PCDVD數位科技討論區 - 史匹柏的AI 人工智慧

就是史丹利庫柏力克的構思啊，下面有篇專訪，大概就知道為何是"史匹力克"了:

Sunday, Jun. 17, 2001

Jess Cagle: What did he (Stanley Kubrick) say he wanted this film to be?

Spielberg: At the very beginning of it, he said to me — you have to
understand, Stanley was an amazing kind of individual because he was
able to wheedle out of you more information than I was ever to coax
out of him. He spent most of the time tapping into my brain asking the
kinds of questions you're asked by a journalist. And so it was a kind
of a shock, in my relationship to Stanley, that Stanley was giving up
something that he was interested in directing. In 1984 is when he first
talked to me about this. I was kind of surprised that Stanley had turned
to me to offer something that he was interested in directing, as opposed
to just asking me questions about what I do and how I do it. He told me
he was going to take a further step beyond the sentient relationship
between HAL 9000 and Bowman and Poole and he was going to tell a kind of
future fairy tale about the state of the art in artificial intelligence
at some unspecified future time.

The movie works because of the casting of the boy. Did you ever say to
Stanley you're nuts if you want to make this main character computer-generated
or a robot.

At first, back in the '80s, he said he was going to construct a robotic
child the way I constructed a robotic alien for ET. Over the next decade,
Stanley had started attempting to create a robot child. Stanley admitted
to me it was completely beyond the ken of physical science. Later in
the '90s when we talked about this again, when he asked me to direct it,
he explored for a little while the same technology we used for the
dinosaurs in "Jurassic Park" to put in David in "A.I.", but Stanley and
I both realized that digital human faces would stand out as a digital
effect in a sea of virtual humans. That would not work at all. Stanley
and I realized we had to find an actor. This was in 1994

How did you feel when he asked you to direct the film in 1994?

I thought he was out of his mind. I felt he was giving up one of the
best stories that I felt he had ever told. I immediately began talking
him back into directing it, but he was adamant that I do it. He said
this story is closer to your sensibilities than my own. He never gave
me any other reason.

You had so much documentation [EM] 1000 Chris Baker drawings [EM] of
his vision. Was that a burden?

Not when I was making the film. But when I was developing the screenplay
after Stanley's death and Christiane and Jan came and asked me to direct
it, I certainly had a brilliant template that Stanely had guided through
a writer named Ian Watson, a 90 page treatment that basically had a
beaautiful first act and a beautiful kind of coda. I had to take the
story boards that he had done with Chris Baker and put together a kind
of creative crime scene. I felt in a way those guys in CSI trying to put
together, trying to flesh out a face from a skull, just based on the
notes and the physical writings of Stanley, longhand, as well as over
1000 individual drawings that Stanley had supervised through the artist
Chris Baker.

The difficulty was piecing it together, rather than worrying that you
were departing too far from his vision?

I did depart certainly when there was nothing to guide me. But when
there was dialogue in the first act and relationship to guide me, I
structured that in complete [adherence to Kubrick's treatment], not
only to honor Stanley, because I knew that I couldn't do better than
Stanley. I used what he gave me as much as I could until it stopped
making sense in telling the story. Then I had to invent things on my
own.

I felt that Stanley really hadn't died, that he was with me for the
three and a half months it took me to write the screenplay and then
the three and a half months it took me to shoot the movie. I felt
Stanley with me every moment.

When did you actually first meet him?

When I was looking at soundstages in England to build our sets for
"Raiders of the Lost Ark" in 1979. Stanley was just finishing
construction on the sets of "The Shining" and we were about to move
onto those stages the second Stanley wrapped photography on his film.
In touring the lot and looking at the stages, I was told that Stanley
Kubrick was on one of the stages. I asked if it would be okay if I met
him. He knew who I was from "Jaws" and "Close Encounters." He met me at
the soundstage door and invited me to his home for dinner that night
and we were friends ever since.

I was surprised at how gregarious and funny he was. I was surprised
at his wit and how kind of shy he actually was. I didn't expect any
of those things. I expected a kind of MIT intellectual, a man who
gets into the molecular structure of cinema. He was also a gifted
storyteller.

Is there a particular shot in the movie that you see as an homage
to him, or very Kubrickian...

In terms of homage to Stanley, there's a lot of homages inside the
movie. In Rouge City, there are little milk bars from "A Clockwork
Orange" that are sort of, these little milk bar stands, floating in
the center of Rouge City as Joe takes David onto the concourse of
Rouge. There's a sign that says Strangelove's. The bottom of the cage
at Flesh Fair opens up inward, in the same way that the moon base
opened up like large artichoke leaves folding upwards toward the
center. Whenever I could I acknowledged Stanley on the camera,
expecting people later when it comes to DVD, to pour over the film to
find even more — there's a lot of Stanley in this movie. Let alone,
the vision and the concept of Stanley, I felt like I had to tell my
own story and express my own vision too. But whenever there was an
idea that was so resonant and resilient, I never let my ego stand in
the way of using a great idea. And Stanley Kubrick provided me with
enough great ideas to get me to say yes to making this movie.