View Full Version : Any one seen I-robot yet.?

07-15-2004, 07:48 PM
Any one seen I-robot yet.? If so let us all know. It look like a good movie to me. And I think LightWAVE had a lot to do with it.

07-16-2004, 10:25 AM
I saw it Tuesday. The effects were great, but thought it was rather disappointing otherwise. I liked Spiderman a lot more! :D

07-16-2004, 03:14 PM
Mr. Cranky's review....

Keep in mind that nobody gets a good review....It's all about reading between the lines (or bombs)


07-16-2004, 05:03 PM
From what I have seen and heard it bares about as much resemblence to Asimov's books as a fish so I will not be bothering with it.

Same goes for Thunderbirds. The CGI might be good but why does Holywood have to take decent books and throw the story out of the window time after time :( ?

07-16-2004, 05:35 PM
Originally posted by Barred

Same goes for Thunderbirds. The CGI might be good but why does Holywood have to take decent books and throw the story out of the window time after time :( ?

Thunderbirds? This was one of my favorite TV shows win I was a kid. I was looking forward to seeing this movie..:(

On the other hand. I agree with you about Hollywood. I think that it is all fueled by money and power.:eek:

:confused: Absolute power corrupts absolutely.:mad:

07-16-2004, 06:51 PM
I am sorry Chazz but SpiderMan II was a complete flop in my opinion. As is most of what is coming out of Hollywood these days.

I hardly waste money anymore and the movies with CG are some of the worst offenders out there.

07-16-2004, 07:20 PM
Not having read the book, I found I, Robot actually pretty good. My expectations were low going in so it didn't have to do much to live up to them.

On that vein, Starship Troopers was similarly Hollwood-ized and I found that a worthwhile film as well.

Spidey was actually a very good film in my opinion. It was refreshing for a comic book movie to rely on a human story instead of some contrived story about vengeance or some other such nonsense. I can cite X-Men as an another example of great storytelling over action and paint-by-numbers filmmaking.

07-16-2004, 09:51 PM
Well, if you've seen the trailers, then you've seen the film... in that they showed pretty much the entire freakin' movie in the trailers, so i have little to no interest in actually seeing the full thing. plus it looking pretty gawd awful... not catwoman gawd awful, but still gawd awful...

07-17-2004, 12:39 AM
HUGE HUGE HUUUUUUUUUUUUGE POS!!!! And I don't mean "Point of Sale".

It probably would have been more entertaining to drill into my skull with a flatblade screwdriver.

It seemed more like they wanted to rip off minority report rather than make a filmed version of I Robot.

had some cool fx though.

jin choung
07-18-2004, 12:38 AM
i thought it was surprisingly good.

and having seen it, i am surprised at the amount of negativity it has been receiving.

great virtual performance by 'sonny'... more understated and less showy than gollum's and in my opinion, BETTER.

not faithful to the series of shortstories in i,robot but remarkably faithful to the spirit.

whereas the short stories were concise, self contained logic stories about the series of events that apparently led a robot to disobey one of its fundamental laws, the movie is a big action adventure flick.

and yet, there is a strong semblance to the 'mystery tale' that was a hallmark of the robot stories.

also, very good acting from smith (that guy looks freakin' gigantic on the big screen now) and bridget moynahan (she's a fine actress and the camera just loves her. i always love it when she shows up in a movie)

also, the movie seems to link asimov to the MATRIX of all things and this flick serves as a nice alternate history to the first animatrix short!

- robots look very much like robots in animatrix short
- will smith fan of matrix films
- jada in matrix movies
- smith produced this movie
- bullet time is at least a visual homage

i actually think of this movie as MATRIX 0 now!

anyhoo, along with spider-man 2 and before sunset, i, robot is making this a great summer to be a moviegoer.


p.s. i wouldn't be surprised if lw was used... simply because digital domain was involved and a lot of the robot technology looks like it came from one of the american express card commercials... but i hear that there is a very solid line at dd... that lw gets used for commercials and not for movies so who knows....

07-19-2004, 02:18 AM
From the plot synopsis on the website it sounds very close to the Caves of Steel?
(obviously "I, Robot" is a much more marketable title though)

after what happened to Hubbard's Battlefield Earth, I dont think I can face the disappointment this might bring :(

07-19-2004, 06:16 AM
Omeone- thing is I kind of liked the film portrayal of Battlefield Earth.

I am not one of these people that thinks that the film HAS to match line for line the book it is based on- so as far as matching Hubbard's story I have little comment.

But the film had a grittiness and a strong creative bent to it that I really liked. There were a lot of stupid aspects as well but the overall ambiance of the film and the depth of the character acting really interested me. The lighting and camera angles were engaging as well.

07-19-2004, 06:36 AM
From a visual POV, I totally agree, there were some great achievements made in that department

But if you either going to half tell a story / rewrite it and do it badly, they should at least change the name.
Alot of people have missed out on one of sf's greatest stories because that film was so far off the mark from the book.

(actually I had to replace my orignal paperback copy lately (read it too often) and the one I got had scenes from the movie and Travolta on the cover :confused: )

but I think it's fair to say the majority of people who had never even heard of the book disliked the film too

>>sorry for the OT<<

07-19-2004, 09:35 AM
To be honest I never knew Irobot was baised on a book!
Well you learn something new every day! :)

Spiderman 2 I really enjoyed but still the odd dodgy FX now and again, in fact in all the films I've scene resently there are always one or two dodgy bits.
I wonder if some one runs out of time or budget or it's just a case of everything else is done so well a bad bit really stands out.
Or it coiuld be the fact I know what I'm looking at!
I know it's really bad though when the girl friend turns to me and says that back drop looks painted! :D

07-19-2004, 09:56 AM
I just saw I-Robot last night. I liked it a lot. It had a nice twist towards the end. The special effects were awesome. I have never read the book that others say the story was somewhat based on so maybe that's why I wasn't disappointed.

07-19-2004, 10:07 AM
I saw I Robot Saturday and loved it..
And I've read the books..

07-19-2004, 10:23 AM
The movie was actually pretty good! Wasn't expecting that.

To those who are interested, I wrote a spoilers review here:


See the little 'show' button by each point? I tried to make it non-spoiling so that you only find out about specific bits of the movie by hitting the show button to reveal it. I'd paste it here, but this board isn't set up with this spoiler tag that makes the visibility thing happen.

If you're dead set on not seeing the movie, then you might as well have a peek at that page. Already had one person change their mind about seeing it after I revealed a bit of what happens in the movie. I'd hate to see this movie sink into obscurity, it was actually one of the more thoughtful movies I've seen in recent years.

07-19-2004, 11:00 AM
I saw it saturday night, I loved it !
(did not read the books)

07-19-2004, 12:12 PM
Spoilers? Spoilers??? The friggin trailer gives the whole ****ed movie away. ;)

I personally didn't notice any "surprises" in the film...in fact, my honest opinion was that it's the same 'ol useless garbage that hollywood puts out around this time every year - usually starring Will Smith. ;)

I'm being mean...leave me alone!! Oh, but the movie was still garbage!! hehehe

07-19-2004, 12:16 PM
Originally posted by TSpyrison
I saw I Robot Saturday and loved it..
And I've read the books..

If its good enough for TSpyrison, its good enough for me :)

nice looking forum there Nanogator (btw I Robot is generally thought of as Asimov's collection of Robot short stories - which had me confused as the movie obviously isnt a collection of shorts)

So is it resembling Caves of Steel for anyone who has read it? I would be happy if it was. (even though I'm a bit of an Asimov fan-boy, I was able to enjoy what they done with Bi-centennial Man)

07-19-2004, 12:24 PM
Originally posted by harlan
Spoilers? Spoilers??? The friggin trailer gives the whole ****ed movie away. ;)

I personally didn't notice any "surprises" in the film...

Um.... were you asleep? Not trying to sound like a zealot here, but there were plenty of 'whoah!' moments in the movie to discuss later.

07-19-2004, 12:27 PM
Glad ya like the site. :)

No, it does not resemble Caves of Steel. (interestingly enough I just read that a couple of weeks ago.) To be honest, I couldn't find the slightest similarity to it. For one thing, it's completely in the wrong century, which was pretty significant. Secondly, the movie takes place right near the beginning of USR.

Hope I didn't give too much away here, but the movie bears little resemblance to the books. I wouldn't necessarily raed that as a bad thing.

07-21-2004, 01:42 AM
Originally posted by Barred
Same goes for Thunderbirds. The CGI might be good but why does Holywood have to take decent books and throw the story out of the window time after time :( ?

Thunderbirds was based on a book?


07-21-2004, 02:41 AM
Lonestar from what they have done with it, it might as well have been based on a book as oppsed to a tv series :)

Sorry I am just tiered of Hollywood, remaking old clasics and destroying them, and it does not matter wether they are books, films or tv series. Or they are making brainless throw away products that you can watch and forget. I know these are generalisations and that there are the exceptions.

07-21-2004, 06:22 AM
I saw the review on TV tonight looks good.

07-21-2004, 06:37 AM
I would love to see Hollywood's role in the entertainment industry almost disapear and be replaced with a bunch of free-thinking independents.

Corporations have their place for sure but this insatiable quest for profit at any cost is killing the beauty of creativity, in my opinion.

07-21-2004, 10:19 AM
I agree Theo my earlier past was not aimed at those who do the work as there is some fantastic talent out there being wasted by the suits.

Look at Peter Jacksons LOTR, main-stream Hollywood did not want to take the project on, and the best film(s) based on a book almost never got made.

07-21-2004, 11:11 AM
Oh absolutely- LOTR is an icon now due to a free-thinking core of ruggedly independent creatives.

We need more of this- the establishment is like posion to true creativity.

I have a radical idea about this social situation. For hundreds of years society has operated almost trickle-down-like. Nothing against wealth or the rich at all but the pursuit thereof has actually created this sense of societal manipulation for the benefit of the wealthy.

I am obviosuly NOT condoning a communistic approach rather a creative solution which in my opinion is the realization of the fact en masse that we can actually serve our own interests and build a society where rugged individualism creates this sense of self-driven purpose rather than the societally accepted and adopted role of life-long servitude to the powerful.

In essence we become our own power structure hence the sense of control. The bargaining side and the other pertinent details are too involved to get into here but we are going to need a radical change from what has been for literally hundreds of years.

The music dictatorship industry is dealing with that now. And this is just the beginning of a battle for control over the individual in unprecendented ways, even in so-called free countries like the US and UK (so-called because we [the US] are no longer a true republic).

Ah well....

07-21-2004, 04:22 PM
Originally posted by badllarma
To be honest I never knew Irobot was baised on a book!
Well you learn something new every day! :)

Actually its more based on the title of a book then what was in the book. :)

07-21-2004, 04:34 PM
Originally posted by SplineGod
Actually its more based on the title of a book then what was in the book. :)


I can explain that a bit. I, Robot is Asimov's first short story. It was about a little girl who owned a robot named Robbie. Robbie was taken away and this little girl was sad. Go read the story if ya wanna know how it ends. :P heh. Asimov had to change the title of this story because there was another story called I Robot by another author. He more or less lifted it from the other author, though it was more out of respect than out of thievery or anything like that. (I don't think he actually intended for this story to ever be published. I think he wrote it for himself, hence the title.) Years (Decades?) later he put together enough short stories to make a book out of them. That collection was titled I, Robot. Literally basing a movie off a book called I, Robot would be like stringing together a shortened episode of an episode of Star Trek from each of the spin-off series. Different location, different story, etc.

Not sure if anybody wanted to know all that, but since I recently read I, Robot...

07-21-2004, 04:41 PM
I rather enjoy how he goes from the short storys, through the robot series, then the Foundation series.. and the nice little surprise at the end of the foundation series..

I have a co-worker, who kept talking about goint to see the "I-Bot" movie..

I guess thats the Apple version :D