While both are stories about a human creation longing to be a real human, Pinocchio is about a misbehaving child failing his caregiver despite the unconditional love Geppetto gives him, A.I. Artificial Intelligence shifts the paradigm and tells the story of caregivers failing the child that loves them unconditionally. While they are both fables, the audience to whom the moral is directed is very different: one warns children about the consequences of their selfishness while the other warns parental figures about theirs.
While both are stories about a human creation longing to be a real human, Pinocchio is about a misbehaving child failing his caregiver despite the unconditional love Geppetto gives him, A.I. Artificial Intelligence shifts the paradigm and tells the story of caregivers failing the child that loves them unconditionally. While they are both fables, the audience at whom the moral is directed is very different: one warns children about the consequences of their selfishness while the other warns parental figures about theirs.
In the Pinocchio I remember growing up, the technicolor Disney nightmare, Pinocchio was created out of loneliness on Geppetto’s part which differs from the Collodi version where the marionette just happened to be sentient, and its consciousness wasn’t deliberately created unlike in the Disney version and in A.I. Artificial Intelligence. Fulfilling the role of Geppetto the creator in A.I. is Professor Hobby; he lost his son and David is based on the real-life David. However, Professor Hobby doesn’t keep David for himself and instead gives him to Monica and Harry who have also lost their son Martin, but not for good. Monica and Harry fulfill the role of Geppetto the caregiver- for a little while. When Martin comes home, Monica and Harry’s priority is, understandably, their human son whose loss they suffered once before. A.I. Artificial Intelligence’s tagline reads “His love is real, but he is not” and that is the backbone of the film’s moral struggle which, for me at least, becomes most pertinent when Martin is rescued from drowning and David lays at the bottom of the pool.
Martin seems to take the place of the Cat, the Fox, and Lamp-Wick as he like these other characters lead the naive character down paths that land him in trouble and Teddy is the closest thing to the Cricket, guiding David through the wider world as a voice of reason. However, David doesn’t hurt Teddy the way Pinocchio does the Cricket and instead treasures him as a friend. Joe parallels Harlequin: David saves him from certain death at the Flesh Faire the same way Pinocchio saves Harlequin from becoming kindling for fire. Joe’s death scene provides the viewer with a troubling little quandary. As he dies, he yells “I am. I was.” referring to René Descartes's cogito, ergo sum, I think therefore I am. Despite being a machine, Joe had his own thoughts and desires. He was alive in his own way. He was not made of flesh, and he was programmed to learn and behave in a certain way; but does that matter? Are we any different?
In terms of theme, I have always been bothered by one thing in any iteration of Pinocchio: why would someone create a fake child when there must be a real one in need of a home and love? As someone who would like to foster or adopt a child in the future, I couldn’t understand why Geppetto didn’t just go to an orphanage or take in a child off the street; no matter what society one is living in be it a pastoral village or a world ravaged by the effects of climate change, there’s bound to be a kid who needs a better home. Why carve a boy out of wood or metal?
A.I. answered that question for me: selfishness. Instead of adopting a child who is organic and unpredictable, capable of hate, and who is not guaranteed to love their parents or live forever, Professor Hobby created a mechanical replica of the son he lost. After David discovers he is not unique, Professor Hobby tells him “My son was one of a kind, you are the first of a kind”. The motivation for the project was personal comfort, to soothe his own loneliness and hurt after the loss of his son. He programmed David to love unconditionally so that he and other grieving parents could feel better without considering how their responses to David’s love would affect him.
On the other hand, the Geppetto in Pinocchio loved his creation unconditionally and his creation’s initial disregard for his feelings pushes him deeper into poverty, sadness, and eventually the stomach of a shark. In A.I. the shark is paralleled by the helicopter/submarine that David spends two millennia in as he prays to the blue fairy statue, he is the one that is completely consumed by loneliness, not his creator. When the blue fairy statue shatters, it symbolizes the impossibility of David becoming a real boy. This differs greatly from Pinocchio where even though the blue fairy is in a fragile state as she lays ill, Pinocchio is still able to redeem himself and become a real boy. David doesn’t need to redeem himself though, he hasn’t done anything wrong. He was abandoned and chased down by the world that was meant to nurture him. David does not become human, but he ends up being the closest thing to a human there is after the human race has become extinct.
The most tragic part of the film’s ending is that it emphasizes the impossibility of David’s desires. He hopes things will end for him the way they do for Pinocchio, that he will be rewarded for his good heart and will be made into a human boy that will be loved. But he doesn’t have a heart, and despite that if he did it would be a good and pure one, it’s the hearts of the human beings that are the source of the problem. David is loving and selfless while the humans in his story are cold and self-serving. He was created to serve them and even on his last “good” day where he and Monica are alone, it’s him that is tucking her into bed to sleep for the last time. There is no comfort for him.
In the Pinocchio I remember growing up, the technicolor Disney nightmare, Pinocchio was created out of loneliness on Geppetto’s part which differs from the Collodi version where the marionette just happened to be sentient, and its consciousness wasn’t deliberately created unlike in the Disney version and in A.I. Artificial Intelligence. Fulfilling the role of Geppetto the creator in A.I. is Professor Hobby; he lost his son and David is based on the real-life David. However, Professor Hobby doesn’t keep David for himself and instead gives him to Monica and Harry who have also lost their son Martin, but not for good. Monica and Harry fulfill the role of Geppetto the caregiver- for a little while. When Martin comes home, Monica and Harry’s priority is, understandably, their human son whose loss they suffered once before. A.I. Artificial Intelligence’s tagline reads “His love is real, but he is not” and that is the backbone of the film’s moral struggle which, for me at least, becomes most pertinent when Martin is rescued from drowning and David lies at the bottom of the pool.
Martin seems to take the place of the Cat, the Fox, and Lamp-Wick, as he like these other characters lead the naive character down paths that land him in trouble, and Teddy, is the closest thing to the Cricket, guiding David through the wider world as a voice of reason. However, David doesn’t hurt Teddy the way Pinocchio does the Cricket and instead treasures him as a friend. Joe parallels Harlequin: David saves him from certain death at the Flesh Faire the same way Pinocchio saves Harlequin from becoming kindling for the fire. Joe’s death scene provides the viewer with a troubling little quandary. As he dies, he yells “I am. I was.” referring to René Descartes's cogito, ergo sum, I think therefore I am. Despite being a machine, Joe had his own thoughts and desires. He was alive in his own way. He was not made of flesh, and he was programmed to learn and behave in a certain way; but does that matter? Are we any different?
In terms of theme, I have always been bothered by one thing in any iteration of Pinocchio: why would someone create a fake child when there must be a real one in need of a home and love? As someone who would like to foster or adopt a child in the future, I couldn’t understand why Geppetto didn’t just go to an orphanage or take in a child off the street; no matter what society one is living in be it a pastoral village or a world ravaged by the effects of climate change, there’s bound to be a kid who needs a better home. Why carve a boy out of wood or metal?
A.I. answered that question for me: selfishness. Instead of adopting a child who is organic and unpredictable, capable of hate, and who is not guaranteed to love their parents or live forever, Professor Hobby created a mechanical replica of the son he lost. After David discovers he is not unique, Professor Hobby tells him “My son was one of a kind, you are the first of a kind”. The motivation for the project was personal comfort, to soothe his own loneliness and hurt after the loss of his son. He programmed David to love unconditionally so that he and other grieving parents could feel better without considering how their responses to David’s love would affect him.
On the other hand, the Geppetto in Pinocchio loved his creation unconditionally and his creation’s initial disregard for his feelings pushes him deeper into poverty, sadness, and eventually the stomach of a shark. In A.I. the shark is paralleled by the helicopter/submarine that David spends two millennia in as he prays to the blue fairy statue, he is the one that is completely consumed by loneliness, not his creator. When the blue fairy statue shatters, it symbolizes the impossibility of David becoming a real boy. This differs greatly from Pinocchio where even though the blue fairy is in a fragile state as she lays ill, Pinocchio is still able to redeem himself and become a real boy. David doesn’t need to redeem himself though, he hasn’t done anything wrong. He was abandoned and chased down by the world that was meant to nurture him. David does not become human, but he ends up being the closest thing to a human there is after the human race has become extinct.
The most tragic part of the film’s ending is that it emphasizes the impossibility of David’s desires. He hopes things will end for him the way they do for Pinocchio, that he will be rewarded for his good heart and will be made into a human boy that will be loved. But he doesn’t have a heart, and despite that if he did it would be a good and pure one, it’s the hearts of the human beings that are the source of the problem. David is loving and selfless while the humans in his story are cold and self-serving. He was created to serve them and even on his last “good” day when he and Monica are alone, it’s him that is tucking her into bed to sleep for the last time. There is no comfort for him.
Comments
Post a Comment