Slashdot Mirror
Spielberg (And Kubrick)'s A.I.
Ainonymous Coward writes " A teaser trailer was released for Steven Spielberg's A.I. For those who know, Stanley Kubrick had been working on this film for nearly 20 years; it is based on the Brian Aldiss short story Supertoys Last All Summer Long. Here is
the trailer (Quicktime).
The link comes from Ain't it Cool. Putting aside the obligatory Kubrick lamentation, I'm looking forward to this one. " I wish I could see this thing... I'm really excited about this movie.
Yea, unfortunately you're absolutely right. It's a sad commentary on American taste when "Steven Spielberg's AI" will bring a bigger audience than would "Stanley Kubrick's AI".
You're right. Only us dumb Americans loved the following movies:
Jaws
Indiana Jones Trilogy
The Color Purple
E.T.
Saving Private Ryan
Jurassic Park
Close Encounters of the Third Kind
Empire of the Sun
Schindler's List
Just because Spielberg is capable of more than one movie a decade and is not a control freak doesn't mean he's any less of an artist or kick-ass director.
-thomas
"And like that
uhh....it took over 4000 years to put man on the moon.
Nah, it took 20 years to put man on the moon.
It took 4000 years for man to figure out he wanted to go there.
"And like that
"AI" is simply the sequel to "Daryl". This time around, Daryl gets the girl... and his revenge!
cpeterso
Humes are just weak little monkey boys.
cpeterso
Maybe if we're lucky, crowds will see the Spielberg name and think "Oh, A.I.? That must be like E.T.! Let's go see it!"
Yea, unfortunately you're absolutely right. It's a sad commentary on American taste when "Steven Spielberg's AI" will bring a bigger audience than would "Stanley Kubrick's AI".
With more and more vital functions of our nations government, banking infrastructure, and military defense relying on machines to perform increasingly complicated tasks, one must wonder what precautions the government is taking to prevent the machines from turning against us. I realize that this seems a bit absurd to most people, but just look at how quickly computer science is advancing. We may not have a machine with the processing power to act as a conscious being right now, but the day that we will is much sooner than you think.
We need a strong, powerful government as proposed by such sensible leaders as George W. Bush to implement measures to ensure that a scenario will remain just fiction. I am calling for immediate government regulation and supervision of all artificial intelligence research programs. Take my advice, when the time comes for the robots to take over, you'll either be enslaved by your mechanical masters, or you'll be ground up for axle grease if you resist.
-atrowe: Card-carrying Mensa member. I have no toleranse for stupidity.
I wanted to look at the trailor, but I'm a bit worried that a film about Artificial Insemination might not be appropriate to download and watch in my office.
At least the online trailers for Lord Of The Ring & Star Wars were worth downloading.
Rader
No, but you can bet your a** everything will be delivered in a FedEx Box.
Let's squash some urban legends here:
1) For a long time, there were rumors that Kubrick was considering filming _AI_ with the same boy actor from Jurassic Park (the kid who says, "Hey, this is UNIX!"), filming scenes months or years apart as the boy aged. From what I've been able to find, this rumor referred to another, dropped project that Kubrick had in mind, a Holocaust story called _The Aryan Papers_. Kubrick decided not to do _AP_ after _Schindler's List_ became The Holocaust Picture of the Decade.
2) To my knowledge, Kubrick first started actively toying with developing the story for _AI_ in 1989, after he had taken a break after _Full Metal Jacket_. The "20 years in making" thing is, as far as I know, Taco foaming at the mouth. However, Kubrick was known to kick ideas around in his head for as long as 30 years (_Eyes Wide Shut_/_Traumnovelle_), it just might be that he didn't talk to scriptwriters and WB before 1989.
2b) Soon after Kubrick died, the _New Yorker_ carried a "Talk of the Town" piece by someone who had worked with Kubrick on the story/script for _AI_ in the early 90s; apparently Kubrick went through a lot of writers, and worked at a very leisurely pace, meeting with the writer(s) once or twice a year.
3) As Kubrick died quite suddenly (my theory is that a combination of stress and fatigue made him vulnerable to heart attack while laughing at the last line of _EWS_), it is improbable that he handed Spielberg the script and said "You are the HAL's last hope...make...this...movie." However, Kubrick frequently talked with other directors, especially those who used F/X well (Jim Cameron), so it's quite likely that he had "talked AI" with Spielberg. Despite some of the things slashdotters are saying about him today, I think Spielberg is a decent enough man to think to himself, "Would Stanley _really_ have wanted me to do this movie?"
It took less time to put men on the moon.
-- yawn. --
Sometimes it puzzles me that AI is a hot topic right now. Why so much fuss, don't people realize that AI is being used right now, every day? This isn't some far flung theory, AI is working wonderfully. There are many industries that require AI to function.. farming for example! Sure AI needs to be controlled, I can see that, and yes, it could be dangerous if it gets of hand. There is an easy solution to this though, we need to teach our kids that sex is better than AI.
I implore you! Educate your kids now on the dangers of Artificial Insemination.
Just tried to watch a Quicktime movie with a fairly recent Winebuild (20001222) and the older player from Quicktime 3 (new codecs though),and it really works. Funny thing is I have never been able to double the size in Windows, but now it works great! It doesn't shut down cleanly though.
Not to mention what that horrible AI will do to our prescious bodily fluids.
With a short story that nuanced and disturbing, what the hell do we need the movie for?
"How many light bulbs does it take to change a person?" --BMcC-->
I'm starting to become convinced that Hollywood producers will never produce a worthwhile technical flick.
20 Years in the making means in all like-li-hood it's 20 years out of date. I'm not trolling here, it's just the way things work. You can work on a technological movie for as long as you want, but once you reach a certain time-frame you have to do one of the following.
1) Update all your information, and waste your footage. Making 20 years about as useful as 5.
2) Make your techno-movie only work in a certain time-line, ie: its a techno movie about technology from the past (not very likely) or:
3) The most common solution to producing a techno movie that meets the demands of artistic license and the motto, "make me money because Akira Kurosawa's dead now" is to make the movie (from the beginning) focus on vague, general idealogies inherent in Technology of one type or another. Movies of this nature, in a nutshell, suck.
If this movie is just another 'Data the pale Ensign' story, then its been done. It was done in Terminator back in the 80s. It was done by Gene Roddenbury... whatever, it's just old.
If this story is about technology, and where we are realistically headed, what we have to question about our research and what we do: Then the information is outdated, sure we could predict AI 20 years ago; but if what we knew of AI 20 years ago is the basis of the plot, then I for one have already seen that story. Either way we as consumers of Spielbergs Crap for the Masses are losers. David Wong on the other hand will probably give it a full two stars
Ace
Kubrick would never have let a clip of his movie be leaked by the studio who gave him carte blanche because of his legend (not Sony whom he did not work for of course). His obsessive and highly secretive filmaking process which also whetted the anticipation for his work is sorely missed.
The movie followed the book to closely: (1) too heavy on ideas, (2) too short on action, (3) way too many subplots (and duration). Many families with kids walked out early and I got a sore butt.
Speilberg won't make these mistakes.
Hey, if you're going to play that game, you'll have to go back to at least 1865, if not earlier. Don't you diss on my boy Jules Verne !
ObAI: I have trouble with most AI movies. They usually start with the premise that this is the first AI ever built, that it was built in secret by a small team, and that either it's in a perfectly human body, or we're attaching a whole lot of guns to it and we're sure it won't go berserk. That does bad things to my suspension of disbelief.
"Any connection between your reality and mine is purely coincidental." -Slashdot
Sci Fi/Cinema:
I think the deal is, a lot of us sci fi fans have had a hope that sci fi would become mainstream in our culture, so that WE would be perceived as the cool ones ("I am Darth Vader, from the planet Vulcan. . . "). In the 50s and 60s, Sci Fi fans were geeks. In the 70s, the huge potential of Sci Fi to become popular happened, thru Star Wars, but was it really Sci Fi, or Science Fantasy? In any case, it came, and suffered the same fate as every genre that has come into mainstream culture. It gets watered down by the money-making machine, because in a purely Darwinian sense, a money-making machine exists to make money, the more money it makes, the more that particular business model survives. Kissing-up to the artist has never been the money-making machine's strong point. And never will. So while we're all now able to enjoy some Sci Fi along with everyone else, it is watered down, and there isn't much hard Science anymore, nor is there a whole lot of sociological exploration going on (which, I believe was the whole point of Sci Fi in the first place, ever since Shelley's Frankenstien).
AI:
I think there are three kinds of opinions where it comes to AI.
First (I belong to this category), AI is a weakly defined term, machine intelligence is inevitable, machine "consciousness" is probably impossible, how can we replicate that which we cannot even define ourselves?
The Second group is more naturalist about it, there is noting special about human consciousness, that it just emerges from the physical properties of movind data the way the human brain moves data, so building a sufficiently powerful and properly designed computer ought to do the trick.
The third group (most people) hasn't really thought about it, just assumes the someday science will come through, and we'll all be doomed to be destroyed by a race of killer robots. Though it's neat to see it happen on the silver screen, worth $8 every time.
In either of the first two cases, I think that the Turing goal of creating something that will be indistinguishable, upon personal interaction, from another human being. That's certainly possible. People are stupid, and easily fooled. Cinema proves that; static images played in rapid succession become moving images. Two channels of sound can adequately simulate full environmental stereo. So what would be so hard about creating an AI that people can't tell the difference? Watch a Bot on IRC lately? Most people can tell the difference, some people will actually argue with them for hours before they figure out something strange is going on. Is this AI? IMHO, yes. But is it "good enough"? Good enough for what? What's the goal? Human interaction is simply an interface problem. How complex and advanced does a program have to be before it's actually considered AI? Does it need to emulate the way a human thinks? Are there other ways of thinking? Is human logic akin to Euclidian geometry? Are we going to discover non-Euclidian thinking? We'll never be able to prove it's conscious - we'll never be able to prove it has a soul. But long, long, long before we reach that point, I'm sure we'll have machines that are smart enough to self-replicate, and learn to survive on their own, (which may or may not lead to conflict with our survival) and possibly be able to evolve into higher intelligence.
These squishy touchy-feely questions about whether an AI will "love" or have rights as an individual, or whether they'll be considered a "new species", and whether it will attempt to compete with other species for survival, etc. are all bullshit in my opinion. They may still have a bit of milage left for film audiences, and hip pseudoscience authors, but that's about it. At the end of the day, it's a computer program, and the code will be owned by the author, or corporation that creates it. As will all the works it creates (if the AI is "good enough" to do things like write sonnets or engineer space stations, or invent a better battery). There's always the issue of the "tool" getting up and walking away, and you know, that's probably inevitable too. But in the end - boring.
(one of my favorite "AI" stories was Frank Miller's Ronin, and I think that would make a fucking Excellent, money-making movie, because although Virgo did do the whole "Frankenstein thing", it did it in a totally original, and very fun way).
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
I wish I could see this thing aswell...but not just the trailer
I wish I could install a sorenson codec from Debian stable (not non-free)...but it's not going to happen
I wish I could go into the cinema to watch this...but it's not going to happen
I wish I could buy or rent a DVD or Video when it is released...but it's not going to happen
In fact I will see this film when:
- I'm in a friends where they are watching it
- One of my local free to air stations shows it
I guess I'll see the trailer before then though just to make it a bit more painful.Never underestimate the dark side of the Source
How do you all play the cool games? In WINE?
Like it's been stated before: Its time the Slashdot crew wratched up its professionalism and drop the anti-MS crusade once and for all.
due to bandwidth limitations i haven't been able to view the trailer yet, so i don't know if these robots were the ones from the video. but this is the story i heard from someone in the film/music-video biz, and it's pretty interesting anyway.
anybody know anything more specific or contradictory or...?
This Like That - fun with words!
-- Some things are to be believed, though not susceptible to rational proof.
Well I have Quicktime here, but for some reason, it didn't want to work. So, for those who need it, here is the AI movie trailer for RealPlayer
Here are some other related nuggets.
"Super-Toys Last All Summer Long" - By Brian Aldiss (AI is based on this short story)
"Frog Crisis" - A multi-part animated series, also based on Aldiss' story, by Greg Hyland [Creator of the Lethargic Lad comic]
"We don't stop playing because we grow old. We grow old because we stop playing."
It's small but you can find a copy that will play on RealPlayer here.
Cypherpunks: Civil Liberty Through Complex Mathematics. Those who live by the sword die by the arrow.
HERE
Free Techno/Jazz/DNB/MI Music by guys obsessed with monkeys!
And I mean come on... Our presidential debate, and nobody is even allowed to address their opponent. "Debate" my red American butt. Look at the Brits in parliament! If they have something to say, they bloody stand up and speak their mind! It's great to watch, anyone who hasn't is really missing out. Dubya says some idiotic thing, and we all try and play along, "He's not REALLY a moron... Seriously... No, he really got to where he was on his own merits, HONESTLY.. Give him a chance.. YES HE DOES have a mandate...." Over there, you make an idiot of yourself and the whole place erupts in laughter, and you have to actually *defend* yourself and your ideas. Hey, the Brits may be a bunch of pansies, but GEEZ, what have we become?! In the words of.. that guy, in.. that movie... "I weep for the future."
Hey, I'm proud of my country. But DAGNABBIT, BRING BACK THE BRITS on Junkyard Wars! Geez!
Ok, that's kinda out of my system now.. Um.. What were we talking about? AI? Um.. Well the site is Slashdat (the past-tense of the verb "to Slashdot", of course) but is it just the same trailer they had in the theaters months ago? It didn't show jack squat about the movie.. Oh well. I'm sure I'll see it anyway.
And what's this "I wish I could see this thing.. I'm really excited about the movie," Taco? What a hypocrite. Get a life already!
Hmm... "Get a life.." The irony....
The streets shall flow with the blood of the Guberminky.
One question though:
Who gets the product placement rights? Will it be Intel? Will he say "Intel inside"?
Will Sun make a comeback and have the child say "I am his Sun"
Maybe Moto can steal a march and have him say, "Well, it was a RISC to build me, but I think it was a success".
A sig?!? I don't think so.....
The only way for SS to redeem himself here is to make a film like he has never made before, devoid of merchandising and marketing hype, as well as the unnecessary eye candy that he and his masses of sheep (most of the movie watching world) love so much.
Do Amistad, Schindler's List, and Saving Private Ryan fall into this category? IMO those were 3 very good films that had little to no merchandising, undue marketing hype, or unnecessary eye candy.
Were Kubrick alive and making it, I would look forward to it. Spielberg, however, does not have the talent that Kubrick had in his little finger.
The signs already are bad: Spielberg got one of his favourite cute, towheaded child actors to play the lead, no doubt tugging the heart-strings of the audience in the syrupy, shallowly emotive style that is Spielberg's trademark.
Spielberg is a master of marketing and mass entertainment, but he is not an artist. His films are throwaway schlock. Even his "serious" films, like Saving Private Ryan and Amistad, don't say anything challenging or thought-provoking, but just mouth simplistic platitudes.
There is no way that AI will be even one tenth of the film Kubrick had in mind. Chances are it will be as banal and dumbed-down as the rest of Spielberg's output.
A little-known fact about A.I. is that Kubrick was initially working with Chris Cunningham on it. Cunningham (a film prodigy who designed creatures for Clive Barker's Nightbreed at age 16) is best-known for directing several music videos, including ones for Aphex Twin (Come to Daddy and Windowlicker), Bjork (All is Full of Love), Madonna (Frozen), Squarepusher (Come on My Selector), Portishead (Only You), Leftfield (Africa Shoxx), and several Auteurs videos.
Cunningham was working with Kubrick on A.I. for about a year and a half, and now he's working on a film version of Gibson's Neuromancer. Personally, I can't think of anyone who I'd rather have work on Neuromancer, especially since I'm sure Cunningham would kill anyone who even suggested he make it like that POS Johnny Mnemonic. It's too bad that he didn't continue work on A.I., as his artistic style could have doubtless made it a mind-blowing experience.
---
4-star general in a one-man army.
Quoth CmdrTaco:
Indeed.. Well, considering the fact that the new Linux distributions are coming with XFree86 4.0, which has built-in YUV->RGB conversion support through the XVideo extension, I think it may be yet again time to campaign for a QuickTime client for Linux. Maybe something will happen once MacOS X comes out, since it's based on BSD. I suppose I shouldn't hold my breath..
--
i recall reading (not sure where, though) that Kubrick had already done a lot for A.I. himself, and just about all that was left was the transferrence of his ideas to film, via the whole filming process, plus casting, scouting and all that mess. he even had storyboards done (a rarity for kubrick.)
in the mid-90's he found himself in a position where he had to make a choice. There were two movies he wanted to make: an adaption of Arthur Schnitzler's Traumnovelle, and A.I. He decided to adapt Traumnovelle first, and it became Eyes Wide Shut. However, days after completing that project, he died.
However, before he died, he decided to pass the film, storyboards, and all of that on to Spielberg for him to complete the work on what had been his project for so many years. It *was* his intention for the film to be completed, and he realized he couldn't do it. He just chose somebody else to work on it in his place.
#define F(x) int main(){printf(#x,10,#x);}
F(#define F(x) int main(){printf(#x,10,#x);}%cF(%s))
The music was neat, very Pink Floydish. And I liked the way they did the title at the end.
Maybe if we're lucky, crowds will see the Spielberg name and think "Oh, A.I.? That must be like E.T.! Let's go see it!" And the sad thing is I'm not trying to be funny.
www.HearMySoulSpeak.com
For better or worse, the AI-enhanced candidate was sent home to a state he didn't carry.