Does Steven Spielberg's ‘AI: Artificial Intelligence' Play Differently Today?
Based on a short story by Brian Aldiss and developed in large part from work previously done by the late Stanley Kubrick, AI is set in an undefined future after the icecaps have melted and destroyed all coastal cities. As a result, society has changed drastically, with certain resources becoming increasingly important and scarce. That's why robots, which don't need to eat or drink, have become so crucial. Tech companies are always looking ahead, though, and inventor Allen Hobby (William Hurt) thinks he's figured out the next step. He hopes to create an artificially intelligent robot child who can love a parent just as a normal child would. Hobby sees true emotion as the logical next step in robotic integration into human life, and about two years later, he believes he has achieved it.
The first act of AI then follows David (Haley Joel Osment), a prototype child robot with the ability to love, as he attempts to help two parents, Monica (Frances O'Connor) and Henry (Sam Robards). Monica and Henry have a son, Martin, but he's been in a coma for about five years. Assuming Martin will pass away, Henry is chosen to bring David home. Initially, Monica and Henry treat David very coldly, and rightfully so. He's weird. He's creepy. He does not act human in any way. So, when Monica decides to keep him and 'imprint' on him, it feels like a bit of a shock. And this is the first of many places AI today just doesn't quite get things right.
We learn that David can love whomever he's programmed to imprint on, but that it's irreversible. So, if for some reason the family doesn't want him anymore, he has to be destroyed, not reprogrammed. Which feels like a pretty big design flaw, does it not? David's deep-seated desire to be loved by Monica is crucial to the story, but watching it now, it feels almost silly that a company wouldn't have the ability to wipe the circuits clean and start it again. Also, the notion that any parent would want to have a child who stays a child forever simply feels off. Isn't the joy of parenting watching your kids grow up and discover the world? Well, David would never do that. He'd just be there, forever, making you coffee and pretending he loves you with the same, never-ending intensity.
Which is a little creepy, right? The beginning of AI has very distinct horror vibes that feel even more prominent now than they did in 2001. But, clearly, this was the intention. Spielberg wants to keep the characters and audience on their toes. After two decades of killer robot movies, though, it's even more unmistakable and obvious. That unsettled tone makes it difficult to feel any connection to these characters, at least at the start.
Eventually, Monica and Henry's son miraculously recovers, comes home, and develops a rivalry with David. The two clash, and, instead of returning David to the company to be destroyed, Monica leaves him in the woods. Which feels so much worse! Truly, it's irredeemable. When an animal is sick beyond aid, the merciful thing is to let them go, not throw them in the woods where they will scream in pain forever. But that's what Monica does to David. You hate her, you feel for him, and it's weird.
From there, AI gets even weirder. David meets Gigolo Joe (Jude Law), an artificially intelligent sex robot who has way more emotion and humanity than the ultra-advanced David (the same goes for David's low-tech teddy bear sidekick, Teddy, the best part of the movie). The two traverse a world that has either become disgusted with machines taking over their lives or fully embraced it. It's an interesting dichotomy, one brought to life by wild production design such as the 'Flesh Fair,' where humans watch robots be destroyed for fun, and 'Rogue City,' which is basically AI Las Vegas. And yet, these scenes only touch on larger concepts of what AI means and what it has done to society. Joe delivers a monologue about humans' distrust of technology that feels poignant and thoughtful, but then it's largely forgotten. The ideas are there, but not crucial to what's happening around them.
What stands out about all of this, especially from a modern viewpoint, is how Spielberg's vision of AI is still so distant. Things in the movie are well beyond what we have today. Even with modern chatbots, self-driving cars, generative AI, and the like, everything in the movie is clearly science fiction. Artificial intelligence in Spielberg's world isn't special. It's been around for so long; it's already been monetized, exploited, embraced, and rejected. One scene, however, does ring truer now than it did in 2001. As Joe and David look for the Blue Fairy that can turn him into a real boy (more on that in a second), they go to 'Dr. Know,' a store where an AI Albert Einstein, voiced by Robin Williams, can search through the entirety of human knowledge to answer any question for you. It's basically ChatGPTat its highest form, and in this world, it's just a cheap attraction in a strip mall.
Dr. Know is a crucial plot device in the film because it puts Joe and David back on the track of the Blue Fairy, a character from Pinocchio who turned that character into a real boy, and whom David believes is real and can do the same for him. This is another disconnect that's hard to get your head around. We're continuously told how advanced David is supposed to be technologically, and yet he exhibits none of that mentally. He only shows the emotions and mind of a small child. There's never any hint that he'll learn or develop past that. That he'll evolve in any way. He's the most advanced robot in the world, but can't grasp that Pinocchio isn't real. So, we're left confused about what he believes, what he doesn't, his potential, and his overall purpose.
Nevertheless, when Joe and David ask Dr. Know about how the Blue Fairy can turn him into a real boy, the program somehow understands this request and sends them on a journey to Manhattan, which has been lost under rising seas. There, David finds Hobby, his creator, and we learn Hobby and his team have been monitoring and even subtly seeding David's adventure to get him to this place. Which feels incredibly forced on multiple levels, but also essential to the big reveal.
To this point, AI has been pretty all over the place. Cautionary, brutal, near-horror movie. Wild, cross-country adventure. Whimsical fairy tale. But finally, Hobby explains the film's central drive. Having completed this adventure, David is the first robot to actually chase his dreams. To act on his own self-motivation, not that of a human, and that's a huge jump ahead for artificial intelligence in this world. It's a fascinating revelation ripe for exploration. And yet, it immediately gets forgotten as Joe helps David escape and complete his journey to find the Blue Fairy, which he settles on being a submerged carnival attraction at Coney Island.
Now, I hadn't seen AI in probably 20 years, and, for some reason, this is the ending I remember. David, stuck underwater, looking at the Blue Fairy forever. His dream, kind of, achieved. But that's not the ending. I forgot that the movie had about 20 more minutes left. We jump ahead 2,000 years. The world has ended, and advanced aliens are here studying our past. They find David buried in the ice, the last being on the planet with any connection to living humans, and, to make him happy, they bring his mom back for one day. The happiest day of his life. Roll credits.
It's a touching ending, but it also speaks to how all over the map the movie plays in 2025. Basically, the movie is a horror, fairy tale, social commentary, and sci-fi adventure with heart… but only sort of. There's no real reason why David's mom can't be around for more than one day. It's just an arbitrary rule the aliens tell us. However, it does hammer home the film's ultimate message about the importance of love and how emotions are what make humans so special. A message that works completely independently of anything regarding artificial intelligence. In fact, calling the movie AI in 2025 is almost a conundrum beyond the movie itself. Upon release, most of us assumed the title just referred to David and the robots. But now, maybe I see that's not the case. AI in the movie is so not the point, maybe calling it that is a commentary on human intelligence itself, or the lack thereof. We certainly take for granted the things we inherently have as people.
In the end, I did not care for AI: Artificial Intelligence as much as I did when it came out. At the time, I found it kind of profound and brilliant. Now I find it sort of messy and underwhelming, with a few hints of genius. But, there are a lot of good ideas here, and as the world of the movie becomes increasingly recognizable, I'd imagine another 25 years is likely to re-contextualize it all over again.
AI: Artificial Intelligence is not currently streaming anywhere, but is available for purchase or rent.
Want more io9 news? Check out when to expect the latest Marvel, Star Wars, and Star Trek releases, what's next for the DC Universe on film and TV, and everything you need to know about the future of Doctor Who.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Gizmodo
25 minutes ago
- Gizmodo
The Mystery Star of ‘Weapons' Talks About Its Most Unforgettable Scene
After watching Zach Cregger's Weapons, a lot of things may run through your mind. There are the characters, the reveals, and the scares. Additionally, there's a lot of actual running that could be running through your mind. Kids running through the streets. Kids running through the woods. Kids running through… other things on the hunt for… someone. We won't spoil it here, but in her first interview about her role in the film, actress Amy Madigan talks about filming her character's unforgettable scene at the end of the plays Aunt Gladys in the film, the eccentric witch aunt of Alex, the last remaining child in the class where everyone else disappeared. We soon learn that Gladys is the one responsible for the kids in Alex's class disappearing, but near the end of the film, Alex turns the tables. He uses her magic against her and sends all the kids from the class after her at the exact same time. They barrel through houses, walls, everything, in a hilarious, exciting, and ultimately gory turn of events. Speaking to Entertainment Weekly, Madigan revealed she was actually the one person running from the kids. 'I said, 'Oh no, I'm going to be doing this running,' except when I get tackled at the very end,' the Field of Dreams star said. 'Thank goodness this stunt woman came in and was tackled. Then I had to roll over and get eviscerated. Zach would say 'you're panicked' and all that, but 'just have your body be out there, flail around.' That's all I need to hear because I like being a physical actor.' So that wacky running? That was Madigan. The screaming and flailing on the ground? Madigan. But the being tackled was not. In terms of talking more about Gladys, like where she came from or what her deal was, Madigan was less open. 'I used a lot of different bits of information, but I wouldn't say it's one or the other. I think it's a combination of a lot of things,' Madigan said. 'People ask that question, 'Is she real or is it this or that?' I said, 'Good, you guys figure it out 'cause I can't answer that.'' She also commented on the potential of an Aunt Gladys prequel, which she doesn't quite believe in yet but is seemingly interested in. 'It's not that I discount it, but in this business, nothing's real till it's real,' she said. 'I just had such a great time working with Zach and being inside that brain of his. That's really the gift of how the movie came out. The other stuff has to do with all sorts of conversations that I would never be privy in and business things like that. But, you know, I love Gladys, so I'll leave it at that.' Hopefully, we don't all have to leave it at that, and we learn more about Gladys in the future. Weapons is now in theaters. Want more io9 news? Check out when to expect the latest Marvel, Star Wars, and Star Trek releases, what's next for the DC Universe on film and TV, and everything you need to know about the future of Doctor Who.
Associated Press
26 minutes ago
- Associated Press
California invested millions pushing these careers for women. The results are disappointing
Ten years ago, it seemed everyone was talking about women in science. As the economy improved in the years after the Great Recession, women were slower to return to the workforce, causing alarm, especially in vital fields like computing. State and federal leaders turned their attention to women in science, technology, engineering and math, known by the acronym STEM. Over the next few years, they poured millions of dollars into increasing the number of women pursuing STEM degrees. But the rate of women who attain those degrees has hardly improved, according to an analysis of colleges' data by the Public Policy Institute of California on behalf of CalMatters. 'The unfortunate news is that the numbers haven't changed much at all,' said Hans Johnson, a senior fellow at the institute who conducted the analysis of California's four-year colleges using data from the 2009-10 school year and comparing it to the most recent numbers, from 2022-23. The share of women who received a bachelor's degree increased from roughly 19% to about 25% in engineering and from nearly 16% to about 23% in computer science. In math and statistics, the percentage of women who graduate with a degree has gone down in the last five years. 'It's not nothing, but at this pace it would take a very long time to reach parity,' Johnson said. Girls are also underrepresented in certain high school classes, such as AP computer science, and while women make up about 42% of California's workforce, they comprise just a quarter of those working in STEM careers, according to a study by Mount Saint Mary's University. Fewer women were working in math careers in 2023 than in the five or 10 years before that, the study found. 'It's a cultural phenomenon, not a biological phenomenon,' said Mayya Tokman, a professor of applied mathematics at UC Merced. She said underrepresentation is a result of perceptions about women, the quality of their education, and a lack of role models in a given field. Science and technology spurs innovation and economic growth while promoting national security, and these jobs are often lucrative and stable. Gender parity is critical, especially as U.S. science and technology industries struggle to find qualified workers, said Sue Rosser, provost emerita at San Francisco State and a longtime advocate for women in science. 'We need more people in STEM. More people means immigrants, women, people of color as well as white men. There's no point in excluding anyone.' She said that recent cuts by the Trump administration to California's research and education programs will stymie progress in science, technology and engineering — and hurt countless careers, including the women who aspire to join these fields. Over the last eight months, the federal government has made extensive cuts to scientific research at California's universities, affecting work on dementia, vaccines, women's issues and on health problems affecting the LGBTQ+ community. The administration also ended programs that support undergraduate students in science. In June a federal judge ruled that the administration needs to restore some of those grants, but a Supreme Court decision could reverse that ruling. More recently, the administration halted hundreds of grants to UCLA — representing hundreds of millions in research funding — in response to a U.S. Justice Department investigation into allegations of antisemitism. Now the Trump administration is asking for a $1 billion settlement in return for the grants. A California district judge ruled on Tuesday that at least some of those grants need to be restored. 'The cultural conversation has changed' In the past five years, attention has shifted away from women in science. Nonprofit leaders and researchers across the state say that many lawmakers and philanthropists turned away from women in STEM during the COVID-19 pandemic and focused more on racial justice following the police killing of George Floyd. Since 1995, women have been outpacing men in college, and women are now much more likely to attain a bachelor's degree. The unemployment rate for men is higher, too, and men without college degrees are opting out of the labor force at unprecedented rates. On July 30 Gov. Gavin Newsom issued an executive order saying the state needs to do more to address the 'growing crisis of connection and opportunity for men and boys.' It's not a 'zero-sum' game, he wrote: the state can, and should, support everyone. But some state investments for women's education are lagging. In 2018, the Legislature agreed to put $10 million each year into a new initiative, the California Education Learning Laboratory, to 'close equity and achievement gaps,' including the underrepresentation of girls and women in science and technology. But two years later, the state imposed large-scale cuts to the initiative due to the pandemic. As the state faced more fiscal challenges in 2024, lawmakers cut its budget to about half its former size. This year, Newsom proposed cutting the Education Learning Laboratory altogether. After negotiations with the Legislature, Newsom agreed to fund the initiative through next year, at which point it's set to close unless new funding is secured. 'While I think women are faring better in college generally, I would be skeptical that we can say 'mission accomplished' in terms of achieving parity for women in STEM undergraduate degrees,' said Lark Park, the director of the Education Learning Laboratory, which uses public money to provide grants to schools and nonprofits. 'I think we've just gotten distracted and the cultural conversation has changed.' Private and corporate foundations fund numerous nonprofit organizations that support girls and women in STEM, but grant recipients say some money has moved toward other, more popular topics or less controversial ones. 'Funders focus on trends and they're very trendy in how they give,' said Dawn Brown, president of the EmpowHer Institute, which offers education programs to girls and women across Los Angeles County. One of her programs provides a free, five-week summer camp to girls, including a trip to Catalina Island, where they learn about environmental science and climate change. Since Trump took office, some corporate funders have pulled back support for the organization's programs, which may be perceived as supporting 'DEI,' she said. 'The words 'women,' 'girls,' 'climate change' — those are banned words.' Supporting women in math When Chloe Lynn, a rising junior at UC Berkeley and a double major in applied math and management science, started taking higher-level courses, she noticed a trend in her math classes: fewer women. 'I'll be one of three girls in a 30, 40-person class,' she said during an interview at the university's division of equity and inclusion. UC Berkeley has a center dedicated to promoting diversity in STEM, known as Cal NERDS, which features cozy study spots, a high-tech makerspace and various multi-purpose meeting rooms. The center receives much of its funding from the state but has a few grants from the federal government, some of which are currently on hold. On a Thursday last month, Lynn was one of 10 students who came to present their summer research in one of the multi-purpose rooms. More than half of the presenters were women or non-binary, and the rest were part of other underrepresented groups in STEM, including Hispanic, Black and LGBTQ+ students. She stood in front of a large poster, waiting for people to stop by and ask about her work. 'Say you're at an auction, and say there's n bidders and k identical items,' she said as another student approached. Over the next two hours, fellow mathematicians, classmates, friends and family stopped by, listening as she explained her formula for allocating resources in an optimal way. Some understood her work and asked questions about her variables, formulas or 3-D models. The rest nodded in admiration. By the end of the event, many students had abandoned their own posters in order to learn about their friends' research. In her free time, as the vice president of UC Berkeley's undergraduate math association, Lynn has been trying to build this kind of community among other female math majors by organizing events where students can meet each other. Her end goal is graduate school, either in applied math or industrial engineering. Women are also underrepresented in those graduate programs. 'Creating an inclusive and uplifting community is so important for anyone that's underrepresented,' she said after finishing her presentation. How STEM helps people The lack of women in STEM has nothing to do with their abilities. In fact, women who major in STEM at California State University campuses are more likely than men to graduate, according to data from the college system, and in biology, women are overrepresented. Over 64% of biology bachelor's degrees awarded in California during the 2022-23 school year went to women, according to the analysis from the Public Policy Institute of California. Brown said some female alumni of EmpowHer have said that college advisers push biology over other science, engineering or math courses, claiming that it's 'easier.' Better advising could create more parity, she said. Rosser, who trained as a zoologist before becoming a college administrator, said women's shift toward biology was a slow process, beginning in the 1970s. 'Women are particularly attracted to STEM when they can see its usefulness, particularly to help people,' she said. Biology is often 'an entryway to the health care professions,' she added, many of which are predominately female. She recommends that professors promote the application of their research as a way to increase the percentage of women in these fields. In her studies at UC Berkeley, Lynn said she's struggled with the relevance of her research. 'There's a lot going on in the world right now and I feel called to help,' she said. 'Even though I did theory research this summer, I've been thinking about ways to apply this theory to real-world applications I care about.' In particular, she wants her research to help her community in the Bay Area, where she grew up. 'Say you're an architect and you're in charge of reinforcing San Francisco's concrete structures in the event of an earthquake,' she said. 'You want to minimize cost in San Francisco, and that's going to help you choose which building you're going to reinforce.' It's just another resource allocation problem, she said, so it could be solved with a similar formula. 'It does hit close to home,' she said. In fact, the UC Berkeley campus lies on a fault line. ___ This story was originally published by CalMatters and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.
Forbes
26 minutes ago
- Forbes
Jerry Schilling Remembers Close Friend Elvis Presley - Nearly 50 Years After His Death
Tens of thousands of Elvis fans from all over the world have converged on Memphis for the annual 'Elvis Week' leading up to the anniversary of his death – August 16th, 1977. They come together to pay tribute, celebrate his music and movies, and hear from those who knew him best. Jerry Schilling is one of the many in town to share stories and personal recollections. Schilling was only 12 years old when he first met Elvis Presley. Their chance meeting happened during a pickup football game at a local park and changed Schilling's life forever. The fact that it happened just before the rest of a world discovered the singer, and turned him into a global superstar, was fortuitous. It laid the groundwork for a deep and lasting friendship built on the things the two had in common. 'We were both teenagers and he didn't have a hit record yet, so I got to know him before he became the famous Elvis Presley,' Schilling recalls. 'He grew up in Tupelo, Mississippi but moved to Memphis when he was 12. So, we were both living in the same poor neighborhood.' Schilling says even back then, however, there was something special about the way Elvis carried himself. 'I was a huge fan of James Dean and Marlon Brando, and here was Elvis in a pair of jeans and t-shirt (like they wore) and nobody knew who he was. But he had a rebel streak, he had charisma. I've met a lot of people and had clients who were famous, and they usually develop that 'after' they've had hit records or movies or both. Elvis had it - even when he had nothing.' This was the summer of 1954. Things would soon take off for Elvis. 'When he started going on the road, I was still in high school at the time,' says Schilling. 'But when he was in Memphis, which was all the time when he wasn't working, things would get pretty crazy. He would rent the amusement park, and we'd ride rollercoasters all night or he'd rent the theater, and we'd watch all-night movies. We kept up the friendship and I was always welcome.' Elvis would later ask Schilling to come to work for him. In the years that followed, Schill filled many different roles. He was a member of the 'Memphis Mafia,' served as a bodyguard, worked with Elvis as a photo double in movies, co-produced a karate film for Elvis, and much more. Their work relationship began in 1964 when Elvis headed to Hollywood to shoot his next movie. 'We drove across country in a little Winnebago and Elvis drove all 2000 miles,' Schilling remembers. 'It was such a fun time. We'd stop at truck stops and get lunch, he'd throw me the football, and I'd dive for passes. And we had these great conversations. It could start off talking about a girlfriend, then go into religion or politics. Elvis was a very smart man; he was ahead of his time.' When they were in Memphis, Schilling lived with Elvis at Graceland. He even drove Elvis and Priscilla to the hospital for the birth of Lisa Marie. The place he once called home still holds special memories. 'We never called it Graceland, we just called it 'the house,' he says. 'And we never called it the Jungle Room, although that's a good name for it. That's where we watched football games. I have great memories of going back to the house and just sitting in the kitchen and talking. Elvis was great to talk to.' In 2006, Schilling wrote a book about their relationship called 'Me and a Guy Named Elvis.' It takes readers on an up-close and personal journey through so many of the experiences he lived, right alongside Elvis, through the 50s, 60s, and 70s. Schilling, who went on to become an actor, documentary producer, and manager for acts like the Beach Boys and Jerry Lee Lewis, spent a lot of time with Elvis on set during many of his films. He believes Elvis had great depth and insight when it came to making movies and had the potential to become great actor. 'I think Elvis could have been a Barbra Streisand, in terms of acting ability, or a Clint Eastwood. I used to go to the dailies with him at MGM and Paramount and he'd say, 'When I go see Brando or James Dean in a movie, they're not in every scene, so I can't wait for them to come back. But here, these guys have me in every scene.'' Schilling pauses, then adds, 'I don't think Hollywood wanted him to get too smart. They had these formulas for him in films with 12 songs.' Throughout his life and career, Elvis was known for his incredible generosity. Today, Schilling still lives in the California home Elvis gave him more than fifty years ago. It was a gift that came from the heart. Elvis knew Schilling's mother died when he was an infant, and as a child, he moved around to stay with different relatives. 'This is the house Elvis bought me in 1974,' Schilling says. 'He stood right here on this balcony and said, 'You never had a home, and I want to be the one to give it to you.' We all know he was generous with cars and things, but I think I'm the only person he bought a home for, outside his immediate family.' After Elvis died, Schilling stayed close to Priscilla, Lisa Marie, and has worked hard to help preserve Graceland and make sure the singer's legacy lives on. 'Elvis had a great career,' he says. 'Unfortunately, it was only 23 years. But he left us with a great body of work.' And for Schilling, the music and the movies live on, and so does Elvis – in spirit. 'What I loved most about Elvis is his humanity. He was just the greatest human being. And I love what he stood for.'
