a further explanation

Posted by tunenut (A) on July 12, 2001 at 14:36:56

In Reply to: Re: response (includes spoilers) posted by Randy Bey on July 11, 2001 at 22:45:12:

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.

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Follow Ups Full Thread

Topic - A.I. - Alan 21:24:24 07/10/01 (29)

Re: A.I. - TAFKA Steve 17:59:41 07/11/01 (7)

Re: A.I. - caa 23:55:44 07/11/01 (6)

Re: A.I. - Alan 09:46:53 07/12/01 (5)

Re: A.I. - caa 19:00:13 07/12/01 (0)

Re: A.I. - Dr. Freud 14:39:55 07/12/01 (1)

Well spelled again Doc. - Alan 12:34:19 07/13/01 (0)

"My parents made me eat liver." - clarkjohnsen 11:14:01 07/12/01 (1)

Re: "My parents made me eat liver." - Jeff Starrs 11:19:16 07/12/01 (0)

response (includes spoilers) - tunenut 13:08:29 07/11/01 (3)

Re: response (includes spoilers) - Randy Bey 22:45:12 07/11/01 (2)

a further explanation - tunenut 14:36:56 07/12/01 (0)

I guess you liked the ending as is - tunenut 00:35:39 07/12/01 (0)

Well, thanks for a new take on it... - Ed M 11:00:53 07/11/01 (1)

Thanks Ed...NM. - Alan 17:18:04 07/11/01 (0)

Jeepers - Troy 23:58:32 07/10/01 (15)

Your comments on Alan are uncalled-for. - clarkjohnsen 10:57:03 07/11/01 (2)

Thanks Clark....NM - Alan 17:19:01 07/11/01 (0)

Sure they are! - Troy 11:31:18 07/11/01 (0)

Jeepers Creepers - Alan 08:30:25 07/11/01 (10)

Re: Jeepers Creepers - Dr. Freud 13:00:18 07/11/01 (3)

Very deep Doc. - Alan 17:20:37 07/11/01 (2)

Re: Very deep Doc. - Dr. Freud 19:22:02 07/11/01 (1)

Basic Adult Education - Alan 21:44:53 07/11/01 (0)

Gee Whiz - Troy 12:00:13 07/11/01 (4)

Re: Gee Whiz - Alan 17:08:23 07/11/01 (3)

Everybody's sick - Bruce from DC 11:33:03 07/12/01 (1)

Re: Everybody's sick - Alan 13:59:43 07/12/01 (0)

Philosophy and Mental Onanism - Dr. Freud 17:38:08 07/11/01 (0)

Re: Maybe you should wait.. - Jeff Starrs 09:52:16 07/11/01 (0)

Follow Ups

a further explanation - tunenut 14:36:56 07/12/01 (0)

You can not post to an archived thread.