I, Robot

PaulSC · Wed 21/07/2004 12:21:23

They should name the sequel "Foundation and Empire" just to drive Asimov fans even crazier.

Esseb · Wed 21/07/2004 12:35:31

Anything but "II, Robot".

Las Naranjas · Wed 21/07/2004 12:49:45

Us, Robot would be also good.

Not as good as Yo, Robot though

m0ds · Wed 21/07/2004 23:18:21

I'm up for seeing a film with Will Smith, robots & guns, rather than a film thats an adaptation of a book, to be honest. So I'm fairly sure I won't be dissapointed. However, Smith's dialogue in the trailer was awful, I hope the full movie includes his usual acting/dialogue style.

DGMacphee · Tue 27/07/2004 15:27:10

Maddox has an interesting point of view: http://maddox.xmission.com/c.cgi?u=i_robot

Kinoko · Tue 27/07/2004 15:35:16

He makes a good point ^_^ I was literally sitting there at the start of the movie with my mouth open, shocked at how utterly blatant the advertising was. It made me want to find Converse and force them to advertise latest release movies on their shoes.

LGM · Tue 27/07/2004 16:34:05

What do you expect.. Alot of movies do product placement. It's how studios make money ._.

Layabout · Tue 27/07/2004 16:50:56

Wait a sec! Why do converse even have to advertise Converse all-stars. They are probably THE most popular shoes ever, and now come in a large range of colours. Vintage 2004?!!? Pfft, more like 1970-ish. The design has never been updated for christs sake! Which is nice. I have a blue pair and they are the best damn shoes ever. I wore my old pair out until the soles disintergrated.

And about the movie. I enjoyed it for what it was. A futuristic detective action-adventure.

Although I did notice the overuse of product placement.

LGM · Tue 27/07/2004 17:55:41

I want some converse.. But every pair I tried was too small.. I went up to size 15 ._. At the time, i was only a size 13. Now I'm a 14.. Big feet, yes

Moox · Tue 27/07/2004 18:05:40

I dont know, but If the old robots can be turned off then why did they leave them on in open crates?

Peefy · Tue 27/07/2004 19:00:12

Hm..
I liked the movie BUT, I have never read any of Asimov's works, and didn't know it was based on a book before afterwards..
Info about the whole thing here: http://www.asimovonline.com/

And an intresting fact:
There was an earlier attempt at a movie version of I, Robot, but it never made it to the screen. In 1969 the rights were optioned to Hollywood, but no progress was made toward making a movie until 1977, when Harlan Ellison, an award-winning author and friend of Asimov, was hired to write a screenplay. Ellison worked on it for a year, and created a screenplay that Asimov thought would make a truly marvelous film. But Hollywood did not have the nerve to make a movie from that screenplay, and the project was shelved. Ellison regained control of his work, and it was published in 1987 as I, Robot: The Illustrated Screenplay.

Sylpher · Wed 28/07/2004 00:38:03

...Which popular bookstores have been stocking their shelves with recently. Strange coincidince or evil scheme to take over our minds!?!

More at 6..

LGM · Wed 28/07/2004 02:04:39

You've been watching too much of the Fox News channel, Sylph

Kinoko · Wed 28/07/2004 02:14:33

Quote from: [lgm] on Tue 27/07/2004 16:34:05
What do you expect.. Alot of movies do product placement. It's how studios make money ._.

Sure it is. Along with the huge bitching profit they make from cinema goers in the first place, and then all of the various movie/merchandise related sales after that.

LGM, are you defending them?

I hate the argument, "That's the way it is". It's not necessary and it cheapens movies, so I think people have every right to be disgusted/annoyed/confused by it, whether it's a product they like or not. If that wasn't what you meant, then fine... I'm just getting a heads up on the argument. ^_^

I think the only kind of movie it works well in is a movie like Evolution, where they're making fun of the whole product placement thing.

Sylpher · Wed 28/07/2004 02:55:46

They did it in Waynes World as well..

I wonder if it wasn't so obvious if there would be product placement in music. Or is there already?!

More at 6..

Kinoko · Wed 28/07/2004 03:07:18

Most likely, there already is in filmclips... in the music itself, I don't think so. People might mention products in music but they probably don't get paid for it.

shbaz · Wed 28/07/2004 03:11:45

Quote from: Kinoko on Wed 28/07/2004 03:07:18
Most likely, there already is in filmclips... in the music itself, I don't think so. People might mention products in music but they probably don't get paid for it.

Lots of companies pay MTV to show music, they pay radio to play it (despite what you'd guess about licensing fees), and Fred Durst got famous by paying DJ's to play their music. Usually I think movies have to pay a fee to put music in, but it wouldn't be unheard of to hear of the opposite if it were a band that needed the publicity (though a name would need to be mentioned for it to have any forseeable commercial effect).

Las Naranjas · Wed 28/07/2004 07:34:01

There's a huge number of Sony products in film clips by artists signed by Sony. It's quite funny.
A great example being the "Freestyler" song by Bomfunk whatsits or whatever which just involves a kid walking around controlling everyone with his sony mp3 player, and whom is only challenged by the kid with the Playstation.

DGMacphee from Uni · Wed 28/07/2004 08:26:15

Las: You're right. It was so strange and subliminal that I even didn't notice it when that film clip first came out. The only thing that stopped me from immediately buying an MP3 player or a playstation was that I thought it was a shitty song and a shitty video clip.

DG: 1
Consumerism: 0

Had it had more hookers and ninjas and hooker ninjas, I might just well have bought everything in the clip (including the hooker ninjas).

Quote from: [lgm] on Tue 27/07/2004 16:34:05
What do you expect.. Alot of movies do product placement. It's how studios make money ._.

Sure, but studios used to make profits without product placements. In fact, there are a lot of films today that can turn a profit without product placements. And I agree with one line especially in Maddox's article:

"What makes a good movie good and a movie like this cunny waft is that in a good movie, every shot counts; every word uttered has a purpose."

As for companies paying MTV to promote certain film clips, I think someone owes Alan Freed a bigass appology (If he weren't dead, that is). Sure, what he did was as scummy as what MTV does today. But back then, they said it was illegal and now it's perfectly acceptable. And the guy's career was basically destroyed because of it.

I guess time does make dipshits of us all.

As for product placements, sure, movies do it. But

DG from Uni · Wed 28/07/2004 08:27:58

Ignore last line. Bah. Stupid laziness stopping from from logging in.

I, Robot

m0ds

DGMacphee from Uni

DG from Uni