I, Robot

[LilCutie]

I thought the movie was great. It was a really good summer action flick. Plus, naked Will Smith sealed the deal for me.

I’m also not a person bothered by product placement. I see those things in the real world, so it is almost like the movie is just an extension of my world. I don’t see the harm in it.
Jenny*

[gentle]

@LilCutie

I’m also not a person bothered by product placement. I see those things in the real world, so it is almost like the movie is just an extension of my world. I don’t see the harm in it.

A few points.
[ul]
[li]It cheapens the experience. It makes explicit the financial aspect of movie-making. A film is no longer just a personal, emotional experience; the screen is now a billboard for commercial interests.[/li][li]It manipulates the audience. It more or less says: BUY THIS THING THAT IS SHOWING ON THE SCREEN. Except for popcorn and the entrance fee, I don’t watch films to buy stuff.[/li][li]It detracts from the virtual experience that is a film: it disrupts the suspension of disbelief. The parade of products at the beginning of I, Robot was so incongruous that I was thinking less about what was going on than about the dishonesty and artificiality of the screenplay.[/li][/ul]
Everyone knows movies are big business. But the reason I am rarely able to enjoy “blockbusters” is that they are so obviously streamlined by the need to hit every possible target audience, to shave off every sharp corner in the name of the lowest common demoninator, cram in every possible product placement, tie in with possible franchises etc.

[BMalion]

@gentle

…But the reason I am rarely able to enjoy “blockbusters” is that they are so obviously streamlined by the need to hit every possible target audience, to shave off every sharp corner in the name of the lowest common demoninator, cram in every possible product placement, tie in with possible franchises etc.

Yeah, I hate David Mamet too.

[Scupper]

@FilmGeek

I thought VIKI’s logic (basically the zeroth law) was evolved, as Cromwell’s character said, not ‘secretly designed’. All the stuff about how robots gather together in an empty space, etc…

I’m not sure if you weren’t watching, or you gave up on it because it was too moronic for your tastes or if I missed the point completely.

No, to be honest, I was probably being a little too hard on that particular aspect of the screenplay.

VIKI does pull a Zeroth Law bit, but I was referring to the robots. “How can a robot commit murder?” is supposed to be the mystery, but “because the local AI has gone haywire and commented out the First Law in all the new robots” isn’t a very satisfying answer, in my opinion.

[Knowed_Out]

@Dolores Reborn

It was a wonderful scene, but: Why didn’t he have a shower curtain? While I was admiring the view, I was also worrying about all the water on the floor! I know, I’m weird.

Supposedly because

WIll Smith researched his role, and consulted with psychiatrists on how paranoids act in everyday life. They told him they keep their bathroom doors open, in case somebody might try to sneak up on them. They also usually don’t shampoo, because they’d have to close their eyes.

/shrug

[DesertDog]

@gentle

The film sucked. It also had a (for me, as far as I have consciously noticed) record number of annoyingly gratuitous product placements.

During the first couple of minutes of the film:
[ul]
[li] Camera zooms in on Will Smith’s JVC CD player.[/li] [li] Steve Wonder hit starts playing.[/li] [li] Will Smith picks up branded shopping bag (though I didn’t recognize the store name).[/li] [li] Will Smith pulls out brand new pair of Converse All Star sneakers. Camera zooms in on brand name while Will murmurs admiringly: “Thing of beauty…”[/li] [li] Will Smith exits apartment and is met by a delivery robot with a large FedEx logo on its chest.[/li][/ul]

I agree with you 80% but I wouldn’t count Stevie Wonder as product placement. For one, it was a (heavy-handed) clue to the character’s personality. For another, it’s a song, not a product. If we’re going to count songs not written for the movie being used in the movie as product placement, I think American Graffitti would be the hands-down winner in that department.

DD

[Agrippina]

What this movie needed was Jeff Golblum.

“Ah, no. Um…these robots, ah, cannot malfunction. I believe you know the, ah, Three Laws?”

[Sundog]

@Captain Amazing

Apparently it takes place in 2035, so let me just say that Susan Calvin is really hot looking for a 53 year old.

Anyone else feel that the actress playing her was channelling Sandra Bullock’s character from Demolition Man? I kept expecting her to break out into a rendition of “I wanna be an Oscar Meyer wiener…”

[Tyrrell_McAllister]

I thought the movie was alright. I was entertained by the action sequences, and I was pleasantly surprised by the lack of polemics on the nature of the soul. Indeed, at the only point in the film where I thought that was going to happen

when Will Smith was talking about how robots don’t have souls because they can’t compose symphonies or turn blank canvases into masterpieces, Sonny quickly put a stop to that by replying with exactly what I was thinking: “Can you?”.

However, the movie was riddled with plot holes. Scupper mentioned some of the worst. An additional one was

how Vici sent a massive hoard of robots after the relatively harmless humans (Susan Calvin said that they couldn’t damage her directly because she was “integrated throughout the building” or something like that) but sent only a few robots after Sonny, who was carrying the only thing that was any real threat to her.