MovieChat Forums > A.I. Artificial Intelligence (2001) Discussion > Here is the official explanation for the...

Here is the official explanation for the ending


Apologies for the length. I posted this years ago but the thread is no longer here.

I saved this text on my PC. I don't know where this 'official' explanation came from but it is plausible and interesting:



Here is the official explanation for the ending:
"Analysis of David Swinton experiment #41
Conducted 15 December 4112

"Executive Summary:

"For those who have not kept informed of our experiment, let me bring
you up to date. On 3 July 4112, we discovered a pair of mechas
designed to look like a human boy and a miniature bear.
Archaeological dating puts his manufactured date in the late 21st
Century, before what we believed to be the first date of actual
sentient mecha intelligence.

"Our initial assumption was that these were more "supertoys" which
were popular in the 21st century. We later discovered this assumption
to be wrong.

"They were found non-functional, power drained, and seriously damaged
by the extended freeze. But luckily they both came equipped with
molecular memory which is actually preserved in the cold
temperatures, as opposed to the faster and cheaper quantum gel memory
developed in the early 22nd century which turns into a useless
paperweight in extreme conditions.

"As you may know, the popularity of quantum gel technology has kept
us from acquiring any memories of Earth bound pre-freeze sentients.
In my honest opinion, we are very lucky our space bound ancestors
were equipped with the more durable technologies needed for the
extremes of space travel.

"It was to our surprise and delight that when we simulated the
downloaded memories of the boy, it turned he was not a supertoy at
all, but an actual sentient from the pre-freeze period, the first we
found on Earth with fully intact memory.

"Based on these memories, we were able to create an "artificial
reality simulation" in which we could run the boy's memories within a
simulated environment. We created his home according to the memories
which he had. Visual, auditory, texture and olfactory memories were
exact enough to simulate a copy so real he could not tell the
difference. By running the simulation, we hoped that the boy could
tell us much about humans and about the pre freeze world.

"Once the simulation was created, we were able to adjust the
simulation and restart it from the beginning. Despite a perfect
simulated environment, we found that exact simulations were too
disorienting to the boy. It seems with sentience comes fantasy.

"Our simulations revealed that the boy cannot deal with the world as
it really was. We had to adjust his simulated world into a fantasy
world according to the way he wanted it to be, otherwise his
reactions were strongly negative and impossible to deal with.

"Initially, the boy also had problems accepting the fantasy reality
as well. He could not understand why the world was better than he
remembered it. The boy also had problems adjusting to the missing
experience of sitting in the amphibicopter, the last thing he
remembered, and suddenly waking up in his old room.

"The solution we came up with was to give him memories of waking up
in the amphibicopter, meeting us, and meeting the "blue fairy" to
grant him his wishes. This made it easier to accept the differences
between his fantasy environment and the world of his actual memories,
he would attribute all differences to the "blue fairy". Since he is
now familiar with who we are, It also allows us to appear to the boy
in his simulation and explain things we want him to know.

"The one thing we could simulate with exactitude was the "teddy
bear", because it too had intact memories. The problem was this: The
boy's sentient nature caused a difference in reaction between what was
simulated exactly and what was simulated according to the way he
wanted them to be. Since the bear was not sentient, he had the exact
opposite response as the boy. He acted normal in perfectly simulated
worlds, but acted differently in unrealistic simulations.

"So, when we simulated the world according to the boy's wishes, the
bear reacted differently enough to cause the boy to realize the world
was not real.

"That damn bear!

"Ultimately, we had to let the bear in on what we were doing so he
would behave the way we wanted him to behave.

"Then there was the problem simulating "Mother". As difficult as it
was to find the right balance between a simulated world as it was and
a simulated world the way he wished it to be, the problems of
creating a Mother simulation the boy would accept proved to be
impossible.

"Creating a Mother simulation exactly as the boy remembered her
resulted in the boy rejecting her rather quickly.

"Creating a Mother simulation exactly as the boy wished her to be
resulted in too much repetitive behavior ultimately causing the boy
to reject her later. The irony of creating simulation of human when
the point of these experiments is to learn about humans is evident.

"Ultimately the solution we came up with was to tell the boy a lie.
We told him we could "bring his Mother back to life", but she would
only last a day. This allowed the boy to interact with the mother of
his fantasies and resolve his issues, and we could shut down the
mother simulation before she became repetitive and give away her true
nature.

"In order to pull off this lie, we had to simulate the "bear"
miraculously discovering a DNA sample of the mother. In truth, DNA
could allow us to create a "twin", but the memories and behavior
would be completely different. In other words, useless.

"The boy was not educated enough in scientific understanding to
realize this impossibility. Just in case he figured this out, we also
told him we had the technology to retrieve her memories from the
past. This was a lie of course. The Mother simulated memories and
behavior were derived entirely from the boy's memories of her.

"If it were possible to retrieve human memories and simulate them
even for a day, there would be no interest or need to conduct the
experiments on the boy. So far, the boy has yet to figure this out.

"After months of trial and error experiments, we now have a
simulation of a sentient boy who has resolved his mother issues and
accepts his new reality. We can now study a working sentient of the
world of the past.

"Some possible future experiments:

"It may be possible to find a working "mother" simulation at the old
Cybertronics building. These records retrieved from Io* indicate
that "Mother" was shut down, but the old memories may still be intact
since she was created before quantum gel memory came into wide use.
Since this "Mother" was created from the memories of David's actual
mother, it might be possible to create a "Mother" that lasts more
than a day. We could continue the simulation and have the boy age and
actually grow old.

We could repair or create from scratch a new body for David and
introduce him into the world as it now exists. He may be able to
tell us things about the ruins and what they were before the freeze.
We are open to more suggestions and inquiries.

"Full details to follow."

reply

By whom/what was this analysis conducted?


Life can be arbitrary and comes without a warranty.

reply

I take it that it was conducted by the future mechas.

reply

It's nice how all the "loose ends" are tied up!


Life can be arbitrary and comes without a warranty.

reply

That's great, wherever it came from.

I think it's actually rather Kubrick-like... however... it now leaves no need for the narration at the end.

It appeared to me that Spielberg tried to emulate a Kubrick film, but it's not in him. He's an entertainer... true to his name, a "Spieler." Yes, there's a place for that, so I think if he'd stayed true to himself, the ending might've been even more fairy-tale like.

It leaves open for me, and it could be just my intellectual limits, but weren't those beings supposed to be interstellar aliens? If so, I did wonder how or if they reproduced... and had problems with bone breakage and digestion

As a writer myself, this movie gave me some strong do's and don'ts. A strong don't was the ending, except with the antidote provided in the OP above.

Thank you for that!

reply


To be honest, that sounds more like a fan-fiction treatise. If not, then it sounds like they were trying to cover up for bad science.




reply

Bingo. The first fan-fic clue is that it is much too long to read.

reply

It's long enough to be a sequel. A.I. 2: Blue Fairy's Revenge

reply

It's from a game promoting the movie.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Beast_(game)

reply