I, Robot

[LGM]

Well.. Saying "I told you so" would be an understatement...

I, Robot was great! Just enough action, blended excellently with actual PLOT. Characters with real emotions and discussions actually fill the screen instead of CG Mayhem (well, there was plenty of that aswell. But it was nothing compared to Van Helsing.)

The story was excellent. It made enough sense, but it wasn't too confusing. The action was quite impressive, and not too overly grand.

Sure, it doesn't follow the actual book "I, Robot" itself at all.. But I don't really think that's the point. The book is set in an Asimov-like universe, and deals with Asimov elements. It's about a robot being created to have free will and "emotions". The title surely makes sense.

Everybody just assumed that because the name was "I, Robot" it was going to be a direct adaptation to the book. But since when do movie studios do that? Never... Well, harldy ever. The movie was just suggested by the writing of Asmiov.. No where did it ever say that the movie was based directly off the book.

It may suck that this happaned, yes.. But Asimov fans can stop worrying that Big Willie has ruined the name of the author.. Because the film is great, and I think brings a good message. In fact, I WANT to read Asimov's works now.

Meh.. Anyways.. I hope some of the whiners out there (not just here) got/get over themselves and just see the damn movie. It's a pleasent surprise.

[Flippy_D]

Will Smith is a fantastic actor when given a decent part.

[LGM]

Exactly.. But he still brought through some of his token one-liners.. But you can't have a summer action flick without some of them :-p.. It just adds charm, I guess. But sometimes made him seem not so serious as he should've been..

[Sylpher]

I hope you cry yourself to sleep at night.

[TerranRich]

LOL

I was thinking along similar lines, Sylph. I guess LGM likes the same old re-hashed cliche plot of "I knew that those nasty varmints were to blame all along! I tolds ya so!!" I, Robot takes Asimov's 3 Rules and flushes them down the toilet, thereby making it cliche... Asimov wrote those rules for the reason that his stories wouldn't become cliche.

[Sylpher]

"Sure, it doesn't follow the actual book "I, Robot" at all.. But I don't really think that's the point. The book is set in an Asimov universe, and deals with Asimov elements."

And, you have no clue what you are talking about. Hope it goes down nice cause when it comes out later it is gonna be smelly..

[Barcik]

The truth is, Asimov hated such stories.

[m0ds]

Woot, I cant wait to see this movie!!!!!!!!!!

[LGM]

Bah.. If the name was something else, no-one would be bitching about it.. now would they?

[Fuzzpilz]

Maybe not, but the name isn't something else. This is a movie that shouts "HI, I'M BASED ON ASIMOV'S WORKS!" at your face, then (judging from basically everything I've read about it, though admittedly I haven't seen it) proceeds to dump everything that made Asimov interesting and gives the audience a bunch of explosions and Will Smith and whatnot instead.

[evenwolf]

LGM, so perhaps the name of the movie SHOULD have been named something else?


For instance, say the next Batman movie had Spiderman instead of Batman.  I would go see the film solely on the chance of seeing Batman.   Once dissapointed, I would bitch to everyone I know that it wasn't even a batman movie.

You however, would claim "so what? the movie was pretty good anyway."  ?

[Peter Thomas]

I agree.

The movie was a good watch, but after coming out, I'm quite sure I didn't go and see "I, Robot". Instead, I think the cinema's changed their mind, and ended up showing "Black Man in leather versus the machines with emotions who like to fight" instead. I, Robot is a story of the mind, and how humans - in all our 'knowledge' - succeed in screwing up time and time again.

This Will Smith movie - though it is a good watch -Ã,  was disappointing for the fact that it was SUPPOSED to be based on the book. Now - I know it didn't actually say 'based on Asimov's book', but then again, You didn't need Lord of The Rings to say "based on the trilogy by J.R.R Tolkien." Or did you?

It's just a given. If people are stupid enough to borrow titles basic plot lines from a book, then why SHOULDN'T they follow the WHOLE plot? And if they don't intend to do it - what gives them the right to title it after the book?

The answer? : None whatsoever.

[Kinoko]

Go, you guys! I may well see the movie, and it may well be a fantastic movie on it's own, but the fact that it used that title and makes no effort whatsoever to follow the original work is just stupid and fans are well justified in bitching. Borrowing the idea would've been fine, but when you borrow the title and consequently, the reputation for either established fan-base or lack of imagination, you have a certain responsibility to the creator.

[LGM]

Well, basically.. Originally it was a script called "Hotwired", I believe.. It had the same premise almost.. But the studio that greenlighted the script had recently aquired film rights to Asimov's work.. So they modified the script to incorporate the three laws and some Asimov elements.  They knew from the start it wasn't going to be a direct adaptation of "I, Robot" It's very hard to accurately adapt anything these days, really.

Sure, they used the title.. But so what? The movie makes sense.. It might not match perfectly with the same views of Asimov, but it's still relevant.

I understand why everyone is upset.. But it's really not that big of a deal. I'm just mad because people are shitting on a perfectly good movie...

[Gilbert]

Sure, they used the title.. But so what? The movie makes sense.. It might not match perfectly with the same views of Asimov, but it's still relevant.

The point is not relevant or not, it's disrespectful, I never read the book nor watch the movie, but judging from the arguments, the movie is something that Asimov would never write (if not completely against his idea).

Considering it's a movie alone it can be great, but using that name... It can only be considered crap.

[DGMacphee]

Holy crap, this discussion/argument/debate/bitch-session sounds familiar.

Where have I seen it before?

Oh wait, I know, it was here except it was Alice in Wonderland instead of I, Robot.

I think I used a good expression to describe such instances. I believe it was "raping the corpse" -- as in the way the producers of I, Robot (the movie) have defiled the dead body of Asimov.

[Las Naranjas]

But you miss a little point LGM.

It's not that it's not exactly asimovian, is the exact opposite of everything that underlies the basis of Asimov's robot stories.

He often complained about the "Frankenstein" complex, that extended from the Golem to the present, that human's shouldn't create something because it would turn on them.

Since he considered this to be absolutely absurd, since human's would create safe guards, he wrote all his stories on the basis of those safe guards apparently failing and not.

Anything with "Robots as a threat" is diametrically opposed.

I can't really comment on the film itself, although it looks derivative and Proyas is a charaltan, but really, adapt a book title, use it's ideas in a different context, but using a title to show the exact opposite concept, that's really not on.

[DGMacphee]

Proyas is a charaltan.

"charlatan" 

[Daz]

just wondering but is this movie anthing like "AI" (artificail(sp) inteligence) because it looks very similar, same plot

maybe it just me

-Daz

[Evil]

I havent seen it, but I guess it would be something along the lines of a Planet of the Apes but with robots. But seriously, it cant be terrible. You guys need to spend less time talking crap about the movie and how it isnt like the book and spend more time pimping the book itself if its so great.