A.I.
I just saw a film that I wasn't looking forward to seeing but thought I should just to have under my belt and I was blown away. It's Stanley Kubrick's and Steven Speilburg's A.I..
I couldn't see how you could merge the visions of those two directors, but this was the story for it, and the two compliment each other in a way that I find overwhelming. It covers ground that Speilburg examines in Close Encounters and in E.T. (Kathleen Kennedy says this in the DVD featurette, and I agree.) but it also covers ground that Kubrick examines in 2001 and Paths to Glory and probably others too for each, I mean ... the point is, impossible as it sounds, it succeeded for me both as a Kubrick movie and as a Spielburg movie.
And the two complimented each other so well. I mean, Kubrick was a very spare storyteller. He didn't fuck around with anything that he didn't need. He was almost journalistic in his approaches at times. This movie has that pure, cleaness, but it's massaged by Speilburg in a way that allows it to be the fairy tale it needs to be. Also, for me, Kubrick's great but he's a bit of a misanthrope and that comes through in his films. With Spielburg at the helm, you get, or I got the integrity and depth of the Kurick vision but with a compasion that I don't know that Kubrick could have brought.
Plus, there are so many other elements of the movie that I found wonderful. I just saw it last night, and part of me wants to see it again, whereas another part of me never wants to watch it again, because there's such saddness about it. And of course, right? 'Cause in a way the entire movie is infused with Spielburg's grief over Kubrick's death. Right? 'Cause in part, it's a movie about the things we create to deal with the impermanence of life and how these can't sustain us but last on after us and grow to represent us. I mean, I see it as such a movie examining the relationship between art and the artist as well as about other things ... it was ... it was just overwhelming and being both a Kubrick fan and a Speilburg fan (Huh, how many of those are there, do you think?) I just found it to be a really wonderful gift and great way to come to closure on Kubrick.
I couldn't see how you could merge the visions of those two directors, but this was the story for it, and the two compliment each other in a way that I find overwhelming. It covers ground that Speilburg examines in Close Encounters and in E.T. (Kathleen Kennedy says this in the DVD featurette, and I agree.) but it also covers ground that Kubrick examines in 2001 and Paths to Glory and probably others too for each, I mean ... the point is, impossible as it sounds, it succeeded for me both as a Kubrick movie and as a Spielburg movie.
And the two complimented each other so well. I mean, Kubrick was a very spare storyteller. He didn't fuck around with anything that he didn't need. He was almost journalistic in his approaches at times. This movie has that pure, cleaness, but it's massaged by Speilburg in a way that allows it to be the fairy tale it needs to be. Also, for me, Kubrick's great but he's a bit of a misanthrope and that comes through in his films. With Spielburg at the helm, you get, or I got the integrity and depth of the Kurick vision but with a compasion that I don't know that Kubrick could have brought.
Plus, there are so many other elements of the movie that I found wonderful. I just saw it last night, and part of me wants to see it again, whereas another part of me never wants to watch it again, because there's such saddness about it. And of course, right? 'Cause in a way the entire movie is infused with Spielburg's grief over Kubrick's death. Right? 'Cause in part, it's a movie about the things we create to deal with the impermanence of life and how these can't sustain us but last on after us and grow to represent us. I mean, I see it as such a movie examining the relationship between art and the artist as well as about other things ... it was ... it was just overwhelming and being both a Kubrick fan and a Speilburg fan (Huh, how many of those are there, do you think?) I just found it to be a really wonderful gift and great way to come to closure on Kubrick.
posted by - caj at 9:40 AM
1 Comments:
Some great actors, some killer cinematography, some great images, and a near total lack of anything resembling coherence. The Robin Williams show is simply an appalling cabaret intrusion, the whole denouement is simply nonsensical.
As much as I loved the alien designs at the end, the idea of giving them a single line and making them the make-a-wish foundation... feh.
If Kubrick had made it, a few people might have consciously gotten the Pinnochio idea, some of them weeks later... But with Steven "Keep whacking them twixt the eyeballs" Spielberg directing and writing (!) there was never the slightest prayer of anything being subtle. An amazingly bad script from someone who should know better - but just like Lucas he keeps failing to understand the contribution that writers like Lawrence Kasdan made to his best movies and decided to write his own hideous screenplay.
Have I chatted with you about The Shining?
-Lee
Post a Comment
<< Home