An Argument Against David’s Evolution into Personhood

An interesting and insightful comment as always, although its esoteric nature made it difficult for me to apply within the context of the original post.

With your words, I would like to discuss Teddy (a recurring topic of mine, I know) again.

I believe one of the reasons for the film's criticism (potential quality notwithstanding) is its liminal state between two directing visions--Kubrick or Spielberg? It certainly tries to tackle on many themes simultaneously, but the sum of the parts don't quite add up to expectation.

Upon scrutiny, we see the film's denouement as not one of happiness, but one of profound sadness, because it ultimately leaves Teddy, the only person who has ever truly loved David, all alone. Not only did Teddy go out of his way to stay with David despite his programming, but he sacrificed his entire existence and potential happiness for a reality that never became actualized. David did not acknowledge Teddy when he gave him the locke of hair, without which David's dream of reuniting with Monica would have never been realized, nor did he acknowledge Teddy's loyalty and supreme friendship. In fact, we never even see a moment where David and Teddy part ways. What we see instead is a simulated sequence where David is happy with Monica, but at Teddy's expense (literally and figuratively). The ending simulation depicts Teddy, the object, being the butt of the jokes (i.e., hide and seek). More than that, however, is with David's symbolic and literal death, he prevents Teddy from ever finding contentment, as all humans have gone extinct. Although we may speculate and assume that the advanced mecha will take Teddy in, I find it much more likely, given what we see in the film, that they merely discard him.

The intrigue in the film is that it is not David who appears sentient or able to exert control over his actions, it is Teddy. All of David's actions function to serve himself, whereas those of Teddy serve others (i.e., David). David's entire perspective is shaped around his coding, where he seeks to be loved by Monica. Teddy, on the other hand, escapes all of his programming. He leaves, volitionally, Martin, despite still being programed to be his "supertoy," and when in the hands of another human who may potentially love him (the girl at the fair), he uses his wit to free David by telling her that he is real. David shows no higher intelligence in the film, instead perseverating on the notion that he may someday become real. Even Joe realizes that his pursuit is a logical dead end.

David is a figure of pathos, but not one to be pitied. His self-serving, reckless, and selfish nature makes him part of the same solipsistic breed of humans which he so longs to be a part of. This is also part of the overarching double entendre of the ending, where by fulfilling his Pinnochio journey, David cements all of humanities foibles, instead of remaining the AI which is actually more human than the humans (i.e., Teddy).

We saw this with Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey, where Hal, despite status as machine, was more human in his emotional exhibition than any of his accompanying biological cosmonauts.