A.I. (2001/05/05)

A.I.

Posted by Jon L. on 2001/05/05 14:25

Okay, doubtless more than a few of us have sat in utter
puzzlement watching the internet-only A.I. trailers (no need for a
URL here, I think you'll all be able to find it), but how many have
picked up the extra clues hidden in the end credits.

S

P

O

I

L

E

R

S

P

A

C

E

Right for everyone who's had their appetite well and truly whetted:

A lady called Jeanine Salia is credited as 'Sentient Machine
Counsellor' or some such. Type her name into a search engine and
see what you get.

For someone who can hide this on their work phone bill, dial 001
50 33 21 51 22. The number comes from the notches in the text of
the film's release date (plus the US dialing code).

From my own experiences I would also recommend typing 'Clavius

Base' and 'Cloudmakers' into a search engine to see what you get.

Have fun,
Jon
"I like it here; all these people running around like Happy Meals with legs!"

A.I.

Posted by Nick Waterman on 2001/05/05 14:22

Jon Lee wrote:

S

P

O

I

L

E

R

S

P

A

C

E

A lady called Jeanine Salia is credited as 'Sentient Machine
Counsellor' or some such. Type her name into a search engine and
see what you get.

My favourite search engine is www.google.com. You can't submit to it,
you can't fiddle it by sticking loads of invisible text keywords in your
page, it works by seeing who link to you, and the text they use to link
to you, and thus tends to get the best results because people don't tend
to link to crap so much, or give unhelpful text in their links.

I did that search, and found nothing useful. Obviously google hasn't
fallen for their tedious marketting games. Instead, I found, amongst
others:

Untitled
... PICTURES clit:pussy pepo:papo jjjjj:jeanine xsw2:xsw2 tarriff:TeeLee
blondes:fuckers
6afeek ... night1:night2 john71:jimmy ruth:salia 28fj0p:kevin maos:maos
village ...
spazioweb.inwind.it/ken78x/images/myfirstcombo.txt - 101k - Cached -
Similar pages

That's probably not what I was supposed to find, no? :-)

OK... altavista? no, nothing particularly cool.

hotbot? nothing particularly useful.

search.netscape.com? nothing interesting

I give up! What are we supposed to find, and what search engine were we
supposed to use, because none of the better ones seem to find anything
at all relevent.

Nick Waterman. Senior Systems Administrator, Sony Interactive Services
mailto:nick-sig@ http://www.nilex.co.uk/~nick/
AX25:G7RZQ@#32.GBR.EU #include <stddisclaimer> Team *AMIGA*!

A.I.

Posted by Philip Ayres on 2001/05/05 14:41

I got a bundle of Trek references out of web ferret - Salia being the name of the girl in
the Dauphin and apparently something to do with the Dominion too
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Philip Ayres
payres@
www.netcomuk.co.uk/~payres
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

A.I.

Posted by Jon L. on 2001/05/05 22:50

I did that search, and found nothing useful.
Obviously google hasn't
fallen for their tedious marketting games. Instead,
I found, amongst
others:

OK... altavista? no, nothing particularly cool.

hotbot? nothing particularly useful.

search.netscape.com? nothing interesting

I give up! What are we supposed to find, and what
search engine were we
supposed to use, because none of the better ones
seem to find anything
at all relevent.

Okay, since people don't seem to be having any joy
with the search engine appraoch - just type
www.jeaninesalia.com straight into the Address box of
your browser.

<sulky> Its not as much fun as doing it through search
engines though, you lose some of the drama. </sulky>

Jon

=====
"Yeah, baby; I'm back!"

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/

A.I.

Posted by Nick Waterman on 2001/05/05 23:31

Jon Lee wrote:

Okay, since people don't seem to be having any joy
with the search engine appraoch - just type
www.jeaninesalia.com straight into the Address box of
your browser.

Unable to determine IP address from host name for www.jeaninesalia.com

Can I safely assume that you've got the name wrong, both times, or
something? That might explain why search engines didn't find much of any
use either.

Nick Waterman. Senior Systems Administrator, Sony Interactive Services
mailto:nick-sig@ http://www.nilex.co.uk/~nick/
AX25:G7RZQ@#32.GBR.EU #include <stddisclaimer> Team *AMIGA*!

A.I.

Posted by Carlos Roman on 2001/05/06 14:00

I did that search, and found nothing useful.
Obviously google hasn't
fallen for their tedious marketting games. Instead,
I found, amongst
others:

Okay, since people don't seem to be having any joy
with the search engine appraoch - just type
www.jeaninesalia.com straight into the Address box of
your browser.

<sulky> Its not as much fun as doing it through search
engines though, you lose some of the drama. </sulky>

yeah thats true, its morefuntrying to find the clues (I'm still looking).
Aprently it was all set-up (or at least planned) by Stanley Kubrick.
Hopefully the film wont be like 2001 (hate it with buring passion)

Carlos

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
This tagline has been cruelly tested on cute furry animals.

"Let me try on your dress, it turns me on when we're a mess...
We won't live forever now, so let's make the most of it somehow"

nothing@

A.I.

Posted by Philip Ayres on 2001/05/06 15:54

Hand hovers near flame thrower.........

So what's wrong with 2001 then ?

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Philip Ayres
payres@
www.netcomuk.co.uk/~payres
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

A.I.

Posted by Andy W. on 2001/05/06 17:16

Hand hovers near flame thrower.........

So what's wrong with 2001 then ?

Tridents fuelled and launch tubes open...

Where to begin? Well how about the beginning? You can't knock the title
sequence - it is iconic. However it lasts a little over a minute and is
followed by 15 minutes of apes screaming at each other. Watch that once,
then hit fast forward every time after.

The trip to the Moon. Nicely realised, but for a film with such attention to
detail it is disppointing that the Moon Shuttle shows such glaring design
flaws as the the flight deck being installed the wrong way up. Don't believe
me? Take a look at the scene where the hostess takes the meals into the
cockpit. If the flight deck was where the exterior shots suggested then she
would go through the doorway in the ceiling.

The landing sequence is ruined because the exterior shots all show the
flight deck facing away from the Moon, but in the interior shots the landing
pad is clearly visible through the cockpit window.

The Spacecraft and Space Stations all show minimal use of unnecessary
technology, but the Clavius base landing sequence is stuffed with clunky
Thunderbirds-style tech which looks completely out of place. This is all the
more annoying as the landing pad in the book was little more than a flat
area of ground.

I'm not going to go on about the Rocket Bus to Tycho travelling at constant
altitude.

The book makes it clear that the Monolith is triggered when sunlight hits
it. It isn't at all clear why it triggers in the film.

You aer in complete control of the ship. You need to dispose of the crew as
they are endangering your mission. Do you:
a) Turn off the heating and freeze the buggers.
b) Blow the airlocks.
c) Concoct an elaborate plan involving changing part of the antenna twice.

The stargate sequence. 10 minutes of flashing lights. Time to turn it off
and go get a cuppa and an asprin.

(Wipes foam away from mouth)

Don't get me wrong, I like 2001, but 2010 was better.

Andy
_____________________
andy@
www.knightsofni.freeserve.co.uk
07968 357 854

A.I.

Posted by Thomas M. on 2001/05/06 21:00

Hand hovers near flame thrower.........

So what's wrong with 2001 then ?

Tridents fuelled and launch tubes open...

<snip>

Where to begin? Well how about the beginning? You can't knock
You aer in complete control of the ship. You need to dispose
of the crew as
they are endangering your mission. Do you:
a) Turn off the heating and freeze the buggers.
b) Blow the airlocks.
c) Concoct an elaborate plan involving changing part of the
antenna twice.

Ok, I won't argue the tech details (hardly a capital offence) or the
speed of the film (god, it was slow). I would suggest that HAL didn't
turn black hat overnight. As it/he was approaching human intelligence
it could be said he suffered a slow mental breakdown.

<snip>

Don't get me wrong, I like 2001, but 2010 was better.

The book was better too, but I wouldn't say Stanely did as much damage
to it as, say, Oliver Stone did to Natural Born Killers.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------
Thomas "B*witched, B*very witched" Martin.
"The difference between sentiment and sentimentality is easy
to see. When you avoid killing somebody's pet on the road,
that's sentiment. If you swerve to avoid the pet and that causes
you to kill pedestrians, that is sentimentality."
Mentat teachings, Chapter House Dune, Frank Herbert.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------

A.I.

Posted by Mark L. on 2001/05/06 22:17

Hang on, I thought the book came *after* the film. A short story 'The
Sentinel' about the discovery of the monolith was the inspiration for the
film and the full-blown book was a subsequent novelization.

Mark

-----Original Message-----
From: Martin TA [mailto:T.A.Martin@]

Don't get me wrong, I like 2001, but 2010 was better.

The book was better too, but I wouldn't say Stanely did as much damage
to it as, say, Oliver Stone did to Natural Born Killers.

A.I.

Posted by Jon L. on 2001/05/07 13:29

The book was better too, but I wouldn't say Stanely
did as much damage
to it as, say, Oliver Stone did to Natural Born
Killers.

Um, hate to break up the party here, but Tarantino
never actually wrote a screenplay called Natural Born
Killers in the first place. He never wrote anything
called True Romance either.

The reason both these movies are so similar (and they
are, if you think about it) is that they are both
culled from a single screenplay idea that would have
ran for something like 500 minutes if filmed in its
entirety and called (if I remeber correctly) On The
Road, presumably after Kerouac.

Jon

=====
"Yeah, baby; I'm back!"

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/

A.I.

Posted by Thomas M. on 2001/05/07 15:26

The book was better too, but I wouldn't say Stanely
did as much damage
to it as, say, Oliver Stone did to Natural Born
Killers.

Um, hate to break up the party here, but Tarantino
never actually wrote a screenplay called Natural Born
Killers in the first place. He never wrote anything
called True Romance either.

The reason both these movies are so similar (and they
are, if you think about it) is that they are both
culled from a single screenplay idea that would have
ran for something like 500 minutes if filmed in its
entirety and called (if I remeber correctly) On The
Road, presumably after Kerouac.

I wouldn't be suprised if the script was a carbon copy of the
above (Tarantino has paid tributie to, or ripped-off if you
will may other film makers), but no descriptions of On The Road
mention young couple in love, drugs, serial killers or Christopher
Walken as a mobster.
Be seeing you.
Thomas.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thomas "B*witched, B*very witched" Martin.
"The difference between sentiment and sentimentality is easy
to see. When you avoid killing somebody's pet on the road,
that's sentiment. If you swerve to avoid the pet and that causes
you to kill pedestrians, that is sentimentality."
Mentat teachings, Chapter House Dune, Frank Herbert.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

A.I.

Posted by Jon L. on 2001/05/08 16:01

I'm gonna put my neck on the line and say Tarantino
actually wrote a screenplay called Natural Born
Killers
(http://www.pg.ru/scripts/natural_b_killers.html)
and a screenplay called True Romance
(http://www.pg.ru/scripts/true_romance.html)
both available to buy from amazon too. IMDB also
gives him
writing credits for both screenplays (i know putting
stock
in the internet is uncertain, but at least i can
make a quick
responce).

I wouldn't be suprised if the script was a carbon
copy of the
above (Tarantino has paid tributie to, or ripped-off
if you
will may other film makers), but no descriptions of
On The Road
mention young couple in love, drugs, serial killers
or Christopher
Walken as a mobster.
Be seeing you.
Thomas.

This is one of those horriblle awkward cases of which
myth to place your faith in. Much of my information on
this subject comes from a book written by Jane Hamsher
and Don Murphy, the producers of NBK. They have no
particular love for either Stone or Tarantino and are
therefore unlikely to be doing much to support either
man, but you would hope they knew what screenplay they
were buying.

Or this being Hollywood perhpas not actually.

Time to do a little more digging I think. I'll see if
I can find out more.

Jon

=====
"Yeah, baby; I'm back!"

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/

20001 the snooze (was A.I.)

Posted by Carlos Roman on 2001/05/07 01:17

Hand hovers near flame thrower.........

So what's wrong with 2001 then ?

Personaly I thought that was the best bit of the film. Its the oly part I
never fast forward.
The after that the space ballet part just causes the film to nose dive.
Yes, it does try and be as realistic as possible, and it was done 3
decades ago, but its just not that impresive. The sequence could be made
shorter and would have no effect on the movie, or atleast a more
intersting one. I usually wake up once they are on the moon and then the
film does improve, but again, its nothing to write home about. I really
don't see what's so special about the film.

You aer in complete control of the ship. You need to dispose of the crew as
they are endangering your mission. Do you:
a) Turn off the heating and freeze the buggers.
b) Blow the airlocks.
c) Concoct an elaborate plan involving changing part of the antenna twice.

d) Force the crew to watch 2001 over and over again, or just the sapce
ballet bit over and over again.

The stargate sequence. 10 minutes of flashing lights. Time to turn it off
and go get a cuppa and an asprin.

Strange, its the bit my house mates always used to love to watch.

Don't get me wrong, I like 2001, but 2010 was better.

Havent seen or read 2010, I'll take your word Andy.

OK,let me turn this question around, what was so good about 2001 (The
film,not the book or any spin-offs)?

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
This tagline has been cruelly tested on cute furry animals.

"Let me try on your dress, it turns me on when we're a mess...
We won't live forever now, so let's make the most of it somehow"

nothing@

A.I.

Posted by Jon L. on 2001/05/07 13:22

try these:
aimovie.warnerbros.com
www.inourimage.org (Robot emancipation)
www.familychan.org/evanchanpage.html (Evan Chan)
http://bangaloreworldu-in.co.nz/ (bangalore world
university)
www.spcb.org (Sentient property rime bureau)

yeah thats true, its morefuntrying to find the clues
(I'm still looking).
Aprently it was all set-up (or at least planned) by
Stanley Kubrick.

Thank god someone gets all this!

Jon

=====
"Yeah, baby; I'm back!"

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/

A.I.

Posted by Chris Turner on 2001/05/07 14:27

On Mon, 7 May 2001, Jon Lee wrote:

yeah thats true, its morefuntrying to find the clues
(I'm still looking).
Aprently it was all set-up (or at least planned) by
Stanley Kubrick.

Thank god someone gets all this!

I'm sure the rest of us would "get it" if we'd seen or heard whatever it was
that set you onto this. But we haven't. So I don't see why any of us would
even think to go looking for anything.

A.I.

Posted by Carlos Roman on 2001/05/08 01:32

yeah thats true, its morefuntrying to find the clues
(I'm still looking).
Aprently it was all set-up (or at least planned) by
Stanley Kubrick.

Thank god someone gets all this!

I'm sure the rest of us would "get it" if we'd seen or heard whatever it was
that set you onto this. But we haven't. So I don't see why any of us would
even think to go looking for anything.

I'm surprise that you have heard nothing about A.I. especially as its a
Spielberg film. This is after all IFIS chat, a place where people
talk about... things to do with IFIS, which I assume a sci-fi film
would definitly be disscused on. Its a film which has been eagerly-awaited
by Spielberg fans, and has had its fair share of coverage.

As for why we would go looking for anything, because its something to do,
intersting, rewarding even, Of course I'm sure it would have been of more
interest if we had include such words as DVD or role-play or vampire or
*insert word of interest* or purity test (or some type of test). Its just
a harmless web puzzle, and clever marketing campaign.

Out of curiosity do I count as "any of us", because I did think about it
and did go looking (I like puzzles).

oh, and for those who are interested try:
http://www.metropolitanlivinghomes.com/
http://www.ita-es.ro

Google seems to be the best search engine to find the links.

If you can't be bothered (or have given up) just follow this one for most
of the links:
http://www.aintitcoolnews.com/display.cgi?id=8659

Message has be edited not to offend!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
This tagline has been cruelly tested on cute furry animals.

"Let me try on your dress, it turns me on when we're a mess...
We won't live forever now, so let's make the most of it somehow"

nothing@

A.I.

Posted by Chris Turner on 2001/05/08 09:52

On Tue, 8 May 2001, Nothing *innocent* wrote:

yeah thats true, its morefuntrying to find the clues
(I'm still looking).
Aprently it was all set-up (or at least planned) by
Stanley Kubrick.

Thank god someone gets all this!

I'm sure the rest of us would "get it" if we'd seen or heard whatever it was
that set you onto this. But we haven't. So I don't see why any of us would
even think to go looking for anything.

I'm surprised too. I read magazines, I watch television, I go to the
cinema, I see billboards as I travel to & from work and I surf the net. I
can't think where else they could have put the advertising for the rest of
us to have missed it entirely.

As for why we would go looking for anything, because its something to do,
intersting, rewarding even, Of course I'm sure it would have been of more
interest if we had include such words as DVD or role-play or vampire or
*insert word of interest* or purity test (or some type of test). Its just
a harmless web puzzle, and clever marketing campaign.

You've miss understood my point. Why go looking for it _if you didn't know
it exists_? Even now that I know of it, I still can't see any puzzle in it?
I think mostly the problem is you've been giving us pointers to stuff part
way through so we don't know whats going on.

Out of curiosity do I count as "any of us", because I did think about it
and did go looking (I like puzzles).

But you only thought about it because you knew it existed. *8)

oh, and for those who are interested try:
http://www.metropolitanlivinghomes.com/
http://www.ita-es.ro

I've looked at these and can't see why I'm meant to be looking at them.

Google seems to be the best search engine to find the links.

If you can't be bothered (or have given up) just follow this one for most
of the links:

http://www.aintitcoolnews.com/display.cgi?id=8659

Ah! This page at least tells us how we're meant to start and even points
out where the first clue is. *8)

A.I.

Posted by Adrian Long on 2001/05/08 11:12

You've miss understood my point. Why go looking for it _if you didn't

know

it exists_? Even now that I know of it, I still can't see any puzzle in

it?

I think mostly the problem is you've been giving us pointers to stuff part
way through so we don't know whats going on.

Not only that, it was an incorrent pointer.

to quote:

A lady called Jeanine Salia is credited as 'Sentient Machine
Counsellor' or some such. Type her name into a search engine and
see what you get.

This just flat out doesn't work. However, if you type the name "Jeanine
Salla" (note the difference in spelling) then you get what's being talked
about...

As for it being a spielberg film, so I should be interested, I got less
interested when I found out spielberg was involved. It started out as a
Kubrick project, and was kept *very* quiet. It didn't seem to be going
anywhere at the time, though, so I stopped following what was happening with
it. That was about 3 or 4 years ago. It looks like it's finally getting
somewhere al last - hopefully spielberg won't ruin it...

Adrian, etc...

A.I.

Posted by Asan Tu on 2001/05/08 11:18

You've miss understood my point. Why go looking for it _if you
didn't know
it exists_? Even now that I know of it, I still can't see any
puzzle in it?
I think mostly the problem is you've been giving us pointers to stuff part
way through so we don't know whats going on.

Out of curiosity do I count as "any of us", because I did think about it
and did go looking (I like puzzles).

But you only thought about it because you knew it existed. *8)

It's got a preliminary release date over here of 21st September 2001, so I'm
not suprised that there's been very little publicity yet, seeing as how it's
still at least four months away from release. It doesn't get released in
America until the 29th of June, so it's only now that the publicity machine
has started to crank up over there.

For possible spoilers have a look at

http://mrshowbiz.go.com/news/2001/5/aipreview050101.html

This has probably given me more information about the film than any other
site really.

A.I.

Posted by Adam Hattrell on 2001/05/08 11:46

-----Original Message-----
From: Asan Tu [mailto:asan@]

But you only thought about it because you knew it existed. *8)

It's got a preliminary release date over here of 21st
September 2001, so I'm not suprised that there's been
very little publicity yet, seeing as how it's still
at least four months away from release.

The was a poster up for it at the cinema this weekend.
Plain just the letters AI. No details. No release
date.

See ya,

Adam

A.I. and Planet of the Apes

Posted by Andy W. on 2001/05/08 15:21

Well forget A.I. and the ad campaign no-one can make head nor tail of for
the moment. I for one am looking forward to seeing what Tim Burton has done
with Planet of the Apes. If anything there has been even less info released
about that...

Andy
_____________________
andy@
www.knightsofni.freeserve.co.uk
07968 357 854

A.I. and Planet of the Apes

Posted by Rey Blewitt on 2001/05/08 15:34

I agree, all I found on a movie site by real player was a single screen shot
and a small list of people involved. Pity as I was hoping for a trailer
(this was after downloading the lord of the rings trailer from the same
site) and looking at a couple of other trailers.

Roy
r.blewitt@

-----Original Message-----
From:Andrew Wren [SMTP:andy@]
Sent:08 May 2001 15:21
To:chat
Subject:Re: A.I. and Planet of the Apes

Well forget A.I. and the ad campaign no-one can make head nor tail of for
the moment. I for one am looking forward to seeing what Tim Burton has
done
with Planet of the Apes. If anything there has been even less info
released
about that...

Andy
_____________________
andy@
www.knightsofni.freeserve.co.uk
07968 357 854

A.I. and Planet of the Apes

Posted by Adam Hattrell on 2001/05/08 15:39

I agree, all I found on a movie site by real player was a
single screen shot and a small list of people involved.

I assume there must be trailers out there. I've seen
at least 2 different trailers for PotA at the cinema -
it looks very pretty. Obviously impossible to judge
plot from a trailer.

Tomb Raider looks okay. Return of the Mummy looks
spectacular. It's going to be a good couple of
months!

See ya,

Adam

A.I.

Posted by Carlos Roman on 2001/05/05 20:27

S

P

O

I

L

E

R

S

P

A

C

E

For someone who can hide this on their work phone bill, dial 001
50 33 21 51 22. The number comes from the notches in the text of
the film's release date (plus the US dialing code).

Aprently this scared alot of people as when you ring you have to leave
your number. It then randomly calls you back with some message can't
remember what it was. I'll try and find the details again (I'll also
post the main sites set up for the film).

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
This tagline has been cruelly tested on cute furry animals.

"Let me try on your dress, it turns me on when we're a mess...
We won't live forever now, so let's make the most of it somehow"

nothing@