14 replies on ““I, Robot” Discussion”

  1. Trekkie says:

    nope
    not going to go see it. no way, I don’t want to watch another installment of “Will Smith vs..’

    • Babbster says:

      Re: nope

      not going to go see it. no way, I don’t want to watch another installment of “Will Smith vs..’

      Now me, I usually like seeing a “Will Smith versus [x]” movie. I like Will Smith on the screen and, for my money, he’s golden in a basic popcorn action way. His movies aren’t going to win big awards (apart from the MTV variety) but I find his stuff is easy to just relax and enjoy. I like silly sometimes.

      That being said, I’m still waiting for the geek reviews to roll in before I even consider this one. The review over on Slashdot (my usual first stop after waking) didn’t give me the info I needed. I don’t want to hear from somebody who hasn’t read the Asimov robot stories because they don’t know enough to tell me if I’m going to be frustrated and desirous of yelling “FIRE” in a crowded movie house…after setting fire to the movie house. :)

      • bombadil says:

        Re: nope

        on Slashdot … I don’t want to hear from somebody who hasn’t read the Asimov robot stories

        The second sentence of the review on slashdot is:

        As someone who grew up with Isaac Asimov’s robot stories, I’ve come to expect a mystery based on the implications of the 3 Laws of Robotics…

        So I don’t know why you think the reviewer hasn’t read the books. I have been assuming this movie would be an insult to Asimov’s writing, but the review hints that it does have some intelligence (he couldn’t say much without spoilers). So I will give it a try.

        • Babbster says:

          Re: nope
          I mis-stated. What I meant was that I didn’t think he cared much about the Asimov stories (apart from “oh, cool story”). I’m a bit of an Asimov nerd while his interest I judged as lesser from this statement: “I’m not a complete continuity freak, so I can’t tell if the movie violated any of Asimov’s universe, but from what I can remember, it fits pretty well (if you ignore Dr. Calvin’s age) and might even explain a few things.”

          I’m probably being a real snob about it but I’m having a hard time keeping that in check. :)

      • hobbes says:

        Re: nope

        That being said, I’m still waiting for the geek reviews to roll in before I even consider this one.

        I am a huge Asimov fan, and I planned to skip this movie, yet circumstances consipred to have me present on opening night. Anyway, it was good. Very good. You should watch it. It isn’t all I could hope for in a serious science fiction movie, but it is a lot more than I have grown to expect, and far beyond what I expected of this movie in particular.

    • davatar2 says:

      Re: nope

      not going to go see it. no way, I don’t want to watch another installment of “Will Smith vs..’

      Good thing he didn’t accept the role of Neo :)

  2. mbourgon says:

    Ebert’s review
    Lemme preface this: ignore the TV show. His written reviews are damn good, so that even if he dislikes it, you can tell from the review that you’d like it.

    And, yes, he’s apparently a sci-fi fan.
    “Every schoolchild knows the laws were set down by the good doctor Isaac Asimov, after a conversation he had on Dec. 23, 1940, with John W. Campbell, the legendary editor of Astounding Science Fiction. It is peculiar that no one in the film knows that, especially since the film is “based on the book by Isaac Asimov.” Would it have killed the filmmakers to credit Asimov?”

    Anyhow, a link to the review. I know I’ll be skipping it now.

    http://sun-times.com/output/ebert1/wkp-news-robot16f.html

  3. mbourgon says:

    So, was anyone actually looking forward to this?
    Several people asked me yesterday if I was going to skip work to see it, if I’d already seen it, etc. They were shocked that neither I nor any of my friends had any intention of going. “But it’s sci-fi!” “But it’s going to be bad sci-fi”. They couldn’t fathom it.

    So, was anyone here, after the trailer, interested in seeing it?

  4. chad says:

    Just Enjoy It
    Too many purists spoil the movie. Take it with a grain of salt and enjoy it for what it is.

    And on a side note, it actually does mesh with Asimov’s “law zero” which essentially states that a robot must protect humanity as a whole before protecting individual humans.

    • Cybercop106 says:

      Yep…..it’s just a movie

      Spoke quoth the Zero Law best when he said “The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one.” But I don’t think he’d agree with the ‘logic’ of “Viki’s” application ……

      To be fair, since Asimov’s book is a collection of short stories and they use quite a bit of stuff from it, I can see
      why they acquired the rights tho ‘naming’ the movie “I, Robot” annoys me…….being the Asimov fan I am.

      If you notice in the credits they phrase it as “suggested by” Asimov’s book, so technically they were honest, in
      that they used his Three Laws, positronic brain postulate, robopsychiatrist Dr Calvin and the main premise of the
      last story in Asimov’s book, called “Evitable Conflict”. This story’s premise was the foundation of the movie…..
      the A.I. ‘evolutionary’ thinking that caused the robots to become selectively murderous.

      Also interesting are other ideas they culled from Asimov’s book of stories, like the rogue robot ‘Sonny’ hiding
      among his bretheren (see “Little Lost Robot”), and the 1st Law being modified like in “LLR”, “EC” and “Escape”.

      If you read the book you’ll see a few subtle examples of the movie having taken things from it, but they definitely
      gave it the old John Woo/Jerry Bruckheimer treatment to keep the lowbrows entertained. Seems a robot flick
      should be more cerebral than visceral, but I guess the folks who don’t like the BillyJoeBob Briggs Drive Inn
      Movie Theatre Critic criteria for a good flick probably aren’t spending much on movies these days………….. just
      my $.02 worth.

      • Cybercop106 says:

        Re: Yep…..it’s just a mistake
        While we’re at it……make that SPOCK instead of Spoke……..holy crap do I need some coffee before I try to compose!!

    • Harry the Dirty Dog says:

      Re: Just Enjoy It

      Too many purists spoil the movie. Take it with a grain of salt and enjoy it for what it is.

      Bingo! I’m an Asimov fan from way back. Sure, at 37 I’ve outgrown it, but at age 15 I devoured every SF book he’d written.

      There’s no point in expecting the film to be slavishly like the book because it isn’t and everyone knows it.

      Go and see the film as a Will Smith action film, not as a cinematic representation of your childhood memories of an Asimove short story.

  5. quecojones says:

    Made me want to read the stories…
    I saw it and enjoyed it. I haven’t read the stories yet (and wasn’t planning to),
    but seeing the movie has me interested in them.

  6. mustBtrue says:

    Why was that in there?
    Saw it and enjoyed it even if the movie turned out to be another “Will Smith” saves the world. When Smith was on Leno he mentioned his son saying, “Good movie dad, but you have got to stop saving the world.” after seeing the premiere.

    I hope that either Speilberg or Lucas does the Bailey / Olivaw adaptations. They should turn out better.

    Speaking of turning out better, I wish the gratuitous shower scenes had been left out. There was no reason for them as they did nothing for the story. But then, that sort of junk never does.

Comments are closed.