Twelve Angry Androids :)
Submitted by Altima on January 23 2002 10:25:51
In reply to Twelve Angry Men and Flesh Fairs submitted by J on January 23 2002 02:52:05
|
Yeah, you're right about the premise of Twelve Angry Men. They've made the play int oa very good movie starring Henry Fonda as the guy who votes "not guilty." I'm Henry Fonda's role. The pressure's on :) It's a good thing I have all my 300-odd lines memorized, or else I'd be fairly screwed... Anyway, my feelings on the Mother's (Monica Swinton's) relationship with David: She decided to activate the irreversable process of coding David to love her. In a sense, she created him. She created his conciousness, drove a spark of life into his brain and gave him purpose. His purpose was, in a way, to worship Monica. I'm guessing that Monica was capable of feeling love for David, but that she was reluctant to display it around her husband (who treated David ambivilantly. To him it was just a machine, part of his job) and her "real" son (Whose clear distain for David was obvious from the moment he arrived.) She showed David affection during some quiet moments, like when he knocked over the perfume and expressed his concern over her inevitable death. She took the time to console him. (Of course, he had little capacity for understanding her consolation. "Is 50 years a long time, Teddy?" "I don't think so...") It was after David sinned, namely listening to the "real" son's serpent friend and allowing him to stab David in the hand (thus triggering that defense reaction, leading to unfortunate consequences) that he was cast out of his little Eden (the household) and into the world's more inhospitable areas. It is my opinion that if one delves deep enough into a book or film, one can see anything he wants. For a school essay once on the film "The Shawshank Redemption" I was able to write a 10,000 word study on Biblical parellels because I was bored. :) Not only that, though, but I realized how easy religious parellels can be found. I also hold the opinion that intentional Biblical metaphors in films are overused, but what I liked in A.I. was that it wasn't a Christ metaphor, like Pay it Forward was trying to be. A.I. was about man's beginings, ironically repeating in the future, and man's descent to the Earth and eventual conquest of it, only to find it empty without a purpose. When I wrote the last sentence, I was thinking namely of (SPOILER) the final act, 2,000 years ahead, when the "Super-Mechas" were seen, total control over matter, but leading fruitless lives and trying to find their soul in their past. Too many people have complained that A.I.'s ending is rediculous, but I'd like to ask them how THEY'D have ended that film. Oh well. :) |
Follow ups: