I am Mother (Netflix) (2019)

bluecanyon643 said:I’d say this sci-fi flick sits in pretty much the same category as Hereditary for me.

The pacing is slow, the story builds up, and you really feel the tension growing... everything seems fine and actually quite engaging, but then, instead of hitting a solid, logical climax, the whole thing just falls apart with some stupid, pathetic ending.😵

Actually, the ending is as logical as it gets. It’s incredibly realistic. You obviously missed some key points.

Yeah, so the kid finally has her little "epiphany" at the end and steps into the role of Mother. Or maybe the consciousness from the robot-mother just jumps over to the girl. It’s pretty stupid and honestly way too saccharine. Same thing with that whole "outcast" character introduction where they try to convince you she isn't even one. The story starts moving in a decent direction, but then it just trips over itself with a few cheap twists and completely ruins the momentum. Kind of a waste, I guess.

To be blunt, he didn't grasp a single thing about it (let alone the whole picture).

Brian Gray5 said:Actually, the ending is as logical as it gets. It’s incredibly realistic. You obviously missed some key points.

Man, they should've just sent Schwarz in there with a minigun to level the whole place. It would've saved us from all this stupidly sweet, sappy nonsense. 😁

An intriguing film. 🙂

A fascinating concept. 👍

bluecanyon643 said:Yeah, so the kid finally has her little "epiphany" at the end and steps into the role of Mother. Or maybe the consciousness from the robot-mother just jumps over to the girl. It’s pretty stupid and honestly way too saccharine. Same thing with that whole "outcast" character introduction where they try to convince you she isn't even one. The story starts moving in a decent direction, but then it just trips over itself with a few cheap twists and completely ruins the momentum. Kind of a waste, I guess.

What? No way.
Oh man...
Yikes...
I don't even know where to start when someone completely misses the point of a movie like this.

The movie is actually surprisingly good—the production design is top-tier and that girl is incredible 👍 Some parts were predictable, sure, but whatever.

Mark White11 said:What? No way.
Oh man...
Yikes...
I don't even know where to start when someone completely misses the point of a movie like this.

The movie is actually surprisingly good—the production design is top-tier and that girl is incredible 👍 Some parts were predictable, sure, but whatever.

Well, I guess both me and Wikipedia are wrong then.

Why don't you explain it to us?

The movie is a solid package. The "effects" are way too good, which makes it weird how Mother looks so flawless—even Marvel's CGI isn't close to that level of shading, yet here we have an actor in a suit.

If you didn't catch how perfectly wrapped up this story is, you probably shouldn't be watching this kind of film anyway. Just stick to Marvel movies, DC flicks, or those new Star Wars space adventures...

SPOILER
The whole point is that humans, with all their flaws—mostly selfishness and ego, that ultimate urge to save yourself by destroying everyone else—basically caused their own extinction. Mother took it upon herself to create a new humanity, something better that isn't selfish or egoistic and actually shows some care for others. Basically everything our version of humanity lacked. That’s why she took on the job of raising a perfect human from day one. In her first few attempts, she realized through testing that she failed as a mother. She killed most of them, but kept a few as final tests. The Woman who shows up at the UN facility is around 30-35; anyone can figure out from the initial day count that more years have passed than the Daughter has actually lived. The final test is selflessness. The Woman is the definition of selfish; she was ready to cut the Daughter's throat just to escape the facility, even lying about helping her find her brother. But the Daughter proved herself in that last test when her survival instinct was overridden by the selfless need to save her brother. When she went back to the facility for him, Mother decided she had successfully raised a perfect human being, free from the primal sins of her ancestors. You have to realize that all those years of training shaped her through constant testing and programming, so maybe the Daughter's sacrifice for a newborn brother is hard for a typical selfish viewer to grasp. She's just not operating on our moral level, so she doesn't experience things emotionally the way we do...

bluecanyon643 said:Well, I guess both me and Wikipedia are wrong then.

Why don't you explain it to us?

Look, you can't even use Wikipedia as a source for a college term paper—so that whole sentence you just wrote is honestly pretty hilarious haha.

Betty Ross6 said:The movie is a solid package. The "effects" are way too good, which makes it weird how Mother looks so flawless—even Marvel's CGI isn't close to that level of shading, yet here we have an actor in a suit.

If you didn't catch how perfectly wrapped up this story is, you probably shouldn't be watching this kind of film anyway. Just stick to Marvel movies, DC flicks, or those new Star Wars space adventures...

SPOILER
The whole point is that humans, with all their flaws—mostly selfishness and ego, that ultimate urge to save yourself by destroying everyone else—basically caused their own extinction. Mother took it upon herself to create a new humanity, something better that isn't selfish or egoistic and actually shows some care for others. Basically everything our version of humanity lacked. That’s why she took on the job of raising a perfect human from day one. In her first few attempts, she realized through testing that she failed as a mother. She killed most of them, but kept a few as final tests. The Woman who shows up at the UN facility is around 30-35; anyone can figure out from the initial day count that more years have passed than the Daughter has actually lived. The final test is selflessness. The Woman is the definition of selfish; she was ready to cut the Daughter's throat just to escape the facility, even lying about helping her find her brother. But the Daughter proved herself in that last test when her survival instinct was overridden by the selfless need to save her brother. When she went back to the facility for him, Mother decided she had successfully raised a perfect human being, free from the primal sins of her ancestors. You have to realize that all those years of training shaped her through constant testing and programming, so maybe the Daughter's sacrifice for a newborn brother is hard for a typical selfish viewer to grasp. She's just not operating on our moral level, so she doesn't experience things emotionally the way we do...

🙂
The story isn't even remotely complete, because in the last quarter, there's a twist that basically boils down to what you described—which is pretty bad, I guess. It could have gone in a much better direction, maybe exploring human intelligence versus AI and what actual AI intentions might look like in reality, but for some strange reason, the producers decided to turn the whole thing into a Biblical parable instead (where Mother ends up being some sort of futuristic Noah 😁). And that whole "rebel" character introduction turns out to be a total miss in the end, since her role seems to be nothing more than confusing the audience, I suppose. Just feels pointless...

Mark White11 said:Look, you can't even use Wikipedia as a source for a college term paper—so that whole sentence you just wrote is honestly pretty hilarious haha.

Is it, though? Wikipedia uses sources, citations, and has editors. I'm talking about the American wiki.

Everything is a miss with you. Why even bother explaining anything when you’re just going to stick to your guns anyway? Everyone’s entitled to their own take... some people hated the movie, others thought it was perfection

Hell no, absolutely NOT! Her role is crystal clear in this movie, and she was designed specifically to serve a purpose that’s laid out right there on the screen ("Untill now!").

No ... it's pretty obvious you just got tripped up by that female character, which honestly isn't a particularly difficult feat to pull off.

If nothing else, since you're clearly lost, you actually fit perfectly into your own theory about how her whole purpose is just to leave the audience confused. 😁

bluecanyon643 said:🙂
The story isn't even remotely complete, because in the last quarter, there's a twist that basically boils down to what you described—which is pretty bad, I guess. It could have gone in a much better direction, maybe exploring human intelligence versus AI and what actual AI intentions might look like in reality, but for some strange reason, the producers decided to turn the whole thing into a Biblical parable instead (where Mother ends up being some sort of futuristic Noah 😁). And that whole "rebel" character introduction turns out to be a total miss in the end, since her role seems to be nothing more than confusing the audience, I suppose. Just feels pointless...

Is it, though? Wikipedia uses sources, citations, and has editors. I'm talking about the American wiki.

That whole conversation inside the shipping container really lays out what the Woman is actually there for.
Plus, the way they highlight the gap between human intelligence and AI is spot on.

You guys are overthinking this way too much.
I mean, look, Mother is God, Daughter is Adam / Eve—and the Woman is just the serpent that drives them out of paradise.
The movie's sequence actually makes total sense from start to finish. I’ll admit, I didn't totally vibe with the motivations or the behavior of the "Woman" character, but honestly? It works because it serves the metaphor.

You're pushing this whole "metaphorical vision" angle when there's zero need for it, basically just overthinking things and trying to read tea leaves where none exist.

The movie works flawlessly exactly as it is, holding up perfectly fine on its most straightforward, surface-level level.

dustyfalcon122 said:You guys are overthinking this way too much.
I mean, look, Mother is God, Daughter is Adam / Eve—and the Woman is just the serpent that drives them out of paradise.
The movie's sequence actually makes total sense from start to finish. I’ll admit, I didn't totally vibe with the motivations or the behavior of the "Woman" character, but honestly? It works because it serves the metaphor.

Kevin Evans41 said:You're pushing this whole "metaphorical vision" angle when there's zero need for it, basically just overthinking things and trying to read tea leaves where none exist.

The movie works flawlessly exactly as it is, holding up perfectly fine on its most straightforward, surface-level level.

I just can't agree with that.
The Woman feels totally unnecessary, and the apocalypse they show isn't even defined—it just doesn't feel real based on what we actually saw on screen.
And the whole idea of breeding a new race and colonizing a new planet? It’s way too oversimplified and practically impossible under those conditions.
The film doesn't work at all unless you view it strictly as a metaphor. "Mother" is everywhere, an absolute force of control, whose only motivation is supposedly love for humanity, yet she's simultaneously capable of such massive cruelty toward them.

On the contrary, that "Woman" character—flawed and messy just like any other human being—is absolutely vital to the story, because she gives the Daughter a chance to get a "firsthand" look at what a typical representative of the old human race actually looked like, a species that basically nuked itself out of existence thanks to its own ego, aggression, selfishness, dishonesty, and all those other lovely little traits that used to define us.

For some reason, you’re stuck in this weird middle ground where you take the plot way too literally on one hand (claiming the apocalypse is undefined or unrealistic based on the visuals) while simultaneously pushing this heavy-handed "metaphorical" angle on the other.

Mother isn't cruel; cruelty is a human trait, whereas she’s just incredibly efficient as she chases that ultimate, lofty goal.

And why on earth are you reaching for a forced word like "omnipresent" when there's perfectly good English right there? 😁

dustyfalcon122 said:I just can't agree with that.
The Woman feels totally unnecessary, and the apocalypse they show isn't even defined—it just doesn't feel real based on what we actually saw on screen.
And the whole idea of breeding a new race and colonizing a new planet? It’s way too oversimplified and practically impossible under those conditions.
The film doesn't work at all unless you view it strictly as a metaphor. "Mother" is everywhere, an absolute force of control, whose only motivation is supposedly love for humanity, yet she's simultaneously capable of such massive cruelty toward them.

Kevin Evans41 said:On the contrary, that "Woman" character—flawed and messy just like any other human being—is absolutely vital to the story, because she gives the Daughter a chance to get a "firsthand" look at what a typical representative of the old human race actually looked like, a species that basically nuked itself out of existence thanks to its own ego, aggression, selfishness, dishonesty, and all those other lovely little traits that used to define us.

For some reason, you’re stuck in this weird middle ground where you take the plot way too literally on one hand (claiming the apocalypse is undefined or unrealistic based on the visuals) while simultaneously pushing this heavy-handed "metaphorical" angle on the other.

Mother isn't cruel; cruelty is a human trait, whereas she’s just incredibly efficient as she chases that ultimate, lofty goal.

And why on earth are you reaching for a forced word like "omnipresent" when there's perfectly good English right there? 😁

First off, Mother wiped out humans; they didn't just do it to themselves. She basically said she was just getting ahead of them before they could finish the job, and Woman actually confirms that point.
Woman is the "wild card." Mother couldn't possibly have known what kind of lesson the Daughter would take away from this, and honestly, the lesson you're talking about could have been delivered much more easily without Woman being there at all.

For some reason, you're taking the plot way too literally on one hand (saying things like "the apocalypse isn't defined and feels unrealistic based on what we saw"), but then on the other hand, you're pushing this heavy "metaphorical" angle.

Well, yeah. Logically? The story doesn't hold up. Metaphorically? It works perfectly.

Mother isn't cruel. Cruelty is a human trait; she's just incredibly efficient in her pursuit of a final, sublime goal.

Since I'm a human being myself, from my perspective, Mother *is* cruel. Just like God in the Great Flood or Sodom.

And why on earth are you using the forced term "omnipresent" when there's a perfectly good American word right there? 😁

I just didn't think of it, 😁

It seems like hardly anyone actually gets the core of the trolley problem.
Another point for Mother.

Brian Gray5 said:It seems like hardly anyone actually gets the core of the trolley problem.
Another point for Mother.

I don't see what the Trolley problem has to do with anything here.
It was just a cheap little trick used to show how Mother "learns" ethics.
A cheap trick for the masses, sure, but effective.