A.I. Rising

Two words: huh & ytho (yes, you have the right image in your head)

85 mins was waaaay too long for this screenplay. I will say the visuals (although 75% repetitive and irrelevant) and the sound/score were the best features of this film. Lastly, it was the awesome directing (his first major film) by novice director Lazar Bodroza, and outstanding cinematography by Kosta Glusica, that offered some redemption for the terrible writing/screenplay by (apparently) seasoned writer Dimitrije Vojnov .

The writing/screenplay had many issues and flawed this film drastically. This was pretty much a Sci-Fi + Soft-Porn = Sci-Porn? Perhaps a good new genre, but not from this film. Then, a spaceship so huge with large empty spaces and basically a computer center in the middle? Unconvincing. Add to the misery completely irrelevant graphic/CGI shots, cheesy command computer dialogue, and consistent high-school puppy love drama. I understand it was a low budget international film, and even moreso for that reason it should have been a short film 20-30 mins long, instead of the slowly paced dragged out long and repetitive sex and boring irrelevant dialogue scenes that made it an unbearable 85 mins. I feel the 'message(s)' this film was trying to tell would have been more effective and obvious as a short, and probably should have been re-made/cut/edited-down as such, seeing this film is based on Zoran Neskovic's 1980's short story.

The acting was between decent and bland, both by Sebastian Cavazza and porn star (yes, you read that right) Stoya.

Would I recommend it? Only if played on a big screen muted with your favorite playlist during a party - only for the visuals. Would I see it again? See previous answer.

A disappointing and underwhelming 4/10 from me

Following on the success of Ex Machina (2014) and Her (2013), this is an Eastern European version. Done on a very modest budget, the movie had surprising good production values.

The cinematography was artistic, sets were futuristic, and lighting was set for effect.

The movie's bleak tone is similar to Kubrick's 2001. An astronaut grappling with loneliness, with only artificial intelligences for companions.

This plot takes the premise a step further. What about his sexual needs? What kind of social dynamics govern a relationship with an android? Out in space, they are alone.

What would the viewer do if placed in the situation of the protagonist?

The surprise was the casting of pornstar Stoya who turned in a good performance as lover, submissive and sex toy. No blonde bimbo. She has a pretty face and lean body, like the girl next door. Definitely sexy.

IMO, worth a second screening.

I'll try to be as objective as possible, therefore even though I am from Serbia I won't give this movie a pass "just because it's ours" or because of its' small budget. Also, no spoilers.

At first I was very surprised by the visuals - the movie started and it looked genuinely good...at first, before you realize that the filmmakers had only 2, maybe 3 small sets and that the film is visually very repetitive (even some of the same shots are used multiple times). That in itself isn't such a huge issue, seeing how there are plenty of films that take place in a single location but they compensate for their visual simplicity with an interesting story and engaging performances, something that's very much lacking here. As for the visual effects, they are ok by early 2000s standards.

The music was good and well implemented. The standout piece for me is Arvo Part's "My Heart's in the Highlands" which was also used in "The Great Beauty" (a good film worth checking out if you're not into conventional films or if you're a fan of Fellini).

The performances are not great. Sebastian Cavazza's performance as the astronaut Milutin is either bad or at best mediocre (I don't know if I can blame him, the director or the poor script for that). Milutin has no real depth and I struggle to describe his personality beyond saying that he's an astronaut with a gruff voice who swears a lot and is horny (oh, and a bit sad, I guess). At one point in the movie we are told that he's severely depressed and if it weren't for that line I would have never guessed that that's where he's at emotionally, you just can't feel it. The few times Cavazza tries to convey emotions that aren't anger and frustration his performance is borderline laughable. Stoya, who plays the part of Nimani, did her job...ok. She plays the part of an emotionless android with a few preprogrammed emotional settings well enough, nothing noteworthy though.

The story is very derivative. If you've seen a film that deals with AI than there's nothing here that you haven't seen before and done way better. The plot is bare bones and shallow with plenty of meandering (albeit aesthetically pleasing) shots of the same 2 (or 3) sets of the ship or of Nimani standing/sleeping/levitating around the ship - shots that don't progress the plot in any way or give any information to the viewer - they're just there to stretch the runtime of the movie. The questions this film raises are raised in other, better movies/TV shows (most notably "Her", "Ex Machina", both "Blade Runner" movies and "Westworld") and done so with more nuance. If you're someone who just wants to watch a movie to pass the time you'll probably find this movie boring and bland, on the other hand if you're someone who wants to experience a deep and meaningful film you'll find it lacking as well.

This movie might easily be viewed as Ex Machina set in space, and it is similar in enough aspects that it is inevitable that many viewers interpret A.I. Rising as a simple re-telling.

Actually there is much more in the concept for this movie (which is really about the risk of a stilted and limited relationship between a man and woman), but the wooden performance of the male lead (at least while working in English) and the lack of exposition about the company or the mission goals means the viewer has no reason to vest interest in any aspect.

The evolution of the female android is intended to tell us more about how a woman may act in such a situation, but the camera merely observes the action and does not show the people or the moments, so we don't see or feel each moment - only deduce its intent.

The result is a bland clinical relationship movie, set in space, but with no drama or insight.

If the leads and cinematographer of Solaris (2002) were to make this movie, there would be less sex, but much much more sizzle.

I was thinking this was going to be a pretty good sci fi....It started out well but became tedious to watch very quickly. This could have been a really good movie about a pilot and the A.I. but because a soft pornographic movie. It evolved around sex between the two, maybe that was the point but it was just repetitive to me to watch. I stayed until the end but came away with nothing. I know it was a low budget movie, and that is ok with me. Only 4 different actors including the voice of the computer..and that was ok also. I like those kind of movies and they can be done really well but, this was just not one of them. The story and the performances just were not good enough. I gave it a 5 for some of the visuals which I did like even though there were only 4 or 5 sets in the whole movie. Sorry I just didn't like this one.