Agreed. The ending was awful and roughly an hour too long. When the damned thing did finally just give up and die, everyone in the theater made exclamations like "That was fucking terrible!" and "what was that crap?" I watched "The Shining" immediately before going to see AI, and my opinion is that AI is basically Spielberg trying his heart out to mimic Kubrick's style (and failing horribly). For instance, the soundtrack attempts to copy the Shining/Eyes Wide Shut approach of eery strings and reused themes to build tension, but the placement of tense and startling scenes is completely haphazard and left me thinking they were just thrown in to startle the viewer from falling asleep. This is probably necessary because, while Kubrick was quite capable of making slow-paced, low-dialogue films that held the viewer's attention, Spielberg is clearly only capable of MTV-level-attention span fare, and this film is downright BORING. What few insights DO exist in the movie are irritatingly shallow and quickly passed over in favor of special effects and Haley Osment looking cutesy for the camera. Perhaps the only thing more nauseating about this film then watching Spielberg ham-fistedly attempt to parrot Kubrick is the attachment of Kubrick's name to the film and every review and advertizement. It's truly disgusting that an overpayed hack like Spielberg is trying to cash in on the good name of a master director like Kubrick after his death.
Also, the Slashdot reviewers' endorsement of this movie should, I think, put to rest any lingering doubts anyone had about the complete lack of aesthetic and artistic sensibility possessed by Slashdot authors. Drop the social and artisitic commentaries, boys, and stick to what you know: Linux and GPL.
Actually, you should be excited about that possibility if you oppose genetically engineered plants. Think about it: once a given trait is out "in the wild", it is effectively FREE. Current GM plants are usually designed with an attempt to make them sterile so that the company producing them can charge you for new seeds EVERY YEAR. Without this market-assurance, most GM crops are not profitable. Consider how many seeds you'd have to sell to recoup 20 million dollars in R&D, plus the costs of getting the damned things approved for human consumption, advertizing, etc. So you should feel somewhat assured that:
A) GM food developers are going to try their damnedest to make sure this doesn't occur.
B) If it DOES occur, it may put a huge dent in the GM food industry, PLUS we'll be getting all these expensive, hand crafted (presumably desirable) traits for FREE from then on.
>Does anyone else find that deeply disturbing? I >certainly do.
-Yes, i most definitely do. but I can't decide what's more disturbing: that Microsoft paranoia has reached the level where people actually take comments about them being "at the center of all things digital" or that a one-line post that this bothered someone got modded up to a 4.
Slashdot Mirror
Agreed. The ending was awful and roughly an hour too long. When the damned thing did finally just give up and die, everyone in the theater made exclamations like "That was fucking terrible!" and "what was that crap?" I watched "The Shining" immediately before going to see AI, and my opinion is that AI is basically Spielberg trying his heart out to mimic Kubrick's style (and failing horribly). For instance, the soundtrack attempts to copy the Shining/Eyes Wide Shut approach of eery strings and reused themes to build tension, but the placement of tense and startling scenes is completely haphazard and left me thinking they were just thrown in to startle the viewer from falling asleep. This is probably necessary because, while Kubrick was quite capable of making slow-paced, low-dialogue films that held the viewer's attention, Spielberg is clearly only capable of MTV-level-attention span fare, and this film is downright BORING. What few insights DO exist in the movie are irritatingly shallow and quickly passed over in favor of special effects and Haley Osment looking cutesy for the camera. Perhaps the only thing more nauseating about this film then watching Spielberg ham-fistedly attempt to parrot Kubrick is the attachment of Kubrick's name to the film and every review and advertizement. It's truly disgusting that an overpayed hack like Spielberg is trying to cash in on the good name of a master director like Kubrick after his death. Also, the Slashdot reviewers' endorsement of this movie should, I think, put to rest any lingering doubts anyone had about the complete lack of aesthetic and artistic sensibility possessed by Slashdot authors. Drop the social and artisitic commentaries, boys, and stick to what you know: Linux and GPL.
Actually, you should be excited about that possibility if you oppose genetically engineered plants. Think about it: once a given trait is out "in the wild", it is effectively FREE. Current GM plants are usually designed with an attempt to make them sterile so that the company producing them can charge you for new seeds EVERY YEAR. Without this market-assurance, most GM crops are not profitable. Consider how many seeds you'd have to sell to recoup 20 million dollars in R&D, plus the costs of getting the damned things approved for human consumption, advertizing, etc. So you should feel somewhat assured that: A) GM food developers are going to try their damnedest to make sure this doesn't occur. B) If it DOES occur, it may put a huge dent in the GM food industry, PLUS we'll be getting all these expensive, hand crafted (presumably desirable) traits for FREE from then on.
>Does anyone else find that deeply disturbing? I >certainly do. -Yes, i most definitely do. but I can't decide what's more disturbing: that Microsoft paranoia has reached the level where people actually take comments about them being "at the center of all things digital" or that a one-line post that this bothered someone got modded up to a 4.