I Robot movie (Isaac Asimov)

Sadly, considering Hollywood lately, my only real response to any Book to Movie translation done withing the United states is a resounding "DUH".

:(
 
Having read asmiov from one end to the other and back again, the film was nothing like the books.
However, the film stands up on it's own as a good movie. Will Smith is an excellent actor, being able to play straight roles, comedy, action, you name it. His portrayal of Spooner is excellend and he makes it totally believable.

The positive side of this movie is that it will get those kids that "haven't got time to read books" to actually sit down and read something for a change.
 
Agree Will Smith was good in the movie. Only good thing about the movie IMO.
 
white_wanderer said:
The positive side of this movie is that it will get those kids that "haven't got time to read books" to actually sit down and read something for a change.
Click to expand...

problem with that is they will decide they now KNOW the respective book and don't need to read it, they are now BETTER than the person who actually read the book. with I, robot that is not the case. with the bicentennial man it is closer, but not quite.

further back in the posts, I laughed about the Data positronic brain being more of a nod to asimov, ALL of the items described , Bicentennial man, I, Robot, and Data/Lor/etc... have positronic brains, and NONE of them adhere wholly to the three laws of robotics. Data is GUNNER on enterprise, his prime directive is to learn, and to try to be more human. Data has no laws of robotics in his brain. at least none asimovian.
 
ghost8772 said:
further back in the posts, I laughed about the Data positronic brain being more of a nod to asimov, ALL of the items described , Bicentennial man, I, Robot, and Data/Lor/etc... have positronic brains, and NONE of them adhere wholly to the three laws of robotics. Data is GUNNER on enterprise, his prime directive is to learn, and to try to be more human. Data has no laws of robotics in his brain. at least none asimovian.
Click to expand...

It's still a nod because the term was just gibberish that Asimov made up. "Positronic" has nothing to do with a robotic brain, it's Asimov's word.You know it, I know it and the writers of Star Trek know it. No, Data is not asimovian, but his brain is positronic.
 
sigh, actually a positron is an antimatter particle, it has identical mass and reverse charge as an electron. if you think of items running on electron signal as electronic, then something based on a signal of positrons could be called positronic. not nonsensical at all. from what I've heard robotics was a word, and study that Asimov started. Asimov's robots were the first to be written as a NON frankenstein or Golem standpoint. the "nod" was the word, not the idea. about the same as I, robot the movie was based on the book. or Starship troopers for that matter.
 
Maybe that is why Asimov used "positronic", but I'd doubt it, more likely he just thought that it sounded futuristic at the time. As regards Star Trek, the original series used duotronic and quadrotronic as terms to show how far electronics had developed by the 23rd Century (Is the Pentium III a nod to Star trek?) When they came to TNG and they needed another leap in the level of technology for the 24th Century, they decided upon positronic. The were obviously well aware of Asimov, and that Data was a robot, so yes, there is definitely much more than a "nod" there. Data himself is nothing like Asimov's robots. The "Laws" are not mentioned. Asimov has stated that Roddenberry asked for his permission to make Data a positronic robot after the fact. Asimov himself had no input into the character. Data's origins are actually in Roddenberry's cancelled series The Questor Tapes.
 
I dunno, Asimov seldom seemed to use words because they sounded futuristic, that was roddenberry's thing. from reading the books it described the brain as having positronic pathways, which if it had been electronics could be described the same way in circuits. come to think of it the robotic brain of his, and the hyperspace travel (instant jump from one point to another) were the only real innovations he ran with. everything else was micro fusion reactors, and microwave beam weapons.
 
I was thinking that at the time Positrons would be new, but I'm wrong there as they were postulated in 1928 and discovered in 1932. However, acccording to Wikipedia, "Asimov, in his book The Relativity of Wrong, he decided to use positrons as they seemed a more interesting name for what is essentially an 'electronic brain'".
 
Yeah, as he invented the positronic brain in the first story he ever managed to get published, in 1939. He was 19 at the time.
 
Well, I liked the film whether its close to 'I'Robot' the book or not, and I have it on DVD.
Also liked The Bicentennial Man. If nothing else these films make more people aware of asimov, same with other films based loosely on works by other authors.

Huge asimov fan, even tho I find many of his books unapproachable! He was quite a guy!
 
AE35Unit said:
Well, I liked the film whether its close to 'I'Robot' the book or not, and I have it on DVD.
Also liked The Bicentennial Man. If nothing else these films make more people aware of asimov, same with other films based loosely on works by other authors.

Huge asimov fan, even tho I find many of his books unapproachable! He was quite a guy!
Click to expand...

I really liked Bicentennial Man, but it was a little too sentimental in the end I thought. I Robot was as far removed from an Asimovian vision as you could get; but once I got past that, it was okay. But just.
 
Just watched the DVD again - one thing strikes me at the end of the movie. Come Monday morning when the workforce come back to work and they log on only to find

"Domain USRobotics is not available".......

What happens?
 
I personally thought that the I Robot movie was massively underrated too and as far as Hollywood goes, it's pretty decent Science Fiction.
 
Rodders said:
I personally thought that the I Robot movie was massively underrated too and as far as Hollywood goes, it's pretty decent Science Fiction.
Click to expand...
Me too Rodders. The trouble is with the 'Based on a book by Isaac Asimov' part-it instantly sets the film up for criticism-'Oh its nothing like the book' or 'asimov didnt write this!' which of course is true, but is also missing the point! They could have used a different title but that would have drawn less attention and therefore money to the project.
Instead one should ignore the title and enjoy the film for what it is!

Incidentally Asimov didnt get there first with the book title. Eando Binder wrote a story called I, Robot before Asimov's great tome. When advised of this the reply was something like 'F##k Eando Binder!'
Asimov, what a guy he was!
 
Last edited:
AE35Unit said:
Incidentally Asimov didnt get there first with the book title. Eando Binder wrote a story called I, Robot before Asimov's great tome. When advised of this the reply was something like 'F##k Eando Binder!'
Asimov, what a guy he was!
Click to expand...

No way. He didn't really say that, did he?:D

Asimov was a hoot - I always read his "About the Author" bit in the back of his books.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Extollager Mushroom-robot partners Science & Nature 0
S J.J. Abrams to produce Victorian steampunk robot movie General Film Discussion 0
Paige Turner Who's your favourite movie robot? General Film Discussion 66
Jayaprakash Satyamurthy Robyn Asimov defends 'I, Robot' movie Isaac Asimov 13
J I, Robot (Reason) story being made into a movie General Film Discussion 0

Similar threads


Back
Top