Originally posted by Chris Knipp: why 99% of the critics dissed it when it’s so remarkable.
Rottentomatoes.com collected 162 reviews of A.I., 121 or 75% were considered "fresh". Even some of the lamentable "rotten" reviews had positive comments. Most "critics" don't go beyond what-is-it-about-'n should-U-see-it. A good critic,steeped in film culture and willing to delve deep into a film's meaning, technique,etc. is a godsend. Pardon my laziness and ponder these observations from my favorite critic.

"A.I. is the most philosophical film in Kubrick's canon, the most intelligent in Spielberg's, and possibly the film with most contemporary relevance that either one has made since Dr. Strangelove"

"Is the cloned Monica(mom), resurrected and corrected to satisfy a robot's programmed cravings, much closer to "human" than David, created and programmed by man in his own image? Is the love of either character genuine? The line separating life from death, being from nothingness, remains as ambiguous as the line separating orga from mecha. It's a line very much like the one separating viewers from the characters in a film."

"When the Blue Fairy comes back for an encore inside the suburban home, I'm reminded of the monolith slab reappearing inside the hotel room just before Bowman gets reborn as Star Child. The Fairy and the slab are both mental projections of the protagonists, but whereas 2001 ends with tragic rebirth, A.I. ends with the implication of sweet annihilation."

"The prime issue for the modern world may be our willingness to treat non-living matter as if it were alive and people as if they were objects. The issue is raised every time we see someone walking down the street talking on a mobile phone and ignoring everyone around, every time we hear a mecha voice on an answering machine."

Jonathan Rosenbaum
The Chicago Reader