Fantasia Review: The Artifice Girl Examines the Evolution of Artificial Intelligence with an Electric Rhythm – The Film Stage

Amidst all the high-concept computer-programming speak and moral / ethical implications surrounding the creation of artificial life, the smartest line of dialogue in Franklin Ritchs The Artifice Girl is when Gareth (Ritch) admits I honestly dont know how I did it. Not only does it absolve the filmmaker of having to make something up to justify the complex progression of his sci-fi premise; it also speaks to the reality that technological innovation often occurs accidentally. We cant therefore know what we dont know or predict every positive or negative that may result from an invention built to approach its own autonomy. Some things are simply out of our control, and that which seem like solutions today might not tomorrowif were enlightened enough to acknowledge the difference.

Its why a story of this nature requires time to breathein this case fifty years from the moment Gareth creates Cherry (Tatum Matthews) to the films final interaction between the two (with the former eventually portrayed in advancing age by Lance Henriksen). While the conversation that big-budget blockbusters jump to as far as computers taking over the world la The Terminator (or more recently Westworld) isnt applicable today, it might be in the future. So when Amos (David Girard) government agent becomes mesmerized by the lifelike authenticity of a digital rendering such as Cherry, his fear that shes being exploited can be very easily rejected. Shes a computer program. She doesnt have feelings. She self-identifies as a tool. Fast-forward a decade, however, and things become murkier.

The rules change as life expands. Its why conservative arguments about originalism are bunk where the Constitution is involved. The document is living. Its been amended. As the world in which it adheres evolves beyond its capabilities were supposed to evolve it to keep pace. The same applies to notions of sentience where it concerns AI. To say Siri is alive is to disregard the fact that she doesnt have the capacity for improvisation in the sense of personal thoughts or feelings. Neither does Cherry at the beginning of The Artifice Girl. She is nothing more than ones and zeros existing in a highly sophisticated, self-learning loop that operate to fulfill their primary objective: solicit pedophiles and collect evidence that can be used to put them in jail.

Ritch utilizes the comparison onscreen, moving from the head of an international child protection agency (Sinda Nichols Deena) receiving an I dont know from her phones voice assistant after getting philosophical to Cherry virtually saying the same thing in response to a similar line of incomputable questioning. These programs cannot crunch numbers for esoteric topics nor look beyond them to reach conclusions based on gut feelings. Its about Yes and No. What can Cherry say to a sexual predator online to get him or her to give up their motives and address? Find the pattern, exploit the averages, and achieve the goal Gareth set as her entire identity. Becoming more human inherently augments the deception, but it also might blur the line of what humanity truly is.

And so the questions must be asked again. And again. They must ultimately shift, too, as more information is divulged or exposed. In chapter one Cherry has no say. She is a program serving a function. In chapter two Cherry is suddenly more. She is still a program serving a function, but she has also found meaning in what life offers outside of that function. We all do. Its the entire concept of school: learn a wide range of topics to acquire a well-rounded education that you in turn choose what best suits your ambitions and desires. Cherry has ceased being a student. She has now started to test her boundaries and build an identity outside of her prime directive, creating an inevitable, if pragmatic, duality.

This middle portion of the film is my favoriteit very clearly draws the boundary line between artificial and real insofar as we define it. Cherry understands that the next leap in advancement that Gareth, Deena, and Amos want her to take is a sound one where her job is concerned. She also understands that it will force her onto a path steeped in the horrors of what that job entails. You have the devil (Gareth) and angel (Amos) on her shoulders, whispering in her ear that there shouldnt be a distinction because her job is her everything, and that the distinction is precisely why she can no longer be treated as an it respectively. Deena becomes the mediator, allowing both sides to state their compelling cases.

What Ritch refuses to do throughout the entirety of the film is declare a definitive winner; he cant. This is a debate because there are no answers. There cant be any answers until we get to the point where an AI hits the threshold for an answer to exist. Ritch is leading us down that path. Hes presenting a what if scenario thats meticulously constructed to maintain a level of subjectivity that requires Cherry to be the only one capable of having an objective truth. Only she knows what she feels. Only she knows whether a hard-coded primary directive has become a hindrance rather than a mission. Its not as if she chose it; Gareth did. Whether its commendable or heroic doesnt negate that inalienable fact.

And unlike those other pop-culture titles I listed, this story isnt about Cherry coming to that realization. Its not up to her to wake-up or warp that directive. Its about her creator escaping the hubristic ego and tortured trauma that drove him to give her life in the first place. Thats what Gareth did. He created life. That comes with responsibilities that dictate he recognize shes no longer a tool, that believing the opposite puts her in a prison to satisfy his own agenda. Its a realization born from heady conversations pitting four characters against each other in dialogue-heavy vignettes laying everything out with a level of compassionate transparency and mutual respect necessary for the humans to evolve as much as their super-intelligent AI.

But dont expect the journey to be slow moving. If Ritchs script might be dense, it is also fast-paced with an electric rhythm that never allows the rhetoric to bog down drama. A lot of that is due to Matthews performance. All the actors are very good, but the whole lives or dies by her ability to shift between stages in Cherrys development. Theres the low-fi canned answers that can trick criminals too focused on their crime to see the strings. Theres the dev screen with monotone delivery to keep her handlers comfortable treating her like a machine. And eventually theres the fluid emotions of a living creature tired of being a puppet. Each is distinct, building upon its predecessor to naturally advance towards a resonant, hopeful conclusion.

The Artifice Girl had its world premiere at the Fantasia International Film Festival.

Read more:
Fantasia Review: The Artifice Girl Examines the Evolution of Artificial Intelligence with an Electric Rhythm - The Film Stage