Stanley Kubrick's AI vs Steven Spielberg's AI

In 2012, I discovered after reading the Stanley Kubrick Archives that my favorite director Stanley Kubrick almost got to make his version of AI: Artificial Intelligence back in 1994. He eventually dropped the project and the project fell into the hands of Steven Spielberg. Let's compare the two versions of the script. The ending is what we'll talk about.

Also, this is a re-edit of my original 2012 video on another channel. Hope you enjoy the tighter edit. You'll also get a peak of how I looked almost a decade ago. Man, time flies. That was before I ever got serious on YouTube. If only I put that movie analysis on a separate dedicated channel and just kept doing movie analyses. Imagine where Jerry Watches Movies would be. Whatever the case, we will keep building.

I analyze the script and how it would have been different from Steven Spielberg's version.

Stanley Kubrick Archives Footage here:

Let me know what other movies you want to see me review! Talk to you guys soon!

Follow other Jerry channels here:
Fight Commentary Chats
Jerry Learns Business

Timecodes:
0:00 Introduction
0:52 Central theme of the movie
0:58 Plot summary
2:31 Why the ending was confusing
3:19 Kubrick's ending
4:03 Analysis

[dk]

This film didn't flop, it made 235 million dollars.

[juzujuzu]

I think it's the safest "prediction" possible to call any film better if it were made by Kubrick. But just changing the ending changes the whole film completely. It's kind of insane how Kubrick manages to do that, 2001, A Clockwork Orange, The Shining, Full Metal Jacket, Eyes Wide Shut, and also Dr.Strangelove, the ending is what solidifies what the whole film was trying to say.

Kubrick films have so many layers that decoding the meaning takes time and effort, but it sure is worth it.

[AlexGarcia-zeyg]

Kubrick was never going to finish this film. Even if he lived another 20 years.

[AY_______]

Stanley Kubricks films are more often IRONIC

[marklechman]

That's wild! Every other source I've watched or read has Spielberg swearing up and down that the ending was exactly Kubrick's vision. I need to look into this more!

[orlandodavison]

Kubrick was never going to get around to directing A.I.

Given that a rather routine film like Eyes Wide Shut was the longest and one of the most painstaking film shoots in history.

So try to imagine with all the technical complexities posed by this film and its premise, along with all of Kubrick's weird requests constant shifting aroundof ideas-- a totally cgi David, the various futuristic sets and exotic locales. There's no way.

No, Kubrick would have scrapped it anyway if he hadn't turned it over to Spielberg. Kubrick was pretty much done, given his working pace, his taste in esoteric subject matter and his age.

[rudra]

dawg i thought this video was from 12 years ago

[Zennofobic]

I loved A.I. but only watch it once in a very long while because it makes me feel disjointed and melancholy, Kubrik's ending probably would have had me bawling my eyes out. Someone might tackle this again some day with Kubrik's intended ending.

[oaktowndimond]

Disagree. That was not Monica. It was a simulation (probably in David's neural network, not physically). So it wasn't true love. Because the real Monica never loved david. Only felt guilty about sending him to be destroyed.

The question posed in the meeting room "can a human love a robot back?" the answer is no.

The future mecca gave david his dream wish. Being a robot boy, he had the innocence to believe the "simulated charade". The robots probably terminated David after his "special day" to put an end to his near eternal suffering.

The future Mecca are a hive mind. They collectively downloaded David's consciousness... All his memories, emotions and "soul".

I can only imagine what they thought of their extinct creators after seeing the anguish and despair they caused david to endure for over 2000 years.

The movie was maligned by many who didn't understand the existentialism.

I'm not convinced that "Kubrick happy ending" was true. that would be WAY too sappy for him IMHO.

[Redeemedbylove]

He’s right. Kubrick’s version offsets a consistently depressing movie with a surprising warm ending. Spielberg’s version is hopelessly depressing. Even the ending message of the best hope is dying with a good last memory is ruined by confusion.

[ursweetsab]

I saw the film at release and loved it.

[AntonioTorres-omiw]

Stanley Kubrick developed the concept for the movie and worked on it for years before his passing, first and last acts of the movie, which reflect a more human and emotional tone, were indeed influenced by Kubrick's vision therefore were ultimately shaped and directed by Steven Spielberg who naturally brought his own sensibilities to the film, especially in the portrayal of emotions and relationships. The middle act, which involves more of the darker, dystopian themes, aligns more closely with Kubrick's style.
That combination of these two directors' influences gives the film its unique blend of starkness and sentimentality.
That being said, the first and last acts were part of Kubrick’s original concept, the “aliens” y’all hated were part of Kubrick’s vision, the reunion between the mother and the child was Kubrick’s concept
Tbh i can understand the confusion and dislike the movie generates but only if it’s your first time, if the second time you haven’t change your perspective then i guess you’re not putting the proper attention,

It’s frustrating how this movie often faces criticism due to the Spielberg-Kubrick comparison, when the film itself presents such a deep and sophisticated exploration of human nature and technology. The emphasis on their differing styles can detract from the film’s rich, thought-provoking concept

[genreonlinenet]

Great video. Where can one get that book you used?

[davidlean]

I suggest you watch some videos by guys like Rob Ager to discover how underrated AI actually is. People forget, Kubrick had agreed to let speilberg direct before he died. Kubrick felt his dark tone would 'give the game away' more that Speilberg's candyfloss touch. There wouldn't have been an AI directed by Stanley had he lived. The movie would have been produced by Kubrick, but directed by Speilberg.

[Zennofobic]

you look a lot like my nephew haha what a trip... sharing this clip with his moms

[BlackMambo]

From my perspective for the topics it delves into, A.I. is a timeless movie. Thanks for your perspective and for the unknown info about the end in the original Kubrick script... 👍🏽👍🏽👍🏽👍🏽👍🏽👍🏽

[rjukusa]

I love the film, I’ve watched it (by accident) enough times to know every scene and effects.
Sadly it’s a mismatch of Spielberg trying to imitate Kubrick’s cold harsh realism and 3rd person view of people and emotions and Spielberg’s urge to place his sentimental build ups to to tug at the audience emotions and leave them with an ex static teary moment (which in our current times no longer is very effective, people seem to have become jaded and see his emotional manipulation for what it is and see it before it hits).

As I said, I do love the film, I found the integration of technology in the future very believable but after seeing it recently I still want the kitchen in the house but the technology of lighting let it down quite severely. We have sky projected holograms in Rouge City yet the house, cars and the Flesh Fair use simple fluorescent tubes or traditional lighting fixtures, this is especially noticeable with the bright lights on the bed canopy.

Given the jumbo screen at the Flesh Fair was a tri-led display they missed a trick with lighting which now is one of the main things that age the film.

The proposed Kubrick ending would have been more satisfying but would have left more question about Monica’s future and reality of loosing the real people in her family.
Remember, she is not a construct of David’s memory, she is living through a thread imprinted in time, it’s limit of a day seems arbitrary and she could have lived for several days to months before fading away.
Another opuntia on your interpretation of the ending, I don’t recall them saying David never wakes up, I just remember him sleeping, dreaming and being satisfied for the first time.

The film ultimately did have too many loose ends that needed to be tied up, other more advanced robots would have been found, their memory chips read and recreated. More of the future that Spielberg is certainly aware of could have been shown. The Flesh Fair was full of disgruntled people so more societal narrative could have been added. Monica’s family were clearly part of the 1% and they could have been placed socially compared to the masses who have been replaced by robots and Ai, presumably living in poverty.

[BrothersWebOfficial]

Thanks, the movie is slow to the point, and when you they 2, 000 years past, it felt like a kick to the nuts. Marketing probably didn't help the film. It's not a kid's film, and definitely a philosophical one, definitely would not help the box office. I give it 2.5/5 - Luke