*** Official I, ROBOT Discussion Thread - Page 4

just retured from seeing the movie.
i liked it...i am vaguely familiar with the asimov stories, but i was not expecting a 'movie based on the book' type flick going in... even if the movie did not hold true to asimov ( i dont know one way or the other), it definitely sparks my curiousity to find some asimov and read it... having some appreciation for the asimov stories will go hand and hand with my appreciation of the movie.

was that because of what you read about the movie, so you knew it wasnt true to the spirit of the book or because ,...well why wouldnt you expect it to be based on the book called i, robot?

tonyd- i went to be entertained and i was curious about the story...i never once thought to myself, hmmm, I,Robot this must be a movie based on asmiov's I,Robot...so for me i was fortunate to watch and enjoy this movie for what it is, a decent and very entertaining summer movie. a very simplistic few, but i guess i was the 'target' audience for this flick.
i usally dont dumb myself down for movies, but for this one i did ...maybe i should have took the time to read the asimov storys first...or?

No, having that Asimov "I, Robot" baggage didn't help me enjoy this film, so, I'd offer that "ignorance is bliss" for this instance.

An officemate came in singing the praises for this movie, and he didn't have any baggage w/r/t reading the book, and treated it like a big action film, not a serious sci-fi movie. So, from that perspective, I guess the film works for a lot of folks.

Very much so Patrick. There is also preconcieved notions about movies that we all have when we go see a movie that works much like bias does.

i am curious about the story too.
i never read i, robot, but i have a basic idea what it is about.
but if i see that a movie called i, robot is coming to the movies i cant help but think it must be based on the book of the same name, until i hear otherwise, like here on htf.

with the same title as the book , how could you not think it may be based on the book?

just as an example did anyone not think lord of the rings movies wouldnt be based on the books?
even if they changed the story somewhat?

Yes, but I, Robot isn't a novel, it's a short story collection. Do you assume the movie is going to be a bunch of short films with a common theme? Probably not.

Has anyone seen the trailer for "A Sound of Thunder" based on the short story by Ray Bradbury? Basically the short story is the set-up, and then they created everything that happens after that. How do people feel about that? Are they desecrating or exploiting Bradbury's story?

oh, ok, now i see your point.
it has the same title as a bunch of short stories in a book called i, robot.

yep not the same thing at all.

I enjoyed it, but not as much as I had hoped.

My review is up here: http://draven99.blogspot.com/2004/07...w-i-robot.html

I forgot to post my review on this message board. Here it is.

NO SPOILERS

A robot may not harm a human or, by inaction, allow a human being to come to harm. A robot must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the first law. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the first or second law. Those are the 3 simple laws of robotics. Alex Proyas takes this concept and turns it into a Terminator-like film that turns out surprisingly good.

Del Spooner (Will Smith) plays a detective that has a vendetta against robots in the year 2035 in Chicago. He despises robots, and one day he catches his break and finds a case that involves a robot. Dr. Alfred Lanning (James Cromwell), the creator of the robots and the three falls from his office window in what looks like a suicide. Spooner has a suspicion that it wasn’t suicide, but that it could have been murder, and with the help of Dr. Susan Calvin (Bridget Moynahan) he reveals a deep mystery focused around a certain robot, and his capability to defy the three laws.

Going into I, Robot, I was expecting an unstable plot with overdone CGI. What I got was a surprisingly pleasing plot with excellent CGI. It was so perfect that you almost couldn’t tell it was CGI. It was probably the best CGI I have ever seen in a film. The film did share a lot of similar ideas with films such as The Terminator and The Matrix, but not enough where you can say the whole film was mimicking those films. The script was strong enough to hold on it’s own without any unneeded side stories. A big plus was the relatively small cast with the script being based on the main idea rather than going into off into unneeded side-stories that would interfere an already complex story. Everything had a connection that concluded the story without a problem.

Will Smith portrayed his character superbly. Sure, the acting could always be better, but he didn’t have much of an impact to say that the whole movie revolved around him. It was a simple role, and Will Smith was perfect for the job. Although this wasn’t a breakthrough role for Will Smith, it was one of his better movies as far as acting goes. Bridget Moynahan wasn’t all that great, and the rest of the cast was adequate.

The visuals were stunning. Patrick Tatopoulos, the production designer, built a realistic universe and Proyas made it visually outstanding. I would have never dreamed to see CGI be this good. It fit perfectly with how the movie flowed with the plot. You wouldn’t be able to tell if it was CGI or not. Visually, everything was up-to-par with the recent standard sci-fi films, but I, Robot stood out with its awe-inspiring unique visualizes.

I, Robot stands out as a very interesting film that made a new standard for visuals. I loved how the film used a concept such as Wal-Mart and independent stores with the idea of robots and humans. Wal-Mart is so cheap, so it forces independent stores to close if no one buys anything from the store, whereas in the movie robots take the place of human jobs because they do a better and faster job. That made the film feel more interested. I could say this movie would be in the top 3 movie roles that Will Smith played, and probably his best acting job. I, Robot offered action, amazing visuals, a delightful plot, a little bit of humor, with so-so acting, which adds up to a must-see film if your into the sci-fi genre, or if you just want to catch a enjoyable film.

Story: B+
Acting: C+
Visuals: A+
Cinematography: B
Overall: B+ (Not an average)

It's funny how much people are bitching about the changes from Asimov when the base SF story was one of the few good things about the script.

How about the terribly obvious and lame character setup and development.

I mean first of all was this Demolition Man part 2? It sure played like it. Anti-tech hero takes down big corp/govt conspiracy while Bullock-esque sidekick in the system helps him along.

The script awkwardly flops out all the setup info it thinks you need in such an obvious way that it either screams "here it comes" or looks identitical to 3 other films you've seen the same moments in.


The "kid" has no reason for existence in the film at all and 75% of Will's lines are cliched even for him. Is this his MIB alien ass-kicking version or his ID4 alien ass-kicking version, he had all the same lines and moments as he did in those films (sans a dry TL Jones to make it funny).


And the action moments are often setup up very poorly too. Sunny runs into a room of identical robots to hide. That's great...except they are lined up in perfect symmetry based on a final build count of 1000. Now there is 1001.

Let me ask you something, where the fuck could he fit in that configuration without being awkwardly out of place? Okay, maybe somehow there was an empty spot in the array BUT THEN HE RUNS AND HIDES AGAIN. No other robot is displaced, yet again he has found his way into another spot lined up perfectly with the other robots.

Why does it bug me? Because the filmmakers are in control here and this doesn't have to be a fucking problem. Try NOT HAVING THE OTHER ROBOTS LINED UP PERFECTLY. Have them not quite finished or just standing in some general clutter. Now Sunny can hide anywhere because there is no order he must fit into. Wow, problem solved and you still have the exact same scene. You could even have some of them lined up and some not.

And that is a perfect example of the issues this film has, most of which come right out of the script. It's not smart enough to get us anywhere it wants us to go without plodding into it like a lumbering Frankenstien.



But the idea that the master CPU (yes, Viki was straight out of Tron) would take control and come to a "control humans to protect them, including some killing" is not the major problem here. Obviously Asimov dealt with such an angle at one point so its not that far out there.

In fact its a very Asimov-themed idea. In one of his other short stories he tells of how engineers conclude that a shield of a certain power/technology could not be maintained long enough for aliens using it to reach them, only to end the story with a reveal to a technologist who didn't get the math and had just come up with an alternate solution by trial and error/common sense (quickly turn shield on and off).

The point being that "correct logic" can be right and yet overlook unexpected results.

Plus, at least the film showed that Viki DID RAISE concerns. She simply was covering her tracks too. Her alteration of technology did not go unnoticed, and in the end she was stopped.

Her redevelopment of fundamental circuitry is probably exactly what made the doctor notice problems in the first place.

It's just like saying that Invasion of the Body Snatchers couldn't happen because people would notice the changes, when the whole point of the story is that people ARE noticing the changes but just not in a shared knowledge way that would help identify the problem until it is too late.

Watched the film and found it only fair. The visuals were good, but the characters and situations were poorly developed and cliched. Will Smith playing an a**-kicking, smart-mouthed cop. Gee, where have I seen this before? The awkward set pieces didn't help. The car in the tunnel sequence made no sense. Someone mentioned that the front truck bracketing Smith could stop and the collision would kill him. My first thought was that these two huge trucks could just close in together and smash Del in a car sandwich.

On the subject of the movies fidelity to Asimov. It seemed to me the Asimov monicker was tacked onto a barely related story to give it some credibility. But the idea of a positronic mind violating the three laws is entertained in "I, Robot". In the short story "Little Lost Robot", a Nestor robot with modified first law programming (Must not harm a human through direct action, but is not required to prevent a human from harm by inaction) goes rogue and hides itself in a mass of identical but classically programed Nestors. It arrogantly disobeys human commands, violating the second law. Some of these elements are mirrored in the film. That said the film really doesn't have the feel or philosophy of Asimov.

In the end, I didn't enjoy the film because it was predictable and uninvolving, not for the failure to remain faithful to Asimov

Based on how well the film is doing outside the U.S. - I'd expect some kind of follow-up. I'm hoping that Kapur gets off his booty and does Foundation as was rumored a few years ago. Don't make it a big summer movie - this could be done on a small budget, with the right cast, writer and score.

There was virtually no action in the older Asimov novels - some tricks could be done to spruce it up a bit, but no dumb chases just to do one.

Anyway - I'm just dreaming.

Must say I'm surprised that it took until post #77 before the Zeroth Law was mentioned.

I finally saw this over the weekend. Once Viki was revealed as the "villain" and she explained her motives, my first thought was the Zeroth Law -- I haven't read Robots & Empire myself, but the Zeroth Law came up in one of the later Foundation books (maybe Foundation and Earth?). Since I haven't read those in ages, I can't remember if Daneel Olivaw "developed" or extrapolated it himself. Assuming he did, Viki's own "development" of the law wouldn't be so far fetched from an Asimovian universe point of view, would it? Just that Viki wasn't quite as discreet nor benevolent as Olivaw was.

Consequently, with Viki as the guiding force behind the "regular" NS5s, she possibly "updated" their programming by adding the Zeroth Law, and guided the NS5s into doing her bidding, justifying her actions (and the individual human-harming actions of any particular NS5) with the Zeroth Law.

Count me as one who thought the movie "wasn't bad". And as earlier noted, shades of Animatrix.

Thoughts as to Sonny being the actual "man" in his own dream? Is he to be the "saviour" of robotkind? Did his "alternate processor" (was that what it was referred to, the thing that allowed him to bypass the 3 Laws?) in effect give him a sense of morality, as per a human's, rather than "simplistic" codified Laws that other robots have?

Giskard developed them - since he was Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show) he had a different POV than most robots. He could see that humans had laws too, as a whole (pyschohistory). Plus he was unsuccessful in really implementing it. Ditto for Daneel. Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show) Plus, even Daneel was never really quite capable of taking a life unless their was another life in danger.

Daneel only really implemented it in the long run, as eventually he changed brains numerous times (getting more and more sophisticated with each generation). Plus he inherited Giskard's, ahem, special trait.


The funny result of the Zeroeth law from Asimov was that Robots themselves had to go in the long run, for the good of humanity.

Actually Giskard did not develop them - Daneel did. Giskard shut down as a result of using the Zeroeth Law, since he could not fully accept it.

I seem to remember that both Daneel and Giskard found the 3 laws insufficient, but Daneel was the first to act on the Zeroeth Law and to state it.

Thanks for the info!

Sheesh, I am now going to have to go and acquire a complete set, and re-read, Asimov's Robot and Foundation books. And that's on top of a fairly extensive backlog of DVDs, comics and books already sitting unviewed/unread at home...

OK, well, I stand corrected. Still, even Daneel never really absorbed the Zeroeth law well enough for cold-blooded killing. Not even over several thousand years and brain changes.

Still "I Robot" was exciting movie to watch. I have to re-read all of my Asimov Robot Series again.

No movie will be good as any book. But I am glad they at least made this movie.

i saw this over the weekend and was quite surprised to find that i liked it a lot; i had been led to believe, both by will smith's track-record, and the tenor of the trailers, that it was going to be a ridiculous, over-the-top action blockbuster. and, to me, (and with the notable exception of a couple of cringe-inducing moments) it wasn't.

i had guessed what was going to happen with the three laws, since it's just the fictionalization of a scenario that's as old as the utilitarian ethical theory the three laws represent. but still, i thought it was handled well and with a remarkable amount of restraint.

it's objections like this that mystify me. how do you know that no other robots have been displaced? what makes you think that the displacement of one or even 10 or twenty robots would have been obvious to spooner? i mean, he's in the middle of row upon row of robots that are as tall as him (he has no bird's eye view of the configuration), quickly walking, focused on the robot or two immediately to his left and right, and perhaps on any peripheral motion. so, if sonny had just moved one robot totally out of position and into another row one or two rows over, or if he had quickly managed to re-space 4 or 5 of the other robots before spooner got to him (there was more than enough time for hom to do so), then it makes perfect sense that spooner would have failed to notice any discrepancy.

but whatever, if you just don't like the film, then so be it - it just (always) seems a little odd to pin one's dislike of a movie on details like this, most of which are easily explainable given the resources offered by the film and a little reflection.

Some members look for any excuse to hate a film John, even before they see it.
I'm sure the knives are already being sharpened for Revenge of the Sith.
I really enjoyed I,Robot, I didn't expect to because I'm not the biggest Will Smith fan, but I'm an Alex Proyas fan and he didn't let me down. And you can tell from the trailer that the Three Laws were going to be fiddled about with. Would Asimov have liked the film? Not sure.