I, Robot

[HelenM]

We went to see I, Robot yesterday. The reviews have been so-so, but we enjoyed it.

We had quite a responsive audience, which led to a funny moment early on, where there is a scene with Will Smith waking up and getting out bed, stretching, etc. He is wearing briefs only, so his body is being showcased - and I'd say he's bulked up since previous movies - and some people started going "Oooh!!!" "Aaaaah!!!" and then everyone else started laughing.

The movie itself had some funny moments too ;)

Given that we're familiar with the Chicago downtown area, it was fascinating to see how the movie merged a futuristic conception of downtown with the real skyscape. We thought they did it pretty well. (As it happens I took my kids up the Sears Tower last week so the view from up high is pretty fresh in my mind :))

The robot graphics were impressive, we thought.

Evidently the storyline not that close to the book Isaac Asimov book; I haven't read it so I can't comment.

I expect you'd like it if you like that sort of movie...i.e. sci-fi action adventure. Or if you like Will Smith, period :D

Helen

[Dingfod]

I heard a brief review on it this morning on NPR. The reviewer said something to the effect that this movie killed and buried Asimov's story and then danced on the grave. Harsh. I'll probably still go see it. I read the book about 30 years ago. I used to have a hardback copy, but I think my wife sold it in a garage sale 15 or so years ago. I've contemplated checking it out of the library and reading it again before going to the see the movie, but if they've bastardized it much, doing that would probably make me so jaded and critical that it would spoil my enjoyment of the CGI-fest that it is.


Warren

[HelenM]

I heard a brief review on it this morning on NPR. The reviewer said something to the effect that this movie killed and buried Asimov's story and then danced on the grave. Harsh. I'll probably still go see it. I read the book about 30 years ago. I used to have a hardback copy, but I think my wife sold it in a garage sale 15 or so years ago. I've contemplated checking it out of the library and reading it again before going to the see the movie, but if they've bastardized it much, doing that would probably make me so jaded and critical that it would spoil my enjoyment of the CGI-fest that it is.


Warren

It's definitely a CGI fest.

I'm not surprised to hear that people who expect it to be like the book are disappointed. The movie itself states "suggested by the book" which does imply, imo, that it is only loosely related to it. Evidently the three robot laws come from the book, but not much else.

Helen

[Dingfod]

Will Smith is well versed in the three laws of robotics, he cited them all on Letterman the other night.


Warren

[HelenM]

Will Smith is well versed in the three laws of robotics, he cited them all on Letterman the other night.


Warren

Impressive; but somehow I doubt that Will Smith's primary draw is his memory!

Helen

[Dingfod]

Impressive; but somehow I doubt that Will Smith's primary draw is his memory!No, it's his acting ability. ;)


Warren

[Scotty]

I haven't seen it. But when I saw one picture I knew it wasn't even close to the book. The book is a murder mystery.
I suspect the only thing that comes from the book is the title and the names of the characters.
I think they just wrote the story then said, "Hey, we need a title..."

-Scott

[viscousmemories]

I don't remember if I've read the book or not. I read a sci-fi book with 'robot' in the title when I was a kid, but not sure if it was that one. In fact I think it might've been Heinlein. Anyway that and the fact that I've never played D&D or read the Lord of the Rings is how I know I'm not a real geek, despite my overwhelming affection for computers and the Internet. :)

[Dingfod]

Isaac Asimov wrote several books with Robot in the title. I, Robot was a collection of short stories, one of which was a murder mystery.

www.asimovonline.com has a good rundown on the differences between the movie and the book.

I like this one, from the above site:
in 1940, Asimov wrote a story called "Reason" which featured two interplanetary field agents for US Robots and Mechanical Men, Inc. named Powell and Donovan. In the story, the two men are confronted with a robot that refuses to believe it was created by humans. Knowing that Campbell was fascinated by religion, Asimov added a religious dimension to the story by having the robot decide that it was actually created by a supreme being; it is to this supreme being, rather than the humans, that the robot decides it owes allegiance.I've got to read it again.


Warren

[Scotty]

Oh yeah, now I remember it being more than one story. I think what it was, was that I had read a screenplay of one of the stories and that was different yet again (I think the stories all ran together in my mind).

-Scott

[livius drusus]

We went to see I, Robot yesterday. The reviews have been so-so, but we enjoyed it.

I saw the movie yesterday and enjoyed it as well. I knew from the reviews that it wasn't Asimov's story, so I wasn't disappointed on that score.

Given that we're familiar with the Chicago downtown area, it was fascinating to see how the movie merged a futuristic conception of downtown with the real skyscape. We thought they did it pretty well. (As it happens I took my kids up the Sears Tower last week so the view from up high is pretty fresh in my mind :))

I found that cool too, and I'm not familiar with the Chicago skyline. The views of the city and lake from the top of the USR building were gorgeous. I'm very glad they didn't make it a generic city of the future kind of thing.

The robot graphics were impressive, we thought.

I thought Sonny was wonderful. It was amazing how expressive the robots were. :)

[HelenM]

I found that cool too, and I'm not familiar with the Chicago skyline. The views of the city and lake from the top of the USR building were gorgeous. I'm very glad they didn't make it a generic city of the future kind of thing.

Me too. I think the views from the top of the USR building were little altered from the actual skyscape here.

I loved that ruined bridge backdrop - I love suspension bridges and I love ruins so go figure...

I thought Sonny was wonderful. It was amazing how expressive the robots were. :)

Yes indeed. I would guess they did Sonny somewhat like they did gollum, i.e. by filming a person and then merging the movements with the robot appearence. I saw some comment to the effect that so-and-so did Sonny's voice and modelling and I assume that's what the comment meant.

Helen

[Scotty]

Okay, so I went and watched it today.
It reminded me of Colossus: The Forbin Project (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0064177/) more than any "I, Robot" story.

Since I went in knowing it wasn't even marginally true to the Asimov stories I wasn't disappointed in that way.

Spoilers:

I still to this moment have no idea why Lanning had Sonny kill Robertson. I just don't get it. If he wasn't part of the problem why kill him? I just missed something. Just because he is gone doesn't mean the whole robot projects die...I mean, the company is huge obviously. Somebody would continue it.

Plus, if Lanning couldn't write down something on a piece of paper explaining the situation, then come on! Sheesh.

It seemed to me they couldn't read Sonny's "mind", and if Lanning could tell Sonny to kill Robertson and not get caught (i.e. why would VIKI (was it VIKI nor NIKI?) keep that secret, because that is bad obviously.), then why couldn't he just tell him to keep a secret except to the Spoon guy?

I cribbed this, but it is my exact thought "like why would thousands of outdated robots be put in storage without being deactivated, and why would U.S.R. hold a big news conference announcing that fact"

Why would the new robots rip up the old robots? What was the point of that? As said above, they could have just been deactivated. Less waste, more computer thinking I would suspect.

Plus, I am getting pretty tired of high-tech buildings with NO SECURITY whatsoever (okay, so they could have all been told to leave I suppose, but if the computer controlling everything just has one or two robots watching things and leaves the rest outside?). No cameras when they should be there, the CONVENIENT passage into the building, that got a "figures" snort out of me (always some AC vent that lets you into the building, come on!)

It seems to me they also removed the ability to have subsequent (sequels) stories from the get go. If they hadn't gone all out with a total revolution, then the stories could continue, just like the "I, Robot" stories themselves.

I guess some of it was enjoyable, but once I start thinking about it, it breaks down.

Now, I did like the scene in the tunnel where the two trucks filled with robots had him blocked in. Of course, if I had been running that, he would be dead (stupid computers never do get that right it seems).

Now, if they had ended it like "Colossus: The Forbin Project", then had a follow-up movie, that would have been much better (I think). Plus, get rid of all of the inconsistencies, and plot holes, and stilly plot advancements. :D

-Scott

[Ensign Steve]

... the fact that I've never played D&D or read the Lord of the Rings is how I know I'm not a real geek...

Take that back!

/derail

[viscousmemories]

Helen: I lived in Ukranian Village (Off Chicago, west of Western) for a year a few years ago. I worked in the old Edison building on Clark, but our lab was in the AT&T building across the street from the Sears Tower. I only went to the top of the Tower once, but the view was quite cool. I had lunch in the Mexican restaurant on the 1st floor a number of times. Chicago is an interesting city.

JD: Well okay, so I spent about 1000 hours in an online role playing game based in part on the LOTR and other various fantasy books, does that qualify?

[HelenM]

Helen: I lived in Ukranian Village (Off Chicago, west of Western) for a year a few years ago. I worked in the old Edison building on Clark, but our lab was in the AT&T building across the street from the Sears Tower. I only went to the top of the Tower once, but the view was quite cool. I had lunch in the Mexican restaurant on the 1st floor a number of times. Chicago is an interesting city.

Yes, definitely. :)

Helen

[Goliath]

I saw it last night. Not bad..like others have said, it's probably nothing like the book, but it was full of good, dumb fun nonetheless.

[Adora]

The reviewer said something to the effect that this movie killed and buried Asimov's story and then danced on the grave.

A short explanation:

The actual reason it's so damn far from the real stories contained in I,Robot is because originally they couldn't get the rights to Asimovs' works. So instead they started working on this script and idea called "Hardwired", much of which is the basis for the story you see on the screen. Then the Asimov © allowed them the rights, about a quarter of the way through shooting the film. So they decided to retain the original storyline and such, but instead incoporate a lot of the Asimov-esque ideas and stuff, and slap the title on so that they'd get more publicity with it. So it isn't really I,Robot, just something else walking around using the I,Robot title.

Or at least, that's what the director said last night in an interview.

[Adora]

*bumpity bump bumfuck bump*

Scuse the lateness of this reply, but I live in the Land of a Few Movie Months Down the Track, and I only saw this yesterday.

It was, quite possibly, the biggest load of shite I've seen all year. And that includes King Arthur. And yes, I prefer Riddick over this. It at least had stuff blowing up to entertain my brain, like people being killed with tea mugs. This didn't. No, instead we are forced to sit through Will Smith attempting to "act" and execute a pitifully bad script, walking like he's still living in the ghetto and pretending he's somehow comical. The writers should have been shot, repeatedly, with ball bearings between their legs. It was so cliched, so predictable that even the 5 year old in front of me, as soon as he saw the security-strip in the Doctor's house knew it was VIKI trying to take over the world ("Daddy! It's the big robot brain!"). If this was trying to be some sort of SF noir detective story, it was doing a fucking pitiful job.

You know it's a bad movie when you think the trailer for Catwoman is better than the whole movie, and that Sonny the Robot is a better actor than all the other real people in the film. Especially that psychologist chick. Holy fuck. She was dreadful!

As we moved through the film I counted off all the previous SF movies they were ripping off. I lost count after the 15th one, which I think was Bubblegum Crisis (robots climbin crab-like up buildings).

The product positioning almost made me cry. Good thing I don't wear Converse, can't afford JVC and, lets face it, even if I could afford it, wouldn't buy an Audi ever. It was just so disgustingly cynical and blatant I actually felt offended.

I want my $5.70 back!

[dave_a]

The writers should have been shot, repeatedly, with ball bearings between their legs.

You're scaring me. :hide:

It's just a movie :P

[Adora]

That I had to sit through!

I was led to believe, through reviews I had read and information from friends, that this movie was at least average, and watchable. I should have remembered never to trust anything they tell me.

[MinorityReport]

Spoilers:






I still to this moment have no idea why Lanning had Sonny kill Robertson. I just don't get it. If he wasn't part of the problem why kill him? I just missed something. Just because he is gone doesn't mean the whole robot projects die...I mean, the company is huge obviously. Somebody would continue it.

Does Sonny kill Robertson? He kills Lanning. Robertson is shown dead, presumably killed by rogue robots.

I didn't quibble, the movie was fun and had a robot theme, and the depiction of Sonny was beautiful.

[Scotty]

Does Sonny kill Robertson? He kills Lanning. Robertson is shown dead, presumably killed by rogue robots.

I didn't quibble, the movie was fun and had a robot theme, and the depiction of Sonny was beautiful.

As far as I understood, he killed both.

-Scott

[Farren]

Despite the fact that I'll probably go see this movie, I feel obliged to offer Maddox's take on this thing:

http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/images/piss_grave4.jpg

...
They turned something as inherently cool as a master race of robots into a blubbering suck-fest of limp-dicked pussies wimpering endlessly about their feelings.
...

Of course Asimov is a terrible writer, so I'll probably enjoy it :D

I, Robot in a Nutshell (http://www.maddox.xmission.com/c.cgi?u=i_robot)

[WinAce]

Since we're now posting satire about the movie, here's my obligatory, conflicts-of-interest-be-damned spoof.

http://www.lordcocentre.com/Stores/golgotha/179/robpost.jpg
i, Rabbi (http://www.lordcocentre.com/Stores/golgotha/179.html) - A LordCo Films Production

It's 1594, and medieval Kabbalists have succeeded in creating intelligent servants--'Golems'--from clay. The magically animated creatures yield great promise; they're potentially a solution to all the problems Europe faces, from safely disposing of Bubonic Plague victims to launching a new, devastatingly effective Crusade to end all Crusades.... [snip]

[livius drusus]

:rofl: That's awesome, WinAce. The original golem is just such a classy, classy touch. Bravo!

[Paul H.]

Hm, given the quality of some recent replies, I hesitiate…


>> Evidently the storyline not that close to the book Isaac Asimov book;
>> I haven't read it so I can't comment.

I have. There isn’t really “a book”, but a series of short stories. (The single short story "I Robot" is pretty limited, in itself).


But I think the general point of Asimov’s efforts was about; ‘what constitutes humanity?’

A theme that’s been tackled (as much as Hollywood tackles anything, that is) before.

But I thought an interesting angle would have been, because Will Smith is Black, to drawn a Negro-slave analogy. Once, slaves weren’t human, either. Then they were rated as 3/5th’s human, now…

That would have given the story some contemporary bite.

[livius drusus]

There are no recent replies on this thread on account of it being a year and a half old. :glare:

Good idea about the slave analogy, though. I get the feeling they wrote the script before they thought of Will Smith in the role, which usually means assumed whiteness, which usually means the story and characters come across as completely colorblind.

[JoeP]

There are no recent replies on this thread on account of it being a year and a half old. :glare:One of your more excellent :glare:s, ma'am.

[livius drusus]

Why, thank you, Joe. :livius:

[Paul H.]

If you've seen the movie, you'll remember that the opening, establishing scenes were of robots... walking the dog, taking care of the human childran, digging ditches. Now, even without a Black lead actor, the analogy is pretty obvious.


Is there any historical irony in that in the movie the Black detective helps to repress a slave rebellion?