Inconsistent and heartless

Rating: 7/10 (28 June 2002)

This film failed to reach out and grab me. Yes, it had amazing, seamless visuals that didn't get in the way of the story, and some wonderful cinematic -moments-. But if you look closely at the story, it is so full of holes. I'm a science fiction fanatic, and the best sci-fi suspends your disbelief. It doesn't give me time to think about why things don't make sense, such as why Andertons's access wouldn't have been shut off, or why the Dr. who he put away wouldn't have done something nasty to him, like amputating his feet (a classic "Twilight Zone" I've always remembered).

I know Spielberg was trying to pose some big, Stanley Kubrick questions again, but Spielberg isn't Kubrick here-he's only inserting some Kubrick -elements- into his films now. In A.I., he posed questions that made you think, and that film had more Kubrick and more heart.