My guess is that the surprise twist ending will be some sci-fi cliche that any Asimov fan will see coming a mile away.
The problem with sci-fi movies in almost every case, is that some Hollywood scriptwriter thinks he’s got to dummy down the material. But when you factor in the low intelligence level in the average script, one that’s being written intentionally dumb is appalling.
“Zero law”?
Someone spoil me, please. It’s been decades since I last read the book.
It’s something like:
[spoiler]“A robot may not injure humanity or, through inaction, allow humanity to come to harm.”
The upshot is, a robot must act in the long-range interest of humanity as a whole, and can overall all other rules - like not killing people - in the name of the “greater good.”[/spoiler]
*override, not overall
And it should be noted that the Zeroth Law does not show up until many novels and many centuries after I, Robot.
I think it’s more likely that I, Robot will suck than not. However, Alex Proyas is not a fool, and he toyed with machine-intelligence plots for a while after Dark City before settling on this, so I’m willing to give the film a chance.
Because the benchmark for big-budget suckitude this summer will be set by Catwoman.
Next to that, even a passably mediocre I, Robot will look like the second coming of Fritz Lang. Catwoman is this year’s Battlefield Earth. Buy your tickets now, because it’ll be gone from theaters in half a heartbeat, and you want to be able to tell your grandchildren you were there for it.
“…And here’s my actual ticket stub!” — “OoooOOOooo!”
So, the impression I’m getting is that this movie will be to Asimov as “Starship Troopers” was to Heinlein. Is that about right?
That’s a pretty valid comparison. Not just for the dumbing down but for the subversion of the entire point of the original work.
And it took a robot of incredible sophistication to concieve of and be willing to implement the “zeroth law”, one that has about as much in common with the robots in I Robot as a modern computer has with an abacus.
And this robot did work for the good of humanity, whereas I bet that if the zeroth law is used in the movie, it will be done to create a sinister “twist” where misguided robots believe that they are helping humanity when they are actually being manipulated by the designated bad-guy.
I’m kind of all at sea, here; I’ve seen the trailer once, and I read the book more than fifteen years ago.
…but I seem to remember that the book revolved largely around robopsychologist Susan Calvin, the corporation U.S. Robots and Mechanical Men, and the public and the society that was shaping and being shaped by the concept of sapient robots (or, at least, robots capable of being sapient) that were bound by the Three Laws… and what story permutations this could generate.
The trailer seemed to imply that the robots wake up, somehow find an end-run around the Three Laws, and are fought by Will Smith and a machine gun, and swarm up the side of a building at one point.
True, it wouldn’t be the first trailer to flat-out lie to its audience about the subject and thrust of a movie. Perhaps these scenes are simply taken out of context, and the movie will be incredibly true to its cerebral (and largely action-free) roots.
…but I ain’t countin’ on it. Someone have gone and sold the good Dr. Asimov out.
Again.
Will ‘I, Robot’ form the trifecta of Robot Movies That Suck?:
Bicentenial Man
A.I.
???
Call me old fashioned, but I like my robots to either be hot, armed and from the future or lurching about screaming DESTROY!! DESTROY!!!
KILL THE HUMANOID!!!
KILL THE INTRUDER!!
It’s going to have to fight with Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow for that niche.
EXTERMINATE! EXTERMINATE! EXTERMINATE!
This movie is going to leave a crater you can see from the Moon!
Any SF movie made by Hollywood that requires the slightest bit of thought will not: 1) star Will Smith; 2) open during the summer months.
No doubt about it…the summer is looking bleak.
I saw a new clip on the Tonight Show last night:
Will Smith comes flying, literally, forward off his motorcycle with two guns a-blazing shooting a robot in the head.
To quote a certain nefarious TV doctor:
“Oh, the pain, the pain of it all.”
Did the Tonight Show clip remind anyone of Jack Williamson’s classic novel, The Humanoids?
http://books.fantasticfiction.co.uk/n0/n3319.htm?authorid=3146
I dunno, if the movie was called Those Darned Robots and never claimed to have any connection with the Asimov stories, I think I would be looking forward to it. I certainly like Alex Proyas as a Director.
msmith fie on you for putting A.I. on a list with Bicentennial Man
Dude, I saw “Battlefield Earth.” I’m still in therapy. The nightmares, they still come back. I read your review of it. You were too kind.
If “Catwoman” really is that bad, anyone seeing it will be lucky to put off suicide long enough to SEE grandchildren.
**Dangerosa **and I saw Spider-Man 2 on Monday. There were, of course, previews. One was for Catwoman. It was followed by the preview for Blade:Trinity.
I was just amazed at the idiocy of the people putting this together. “Hey, I know, let’s put the Catwoman trailer up, you know, the one that’s cut real fast so you think it’s got lots of cool action and might not suck? Yeah, and then let’s put the new Blade one right after it… the one that… um… reminds everyone what an action movie is supposed to be like… woops.”
Back on topic… My reaction to the I, Robot trailer was "I didn’t think it was originally supposed to be an action movie. " Maybe the original concept didn’t test well or something, but I seem to recall that Will Smith was really going to have to test his limits, because it wasn’t a big-budget action movie. Oh well.