Lleena said:

No, not at all.

Byron said:

The difference between us and an artificial intelligence is our ability to experience emotions!

starkitty said:

Actually, A.I. didn't explore the dangers of computers experiencing emotions...it explored the true nature of love and what it is exactly that makes us human.

Byron said:

The difference between us and an artificial intelligence is our ability to experience emotions!

Lleena said:

But in the movie, the little boy did experience emotions...love, fear, etc. And what the movie seemed to be saying, was that it was his ability to dream--have goals based solely on emotion and desire, instead of logic--that made him human in the end.

i have to say i found AI to be trite. sorry.

Lleena said:

But in the movie, the little boy did experience emotions...love, fear, etc. And what the movie seemed to be saying, was that it was his ability to dream--have goals based solely on emotion and desire, instead of logic--that made him human in the end.

Byron said:

it did in a sense though. it did explore computers becoming somewhat 'human', or experiencing emotion, as the 'boy' began to feel for his 'mother'. i don't know if it was me projecting but i felt emotion at the sideshow and the junkyard.

Byron said:

Ultimately the child was a computer experiencing emotions, thats what I said about 2001. You said the movie wasn't about this..oh god..somewhere along the lines our wires have crossed. lol.

i have to say i found AI to be trite. sorry.

Byron said:

Ultimately the child was a computer experiencing emotions, thats what I said about 2001. You said the movie wasn't about this..oh god..somewhere along the lines our wires have crossed. lol.

starkitty said:

True, but it didn't really explore the dangers of it...none of the artificials in the movie were shown to be even remotely dangerous or even gave off the sense of danger when they interacted with humans. If anything, A.I. casts an ugly spotlight on the dangers of human beings and their emotions--the family leaves A.I. down at the bottom of the pool so casually, the mom disregards what she's caused the boy to feel and abandons him on the roadside, the sideshow at the junkyard where they "execute" the robots for a cheering crowd. The robots were Mother Teresa in comparison...

Byron said:

EXACTLY THE ROBOTS ARE BETTER PEOPLE THAN PEOPLE.

SWEENY GET A JOB.

Sweeny79 said:

And in reality, A.I. wasn't about technology at all...technology was mostly a device, a tool used to tell a deeper story about what makes us human. It could have just as easily used trees or ferrets instead of robots....

Come to think of it, using ferrets would have made it a much better movie.

All right I consider myself to be a fairly intelligent person, I understand more than most symbolism and I usually am able to digest the context of most art.....but I just finished watching 2001: A Space Odyssey and all I can say is WTF????

I just don't get it...

What's up with the monkeys ?

That big ol' black wall thing?

What made Hal bug out?

What was the message that they were supposed to uncover on the mission?

What the fuck happens in the last 20 min or so after Dave goes through that black hole???

Why is there a giant fetus floating in space in the last scene?

Ok Admittedly I had roughly an hour and a half sleep last night and I dozed for approximately 40- 60% of the film ... but had I been at full thinking power and had a remained awake for the full time allotment I still don't think I would have got this movie.


Can someone kindly explain the film in the most simplistic terms possible?

Thanks.... Now I'm going to watch the Price is right, I think that is more befitting my thinking mode today.

Sweeny79 said:

Okay, here we go: The big ol' black wall thing is a machine made by ancient ETs who are a couple of millions of years further in the evolution and found that sentience (sp?) is the most worthy concept to keep. So wherever they detect signs of developing societies, they leave that big machine to give the species (monkeys) an evolutionairy kick in the butt if necessary. Now the ETs don't have the time/patience to keep waiting so they just leave the machine. When the machine decided it helped the monkeys enough to start things up, it left and buried itself on the moon (hey it's SciFi) to be discovered later when the evolved monkeys (us humans) were at that technological stage as to travel to the moon and discover it. When it is unmooned, it sends out a warning signal to its big brother around Jupiter, telling it : Oi, they've waken up around here !
So, we humans can track the signal and are curious enough to construct a spaceship to fly to the big machine. Because it'll take a couple of years to get there they have a science crew in deep sleep, to be thawed upon arrival. Ppl at earth wrongly thought to not tell the whole mission plan to the flying crew (Bowman & Poole) in case they got the shivers. They did fill in HAL, whose algorithms were such poorly designed, it was unable to solve the conflicting orders it were given. It decided it was best to ditch the crew and complete the mission itself. Bowman won. He travels to the big machine, which senses him and let's him in, travels to some other part of the galaxy (20 mins of special effects at the technological highpoint of the 60s). He is there 'debriefed' so the ETs know how human society is fairing (cold war times etc etc) and decides it's best if the big fallus in the sky keeps an eye on us for now....


Phew

The story is quite good, you should [color=red:1a9c6c0305]read[/color] 2001, 2010, 2061 and 3001 to get the complete picture though

Byron said:

No I still think AI was about technology.

Talking ferrets!

Sweeny79 said:

You can think that...but you'd be wrong.

(Still think that movie was would have been better if Kubrick had lived to make it.))

Byron said:

Don't make me hurt you!

really it is....

Both movies are in the same vien... what we create is better than us. the end.

Sweeny79 said:

I would have to agree with Sweeny, here.

Sweeny79 said:

And in reality, A.I. wasn't about technology at all...technology was mostly a device, a tool used to tell a deeper story about what makes us human. It could have just as easily used trees or ferrets instead of robots....

Come to think of it, using ferrets would have made it a much better movie.

Byron said:

The point being that human beings like to play god and technology provides us with the tools that allow us to do this, thus creating a robot that walks talks and thinks likes a human being. Using a tree wouldn't have the same effect.

damnation!
[This message was edited Wed Jun 30 10:14:19 2004 by Lleena]

It's about artificial intelligence vs human intelligence. Artificial intelligence ultimately destroying its human creators. I think the film is an exploration of the dangers of computers experiencing "emotions."

Is there any way we can segue this into a discussion of Eyes Wide Shut?

Ace said:

we approached that already... we agreed it stunk