With one of the more intriguing IMDb synopses that I've had the pleasure of reading, it's a shame that "The Artifice Girl" is as banal as it is. "A team of special agents discovers a revolutionary new computer program to bait and trap online predators. After teaming up with the program's troubled developer, they soon find that the AI is rapidly advancing beyond its original purpose." I mean, it sounds interesting, right? It sounds like a movie that's ripe with possibility, but instead, "The Artifice Girl" is as bare-bones as a corpse.
Instead of talking about what "The Artifice Girl" is, let's talk about what it's not. "The Artifice Girl" is not a taut thriller about a group of special agents hunting down online predators with the help of an AI that may or may not be sentient - perhaps an AI that may or may not have an agenda of its own. "The Artifice Girl" is not a horror film about an AI child that is being exploited by law enforcement, nor is it a thought-provoking commentary on the ethical implications of AI development and its potential for misuse. So, with everything "The Artifice Girl" is not, what is it? It's a film divided into three chapters, each of which unfortunately turns out to be a tediously dull experience. Prolonged, poorly written, and inadequately acted, these chapters primarily consist of long-winded conversations that fail to engage the audience.
Honestly, what's the purpose of having such a fascinating premise if it's going to be squandered on a story that has been done, and done better, countless times before? It's perplexing to conceive of this movie only to undermine it with the employment of untalented actors and a subpar script. And I'm not one to complain if a movie is mostly dialogue; some of my favorite movies are all dialogue, but in order for such a film to be successful, the dialogue actually has to be well written, and well acted. So, you'll sit through a series of boring conversations about this AI software, with the only saving grace being the performance of Tatum Matthews. In her portrayal of Cherry, the AI girl, Tatum Matthews delivers a genuinely captivating performance that leaves me intrigued about the trajectory of her career. However, it's hard not to wonder how much more she could have accomplished if the script had provided her with distinctive and original material, rather than recycling concepts and conversations we've encountered time and again in far superior films.
Look, this isn't a good movie, and I'm honestly shocked by the positive reviews, including the recent YouTube review by one of my favorite critics, Chris Stuckmann. I understand wanting to support upcoming filmmakers, but said upcoming filmmakers actually have to make a quality film if they want to be supported, and "The Artifice Girl" is a resoundingly low quality film in virtually every aspect. With wooden, unbelievable acting, a script that ChatGPT probably assisted in writing, and a premise that's squandered by recycled content, "The Artifice Girl" is a disappointingly meandering movie that could have, and should have, been so much more.
Instead of talking about what "The Artifice Girl" is, let's talk about what it's not. "The Artifice Girl" is not a taut thriller about a group of special agents hunting down online predators with the help of an AI that may or may not be sentient - perhaps an AI that may or may not have an agenda of its own. "The Artifice Girl" is not a horror film about an AI child that is being exploited by law enforcement, nor is it a thought-provoking commentary on the ethical implications of AI development and its potential for misuse. So, with everything "The Artifice Girl" is not, what is it? It's a film divided into three chapters, each of which unfortunately turns out to be a tediously dull experience. Prolonged, poorly written, and inadequately acted, these chapters primarily consist of long-winded conversations that fail to engage the audience.
Honestly, what's the purpose of having such a fascinating premise if it's going to be squandered on a story that has been done, and done better, countless times before? It's perplexing to conceive of this movie only to undermine it with the employment of untalented actors and a subpar script. And I'm not one to complain if a movie is mostly dialogue; some of my favorite movies are all dialogue, but in order for such a film to be successful, the dialogue actually has to be well written, and well acted. So, you'll sit through a series of boring conversations about this AI software, with the only saving grace being the performance of Tatum Matthews. In her portrayal of Cherry, the AI girl, Tatum Matthews delivers a genuinely captivating performance that leaves me intrigued about the trajectory of her career. However, it's hard not to wonder how much more she could have accomplished if the script had provided her with distinctive and original material, rather than recycling concepts and conversations we've encountered time and again in far superior films.
Look, this isn't a good movie, and I'm honestly shocked by the positive reviews, including the recent YouTube review by one of my favorite critics, Chris Stuckmann. I understand wanting to support upcoming filmmakers, but said upcoming filmmakers actually have to make a quality film if they want to be supported, and "The Artifice Girl" is a resoundingly low quality film in virtually every aspect. With wooden, unbelievable acting, a script that ChatGPT probably assisted in writing, and a premise that's squandered by recycled content, "The Artifice Girl" is a disappointingly meandering movie that could have, and should have, been so much more.