We’ve seen artificial intelligence portrayed as humanity’s greatest threat countless times. Whether it’s Skynet sending Terminators back through time or machines deciding humans are the planet’s biggest problem, Hollywood has made one thing pretty clear: Give AI enough intelligence, and apparently, its first order of business is to get rid of us.
So imagine my surprise when Klara and the Sun (2026) comes along and gives us an artificial intelligence that actually wants to help humanity. No killer robots, no elaborate plans for world domination, and no machines plotting our extinction. Just an AI companion trying to understand human emotions and bring a little happiness into a troubled family’s life.
That alone makes the premise refreshing.
Directed by Taika Waititi and starring Jenna Ortega, the film explores companionship, grief, and what it means to be human. Unfortunately, while I appreciate what the movie is trying to accomplish, the screenplay doesn’t always deliver on its intriguing ideas.
A Robot That Actually Cares About Humans? Imagine That.
Based on the novel by Klara and the Sun by Kazuo Ishiguro, the story introduces us to Klara (Jenna Ortega), an Artificial Friend designed to provide companionship to lonely children.
Klara eventually finds herself living with Josie (Mia Tharia), a young girl dealing with illness, family struggles, and a complicated relationship with her mother, Chrissie (Amy Adams).
Rather than simply functioning as an expensive piece of technology, Klara develops a fascination with the people around her. She observes their behaviors, struggles to understand their emotions, and becomes determined to help Josie and her family.
What caught my attention most is how the film approaches artificial intelligence from a completely different angle.
Instead of asking what happens when machines become smarter than humans and decide we’re obsolete, it asks something more personal: What happens when a machine begins caring about people more than they seem capable of caring about one another?
That’s a fascinating idea, especially considering how rapidly AI is becoming part of our everyday lives.
We’re already using AI to answer questions, help with work, and provide something resembling conversation. The possibility of artificial companions becoming emotionally important to people doesn’t seem nearly as far-fetched as it once did.
And that’s where I think Klara and the Sun has its greatest potential.
Unfortunately, having an interesting concept and fully exploring that concept are two very different things.
Jenna Ortega has established herself as one of Hollywood’s most recognizable young actresses, particularly thanks to her portrayal of Wednesday Addams in Wednesday.
And while she certainly knows how to deliver a restrained, emotionally distant performance, I’m beginning to wonder whether Hollywood is becoming a little too comfortable casting her in similar roles.
In Klara and the Sun, Ortega plays another character whose emotional expression is deliberately limited. Of course, this time there’s a perfectly reasonable explanation: She’s a robot.
And to be fair, portraying artificial intelligence requires a particular kind of performance. Klara isn’t supposed to behave like a typical teenager. Her understanding of the world comes from observation rather than lived human experience.
Still, there’s a difference between an actress having a recognizable strength and repeatedly being asked to demonstrate that same strength.
Ortega is talented, and I’d like to see her continue exploring characters who allow her to display a broader emotional range. Otherwise, there’s a risk that audiences will start associating her almost exclusively with awkward, detached, or emotionally reserved personalities.
It’s not necessarily a criticism of her performance here. It’s more of a concern about the direction her career could take if these roles become her specialty.
After all, we already know she can play the emotionless girl. I’d love to see Hollywood challenge her with something completely different.
The Screenplay Needed More Intelligence
Here’s where the film begins to lose me.
The screenplay, written by Waititi and Dahvi Waller, introduces several interesting ideas about technology, education, social status, and the consequences of manipulating human intelligence.
One of those concepts involves children who have been genetically enhanced, or “lifted,” to become intellectually superior.
On paper, that’s a fantastic opportunity to explore a society where parents are willing to alter their children’s biology to secure a competitive advantage.
But the execution left me scratching my head.
The lifted children are supposed to represent a more intellectually advanced generation. Yet their interactions and behavior don’t consistently communicate the extraordinary intelligence we’re told they possess.
At times, the portrayal seems more interested in making them socially awkward or behaviorally unusual than demonstrating what makes them exceptionally gifted.
And those are two very different things.
Being intellectually gifted doesn’t necessarily mean being socially polished, just as having difficulty navigating social situations doesn’t indicate a lack of intelligence. The problem is that the script doesn’t establish that distinction particularly well.
If these children are supposed to represent humanity’s next intellectual evolution, shouldn’t the screenplay give us more compelling demonstrations of their advanced capabilities?
Show me how differently they think. Let their conversations reveal something fascinating about their intelligence. Give their enhanced abilities meaningful consequences beyond their social standing.
Instead, the concept feels underdeveloped.
It’s especially frustrating because the idea raises some genuinely fascinating questions. What happens to children whose parents cannot afford genetic enhancements? Does intelligence become another privilege reserved for wealthy families? And what happens to ordinary children in a society that increasingly values manufactured superiority?
Those are substantial themes, but I wanted the movie to dig deeper rather than merely introduce them.
Plenty of Heart, but the Story Doesn’t Always Earn It
One thing I appreciate about the film is its willingness to approach science fiction through emotions rather than spectacle.
Not every AI movie needs explosions, futuristic battles, or an enormous special-effects budget. Sometimes the most interesting stories are about how technology changes our relationships.
Klara and the Sun is ultimately concerned with loneliness, loss, and the lengths people will go to protect those they love.
Amy Adams brings her considerable acting experience to the role of Chrissie, a mother whose relationship with her daughter is shaped by grief and fear. Mia Tharia’s Josie is central to the film’s exploration of companionship, while Aran Murphy, Steve Buscemi, and Natasha Lyonne round out the supporting cast.
The ingredients are certainly there for an emotionally engaging drama.
But I kept coming back to the writing.
When you’re making a movie about an artificial being learning to understand humanity, the emotional relationships need to be especially convincing. We should become invested not simply because the story tells us these characters are hurting, but because their experiences make us care.
And that’s where I think Waititi’s approach falls somewhat short.
The film wants to be thoughtful, heartfelt, and occasionally whimsical, but those elements don’t always come together as smoothly as they should.
That’s disappointing because there’s a genuinely moving story buried somewhere in this material. With a tighter screenplay and stronger character development, the film could have delivered something far more memorable.
