movie should have ended with him staring at the fairy under the ferris wheel. I felt that the movie after that had too many similarities to 2001’s
Still, I would have preferred the robots to look a little less like those damned slender aliens that everyone nowadays keeps claiming they see…
Oh well. Atleast the movie makesmore sense now.
For more intelligent commentary, see this thread:
A.I (Spoiler)
I thought the bear was telling the story.
Tiny hijack, but I wanted to address this point…
Given Kubrick’s role in this movie, I strongly suspect that this is intentional. 2001: A Space Odyssey can be seen as a story about the evolution of man, while A.I. can be seen as a story about the evolution of robots.
The ending wasn’t the only parallel. I thought the music often borrowed from 2001.