Spotlighting themes of self-discovery, purpose and free will, Drew Hancock’s new film “Companion” is contoured by shadows of loneliness and emboldened by a backdrop of intense pain. 

Compounded with familiar tropes and dark comedy, these trickle into each of the characters’ narratives, intensifying an ongoing discussion around the ethics of artificial intelligence use — think “Priscilla” (2023) meets “Subservience” (2024).

In a recent episode of “Modern Love” by The New York Times, an individual speaks about his experience developing an artificially intelligent clone to attend virtual dates in place of himself. When a connection felt strong, the clone would say something intimate to the online date, and the date would respond with an affirmative sentiment — something synonymous with the phrase “I like you, too.” 

Daily headlines, sent straight to your inbox.

Subscribe to our newsletter to keep up with the latest at and around USC.

Is this really possible — can people truly feel connected to AI? 

Falling in love with a robot may seem preposterous. However, just as the episode of “Modern Love” opens up a discussion about authenticity in AI interaction, Hancock’s film puts this notion of love to the test, skating audiences down a semi-predictable road with thought-provoking moments and comical insights.

The opening scenes felt startlingly similar to snippets of Tinder ads; the bright lighting, echoes of romantic comedy dialogue and clunky staging all felt more inauthentic than the AI itself. 

Yet the cheesy meet-cute and awkward language that failed to provoke a sense of intimacy was just that: a way to introduce estranged tension and a broader feeling that something was amiss between the characters. 

Even before relaxing into the comfort of movie theater seats, audience members question how the movie will take shape. The trailer opens with the phrase “from the studio that brought you ‘The Notebook,’” which sets the stage for a lighthearted, feel-good movie. Mirroring the structure of the film, the trailer soon progresses into a chaotic whirlwind of violence. 

On a subtler note, Hancock weaves ideas about the commodification of women at the beginning of the film. As Iris (Sophie Thatcher), a robot unaware of her programmed existence, commences to prove herself to her boyfriend Josh (Jack Quaid) and his host of friends, it becomes apparent that pleasing and attending to Josh is hardwired into Iris’ nature. 

What’s more, in addressing Iris, Kat (Megan Suri) — Josh’s human friend and self-proclaimed accessory — says something along the lines of the following: “You make me feel so replaceable.” 

Hancock also ties in themes related to toxic masculinity and societal conformity. As a long shot of Iris and Josh pans out, Josh begins a rant about the pain Iris has caused him. By expressing his frustration, Josh inadvertently poses the following question: To what lengths does one go to feel a sense of normalcy? 

Josh exploits AI as a medium for couching insecurity and hiding behind false designations. Yet as the film progresses, and as Josh is ready to end his relationship with Iris once and for all, his bitterness over the dating scene — this need to find a one, true soulmate — bleeds through by brute force as he chokes Iris into submission. Hancock’s attempt at portraying a complicated love quickly digresses into an explosion of past wounds. 

On the surface, “Companion” fits the stereotypical AI-human trope: The robot goes rogue, and the human engineer festers with regret as they attempt to override a force bubbling out of control.

Upon a second look, however, audiences are left to grapple with an interesting dichotomy that raises a host of philosophical questions comparing mortality and authenticity. The two are not polar opposites in meaning by any means, but they are heavily contrasted across the duration of the film as the question of sides comes into play. 

Choose your character: Josh, a morally gray human whose insecurity about his love life leads him to pursue an AI companion, or Iris, a robot who has been abused physically and emotionally but tries to assassinate multiple characters. To add to the confusion, Josh is a human with the depth to feel, while Iris is programmed to understand feeling but cannot truly feel — or can she? 

Which does society favor: humanity or ethicality? Is it possible to favor both at once? 

It is tempting to equate humanity with authenticity, but “Companion” places this idea into a space of debate. Can something that is not “human” — but which is programmed and trained by humans to replicate lived experience — be real? If not, how should society treat these beings? Certainly, if AI is not human, then society’s ethical and moral standards do not apply. 

Even so, audiences may find themselves rooting for Iris as she attempts to procure her freedom from Josh, which poses the question of humanity versus fabrication, free will versus ownership and feeling versus empathizing. 

If AI knows what fear is — that is, it understands the definition and scope of the word — does it truly know the feeling? One cannot emotionally manipulate a being that does not have the capacity to grasp the full breadth of the world. Even so, society assumes that raw, visceral emotions are limited by the constraints of life. 

Questions such as these populated the outskirts of the film until Iris gained full autonomy over her life. Alongside a splattering monologue detailing the ins and outs of depression, Iris’ attempts at saving others damage her reputation as the villain. Time and again, she proves that the boundary between artificial and truth is blurrier than ever before. 

Packed into “Companion’s” cocktail of movie genres lies a dark comedy that spikes the film’s engagement with a spark of laughter. Lines such as “It’s not you, it’s me” and brisk cuts to obscene acts soften the intense corners of the film. Placed against the actors’ performances, these laughable moments tie the movie to more realistic encounters. 

While Quaid’s performance will forever hold undertones of his small and insecure persona in “The Boys,” Thatcher replicates the tense movements and mechanical intonation of AI in a detached, precise manner. Her ability to vitalize a character straddling the boundary between AI and humans is a difficult feat that she manages to crack with subtle facial expressions and frantic urgency.

“Companion” is a straightforward attempt at humanizing — for lack of a better word — the artificial world, posing unanswered questions and drawing attention to the impossibility of “winning” in a society that stresses true love. 

With most science-fiction/thriller movies, it becomes imperative to question whether the future will populate in full color by the coded terms. Perhaps it is a bold assertion, but Hancock was not trying to predict society’s outcome with this film. Rather, by guiding audiences through a narrative about a robot’s reclaiming of independence, Hancock outlines the present.