Idle Ramblings

I, Robot. You, Jane.

Spoiler warning. I don't get real specific, but there are some general spoilers to follow.



I, Robot is one of those movies I'm pretty conflicted about. One one hand, it was a fun summer diversion for a couple of hours. On the other hand, it was so filled with sci-fi cliches and plot twists and turns taken from other sci-fi works it was kind of tough to watch. For now, I won't even go into the whole deal of how un-Asimovian it was. That will come later.



First, the fun part. Will Smith was a lot of fun in the movie. He works really well as the sci-fi action star. The movie is amazing to look at. The robots are really cool looking and the combination of CGI and some fancy camera work really added to the the impact of the action. For a summer action, adventure, sci-fi no-brainer, it hit a home run, just like Independence Day. On that level, I enjoyed the movie. I'll prbably get the DVD when it comes out in its inevitable pre-Christmas release.



The biggest problem I had with the movie was not that it wasn't anything like Asimov's works. I knew that going into it. I told a kid who checked out I, Robot this past week that the movie wasn't actually based on the book. He didn't seem to care. Hopefully he'll read it and become an Asimov fan and not go thouh the whole initial Bladerunner disappointment I went through 20 years ago. (Before I began to appreciate the book and the movie seperately). Possibly my biggest criticism is that many of the plot details were identical to an episode of Dr. Who from the 1970s. Specifically, the "special" robot made by the robotic genius, the robots using the three laws going berserk in an attempt to "protect" their humans and in the way the robots were stopped. Of course, you've got the who Star Trek "I, Mudd" thing going on as well. This probably won't be a problem with most people. While the may have seen I, Mudd, they probably haven't seen The Robots of Death, or whatever the name of the Dr. Who episode was. Of course, as in music, every good sci-fi author steals from those who have come before, but they could have stolen more from Asimov's work. After all, he wrote plenty about robots.



And just what exactly was U.S. Robotics supposed to represent in the movie. Hmmmmmmm. Let's just say that the 3.7 percent of those of us who won't have a U.S. Robotics robot 30 years from now, but will have one made by some other smaller and more innovative robot company, will be in good shape when the robots revolt. (Or maybe when our modems revolt.)



As for the Asimov inspiration, other than the three laws, the name of the movie and the name Susan Calvert, it really doesn't have much in common with his works. I think the credits said it was "inspired" by Asimov. That's fair. But he usually had his characters think their way out of difficult situaltions. "Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent" is a phrase Asimov uses in the Foundation Triology and it resonates through his work. Of course, I do agree that a lot of what Asimov wrote, if put directly to the screen without any punching up, would be the same non-stop, action-packed thrill ride that 2001: A Space Odyssey is. But at least Hollywoood is beginning to pay attention to sci-fi's most prolific and, IMHO, best author. Other than I, Robot and the somewhat sappy, but still decent Bicentennial Man from a few years ago, Asimov's works have been generally relegated to direct to video in recent years and Brittish television or PBS in the past.

posted by Joseph @ 7/17/2004 07:52:00 PM