Home Theater Forum › Home Theater Forum › Entertainment › Movies (Theatrical) › *** Official I, ROBOT Discussion Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

*** Official I, ROBOT Discussion Thread - Page 2

post #31 of 111
7/17/04 at 4:45pm
I was wondering what the robots/Viki thought they were going to do with all the humans? Were they going to keep all humans in their houses indefinitely? Were humans to be sheltered pets of robots? What's the endgame here?

It was just a bizarre development that had no logic behind Viki's actions. Were the robots going to protect humans in such a way that the human race would not procreate anymore? In an ongoing manner, how would Viki truly protect humans from themselves?
Reply
post #32 of 111
7/17/04 at 4:57pm
It wasn't terrible, but not all that good. Decent popcorn moments, but Will Smith playing Will Smith didn't work.

You're better off reading Ellison's screenplay (which has just been reprinted). Thanks for posting his comments, Robert - I was wondering how vocal he'd be about the project.

On that note, I wouldn't be surprised if we see that script get made for cable in about 5-10 years time, like the more faithful version of Dune...
Reply
post #33 of 111
7/17/04 at 6:47pm
Glad it is doing decent business. I enjoyed it quite a bit. A steady pace, interesting story and some cool effects. What more could you ask for in a summer movie? The tunnel chase was probably the only part that didn't 'work' in the CGI department. Just too computer game like. But the camera work on the end fight was awesome. That totally grabbed my attention, very well done.

Heck at least they didn't do the one typical action movie cliche, a forced love story, and they easily could have.
Reply
post #34 of 111
7/17/04 at 7:47pm
Well, (in the books) Susan Calvin was mainly interested in her robots...
Reply
post #35 of 111
7/17/04 at 8:25pm
Quote:
If they had named this somethign other than "I, Robot," Asimov fans would have been a lot less hostile to it.


In agreement there.

If it didn't have an Asimovian association (name, 3 Laws, characters, other Asimov elements). If it was just some Will Smith action/drama movie with some typical Frankenstein robots in it.

The wife and I would probably have seen it.

I think I'm pretty much out of the thread at this point, because, like I said, I don't want to be "That Annoying Dude". We all know what I am talking about!

Peace, and hope you enjoy your corrupted monstrosity. hehe.
Reply
post #36 of 111
7/17/04 at 10:14pm
Quote:
Glad it is doing decent business. I enjoyed it quite a bit. A steady pace, interesting story and some cool effects. What more could you ask for in a summer movie?
A story that makes some freaking sense.

3 Laws. Bad guy finds a loophole. Except, it ain't much of a loophole, it's a blatant disregard of at least 2 of the 3 laws, with absolutely NO GOOD REASON OR EXPLANATION.

Something as absurd as a rogue program has no business in a universe with such rigid, yet simple rules. If loophole there must be, I expect it to be clever, akin to the answer of a brainteaser, not some vague, bullshit about a rogue element which "reinterprets" the laws - i.e., simply breaks them.

I have never read the book(s), but even I must wonder, why bother with the 3 Laws?

--
H
Reply
post #37 of 111
7/17/04 at 10:14pm
In the theater I just saw this in, it was presented in dts and the sound track was VERY well done, IMHO. The opening water scene was stellar, IMHO. Took my two kids and they loved it as did I, great popcorn flick.
Reply
post #38 of 111
7/17/04 at 10:43pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
it was presented in dts and the sound track was VERY well done, IMHO
It's posts like this that help explain why Hollywood churns out "product" like this.
Reply
post #39 of 111
7/17/04 at 11:05pm
For those of you having a problem with the "loophole" in the laws...it's not a loophole. It is perfect logic, and it is one of the ONLY things remaining from the original book.

The perfect logical end to the three rules is that robots care for humans and protect us from ourselves. Unfortunately, we lose our freedom. It was a great, original idea in the '60's, full of "Twilight Zone" irony, when Asimov published his book. But, in an era where we've seen tons of Star Trek episodes and sci-fi movies explore similar themes...it's just ok.
Reply
post #40 of 111
7/18/04 at 11:50am
Well, of all people, the New York Times editorial page chimes in about "I, Robot".

Quote:
Now that "I, Robot," a technophobic thriller starring Will Smith, has hit movie screens nationwide, it's worth remembering Isaac Asimov's accomplishment in the book of the same name, which was first published in 1950. True, the humans in Asimov's book seem more than a little robotic, despite their snappy, Batman-like dialogue. ("Holy space!") Donovan and Powell — the robot-testers — resemble Cub Scouts in adult bodies. And as for Susan Calvin, the rather dried-up robopsychologist, well, it's simplest to say that she bears as much resemblance to her screen counterpart, played by Bridget Moynahan, as Asimov's robot stories do to this movie.


The rest can be read here (free registration required)



Quote:
If they had named this somethign other than "I, Robot," Asimov fans would have been a lot less hostile to it.


If this film had been presented as just a Will Smith piece of summer "mind popcorn" I would have gone and seen it and most likely enjoyed it but all I can think of is that the whole spirit of Asimov's robot stories was gutted.
Reply
post #41 of 111
7/18/04 at 12:18pm
So, like, why doesn't the massive vehicle IN FRONT OF WILLY just STOP COLD? At the speed, there'd be nothing left but an icky stain and that oh-so-fashionable pantyhose thing Willbur wore on his head.


And in Raiders of the Lost Ark when the nazi gets control of the truck, why doesn't he hit the brakes, get out and shoot Indy?

Point being, if an action scene is fast, spectacular and fun your mind doesn't have time to wander off into specifics. The problem with this scene wasn't that it was logically flawed, it's that it wasn't exciting enough to keep your mind suspending from disbelief.
Reply
post #42 of 111
7/18/04 at 1:12pm
Thread Starter 
Thanks for the link, Michael. I love this quote from the piece:

Quote:
After all, those three ironclad laws create a framework for decency that — as Susan Calvin might say — few people ever display. It's no wonder Hollywood prefers simply to fear robots, as it does in "The Terminator," "The Matrix" and now "I, Robot," to name only a few examples. It's vastly easier and more thrilling than introspection.
Reply
post #43 of 111
7/18/04 at 1:46pm
Quote:
It's posts like this that help explain why Hollywood churns out "product" like this.


I went to the show for an enjoyable evening with my kids, apparently the other 300 people in the sold out cinema like the "product" too. And apparently the people standing in the lines for the later shows which started every 40 minutes apart must have thought they would like the "product" too. We did not set out to find a new release we could tear apart for its flaws. If anyone wants to send me money to critique movies, feel free, but since I paid the bill...have a nice day.
Reply
post #44 of 111
7/18/04 at 1:48pm
I just returned from seeing this flick. I quite enjoyed the movie on several levels. First, the production values and CG effects were top notch. Second, the story line made sense to me. Granted I have not read Asimov's book, but I did like the premise of the movie. Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Viki basically learns that a few humans may have to die for the sake of saving the rest.
Go see the movie and take it for what it is. It's a better than average, fun sci-fi flick with a good story line. Just my .02.
Reply
post #45 of 111
7/18/04 at 3:20pm
Checked out the movie on Saturday. I actually enjoyed it a lot. The CGI was great, especially the parts with sonny fighting some of the other robots. He was doing some pretty sick moves on them. Great pop-corn flick for sure.

Funniest thing was in the theater I saw it in, the part where Will is on the bike jumping while shooting in super slow motion, this large black woman shouted out "Gooo Willllll". everybody in the theater was cracking up, it was classic.

This was a very fun movie, which shouldn't be over critiqued. Like one of the other posters said, if the movie wasn't called I Robot, and wasn't tied to Asimov, it would have been even better.

Also, the theater where I saw it, the DTS soundtrack came through great, system was pumped up nicely.
Reply
post #46 of 111
7/18/04 at 3:25pm
Quote:
apparently the people standing in the lines for the later shows which started every 40 minutes apart must have thought they would like the "product" too
But the real question is: did they? If so, did they just get what they were expecting, or were they actually surprised at how much they liked it? Too bad you can't pay after the movie is over; or maybe a buck to get in, and the rest is a tip.

People lined up to see a movie and the resulting first weekend grosses indicate demand, not satisfaction or quality.
Reply
post #47 of 111
7/18/04 at 5:47pm
I enjoyed this quite a bit. This is excellent summer stuff. I simply didn't expect a whole lot and got what I asked for and a bit more. At this point I may actually go ahead and read the book. I may not. I still enjoyed the movie.
Reply
post #48 of 111
7/18/04 at 5:50pm
Never read the book but really liked the movie. Went with four other people and 4 out of 5 gave it a big thumbs up My wife gave it a "just ok". Funny thing is, there probably weren't even 50 people at the 1:15 showing in Green Bay.

One of the first times I can ever remember going to a movie and being impressed with the bass quality of the theater.

I'll be buying when the dvd's available.
Reply
post #49 of 111
7/18/04 at 8:04pm
It's not up to DARK CITY and THE CROW, but I've seen it twice now, and think it's generally very good. Some parts are even great.
Reply
post #50 of 111
7/18/04 at 8:25pm
well i was going to come in and ask, how close does this resemble the actual book "I, robot"(or books).
i guess harlan answered my question.

"not very much."

Quote:
"The I, ROBOT opening next Friday is the awful retrofitting of an oldscreenplay called HARDWIRED that had been lying around for years, until it was picked up by Proyas (the director). At that point, lawyers (or someone) who were slightly less illiterate than the usual movie gang, pointed out that the script used as its core the 3 Laws of Robotics that were clearly the creative property of the estate of the late Isaac Asimov. And so, properly
fearing a lawsuit, they scampered fast as their asses-needing-covering would permit, and they bought the rights to the title of Isaac's classic collection of robot stories from an equally ignorant rights&permissions functionary at Doubleday. They changed the names of a few characters, they
stuck in as little of the Asimov material as they could, and they used the idiotic robot-amuck CGI-festooned HARDWIRED, now retitled I, ROBOT."
Reply
post #51 of 111
7/19/04 at 7:44am
Went in with couple of friends and family yesterday to watch it and really enjoyed the movie. Everyone gave it a big thumbs up. I havent read the books so took it from its face value. The theater had SDDS and the sound track was really amazing, some cool CGI's and and awesome soundtrack. I loved it and would definetly watch it again
Reply
post #52 of 111
7/19/04 at 10:45am
I love how people who've not seen the film dismiss it as junk. Nobody said it was an adaptation of any of Asimov's stories. It's "suggested" by them. I'd give Alex Proyas more credit than that. I loved the film, and I thought the plot was smart and interesting. And nothing like any "summer popcorn movie". Proyas has said this could very well be a first in a series of films based on or suggested or inspired by Asimov's stories. Cool, can't wait!
Reply
post #53 of 111
7/19/04 at 10:53am
Agree with you Paul, after reading the posts here on friday and some reviews i did not want to see the movie but my friends dragged me literally im glad they did, i found the movie as entertaining as SP2 and even enjoyed the tunnel scene which many people think was too CGI'ed.. well each to his own, but ill definetly say it should be watched once.
Reply
post #54 of 111
7/19/04 at 10:56am
Quote:
Nobody said it was an adaptation of any of Asimov's stories.
So why is it called "I, Robot" again? Oh, and we have more raping and pillaging of Isaac Asimov's work to look forward to? Oh, goody!
Reply
post #55 of 111
7/19/04 at 11:21am
The film really shouldn't have been called "I, Robot", but I found myself quite enjoying it. This was despite going in sort of predisposed to not liking it (which I try to never do).

If you bear through the first few minutes of it, which are marred in my opinion by some very broad character strokes and a few questionable scenes, you'll find a fairly good futuristic action film with some fairly nice work in most of the technical areas.

There are more than a few plotholes (no cameras in the tunnels to capture the whirlwind Benz ballet?) and some a few undeveloped concepts, but overall not bad in the least.
Reply
post #56 of 111
7/19/04 at 12:11pm
Quote:
Nobody said it was an adaptation of any of Asimov's stories.


Except when you call a film "I, Robot" and you have Asimov's three laws, you will have to expect that people will bring in their baggage. They would have been so better off not associating this film with Asimov.

I think what gets fan's panties in a bunch is that the ideas presented here appear to be in total contradiction to what Asimov's beliefs were.

A decent article about that:
http://slate.msn.com/id/2103979/fr/ifr/

Not saying it is a bad film (since I haven't seen it yet). Hell, I enjoyed "Starship Troopers", even if it doesn't have much to do with Heinlein. But, right now, I have a feeling the movie will make me twitch.

Jason
Reply
post #57 of 111
7/19/04 at 1:05pm
Thread Starter 
Thanks for the link, Jason. Sounds like the film is very much in line with the typical "logic and reason?? Nah, what one FEELS is what's importance" point of view promulgated in Hollywood.
Reply
post #58 of 111
7/19/04 at 1:06pm
Anyone notice that the end titles say suggested by Asimov's I, Robot? Interesting that.
Reply
post #59 of 111
7/19/04 at 2:52pm
Random comments:

1. Boy and I thought Brad Pitt got much bigger in Troy. Will Smith took the cake. The guy had huge firm muscles!

2. Why must they say 2035. Couldn't they have said sometime in the future or not give a date. Watching back Back of the Future Trilogy is such a pain because of the years given. I don't buy that I have a robot in my living room by the time I retire.

3. Made no sense that the robots were designed to move like spiderman (climb walls and super strength). I know every product I buy, they built them as cheap as possible .

Overall I went in expecting a Will Smith mindless fun movie but gotten something more in line with Minority Report.
Reply
post #60 of 111
7/19/04 at 3:05pm
MTV showed a 10 min clip this weekend for their movie special with Wil Smith. Not wanting to see the movie in the first place and after watching the preview, I will definately skip it in the theater.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Movies (Theatrical)
Home Theater Forum › Home Theater Forum › Entertainment › Movies (Theatrical) › *** Official I, ROBOT Discussion Thread