Artificial Justice - Tödliche Gerechtigkeit

Artificial Justice is a good film that has been on screens and by critics without much fanfare. And above all because it poses an interesting dilemma about artificial intelligence: would you leave a country's judicial system in the hands of a machine?

In addition to this interesting question that would provide many hours of debate, the film provides a good cast of actors, with good performances, especially those of Verónica Echegui and Alberto Amman. It also has an exceptional and careful production design, with many small details that give credibility to the story.

In short, a recommendable film that was unfairly treated in its evaluation.

Artificial intelligence is a topic with endless possibilities in cinema, especially in the thriller genre. Artificial Justice starts with an intriguing premise: a future where algorithms determine people's fate. However, what could have been a gripping thriller falls short, never fully developing its ideas.

From the beginning, the film establishes a well-crafted atmosphere with an appealing cyber-noir aesthetic. The world-building is convincing, and the futuristic setting feels immersive. The effort in production design is evident, and in that regard, the film delivers. The problem is that as the story progresses, it loses momentum and struggles to hold interest. What initially seemed like an engaging exploration of AI dilemmas gradually deflates, leaving behind a predictable plot with moments that don't quite fit together.

The cast does a decent job, but the characters lack depth and development. There's little evolution, which makes it hard for the film to establish an emotional connection. The protagonist, in particular, feels more like a narrative device than a fully realized character. Her journey comes across as distant and lacks impact.

As it approaches its final act, the film attempts to ramp up the tension, but it does so hastily, without the necessary weight to make the climax meaningful. Instead of delivering a powerful conclusion, it feels more like an obligatory wrap-up than a memorable ending. The plot twists fail to surprise, and the resolution feels more like a formality than a well-constructed payoff.

The concept had potential, and visually the film works, but in the end, it lacks the soul and weight needed to leave a lasting impression.

Saw this at the Imagine 2024 film festival in Amsterdam. Having worked in IT all my life, I'm always a bit afraid of simplifications making a story edible for non-IT viewers with the best of intentions. In this case, my worries were unnecessary. The story has been slightly simplified for consumption by the average citizen, but I saw only a limited number of potentially annoying discrepancies from technical reality.

Several important issues are raised along the story line. One that took me by surprise is the ethical component of a self-driving car, making life/death decisions by counting possible victims and acting accordingly, trying to have minimize societal "damage". So far so good. But lo and behold that this algorithm can be changed for VIP's, whose importance is weighed higher than other citizens. That weighing factor can be changed by bribes or any other form of corruption. It can even be determined in a secret ruling "for national security reasons". This movie showed one example of such a change, but the mere thought of such capabilities is daunting. Though I admit that it is loosely related to AI-supported justice, being the main topic of this movie, the potential problems are identical and thus cannot be ignored.

Another big issue is that the Trias Politica is destroyed by giving the executive government direct control over the judiciary system, by eliminating humans all together out of the equation. Separation of powers is still an important mechanism in the checks and balances we expect to uphold our current "law and order" system and keep it honest, just, neutral and objective.

Still another issue is that AI works by employing data from the past, and thus does not adapt to a new context, nor does it adopt changes in society that came about recently. Officially, laws must be adapted to reflect those changes, but it does not always happen spontaneously. We know of cases where the Supreme Court suddenly "turned" in a new direction, based on cases in lower courts where existing rules and regulations were challenged, and where the lower courts felt that new jurisprudence should be created accordingly. The judge who we see appointed here to get the new form of justice on the rails, was applauded as a perfect example of such "turns" in jurisprudential case law.

All in all, this movie contained perfect triggers to start a dialog about the issues at hand. Implementing AI in our judicial system is not a simple "technical" project, and cannot be implemented without a proper public debate.