 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
In Reply to: response (includes spoilers) posted by tunenut on July 11, 2001 at 13:08:29:
yeah that part was lame. With relatively modest suspensions of disbelief the movie is plausible till they start spouting that kind of voodoo mumbo jumbo.Could have made a more plausible scene if they dropped the DNA aspect, forgot the hair, and went for "vibrations encased in inanimate objects" angle which is plausible at least from what they have learned about stones.
Then mix in a little holographic trickery ala Superman's ability to "see" the past via distant photons, and bingo! a far more acceptable premise than the lala crap they tried to feed us.
Follow Ups:
I do not mean to run this into the ground, I just think it is interesting and I had more thoughts.From the sarcastic tone of your reply, you seem to be implying that since this is sci fi/fantasy, it is all far-fetched and any quest for plot consistency is unimportant.
I would like to draw a distinction. Typically, sci-fi/fantasy postulates a situation, which may be extremely far-fetched. In this case, it is the building of a machine capable of love. The story then explores the implications of this situation. The original situation may be totally unbelievable, such as the many switched life fantasies that are made, but if the story uses the situation intelligently, disbelief is willingly suspended.
This is not the same as a deus ex machina ending. The classic example of this is a man, menaced by a villain. The villain is walking down the street, a safe falls from the sky and kills him, and the man lives happily ever after. This kind of thing is not dramatically consistent.
Now in A.I., you have an almost classic deus ex machina. Beings are brought in who are not gods, but who may as well be, for their powers are god-like. At this point, anything at all can happen. Spielberg's choice is a sentimental reunion, but it really could have been anything. It could have been time travel or construction of a new world or whatever. Once you have an ending that depends on the power of godlike beings, the rules of the story are out the window.
So it was not strictly the sentimentality I criticize- it is really the structure. Ultimately it is not satisfying.
Compare this to the Princess and the Warrior. A flawed movie, but structurally organized with a symmetry and beauty which makes it satisfying as a whole and rewarding to consider after leaving the theater.
The John Williams music welling up, the voice-over...had Kubrick made this movie, it would not have ended like this. I had checked out at this point, but 2 good hours are more than most movies offer, with ideas to boot. I just did not like the ending that's all.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
