I, Robot
I just saw I, Robot, and even though it kinda meshes with T2 and others, it was really good. Great effects, not bad acting and great action. The story was also pretty good.
I'm actually fascinated by the concept of this movie. It got 3.5 stars from ... I ferget where, but somewhere.
I'm told it's too much of that MiB-type tone - is there a lot of farfetched alien comedy in it?
as far as i remember, there was no farfetched robot comedy, if that's what you mean. I would give it a 3.5-4
Is it based on Isaac Asimov's robot stories?
Was there even the slightest glimmer of Asimov in it?
I stillhavent recovered from the travesty that was "Bicentennial man"....I mean ....I seriously dont recall the robot getting to make himself a chick in Asimovs story!
It's supposed to be based on them, but i couldn't tell you if there was any glimmer because I've never read anything of Asimovs
Is it based on Isaac Asimov's robot stories?
From what I've heard, the movie actually claims it is "suggested by" the book by Asimov. That's 1000X more vague than saying "based on", and from what I've heard about the plot of the movie, the only ideas suggested by asimov's work are:
its about robots
they mention the 3 rule of robotics
a character from the book carries over to the movie, but switched from a major role in the book to a minor role in the movie
I think calling this movie I Robot would be like retitling Star Trek TNG with the new "suggested by" Asimov title of Foundation because both are about a space empire and because Data has a positronic brain like Asimov's robots.
Do I have to mention I will never, ever, choose to see this movie, not even on tv?
Has anyone ever seen the movie Nightfall? I am beginning to think any movie with any claim to be about Asimov's work is utterly cursed to fail.
Near as I can tell it looks to be more based on "The Caves of Steel" than the series of stories in the "I, Robot" series.
A friend who knows how I am about the works of the master storytellers is going to see it for me and let me know how bad it is.
To be quite honest, I relly don't care how much it follows the stories, it was still a really good movie. But still, I'm interested to know what your friend thinks
I don’t know if it applies here, but whenever I see a movie that’s based on a book or story I’ve read, I’m disappointed. Written work allows me to fill in the blanks and the movie never does it the way (as well as?) I do. Maybe if I’d read a Cliff's notes outline, but not the book. :o
Asimov must be near 100rpm by now. If they think that's based on Asimov they mistook the word based on for 'fucking the corpse of'. Of course some of Asimov's later stuff sucked anyway.
Hmm.
Apparently it's based on an old script ( "Hardwired" ) that's been bouncing around Hollywood for a while. They added some elements from Asimov.
well, there we have it. its not based on Asimov, but it contains elements of Asimov
they added the 3 laws of robotics. Unfortunately, whatever intern wrote the script forgot that the whole crux of Asimov's 3 laws was that they were un-breakable.
Well, my friend just got back and it's as I'd figured.
It's an adequate action film if you don't know any better.
Well, i still really liked it.
Well, i still really liked it.
Isn't that what really counts? :eyebrow:
sm, you need to read move Asimov, he wrote a lot describing the flaws in his laws.
I'm in the middle of another great book, and I'm not much of a reader
i'll admit that there were parts of this movie that i liked, namely the special effects and some of the glimmers of theme that made it over from the asimov universe. what i cannot, absolutely cannot deal with is.........
BLATANT PRODUCT PLACEMENT
after i got hit over the head with the blatant converse shoe advertisement i wanted to walk out. the audi thing i can handle, since they DID make a car for the movie and it was cool, so i think they deserve a plug. but it was too much. and in my opinion, will smith destroys any credibility that the movie might otherwise have had. i don't hate the guy or anything, and i'm trying not to be a sci fi snob, but his role was nothing more than a futuristic bad boyz. it was awful. the voice and face acting for the sonny the robot was impressive and overall i'd say that i enjoyed myself, but really they spent a lot of money to make a mediocre movie when it could have easily been a lot better.
As they say, agree to disagree, but let me ask you a question, instead of Smith, who would you have put into the role?
Harrison Ford would have a certain nostalgic appeal...
dunno off hand. it seemed to me that there was a theme as far as black actors go with the movie, which was both subtle and made a lot of sense to me when i thought about it. an interesting message. if i were to replace him, i'd say......maybe denzel washington? more beleivable in a serious role, i guess. not wesly snipes, to action/hardass. even a cuba gooding would have worked better, imho. there's a deep thoughtfullness implied in the character that is integral to the story, and smith botches it completely.
i can completely agree with Denzel Washington
On the "Sci Fi shows based on classics" front, there might just be some
Star Trek worth watching coming up.
I'm sorry, but I will never watch Star Trek
That's been a good bet in recent years. My post was intended to express surprise.
"On the "Sci Fi shows based on classics" front, there might just be some Star Trek worth watching coming up."
*bristles* I resent the implication that some StarTrek is not worth watching..... :corn:
Sorry, i misunderstood your post, i get it now.
Any recent Star Trek that was decent had to claw and scratch its way past Brannon Braga and Rick Berman. Unfortunately, not enough of it made it through to keep me interested.
And I used to be a massive Trekkie. :blkwht: :whtblk:
For me the best Star Trek series was DS9....Next gen was the one I got into first.....but I do have a soft spot for the Original, it had heart if no budget
I first got into the original series when it was on reruns in the kiddie corner of a car dealership. I was excited when Next Gen came out, but got discouraged by a few stupid episodes. A year or two later, some friends convinced me it had caught its stride, and I got into it again. DS9 was great (primarily, I believe, due to the competition with Babylon 5), so I was excited to see Voyager.
:greenface
It didn't work out. When Enterprise started, I was game, but it again didn't hold my interest, and the occasional summaries I'd see on the net didn't tempt me.
But the new direction that Manny Coto is looking at is promising. Plus:
Manny Coto, a writer (Showtime's Odyssey 5) who joined the series in the third season and was responsible for many of the Xindi storylines, has been promoted to "show runner," in charge of the day-to-day operations and writing, while previous show runner Brannon Braga steps back into a more executive role.
Next Gen did have enormous quantities of cheese .....but there were some kickass episodes also which I always felt made it worth a go...Voyager was a mixed bag also, liked individual episodes and liked particular characters but overall the show didnt qute work...Enterprise ...yeah cheesy but I like some aspects of it. I wasnt particularly impressed when the last series ended with a Lizard alien in an SS uniform *rolls eyes*
HM knows why after I found the first smiley with the white on the left, I had to find the other one with reverse coloring... good work man
I almost used one of the generic aliens... To think of the opportunity I almost missed.
Yeah, now i'm completely out of this thread. hehe
i grew up on the original as my parents were big trekkies. next generation i enjoyed to a degree in late night reruns - but it was very soft to me. it left me feeling like i had just left a big group hug. DS9 and voyager seemed alright but i didn't pay much attention. when enterprise came around i was pretty optimistic. i haven't seen very many episodes but what i have seen seemed a little more gritty than the more recent star trek products. more conflict i guess. hopefully this new direction works well. i hate to imagine a world without some star trek on the airwaves.
Harrison Ford would have a certain nostalgic appeal...
Deckard a la Bladerunner is almost perfect as the character that they meant to portray.
So, I went to see I, Robot tonight. It's a fun action film, but, well ... it's not Asimov, but I knew that going in.
There were some very cool, very neat things to see ... and the usual number of plot weakenesses. Overall, though, it was a fun evening.
There were quite a few visual elements that I thought were nicely done ... the future Chicago, for example, that they managed to tuck the John Hancock Building and the Sears Tower into, but not as central elements ...
I'll go as much as 3.5/5.
I just wished they'd do it right. Didn't Harlan Ellison do a script, or at least a treatment for I, Robot at one point?
Did anyone else wonder about the origin of the abstract paintings in the doc's house? Was that a brief nod to Ike, or am I hoping for too much in a relatively pedestrian film?
As far as I could tell, the paintings in the house weren't really the main idea of the story. Also, even though the idea is an Asimov idea, but was not exactly parallel to Asimov's story, doesn't mean that the movie couldn't be cool. It was a really good movie.
No the paintings weren't really part of the story, but I did think it was kind of a subtle nod to Asimov, because of one of the other stories in the I, Robot collection.
ah, ok, because I've never read Asimov. So, i don't know anything about the pictures.