Some criticisms:

And by artificial intelligence, read of course (non-human-identical) artificial general intelligence.

Today-2022, this is placed under the science fiction film category. But maybe this might change during Ciro Santilli's own lifetime?

The basic criteria of "is a film about artificial intelligence good or not" to Ciro Santilli is: does the AI inhabit humanoid, or fully human looking, bodies? Bodies is a bad sign due to:

This is a tag for films that depict some sort of artificial general intelligence, but in which that is not the primary focus of the film.

Low budget.

Things that can be understood are boring.

Aaron Swartz agrees: www.aaronsw.com/weblog/looperexplained "Next week we'll explain Primer." He never did though :'-(

That makes Ciro Santilli most mad about this film is the fact that the dude was passionate about writing, and when he became a genius, rather than write the best novels ever written, he decided instead to play the stock market instead. This paints an accurate picture of 2020's society, where finance jobs make infinitely more money than other real engineering jobs, and end up attracting much of the talent.

Another enraging thing is how his girlfriend starts liking him again once he is a genius, and instead of telling her to fuck off, he stays with her.

The other really bad thing is the ending. He fixed the drug by himself? He scared off De Niro just like that?

Ciro Santilli just keep watching that a gazillion times whenever it showed on TV.

All action scenes are useless crap, but the premise with Ciro's precious simulation hypothesis subject, related physics and the illusion of life.

It is a shame that the key premise of using human bodies to produce energy is completely and impossibly stupid. You would obviously get more energy by directing burning the food you feed into humans.

If the film had been made later, maybe the much more plausible concept of AI alignment would would have been used instead. What a shame.

The premise that "we can't make AGI, but we know enough about the human brain to upload on to a computer" is flawed. Edit: after reading Superintelligence by Nick Bostrom (2014), Ciro Santilli was convinced otherwise. What is flawed is of course just the "extracting connectome with macroscopic probes part". A post mortem connectome extraction with microtome is much more believable. But of course they weren't going to show fake slices of Jonny Depp's brain, are they? Famous actor bodies are sacred! What a huge lost opportunity. On the other hand however, the scale of the first connectome extraction would be arguably too huge to be undertaken by a random pair of rogue researchers. The same would also likely apply to any first time human brain connectome. It would much more likely be a huge public effort, much like the Human Genome Project.

But this film does have the merit of exploring how an AGI might act to take over the AGI might act to take over the world once created, notably by creating its own physical research laboratory. Though it doesn't feel likely that it could go under the radar for 2 years given the energetic requirements of the research. Even the terrorists find it before the FBI!

I also wish they had shown the dildo (or more likely, direct stimulation!) computerized Jonny Depp used to use with his wife before he managed to re-synthesized his body. But you know, 18+ would cut too much profits. Ah, what a shame.

The film starts off with more interesting "near the revelation" stuff. But then it degrades into religious wars. Ciro was reminded notably of S.

Our definition is: about which culture a film is. Not who paid for it.

Ciro Santilli has already watched all the best films in history, and as a result any of those new movies that is full of clichés and has no innovative aspect at all (99.99999% of all modern movies) makes Ciro want to puke and to start Googling TV Tropes to classify as many clichés as possible.

Good movies are those that teach you mechanisms of the real world. Willing suspension of disbelief must be maintained at all costs.

Or of what could happen a world where a single sci-fi element is added and explored to its limits.

Love is not an interesting aspect of the world. You solve your love life at university, Tinder or Tango.

The actually interesting aspects of the world are:

Movies with a lot of action scenes, with exception of some war movies, are shit.

The Sliding scale of idealism vs. cynicism must be close to Cynicism max at all times. Movies with pure good and pure bad are shit.

Knowing spoilers has no effect in the film's enjoyment. The interest of storyline concepts is all that matters, visuals and acting are useless.

In a multi-language film, when two foreign characters speak English to each other when they obviously would have spoken their native language, that is a crime. Original language + subtitles is a must!

Movies that are very expensive to make tend to be bad, because they have to make returns and thus appeal to a large amorphous population without any specialization, i.e. the lowest common denominator but in TV Tropes terminology rather than mathematics: tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/LowestCommonDenominator.

See e.g.:

Looking down the largest flops of all time list didn't help much, only Heaven's gate appears reasonable from the top 20.

On TV Tropes: it's Popular Now It Sucks.