movie like this and better than 10 times

those other movies were better but just remember, EVA was made on a small budget and it was quite good by its own right.

this movie was a mess. yea, maybe it was done with a short budget, in that case they should have spent more time, effort and money on making a credible story. it was so frustrating and unbeliavable i couldn't wait for it to end.
besides the impossible connection with the characters' feelings (was I supposed to cry when Eva's memories where dissapearing??), it was full of ridiculous details such as a teacher smoking inside a university (a society so advanced and suddenly smoking is permitted inside a university?), completely useless robot designs rolling around the city and the campus... when they actually have FULL WORKING HUMAN ROBOTS in existance... does that make any sense?? why is there a half bodied robot receptionist when you can have her with legs?

I agree except for Bicentennial Man. That movie was messier than EVA, in terms of over budget and story. It costed, by then, $100 Million...

On the other hand, I absolutely loved A.I.


I'm so excited, I think I'll brush all my teeth today!

This film is great, if you understand it is an indie one, with low budget, from Spain. What you get with lots of money, ultimate fx and some surnames up front, such as Clooney and Bullock, is the AWFUL 8-Oscar nomination "Gravity". (SPOILERS from here) I saw it in a theater in 3-D and yes. .. it looks great. However, there are no more than 10 minutes of dialogue, script?, G.C.' s bait is to watch (?) him for about 12 minutes in the whole movie. Plot: Female astronaut looses her spaceship and floats in space throughout the film. That's it.
"A.I." was fine, however with awful edition and a messy script with too many hands on it. Kubrick left a skeleton 1/3 script, hence the mess of three almost non-related parts (kindly Google it). And we're talking about Steven Spielberg here!.
"Eva"'s fx are as good as any. And there IS a story and subplots.

I only have few complaints about EVA which was very good, but could have been great.

(1) Unless I missed it, all you have to say is "What do you see when you close your eyes?" and the robots "soul" is destroyed? Since there is a GOD/CREATOR/FRANKENSTEIN theme, maybe only the "creator(s) could "kill" their own creation, rather than anyone on a whim saying the magic words... I didn't see this explained in the film(?)

(2) The relationship between Alex and Eva is crucial to the film..and very complex.
At first it seemed like a innocent romantic infatuation similar to Pierre and Françoise/Cybèle in Sundays and Cybele (1962) but EVA the movie is way too short to develop the budding relationship and give it true life. The depth of Alex and
Eva's bond is what makes the movie, or could have.

However, rather than 10 year old Eva being a muse to an older man, we find out (spoilers) that being a combination of Alex and Lana, Eva is more a daughter than niece to a distant uncle.

(3) I don't think, despite her guilt, that Eva meant to hurt/kill Lana. It was totally unlike the robot prototype in the lab which had a murderous meltdown and needed to be terminated.
Eva was just acting human, and it was precisely the FREE WILL given to her by Alex and Lana, that caused her to react to the mind shattering implications that SHE was not human.
Eva was just pushing her mother away in anger, but not with murderous intent. Her inaction on the mountain top was more of shock, and impotence being a little girl. She could not have pulled her mother up even if she wanted to.

This was not an evil deed that need her "death" More frustrating is the father's (Alex's) inability to ask Eva what actually happened and realize that she was not an out of control machine needing termination.

This leads into the more profound themes of the film. As robots evolve to where they are indistinguishable from humans, shouldn't the protections of human justice prevail? Shouldn't Eva have had a"trial" or some therapy like a "real" child? But..it is so easy to kill a robot rather than consider that their "souls" are as sacred as human kind.

The old Asimov caveat of robotic law has a profound and perverse effect on the non-flesh and blood humans man is trying to create. A theme that Mary Shelly knew well enough about nearly 300 years ago.

And what about Eva? If she HAD "lived" what then? Another "flaw" was that the film starts 10 years after Eva was created, and she just happens to be 10 years old.. Does Eva "grow" or will she remain 10 forever, and what are the implications of that? What did the scientists envision for robots like Eva if they WERE successful?

(4) Finally, when Eva dies, what she "sees" is her view of heaven...a robots view of heaven, living in the idyllic world of her human family.

A robots dream... to be a real little girl.....just like a well known literary puppet.

In a larger sense, man cannot create a human from machinery. To be human is to be flesh and blood, to grow old and eventually die. It is what makes our time on Earth have meaning. A robot can be intelligent, it may have a "soul" but it can never be human...and a robotic humanoid like Eva can understand that...which is the paramount tragedy put forth in the film.

[deleted]

Eva is vastly superior to Bicentennial Man