Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Spielberg (And Kubrick)'s A.I.

CmdrTaco posted more than 13 years ago | from the stuff-to-see dept.

Movies 202

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.

cancel ×


Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

A true teaser trailer. (1)

Goronguer (223202) | more than 13 years ago | (#483889)

The trailer would have been better if it had featured even ONE scene from the movie. This does little more than announce that the movie will be coming out. Why did I take the time to download this?
This trailer is to the movie as vaporware is to actual software.

Re:I didn't submit this article. (1)

technos (73414) | more than 13 years ago | (#483891)

AI-nonymous Coward? What, joke too subtle?

I liked it the first time... (1)

_SIGKILL_ (170600) | more than 13 years ago | (#483897)

...when it was called D.A.R.Y.L.

Re:Hey Cmdr... (1)

Paradise_Pete (95412) | more than 13 years ago | (#483901)

poor spelling, grammer[sic], and the general flaimbait[sic] nature...

That's gotta be a troll.

Re:Kubrick: So what? (1)

IronChef (164482) | more than 13 years ago | (#483902)

Are you forgetting Full Metal Jacket, or did you dislike it?

One of the best war movies ever, IMHO, and definitely Kubrick's best movie. Can't watch the others over and over.

Re:Is that a little slow for Joe Audience? (5)

Stiletto (12066) | more than 13 years ago | (#483905)

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".

Re:The idea is a little old (1)

Paradise_Pete (95412) | more than 13 years ago | (#483907)

The previous post brought to you by Gobeur, The Human Babelfish.


Re:20 years?? (1)

Shocker69 (141391) | more than 13 years ago | (#483908)

I wonder if it starts out in Black and white, then moves to technicolor(tm) half way through. As long as it gets to digital by the end of the movie.

Kubrick's underlying theme... (1)

Colz Grigor (126123) | more than 13 years ago | (#483910)

Every single movie that Stanley Kubrick was involved with dealt with an aspect of dehumanization.

Ironic that what will most likely be his last film project (he's dead, after all) will wind up being about just the opposite.

Can't wait to see it.

::Colz Grigor

Don't count on the music (1)

squarooticus (5092) | more than 13 years ago | (#483911)

Trailers are typically made with music that has nothing to do with the final movie's actual soundtrack. Witness a recent trailer (can't remember which movie it was for) using some of the music from Braveheart.

Re:Woo hoo (5)

atrowe (209484) | more than 13 years ago | (#483912)

The trailer certainly looks promising. A big-budget Hollywood movie like this may be just what it takes to raise the public's awareness of the dangers that artificial intelligence poses to our race. I realize that Spielberg's movie is a complete work of fiction, but the movie's plot deals with the important issue of the possible consequenses when humans try to "play God" and create a new race of sentient machines.

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.

Re:Is that a little slow for Joe Audience? (1)

Angreallabeau (263172) | more than 13 years ago | (#483914)

Agreed...Although Kubrick has made many beautiful (if not disturbing) films, he has never managed to reach a large audience (the masses). Not to say that I am complaining, as you have usually never heard of the best films of the year.

Lets hope the Internet solves many of the distribution problems small film makers have. It is amazing to see how many GREAT film get made, but never get released because some BIG-WIG at Paramont decides the masses would like or see the movie.

That is all!

Re:Is that a little slow for Joe Audience? (1)

The Good Reverend (84440) | more than 13 years ago | (#483915)

"But would a trailer like that capture the hearts of the audience at large?

Why not? The "masses" aren't any one kind of moviegoer. They don't "need" a murder or chase'll notice many movies have those elements, because it's what sells. Now, is this because it's what the audience wants or what the studios think the audience wants? People will go to the movies no matter what. They'll tend to see something that at least partially sparks their interest, but they'll go if the studios put out crap or art, because they like to see a movie.

The Good Reverend

Bad trailer (2)

Rader (40041) | more than 13 years ago | (#483916)

I know, explosions don't have to be a part of every trailer or movie, but there was something a bit ....lacking.... in that trailer. 10 seconds of a blurry object, with fonts coming in every 4 seconds, then some fingers? Then some aerial run-down of some cartoon circuits. They could have done all that with 95K of FLASH.

At least the online trailers for Lord Of The Ring & Star Wars were worth downloading.


Re:Time to dig out I Robot. (1)

Vortran (253538) | more than 13 years ago | (#483917)

What was not to like about Bicentennial Man? I thoroughly enjoyed that movie. Am I missing something here?

Re:Time to dig out I Robot. (2)

Shocker69 (141391) | more than 13 years ago | (#483922)

No, but you can bet your a** everything will be delivered in a FedEx Box.

Re:Sorry, can't get excited (1)

Paradise_Pete (95412) | more than 13 years ago | (#483923)

...throw in a love interest to pull in women...

If the love interest was to reach the women you wouldn't have movies like Entrapment, where the gorgeous young Catherine Zeta-Jones falls for some fossilized old guy like Sean Connery, since we all know that could never happen in real life.

Re:Spielberg should let sleeping movies lie (1)

Rew190 (138940) | more than 13 years ago | (#483924)

I understand what you're saying about art and such, and I should let you know I'm a huge Kubrisk fan...

But dude. It's a movie. We'll see if Stevie bastardizes it, but perhaps you should give it a chance before shooting it down. If anything, I think Spielberg is doing honor to Kubrick by at least making an attempt. If it's going to be good or not is unknown, but let's not go so far as to call Spielberg a "second rate charltan." ET. Close Encounters. Saving Private Ryan. Sure, some of his others sucked, but if you look at his history you'll see that action movies aren't his strongpoint... but he's damn good with drama (these are all MY opinions, mind you).

Give the man a chance, if we go to see a movie that Kubrick had a part in then we're doing him honor by wanting to see it. I also would like to ask you where EXACTLY did you get the information that Kubrick specifically didn't want any of his movies finished? Or are you merely assuming all of this? A visionary like Kubrick WOULD want to finish his own work, but I think more importantly after his death he would want his work to be seen instead of sealed away into obscurity.

Woo hoo (1)

WickedClean (230550) | more than 13 years ago | (#483925)

I've seen the previews for AI a couple of times now, and it does look quite interesting. I'm SURE it will be better than Bicentennial Man.

Re:Quicktime for Linux (1)

Paradise_Pete (95412) | more than 13 years ago | (#483926)

Say, who's that blue guy sitting next to that Linux box?

20 years, some information (3)

Kevin T. (25654) | more than 13 years ago | (#483928)

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" 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?"

20 years? (2)

programic (139404) | more than 13 years ago | (#483930)

It took less time to put men on the moon.

Kubrick must have been a real visionary ... (1)

laetus (45131) | more than 13 years ago | (#483932)

to know that Dubbya would be in office at the begin of the new millenia. Just kidding folks! It's a joke, you know, AI, Dubbya, etc. Ahem.

Why sex is better than AI. (3)

spludge (99050) | more than 13 years ago | (#483933)

I can see that this will be a touching movie, a child concieved by AI. I can see why this movie will be controversial. How will AI affect our kids in the future?

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.

Re:A true teaser trailer. (1)

baptiste (256004) | more than 13 years ago | (#483934)

Not doubt - one of the worst trailers I've ever seen (though the final title setup was cool) Gee - so it tells me about an 11 year old android - well um, Star Trek has androids too :) At least one scene or something would have been nice. Don't give everything away - but tease me a LITTLE! (Boy can THAT be taken out of context! :))

Love interest? (1)

xueexueg (224483) | more than 13 years ago | (#483935)

Since when is the purpose of a "love interest" to "pull in women"? Are you stupid? If love interest pulls in anyone, it's gentlemen like myself, who hope to catch a glimpse of booty. And booty is hard science if ever there was such a thing. Don't be a snob.

Two Words (1)

ellem (147712) | more than 13 years ago | (#483936)

duh - ull


I thought Kubrick spent the last twenty years... (1)

ahde (95143) | more than 13 years ago | (#483937)

working on Eyes Wide Shut.

Speilberg's A.I. (1)

kurtz_is_watching (308869) | more than 13 years ago | (#483938)

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. He will not. I've read many of SS's comments on Kubrick and it is amazing that such a talented director still does not understand how to interpret SK's vision(s), by means of avoiding singular reasoning.
It is typical of SS to not give Kubrick higher billing for what are his inspired ideas. In fact, just from the mood of this teaser/trailer, it is clear to me that the film is already lost, and if Kubrick is/can be watching, he is certainly laughing with frustration.
If I wasn't at work right now I would have time to write up a short novella about how 99.9% of so called "movie buffs" can't understand Kubrick's genius, and never will.
What I can tell you is that it disappointing and typical of the masses to flock to an inferior film, constructed with menial intelligence and maximum technology to prove simple points that were only supposed to be the tip of the iceberg. SS doesn't see beyond the tip of this glacial mound, because he is at the limit of his intellectual capacity.
Go Ravens!

Re:Indeed.. (1)

azool (91453) | more than 13 years ago | (#483939)

The 'block' was that Kubrick wanted the characters to age 'naturally', so he was filming a bit every year as the actors aged.

Is AI really a good idea? (1)

ceesco (259588) | more than 13 years ago | (#483940)

Did we learn nothing from Terminator and the Matrix? Those who don't learn from the future are doomed to inherit it.

Re:20 years? (3)

luxaeterna7 (204579) | more than 13 years ago | (#483951) took over 4000 years to put man on the moon.

Re:AI (1)

.sig (180877) | more than 13 years ago | (#483955)

Well, once again I stand corrected. That was a Kubrick movie? Of course I haven't seen it since it was released on video, which has been quite awhile ;-) Back that I never really paid much attention to details like who directed the movie, I just watched what looked good :)
Oh well, I guess I should change my stance to "I really hated some Kubrick films" ;-)

Really doesn't look good to me. (2)

Ace905 (163071) | more than 13 years ago | (#483957)

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

Re:Bicentennial Man. (1)

bobv-pillars-net (97943) | more than 13 years ago | (#483958)

Dunno. I really liked it too, and I even read the book *first*. But then, I've never seen a Robin Williams movie that I didn't like. (Though I didn't particularly care for Mork&Mindy.)

Of all the movies I've seen in my lifetime that were based on books rather than screenplays, I'd say this one ranks about fourth or fifth as to how well it preserves the flavor and plot of the original story.

Sure, they through in a little sex, and sure it was juvenile. But hey, Hollywood *will* be Hollywood.

Re:Spielberg should let sleeping movies lie (1)

mrzaph0d (25646) | more than 13 years ago | (#483959)

if i had a project that i'd been working on for 20 years and i was getting up there in age, i'd sure talk to a friend about continuing it should something happen to me..
"Leave the gun, take the canoli."

Of course you realize... (3)

kevcol (3467) | more than 13 years ago | (#483960)

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.

Re:20 years? (2)

Sc00ter (99550) | more than 13 years ago | (#483961)

I remember reading way back about how they wanted to use the same kid thru his entire life to make it more real. I don't really think that happened, but that's probably part of the reason why it took so long.

Read the original story (1)

Seinfeld (243496) | more than 13 years ago | (#483962)

You can read the story Supertoys Last All Summer Long At: pe rtoys.html


Kubrick: So what? (1)

sehlat (180760) | more than 13 years ago | (#483963)

With the single exception of "Dr. Strangelove" Kubrick didn't do a single film that was worth watching more than once, and except for Dr. S and 2001, none of his films are worth watching even once. Having Spielberg do it might be an improvement, but he's gotten so big-headed with his status as an 'auteur' that I'll wait for somebody I trust to go see it first.

Re:Two Words (1)

centauri (217890) | more than 13 years ago | (#483964)

We are the music makers, and we are the dreamers of dreams.

Bicentennial Man too cerebral (2)

peter303 (12292) | more than 13 years ago | (#483965)

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.

Re:20 years, some information (2)

mrzaph0d (25646) | more than 13 years ago | (#483976)

with the same boy actor from Jurassic Park (the kid who says, "Hey, this is UNIX!")

erm, that was a girl who had that line. at least in the version i saw..

"Leave the gun, take the canoli."

Re:QuickTime (2)

VividU (175339) | more than 13 years ago | (#483981)

It's amazing to me: The animosity towards Microsoft runs so deep with these Slashdot guys that they don't even have a spare Win98 box in the corner somewhere.

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.

Eyes Wide Shut (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#483984)

Yet another action movie freak who was lured in by the ridiculous ad campaign but couldn't understand the plot?

"What? No explosions or car chases! That sucks!"

Re:Bad trailer (2)

_vapor (55645) | more than 13 years ago | (#483989)

Remember, this is not a trailer. It's a teaser. Teasers are supposed to leave the audience wondering about the movie and to pique their interest. There will be a full trailer in the near future, I'm sure.

Re:Is that a little slow for Joe Audience? (1)

mako (30489) | more than 13 years ago | (#483990)

I'd rather a trailer be slow than have it give everything away. Geez, now there is probably some marketing guy reading your comment splicing together a trailer with the special suprise ending. Gotta get peoples attention. Thanks alot.

Re:Kubrick's underlying theme... (1)

zephc (225327) | more than 13 years ago | (#483991)

I've always wondered why people assume that AI designed in the likeness of Man, would be inhuman... I guess it sells books better than writing about an AI that learns slowly at first then starts learning more and more like a *gasp* human being, and thinking just like a human. Except faster :)

Really, what interest me about AI and such are things you will never see in AI-related movies: that in the real world, when it gets here, AI will have the ability to modify it own, and will in all likelihood modify its own hardware, mking itself smarter and faster.... yes they HAVE the technology! *queue bad 70's music* :)

Anyway like I was saying, when we get true AI, it will be so much more than what most people will be expecting, that I bet most ppl will be quite excited... I know I will be :) And I bet it won't even be evil! :)


Spielberg should let sleeping movies lie (1)

Chuck Flynn (265247) | more than 13 years ago | (#483992)

Kubrick is dead. Nothing we can do can bring him back. What we can say is only an inadequate expression of what we carry in our hearts. Words pale in the shadow of grief; they seem insufficient even to measure the brave sacrifice of this great director. Their truest testimony will not be in the words we speak, but in the way he led his life and in the way he spent his life -- with dedication, honor and an unquenchable desire to explore this mysterious and beautiful universe through the lens of his camera.

The best we can do is remember Stanley; remember him as he lived, bringing life and love and joy to those who knew him and pride to a nation of cinema goers.

The way not to remember Stanley is to give his unfinished films to Spielberg to finish. What's done is done, and what's passed is passed. When Kubrick died, he never wished for others to bastardize his work. He was a visionary, one of the best directors of this century (and consequently, of all time), and to entrust his vision with a second-rate charlatan like Spielberg would be like giving Schubert's unfinished symphony to Yanni to complete. There are some things never to be done in this world.

Anyone who gives pays Sony's admission price to see this film is committing an abomination against Kubrick's art. AA Milne didn't intend Winnie the Pooh to be Disney's cash cow, and Kubrick didn't intend A.I. to be finished after his death. It mocks his death and mocks the life he led which we cherish so dearly.

What you do has consequences. The way you treat wronghoods in this world has important meaning for how others will commit wrongs anew. You know in your heart what is best, so don't debase it by giving in to oppression, however small it may seem or however insignificant it may appear. No evil is too insignificant to go unnoticed. We must respect Kubrick's wishes, because if we do not, then we cannot claim to have respected Kubrick himself. That is all.

Re:20 years? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#483993)

You can put a man on the moon in a week, if you want to.

Kubick wasn't trying to do that.

He was trying to understand the moon, and that takes a lifetime.

Hey Cmdr... (1)

spyrral (162842) | more than 13 years ago | (#483994)

I you want to see the trailer, get yourself a computer that will let you watch it. I'm sure you can afford it, and we're all tired of hearing you whine about quicktime trailers. If you're worried about the Slashdot readers thinking less of you, consider two points:

1. After years of being assulted by your poor spelling, grammer, and the general flaimbait nature of your posts, we couldn't possibly think any less of you.

2. Who cares what slashdot readers think of you, anyway?

Re:Woo hoo (2)

st. augustine (14437) | more than 13 years ago | (#483995)

just what it takes to raise the public's awareness of the dangers that artificial intelligence poses to our race
Speak for yourself, meat person!

Re:Two Words (1)

ellem (147712) | more than 13 years ago | (#483996)

-Damn helper monkey!

Re:AI (trailer help and other tidbits) (2)

subbiecho (303134) | more than 13 years ago | (#483997)

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]

Re:Hey Cmdr... (1)

CmdrButtPlug (308493) | more than 13 years ago | (#483998)

Bitching about poor spelling and grammar usually implies that you can do a better job. Granted, you have fewer spelling errors than the dear Cmdr, but still != 0.

Hey Rob.... (5)

SquadBoy (167263) | more than 13 years ago | (#483999)

It's small but you can find a copy that will play on RealPlayer here [] .

You can read the short story (5)

OmegaDan (101255) | more than 13 years ago | (#484000)


Hey Taco! (1)

rppp01 (236599) | more than 13 years ago | (#484017)

Why don't you reboot your computer into windows (we all know you have a partition for your games) and download quicktime, then you don't have to wish any more. You can see it on your own computer!

I have no gate key

Re:I thought Kubrick spent the last twenty years.. (1)

chorder (177607) | more than 13 years ago | (#484018)

No, he spent the last twenty years researching the films he wanted to make, as opposed to spending the Hollywood average of 20 minutes.

He did a lot of work on a project about Napolean in the 80's, but then decided against for lack of whatever it would take to make a good enough movie out of it. Then he spent the rest of his time researching for "AI", with a short (5 year?) break to put "Eyes Wide Shut" together exactly as it needed to be, only to have it edited at the last minute after his death.

I've heard that he had extensive talks with Spielberg about "AI", so I'm not completely aghast that such an opposite filmmaker (Kubrick != Spielberg) is taking the helm. Kubrick probably realized what one of the above trolls did, that "AI" may have to be a story about humanization and hence material for the biggest sappiest money-makingest (though still directorily free) director in Hollywood. At least that's what I hope, cuz if Spielberg wasn't right for this project, all I have left in my Kubrick waitlist is a glimmer of hope for an unedited "Eyes Wide Shut" DVD and the off chance that Criterion will ever finish their "Spartacus" DVD with some semblance of Kubrick's final cut in there.

-Not So Annonymous Kubrick Devotee

Awwwwwww (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#484019)

whassum matters cmdrtac-y wac-y hissums widdle winux machine can't view the widdle quicktime?

[OT] Brits are awesome. (2)

Uberminky (122220) | more than 13 years ago | (#484020)

Brits are cool. They're hilarious. "Two Fat Ladies" on the Food Network rules! "And I'll put it into this rrrrravishing little blender...." You know what pisses me off? The British guy from Junkyard Wars has been replaced by some bloody idiot from the States! DANGIT... I liked the old guy. But what really gets me is that all the teams now are from the States. Now I'm American, myself, but... geez. It's just not the same anymore. Where's the old show, the way it was? Now it's just a bunch of rednecks throwing around stupid phrases and "raising the roof" and all sorts of other retarded stuff that makes me almost embarrassed to be from here.

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....


Re:Spielberg should let sleeping movies lie (1)

jrstewart (46866) | more than 13 years ago | (#484021)

I hate to disagree with such a well written post, but I seem to remember reading that Stanley Kubrick and Steven Spielberg were close friends and that when Kubrick was close to death he asked Spielberg to finish the film.

Eliza (1)

Grakk (308508) | more than 13 years ago | (#484022)

I can just imagine the human race subjegated by Eliza.

US>We want our Freedom

AI>Why do you want our Freedom?

US>Umm... you have your freedom, but where's ours?

AI>I'll ask the questions, How was your day today?

US> *sound of 9mm slide being pulled back, a sharp explosion, and something a split second later that sounds like wet oatmeal hitting concrete*

The idea is a little old (1)

Gobeur (212824) | more than 13 years ago | (#484023)

I saw a movie named DARRYL o something, was about a kid with a silicon based brain who escape from the lab and start to relate with real people.
The movie was centered into his feelings.

I'm talking about the '80s... I wonder what has this movie of novel.
(I'm sorry about the spelling)

Sacrilege (1)

stud9920 (236753) | more than 13 years ago | (#484024)

I really think this sucks. Kubrick was the guy who took years to finish his movies. Now not even two years after he's died, Spielberg, the king of fastfood movies, finishes his next film in two years. This is sacrilege !

Is the producer Jerry Bruckenheimer ? Does Tom Hanks play in it ? Does it have an happy end ? Are there stupid kids-with-the-cute-pet-dog-that-are-smarter-than-a dults ?Is the soundtrack yet another from John Williams ?

Re:20 years in the making? (1)

cprael (215426) | more than 13 years ago | (#484025)

All thatI can remember about Steven Spielberg's past was that he was filming a movie in China, I forget the movie's name, and a helicopter stunt ended in horror when 4 or 5 of China's best actors in history got decapitated by the chopper's blades. Anyone here know the name of the movie and can post it for me? Thanks. Yahoo isn't being too cooperative in shedding more light on Spielburg's crooked past.

You've managed to totally confuse reality with fantasy. Set the wayback machine to 1983, Sherman.

In 1983, Twilight Zone: The Movie was released. It featured four "episode" pieces, each shot by a different director. One, "Kick the can", was shot by Steven Spielberg. Another, directed by John Landis and starring Vic Morrow, suffered a fatal helicopter accident that killed Morrow and two Chinese-American children also acting in that scene (Morrow and one of the children were decapitated by the helicopter, while the other child was crushed by the helicopter landing on top of her) (look here [] for a short article on the accident.

Re:AI (1)

.sig (180877) | more than 13 years ago | (#484026)

Actually, you're right. Never saw it, though I have been meaning to for quite a while. I have the trailer for it, looks quite bizzare, and from what I hear it's quite a classic.
Is it out on DVD? I'll have to look for it, my roomate says it was great.

Re:20 years in the making? (1)

DESADE (104626) | more than 13 years ago | (#484027)

Twilight Zone... the Movie.

Re:Another interesting AI book for movie (1)

karot (26201) | more than 13 years ago | (#484028)

Yes, a review would be good, and anybody who finds a source for this book in the US or UK, let us all know...

In a similar vein, "Slant" by Greg Bear, is a weighty tome, but includes some excellent AI storylines, and to keep the true Slashdotter happy, there's a whole heap of nano-technology thrown in with some excellent medical-nano and war-machine-nano to keep you happy, with an underlying plot about the mental development of two entirely different and both quite incerdible AIs.


Re:Kubrick must have been a real visionary ... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 13 years ago | (#484029)

A joke indicates at least a modicum of humour. Your "joke" appears to have none whatsoever. But keep at it, sport!

AI (1)

.sig (180877) | more than 13 years ago | (#484035)

Now this is definately good news. Too bad I can't use quicktime here, I have to wait till I get home to watch the trailer.
I've always been big in AI, my first programming experiences were with modifying some of the simpler games on my old apple ][e ;-)
It'd be interesting to see how deep into AI the movie goes; I doubt that it'll go into anything even remotely like what they teach in the AI intro classes, but hopefully they'll still keep it accurate enough to keep those who know what it's all about happy. Nothing's more annying than a movie that gets just about everything wrong, (*COUGH*Hackers*COUGH*The Net*COUGH*)
Also curious about what effect Spielburg's taking the reins will have on the overall outlook. I hated just about all of Kubrick's films, with the exceptions of 2001 and The Shining, but it's also hard to see a movie like this coming from Spielburg. It's definately got my attention...

Re:Woo hoo (1)

suffocate (90016) | more than 13 years ago | (#484036)

It'd be awfully damned hard to be worse than Bicentennial man.

Obligatory Box Office Predictions (1)

Cyclopedian (163375) | more than 13 years ago | (#484039)

I predict A.I. will earn well over $200 million at the summer box office, and becoming a run-away hit for the year.

Why not invest in this movie? Go here [] to put your HSX dollars in it and become stinking rich.

Remember, this is both Kubrick and Spielberg we're talking about here. Kubrick has the great story touch, Spielberg the great Box Office Touch(tm).


20 years?? (1)

NeoCode (207863) | more than 13 years ago | (#484040)

hmmm..I wonder how many actors they went through the entire production time.

Time to dig out I Robot. (3)

morganew (194299) | more than 13 years ago | (#484042)

Hopefully this movie will redeem robotics and AI, especially after the Robin Williams "effort" last year.

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".

Another interesting AI book for movie (1)

Woodrow (21174) | more than 13 years ago | (#484048)

The book "The Turing Option" by Harry Harrison and Marvin Minsky would also make a good movie. It is a book using Minsky's theories and ideas of AI with a great storyline. Mr. Minsky wrote me and said that at one time it was under option to be made but interest was lost (no money). If anyone wants a good read find this book. It is out of print but you should be able to find it used. Mr. Minsky also has extra chapters at his personal []
web page.

If there is interest, I am rereading the book and would do write a review for /. in a few weeks.

Where Spielberg's Roots Lie (1)

mrparker (265848) | more than 13 years ago | (#484049)

When Spielberg started out, he was really a horror/sci-fi director. He made that short film based on the Richard Matheson story, Jaws, Close Encounters, etc. No matter how successful Spielberg has become, I believe that his roots still lie in what major media would call B-movie schlock.

Re:Spielberg should let sleeping movies lie (1)

tongue (30814) | more than 13 years ago | (#484050)

The way not to remember Stanley is to give his unfinished films to Spielberg to finish. What's done is done, and what's passed is passed. When Kubrick died, he never wished for others to bastardize his work.

Actually, according to my cousin who was actually IN the movie, Kubrick fully intended for Spielberg to direct the movie. He left it to SS in a will of some sort.

also working on adapting "The Minoroty Report" (1)

Saint Nobody (21391) | more than 13 years ago | (#484051)

I was so focused on his upcoming adaption of Philip K. Dick's "The Minority Report" [] that i didn't realize Spielberg was actually doing A.I. I knew Kubrick was thinking of having Spielberg do the movie from the previously prepared storyboards, but that was the last i heard of it until now.

A.I. sounds cool (damn quicktime. i want to see the trailer, too), but as a newly-initiated PKD fan, i'm looking forweard to "The Minority Report" [] more.

Nice one. You almost had me going there... (1)

dave-fu (86011) | more than 13 years ago | (#484052)

> such sensible leaders as George W. Bush Ha ha.

Kubrick and Chris Cunningham (5)

yardgnome (190624) | more than 13 years ago | (#484053)

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.


Re:Speilberg's A.I. (1)

chorder (177607) | more than 13 years ago | (#484054)

Preach on Brother Man.

I'd rather be a Kubrick Buff than a Film Buff any day of the week.

Re:Woo hoo (1)

Paradise_Pete (95412) | more than 13 years ago | (#484055)

Bicentennial man blew no question about it

Up until the bonus round, when he missed a couple and had to settle for some lovely parting gifts.

QuickTime (3)

Mike Hicks (244) | more than 13 years ago | (#484056)

Quoth CmdrTaco:

I wish I could see this thing...

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..


Kubrick's intentions regarding A.I. (5)

Saint Nobody (21391) | more than 13 years ago | (#484057)

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.

Why are you looking forward to this movie? (1)

xmutex (191032) | more than 13 years ago | (#484058)

Lessee... the original story had what, one character? This movie has 9, 10, whatever people cast?

Voice-over by Robin Fucking Williams?

If you're looking forward to watching an over-hyped mediocre-talented director butcher what would have been a great work, then you'll be in for much amusement.

However, if you're a fan of Kubrick, or decent filmmaking in general, then hang your head in shame and hope Stanley's not too occupied rolling over in his grave.

It'll be a sad day when this fluffed up butchered crap hits the screens.

Who cares how many people see it? (1)

SPYvSPY (166790) | more than 13 years ago | (#484059)

Why would we be "lucky" if crowds flock to this movie. I'd prefer that they bugger off and stay home so I can sit where I want.

Do I really want to improve the chances that some jackass will be kicking the back of my seat?

Format (1)

redhog (15207) | more than 13 years ago | (#484060)

Could someone please convert that trailer into MPEG? Everyone does not have a QT viewer...

A Trailer for Another Interesting Movie (1)

LetterJ (3524) | more than 13 years ago | (#484062)

Submitted but rejected. I saw a poster for a movie this weekend that had some pretty detailed rendering of the character faces. The trailer looks like it might be an entertaining movie. Check it out at [] .

Head Geek

I didn't submit this article. (1)

Ainonymous Coward (308866) | more than 13 years ago | (#484065)

CmdrTaco's spell check must be broken again.

Or he doesn't care.

Get some pride in your damn site, Taco.

Hasn't this been out for a while now? (1)

Mr._Anderson (117747) | more than 13 years ago | (#484068)

I'm pretty sure I saw this teaser last fall.

Re:Format (1)

Paradise_Pete (95412) | more than 13 years ago | (#484074)

Everyone does not have a QT viewer

Whaddaya mean? Surely some people do. I've got one right here, in fact.

Re:AI (1)

pappy72 (226382) | more than 13 years ago | (#484076)

or how bout Full Metal Jacket?? Probably the best 'true to life' war movie made...

Re:Spielberg should let sleeping movies lie (1)

foistboinder (99286) | more than 13 years ago | (#484078)

when Kubrick was close to death he asked Spielberg to finish the film.

Since Kubrick's death was quite unexpected, I question that there was any such request.

Re:Obligatory Box Office Predictions (1)

IronChef (164482) | more than 13 years ago | (#484082)

After seeing Eyes Wide Shut I think that Kubrick lost his mind in his old age. Like Arthur C. Clarke... his latest stuff has been crap.

I'm very excited to see AI, it's one of my favorite themes, but I remain skeptical about the quality of the film.

Re:Of course you realize... (1)

Paradise_Pete (95412) | more than 13 years ago | (#484083)

His obsessive and secretive ways are sorely missed? That's a bit dramatic, don't you think?

Re:Woo hoo (1)

guinsu (198732) | more than 13 years ago | (#484084)

Am I the only one who liked this movie? I thought it captured some of the style of Asimov's writing.

Why are you looking forward to this? (1)

thomkt (59664) | more than 13 years ago | (#484085)

I saw the trailer for this while waiting for Cast Away [] to start.

It just looked like a remake of D.A.R.Y.L. []

Is that a little slow for Joe Audience? (4)

dmorin (25609) | more than 13 years ago | (#484086)

Of course I'll go see it, as will many geeks. But would a trailer like that capture the hearts of the audience at large? For a minute there in the opening it looks like it might ask you to feed the kid for just 57 cents a day or something. I fear that the masses need a chase scene or a murder or something (see Antitrust, or even E.T.) to spark their interest.

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.

Actually, We Narrowly Missed AI (2)

Dr. Dew (219113) | more than 13 years ago | (#484088)

For better or worse, the AI-enhanced [] candidate was sent home to a state he didn't carry.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>