This is a really good movie with a lot going for it. Some good action, good story and a good twist at the end. I wouldn't say it is flawless in terms of acting but that's not necessarily what you are looking at in this movie.
906 Reviews
Rock'em Sock'em Robo-fun
Dkish15 July 2004
Director Alex Proyas, helmer of such cult favorites as 'Dark City' and 'The Crow', steps into the Hollywood limelight with his first attempt at a mainstream Hollywood blockbuster.
'I, Robot' chronicles the life of Detective Del Spooner (Will Smith) who has a techno-phobic view of the world's newest appliance, a life-like robot created by the world's leading technology giant US Robotics. A link in Spooner's past is linked to his phobia of the automaton movement sweeping the nation. According to US Robotics, there will be eventually 1 robot to every 5 humans.
Spooner is called to the offices of US Robotics when a leading scientist (James Cromwell), with a secret link to Spooner, has apparently committed suicide. His death seems to have mysterious circumstances which could link to a robot. With man's complete trust in the new robot technology, it seems too ludicrous to every one except Spooner.
As the mystery deepens, Spooner unravels the very fabric of the robotic giant, locks horns with CEO Lawrence Robertson (Bruce Greenwood) and learns more about his automated enemy with the aid of scientist Dr. Susan Calvin (Bridget Moynahan). Through the course of these events he may learn more than he could ever imagine.
It is hard to defend a film like 'I, Robot' but I am going to try. For sci-fi purists, Isaac Asimov's legendary work about the robot and how he will intricate into our society has filled the minds of readers for over 50 years. But the similarities between the film presented here and his work are few and far between. Kind of like last week's release of Jerry Bruckheimer's 'King Arthur'. Both films take sacred subject matter and re-invent it with a new twist. I would have to say that 'I. Robot' is better in a lot ways.
At the core of 'I, Robot' beats the soul of Asimov as his 3 laws regarding robots are sacredly left intact and the film does abide by them. Also a lot of the characters have similar names to the people in the text. It is almost like taking Star Trek's 'prime directive' and some of the now classic characters and setting them in a new idea of the future. The core is left intact but in some ways it has been updated and refreshed.
The story, special effects and extremely zealous direction, however, all seem to be brought forth by the collaborators who cobbled this film together. There are influences of 'Robocop', 'Short Circuit', 'Blade Runner' and even the classic comic-book series 'Magnus: Robot Fighter'. Each of these robot influences echo back to what makes 'I Robot' so intriguing, a joy to watch and memorable.
Sure the story does have a lot of sci-fi influences and clichés aside from robot films including 'Star Wars' and 'Planet of the Apes' but don't these benchmark sci-fi films influence everything coming down the turnpike these days. It even has the classic sci-fi cliché of the social outcast claiming there is an invasion coming except no one believes him. But that is not what should bring us into the film.
You really need to give credit to director Alex Proyas because it is his magic as a filmmaker that holds this film together. He knows where to play it straight and where to let his lead actor bring on the charm. Also you really have to admire the man's technical ability. His brilliant inter-laying of robots into the photography is astounding. Proyas is an A-list director in the making and 'I, Robot' shows that he can deliver a big Hollywood film.
I also give credit to Will Smith who starts out being very unapproachable with his character but as the film goes we really become fond of his hero. Smith's Spooner does have a lot of his previous sci-fi heroes inter-laced into Spooner but it comes off as more of a homecoming than an annoyance. In some ways I think Proyas had something to do with that especially in the chase down scene towards the beginning of the film. It almost felt like 'Men in Black' again.
As for Smith's co-stars, Cromwell's Lanning is a throwaway character used mainly for effect, Moynahan is timid and sometimes robot-like but it is a sturdy performance and Greenwood is menacing and a good match to face off against the rebellious Smith.
The reason I was so fond of 'I, Robot' is because for once it was a summer film that didn't apologize for trying to be entertaining. The special effects, the performances and the direction are all what people want to see in the summer and this film is loads and loads of fun. It is a great giant popcorn film with a light layering of message.
My only small problem with this film was that it is supposed to be set in Chicago in 2035. I didn't buy it but if it was 2135, then maybe.
Sure the film doesn't pave new ground but why does every film have to. It is pure summer fun and what is wrong with that.
If you want Asimov and sci-fi purism then you can always read the novels. Stop apologizing and most of all stop belly-aching, just give the film a chance. If you like science fiction films and want to be remembered how much fun they used to be then this picture is the perfect ticket for you. So Says the Soothsayer.
'I, Robot' chronicles the life of Detective Del Spooner (Will Smith) who has a techno-phobic view of the world's newest appliance, a life-like robot created by the world's leading technology giant US Robotics. A link in Spooner's past is linked to his phobia of the automaton movement sweeping the nation. According to US Robotics, there will be eventually 1 robot to every 5 humans.
Spooner is called to the offices of US Robotics when a leading scientist (James Cromwell), with a secret link to Spooner, has apparently committed suicide. His death seems to have mysterious circumstances which could link to a robot. With man's complete trust in the new robot technology, it seems too ludicrous to every one except Spooner.
As the mystery deepens, Spooner unravels the very fabric of the robotic giant, locks horns with CEO Lawrence Robertson (Bruce Greenwood) and learns more about his automated enemy with the aid of scientist Dr. Susan Calvin (Bridget Moynahan). Through the course of these events he may learn more than he could ever imagine.
It is hard to defend a film like 'I, Robot' but I am going to try. For sci-fi purists, Isaac Asimov's legendary work about the robot and how he will intricate into our society has filled the minds of readers for over 50 years. But the similarities between the film presented here and his work are few and far between. Kind of like last week's release of Jerry Bruckheimer's 'King Arthur'. Both films take sacred subject matter and re-invent it with a new twist. I would have to say that 'I. Robot' is better in a lot ways.
At the core of 'I, Robot' beats the soul of Asimov as his 3 laws regarding robots are sacredly left intact and the film does abide by them. Also a lot of the characters have similar names to the people in the text. It is almost like taking Star Trek's 'prime directive' and some of the now classic characters and setting them in a new idea of the future. The core is left intact but in some ways it has been updated and refreshed.
The story, special effects and extremely zealous direction, however, all seem to be brought forth by the collaborators who cobbled this film together. There are influences of 'Robocop', 'Short Circuit', 'Blade Runner' and even the classic comic-book series 'Magnus: Robot Fighter'. Each of these robot influences echo back to what makes 'I Robot' so intriguing, a joy to watch and memorable.
Sure the story does have a lot of sci-fi influences and clichés aside from robot films including 'Star Wars' and 'Planet of the Apes' but don't these benchmark sci-fi films influence everything coming down the turnpike these days. It even has the classic sci-fi cliché of the social outcast claiming there is an invasion coming except no one believes him. But that is not what should bring us into the film.
You really need to give credit to director Alex Proyas because it is his magic as a filmmaker that holds this film together. He knows where to play it straight and where to let his lead actor bring on the charm. Also you really have to admire the man's technical ability. His brilliant inter-laying of robots into the photography is astounding. Proyas is an A-list director in the making and 'I, Robot' shows that he can deliver a big Hollywood film.
I also give credit to Will Smith who starts out being very unapproachable with his character but as the film goes we really become fond of his hero. Smith's Spooner does have a lot of his previous sci-fi heroes inter-laced into Spooner but it comes off as more of a homecoming than an annoyance. In some ways I think Proyas had something to do with that especially in the chase down scene towards the beginning of the film. It almost felt like 'Men in Black' again.
As for Smith's co-stars, Cromwell's Lanning is a throwaway character used mainly for effect, Moynahan is timid and sometimes robot-like but it is a sturdy performance and Greenwood is menacing and a good match to face off against the rebellious Smith.
The reason I was so fond of 'I, Robot' is because for once it was a summer film that didn't apologize for trying to be entertaining. The special effects, the performances and the direction are all what people want to see in the summer and this film is loads and loads of fun. It is a great giant popcorn film with a light layering of message.
My only small problem with this film was that it is supposed to be set in Chicago in 2035. I didn't buy it but if it was 2135, then maybe.
Sure the film doesn't pave new ground but why does every film have to. It is pure summer fun and what is wrong with that.
If you want Asimov and sci-fi purism then you can always read the novels. Stop apologizing and most of all stop belly-aching, just give the film a chance. If you like science fiction films and want to be remembered how much fun they used to be then this picture is the perfect ticket for you. So Says the Soothsayer.
"These robots are the realization of a dream."
classicsoncall18 May 2014
Warning: Spoilers
When I was reading 'Magnus, Robot Fighter' comics back in the Sixties, I could never understand how robots might ever get to a place where they were more intelligent than humans. Or how, through some process of mechanical evolution they could wind up as creatures of free will. Well, that future is rapidly approaching, and with all it's inherent dangers, it looks like robots will be a part of every day life not too long from now. Will humanity be ready for a 'lesser of two evils' outcome in situations where robots are the principals? Let's say two 'intelligent' vehicles are about to collide in an unavoidable crash. You're riding in one and the other contains a family of five. With infinitesimal speed and calculation, the two robotic vehicles must decide an outcome with the least possible harm, similar to Del Spooner's accident scenario. Guess what, you're a goner.
I guess I'm a spooner too. Fuddy duddy might be another name for it. I'm all for advances in science that make life more productive and enjoyable, but concepts like cloning, selective reproduction and drones of all kinds lead to all sorts of ethical and moral questions that humanity will have to deal with, usually after the fact and after grave harm has already been done. "I, Robot" does a pretty good job of drawing out some of those considerations, and does it in a creative way. I haven't read enough Azimov to offer a critique from that perspective, but I found Spooner's dilemma of ferreting out a robot killer to be creatively done. As one would expect, the special effects are grand, and downright scary when you think about robots produced on the kind of scale needed to proportion one to every five humans. So overall I enjoyed the film while pausing the action every now and then to consider the thought provoking issues being presented.
However there was one element in the story that just didn't make sense to me, and it was mentioned specifically twice. The service areas of the U.S. Robotics building were not installed with surveillance equipment!?!? That just seemed like too much of a plot hole to me, because after all, one could do a lot of damage by infiltrating those areas to get close to VIKI, which Spooner and Dr. Calvin (Bridget Moynahan) eventually did. Seems to me an intelligence like VIKI should have figured that out. Then when VIKI was destroyed placing all the rogue robots off line, there was no explanation of what would happen to all the properly functioning NS-5's now that the uplink was gone. Maybe we weren't supposed to think about that.
I guess I'm a spooner too. Fuddy duddy might be another name for it. I'm all for advances in science that make life more productive and enjoyable, but concepts like cloning, selective reproduction and drones of all kinds lead to all sorts of ethical and moral questions that humanity will have to deal with, usually after the fact and after grave harm has already been done. "I, Robot" does a pretty good job of drawing out some of those considerations, and does it in a creative way. I haven't read enough Azimov to offer a critique from that perspective, but I found Spooner's dilemma of ferreting out a robot killer to be creatively done. As one would expect, the special effects are grand, and downright scary when you think about robots produced on the kind of scale needed to proportion one to every five humans. So overall I enjoyed the film while pausing the action every now and then to consider the thought provoking issues being presented.
However there was one element in the story that just didn't make sense to me, and it was mentioned specifically twice. The service areas of the U.S. Robotics building were not installed with surveillance equipment!?!? That just seemed like too much of a plot hole to me, because after all, one could do a lot of damage by infiltrating those areas to get close to VIKI, which Spooner and Dr. Calvin (Bridget Moynahan) eventually did. Seems to me an intelligence like VIKI should have figured that out. Then when VIKI was destroyed placing all the rogue robots off line, there was no explanation of what would happen to all the properly functioning NS-5's now that the uplink was gone. Maybe we weren't supposed to think about that.
Good mix of action and philosophy
Danny_G1331 August 2004
Like the Matrix and many other major movies, I, Robot has its foundations in philosophy, in its case the question of epistemology(The study of knowledge itself and computers being self-aware).
Will Smith is Spooner, a cop with an apparent attitude problem. Set in the future, I Robot sees Spooner embarking on a puzzling case of suicide where he believes it was actually murder. By a robot.
In this future society (With more than a homage to Blade Runner) robots are used as slaves of humans in all facets of life. They have 3 rules of conduct hard coded into them which essentially state they cannot harm humans. So the postulation by Spooner that a robot killed a man after a history where no robot had ever committed so much as a mugging presents a big problem to both his peers and his boss.
Suffice to say the story's plot thickens and a number of twists and turns emerge before the truth is revealed.
Will Smith is an absolute surprise here. Having previously been a light-hearted comedy actor he puts in a truly excellent and believable shift as a wise-cracking cop with a dark past.
However, the real star is the special effects and visual trickery. Impossible but ingenious camerawork and some jawdropping animation really make I, Robot feel truly alive and utterly believable, while never being dull for a second.
It arguably doesn't delve too deep into its philosophical undertones, but it doesn't really need to. It's a traditional Hollywood blockbuster action flick but it unquestionably has a brain and is a clear cut above the likes of Armageddon et al.
Very enjoyable.
Will Smith is Spooner, a cop with an apparent attitude problem. Set in the future, I Robot sees Spooner embarking on a puzzling case of suicide where he believes it was actually murder. By a robot.
In this future society (With more than a homage to Blade Runner) robots are used as slaves of humans in all facets of life. They have 3 rules of conduct hard coded into them which essentially state they cannot harm humans. So the postulation by Spooner that a robot killed a man after a history where no robot had ever committed so much as a mugging presents a big problem to both his peers and his boss.
Suffice to say the story's plot thickens and a number of twists and turns emerge before the truth is revealed.
Will Smith is an absolute surprise here. Having previously been a light-hearted comedy actor he puts in a truly excellent and believable shift as a wise-cracking cop with a dark past.
However, the real star is the special effects and visual trickery. Impossible but ingenious camerawork and some jawdropping animation really make I, Robot feel truly alive and utterly believable, while never being dull for a second.
It arguably doesn't delve too deep into its philosophical undertones, but it doesn't really need to. It's a traditional Hollywood blockbuster action flick but it unquestionably has a brain and is a clear cut above the likes of Armageddon et al.
Very enjoyable.
Human, robotics and laws
HeyRhodoks1 June 2020
The film shares the same name as Asimov's novel, but with some adaptations. But in general, it doesn't break the three laws. This kind of science fiction film, which integrates human nature and ethics of science and technology, triggers our deep reflection. Human beings and robots have advantages and disadvantages, no matter when, in front of any biological species, we always have the freedom to choose.
First Rule of Robotics: Don't Kick Isaac In His Asimov
zardoz-1322 January 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Rule # 1: Hollywood shouldn't make some books into movies.
Take, for example, science fiction author Isaac Asimov's "I, Robot," a classic collection of cautionary short stories about the unforeseen complications in a robot's logic as it tries to obey the three laws of robotics. Even when the robots appeared insane, Asimov was careful to show that by the lights of the robot's "positronic brains," they are behaving logically.
Rule # 2: Movies with multiple stories don't make millions.
Too many characters. Too many ideas. Too much originality. Too much segmentation. Consequently, when Hollywood lays its hands on literary legends like Asimov, they dumb down his work and turn it into a sprawling saga, with brash, loud-mouthed characters that audiences can laugh with so they can forget about the summer heat.
In the Will Smith movie "I, Robot," Australian director Alex Proyas of "The Crow," Oscar-winning scenarist Akiva Goldsman of "A Beautiful Mind," and "Final Fantasy" scribe Jeff Vintar have retained the three laws of robotics, but have turned an otherwise literary classic into a shallow, uninspired, paint-by-the-numbers, potboiler about an heroic, wise-cracking Chicago cop in the year 2035 who abhors robots. "I, Robot" opens with the three laws of robots.
1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2. A robot must obey orders given it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.
An alarm clock awakens divorced homicide detective Del Spooner (Will Smith of "Ali") to another wonderful day. After a shower scene designed to display Smith's buff body, especially his curiously scarred "Rambo" pectorals, our swaggering stereotypical lone wolf hero dons his ghetto black street clothes, unpacks a vintage pair of 2004 Converse All-Star sneakers, and cruises off to his first crime scene of the day in his tricked out Audi.
The headquarters of the U.S. Robotics Corporation--a Microsoft-type company—stands in downtown Chicago. U.S. Robotics plans to put a robot in every home. Apparently, U.S.R.'s chief robot designer, Dr. Alfred Lanning (James Cromwell of "Babe"), committed suicide. The visionary scientist hurled himself through his office window and fell hundreds of feet to the lobby. Spooner learns that Lanning had requested him specifically, so Del could listen to a message Lanning recorded for him on a preprogrammed hologram. Initially, Lanning's cryptic remarks make no sense to Del. When he visits Lanning's office, he discovers that the good doctor couldn't have jumped through the window. Del tries to break the window next to the window that Lanning shattered and barely makes a dent when he smashes a chair against it. No sooner does Del realize that the killer may still be in the room than the killer surprises him and escapes.
Eventually, Del captures the robot and interrogates him. Before he can get far, U.S. Robotics' CEO Lawrence Robertson (Bruce Greenwood, who played JFK in "Thirteen Days") storms into the police station. He demands the return of his property. Robertson reminds Del that the authorities cannot charge robots with murder. Not only have robots never posed a threat to humans, but also only humans can be charged with homicide. Inevitably, Del's world-weary boss, Lieutenant John Bergin (Chi McBride of "Gone In 60 Seconds"), chews him out for crying 'robot' every time something happens to him. Del remains far from convinced, however, about the innocence of robots. He bears a grudge against them. During an accident, a truck rammed both his vehicle and another car with a 12-year old girl inside. Both cars sank into a river. A passing robot witnessed the accident and dived in to rescue Del. Our protagonist told the robot to save the little girl instead, so he feels guilty about her death and despises robots.
Gee, doesn't this sound familiar? Like a movie from the 1980s? A rebellious but maimed cop battling a corporation with a dark secret. Hey, didn't Tom Selleck do something like that in the 1984 epic "Runaway?" Or what about 1982's "Blade Runner?" Or "Westworld," where the robots cannot kill humans either. Del spends the rest of "I, Robot's" predictable 115 minutes trying to prove to everybody that robots are dangerous. He worries especially because his mother (Adrian Ricard of "Bulworth") has won a robot in lottery. Meanwhile, despite all this horrible publicity, Robertson plans to market a new line of robots, and he wants Del off his back permanently. Of course, hard-headed as Del is, he doesn't take no for an answer, even when Bergin takes his badge and suspends him from the force.
Basically, aside from a fairly low-key performance, Will Smith's futuristic detective doesn't appear too far removed from his wealthy playboy cop in the "Bad Boys" movies. Unfortunately, he doesn't have a sidekick like Martin Lawrence to take up the slack in this occasionally exciting but largely superficial sci-fi saga. Not even his quips seem catchy. Smith spouts lines like: "Does believing you're the last sane man on the planet make you crazy? 'Cause if that's the case, maybe I am. " Probably his best line, and that isn't saying much, is: "Somehow 'I told you so' just doesn't quite say it." "I, Robot" looks okay, if you don't think about some of the gaping plot holes. Wait until you see what Del's secret weapon is. Talk about a cop-out! The robots are marginally intimidating, but two action sequences, a careening chase scene in a freeway tunnel and a demolition robot that destroys a mansion look cool. Despite its plea for tolerance, which was handled better in "Bicentennial Man," "I, Robot" breaks no new ground in the robots on the prowl genre.
Take, for example, science fiction author Isaac Asimov's "I, Robot," a classic collection of cautionary short stories about the unforeseen complications in a robot's logic as it tries to obey the three laws of robotics. Even when the robots appeared insane, Asimov was careful to show that by the lights of the robot's "positronic brains," they are behaving logically.
Rule # 2: Movies with multiple stories don't make millions.
Too many characters. Too many ideas. Too much originality. Too much segmentation. Consequently, when Hollywood lays its hands on literary legends like Asimov, they dumb down his work and turn it into a sprawling saga, with brash, loud-mouthed characters that audiences can laugh with so they can forget about the summer heat.
In the Will Smith movie "I, Robot," Australian director Alex Proyas of "The Crow," Oscar-winning scenarist Akiva Goldsman of "A Beautiful Mind," and "Final Fantasy" scribe Jeff Vintar have retained the three laws of robotics, but have turned an otherwise literary classic into a shallow, uninspired, paint-by-the-numbers, potboiler about an heroic, wise-cracking Chicago cop in the year 2035 who abhors robots. "I, Robot" opens with the three laws of robots.
1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2. A robot must obey orders given it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.
An alarm clock awakens divorced homicide detective Del Spooner (Will Smith of "Ali") to another wonderful day. After a shower scene designed to display Smith's buff body, especially his curiously scarred "Rambo" pectorals, our swaggering stereotypical lone wolf hero dons his ghetto black street clothes, unpacks a vintage pair of 2004 Converse All-Star sneakers, and cruises off to his first crime scene of the day in his tricked out Audi.
The headquarters of the U.S. Robotics Corporation--a Microsoft-type company—stands in downtown Chicago. U.S. Robotics plans to put a robot in every home. Apparently, U.S.R.'s chief robot designer, Dr. Alfred Lanning (James Cromwell of "Babe"), committed suicide. The visionary scientist hurled himself through his office window and fell hundreds of feet to the lobby. Spooner learns that Lanning had requested him specifically, so Del could listen to a message Lanning recorded for him on a preprogrammed hologram. Initially, Lanning's cryptic remarks make no sense to Del. When he visits Lanning's office, he discovers that the good doctor couldn't have jumped through the window. Del tries to break the window next to the window that Lanning shattered and barely makes a dent when he smashes a chair against it. No sooner does Del realize that the killer may still be in the room than the killer surprises him and escapes.
Eventually, Del captures the robot and interrogates him. Before he can get far, U.S. Robotics' CEO Lawrence Robertson (Bruce Greenwood, who played JFK in "Thirteen Days") storms into the police station. He demands the return of his property. Robertson reminds Del that the authorities cannot charge robots with murder. Not only have robots never posed a threat to humans, but also only humans can be charged with homicide. Inevitably, Del's world-weary boss, Lieutenant John Bergin (Chi McBride of "Gone In 60 Seconds"), chews him out for crying 'robot' every time something happens to him. Del remains far from convinced, however, about the innocence of robots. He bears a grudge against them. During an accident, a truck rammed both his vehicle and another car with a 12-year old girl inside. Both cars sank into a river. A passing robot witnessed the accident and dived in to rescue Del. Our protagonist told the robot to save the little girl instead, so he feels guilty about her death and despises robots.
Gee, doesn't this sound familiar? Like a movie from the 1980s? A rebellious but maimed cop battling a corporation with a dark secret. Hey, didn't Tom Selleck do something like that in the 1984 epic "Runaway?" Or what about 1982's "Blade Runner?" Or "Westworld," where the robots cannot kill humans either. Del spends the rest of "I, Robot's" predictable 115 minutes trying to prove to everybody that robots are dangerous. He worries especially because his mother (Adrian Ricard of "Bulworth") has won a robot in lottery. Meanwhile, despite all this horrible publicity, Robertson plans to market a new line of robots, and he wants Del off his back permanently. Of course, hard-headed as Del is, he doesn't take no for an answer, even when Bergin takes his badge and suspends him from the force.
Basically, aside from a fairly low-key performance, Will Smith's futuristic detective doesn't appear too far removed from his wealthy playboy cop in the "Bad Boys" movies. Unfortunately, he doesn't have a sidekick like Martin Lawrence to take up the slack in this occasionally exciting but largely superficial sci-fi saga. Not even his quips seem catchy. Smith spouts lines like: "Does believing you're the last sane man on the planet make you crazy? 'Cause if that's the case, maybe I am. " Probably his best line, and that isn't saying much, is: "Somehow 'I told you so' just doesn't quite say it." "I, Robot" looks okay, if you don't think about some of the gaping plot holes. Wait until you see what Del's secret weapon is. Talk about a cop-out! The robots are marginally intimidating, but two action sequences, a careening chase scene in a freeway tunnel and a demolition robot that destroys a mansion look cool. Despite its plea for tolerance, which was handled better in "Bicentennial Man," "I, Robot" breaks no new ground in the robots on the prowl genre.
Could have been the next "Blade Runner"
Superunknovvn10 August 2004
Warning: Spoilers
"I, Robot" was this year's most entertaining Blockbuster: a lot of action, witty dialog and a fine plot. In fact, I thought the plot was so good that it was a waste to turn this project into a Will Smith vehicle. Not that he ruined the movie or anything but his funnyman performance - and the witty dialog - just kept the story from getting deep. So many other recent Blockbusters were unnecessarily lofty (*cough*SPIDER-MAN2*cough*MATRIX2&3*cough*cough*) and could have used some irony. With "I, Robot", however, it would have been a great idea to go for a more philosophical approach. The direction is very spectacular and fast paced, which isn't a bad thing, but it doesn't help to create an intriguing atmosphere, either. The special effects look great for the most parts, except when they are used to create landscapes. Sometimes a location looks like it was taken directly out of a video game. Anyway, "I, Robot" is a fantastic way to spend 90 minutes, but it's no masterpiece and won't be remembered among classics who deal with similar topics ("Blade Runner", "The Terminator", "The Matrix 1"). Pity. The potential was there.
Surprisingly Good!
Mstrom4221 July 2004
When I was growing up, one of my favourite authors was Isaac Asimov. I loved his books and his ideas about robots. The man was a genius in the way he wrote, he invented the three laws of Robotics, as the very beginning of the movie tells us, they are: 1) A robot can never harm a human. 2) A robot must obey all human orders unless it conflicts with the first law. 3) A robot must protect itself unless it conflicts with the first two laws.
Because of this and because of the fact that I knew Will Smith was the leading actor in this movie I went into this movie with lowered expectations. I expected to see a corny movie full of explosions and killer robots.
I did get that, or at least the explosions part, but imagine my surprise when the movie ended up exceeding my expectations and more. Even though during the ending credits it says that the movie was suggested by the books by Isaac Asimov most of the movie seemed to play quite well with Isaac Asimov's ideas about robots. The movie played with concepts that Isaac Asimov played with, if the three laws can be made, they can be broken. And it was an Asimov-ish "whodunit" as well.
Will Smith managed to pull off a stunning performance as "Del Spooner", a Chicago detective that is suspicious of robots and is against technology. His acting is much more like his acting in "Enemy of the State" than his performances in his other two Science Fiction flicks, "Independence Day" and "Men in Black". He is a believable character, one that you end up sympathising with as you learn why, exactly, he hates robots so much.
A highly critiqued point usually comes from the fans of the book in that Bridget Moynahan plays Susan Calvin. It is true that Moynahan as Calvin is much younger than the Isaac Asimov version, but beyond that I found her to be a pleasant surprise as well. She plays her persona very well, delivering a wooden, robot-like performance. She is obvious in the fact that she likes robots much more than humans, and her dislike of Spooner is amusing. Over the course of the movie she thaws a little, but not an incredible lot. I find her to be a believable character.
The pure stroke of genius in this movie is the robot, Sonny, who at first reminds one of Data from Star Trek. His character evolves over the course of the story, and Alex Proyas does a good job at keeping us guessing at whether the emotional robot is a "good guy" or not.
This movie, which I've now seen twice, has been raked over the coals so to speak in the realm of artistic licence, but I felt that Isaac Asimov, if he were here, would have been rather pleased with this movie. The only two points of conflict, perhaps, would be the amount of violence against actual robots in the story (he was never that violent in his short stories/books) and the very typical Hollywood blow'emup climax, which, yes, smacked heavily of Terminator for a while there. The ending, I felt, repaired and wrapped up nicely, making up for whatever excessive action went on before it.
Two notes about the cinematography in this movie, first of all, the Matrix scene was not necessary. A character was being chased and did a Trinity pause in mid-air pose, which pulled me out of the movie for a couple seconds. Luckily it wasn't too hard to get back into the movie. Second note was something that I felt was very innovative on the part of Alex Proyas, which was the "camera moving with moving object" shots. I noticed at least three of them in the movie. Very nice film work there. I'm sure it will get horribly overdone in the next few years, but for now it is nice. The CGI also gets honourable mention for making the robots meld so well with their surroundings. Finally CGI has reached a point where they don't seem fake, even for a moment.
In regards to nudity in the movie... I've read a couple of reviews which notice the Moynahan nude in fogged up shower scene, and forget to notice the Will Smith completely nude with no fog shower scene. I must say, as a female viewer it is nice to get the generous end of the stick when it comes to seeing something as, dare I say appealing? as Will Smith's very nicely developed body.
Lastly and in a point that has nothing to do with the movie and more to do with questions brought up by it-- It took until a day later and thinking about the movie some more that I realized that "I, Robot" was also very socially different. As in two of the main characters, including the hero are black males, one woman, and one (male) robot. I didn't find this odd at all in watching it, perhaps because Will Smith is such a recognisable character, but after thinking about it, I felt that this is a very positive sign. It shows, to me, that society is changing. I feel that I wouldn't have been able to see that, even 10-15 years ago and thought nothing of it. I've noticed this before though... that the most gender/social equal views seem to come from science fiction in our media... it is interesting.
Now, of course the movie does bring up some ethical questions like if it's all right to make a servant/slave class out of robots, etc., but all in all I really liked this movie. Any movie that makes you think is a good movie, any movie that gives you fun, drama, action, mystery, and makes you think is a great movie. Thank goodness I, Robot is all of the above.
Because of this and because of the fact that I knew Will Smith was the leading actor in this movie I went into this movie with lowered expectations. I expected to see a corny movie full of explosions and killer robots.
I did get that, or at least the explosions part, but imagine my surprise when the movie ended up exceeding my expectations and more. Even though during the ending credits it says that the movie was suggested by the books by Isaac Asimov most of the movie seemed to play quite well with Isaac Asimov's ideas about robots. The movie played with concepts that Isaac Asimov played with, if the three laws can be made, they can be broken. And it was an Asimov-ish "whodunit" as well.
Will Smith managed to pull off a stunning performance as "Del Spooner", a Chicago detective that is suspicious of robots and is against technology. His acting is much more like his acting in "Enemy of the State" than his performances in his other two Science Fiction flicks, "Independence Day" and "Men in Black". He is a believable character, one that you end up sympathising with as you learn why, exactly, he hates robots so much.
A highly critiqued point usually comes from the fans of the book in that Bridget Moynahan plays Susan Calvin. It is true that Moynahan as Calvin is much younger than the Isaac Asimov version, but beyond that I found her to be a pleasant surprise as well. She plays her persona very well, delivering a wooden, robot-like performance. She is obvious in the fact that she likes robots much more than humans, and her dislike of Spooner is amusing. Over the course of the movie she thaws a little, but not an incredible lot. I find her to be a believable character.
The pure stroke of genius in this movie is the robot, Sonny, who at first reminds one of Data from Star Trek. His character evolves over the course of the story, and Alex Proyas does a good job at keeping us guessing at whether the emotional robot is a "good guy" or not.
This movie, which I've now seen twice, has been raked over the coals so to speak in the realm of artistic licence, but I felt that Isaac Asimov, if he were here, would have been rather pleased with this movie. The only two points of conflict, perhaps, would be the amount of violence against actual robots in the story (he was never that violent in his short stories/books) and the very typical Hollywood blow'emup climax, which, yes, smacked heavily of Terminator for a while there. The ending, I felt, repaired and wrapped up nicely, making up for whatever excessive action went on before it.
Two notes about the cinematography in this movie, first of all, the Matrix scene was not necessary. A character was being chased and did a Trinity pause in mid-air pose, which pulled me out of the movie for a couple seconds. Luckily it wasn't too hard to get back into the movie. Second note was something that I felt was very innovative on the part of Alex Proyas, which was the "camera moving with moving object" shots. I noticed at least three of them in the movie. Very nice film work there. I'm sure it will get horribly overdone in the next few years, but for now it is nice. The CGI also gets honourable mention for making the robots meld so well with their surroundings. Finally CGI has reached a point where they don't seem fake, even for a moment.
In regards to nudity in the movie... I've read a couple of reviews which notice the Moynahan nude in fogged up shower scene, and forget to notice the Will Smith completely nude with no fog shower scene. I must say, as a female viewer it is nice to get the generous end of the stick when it comes to seeing something as, dare I say appealing? as Will Smith's very nicely developed body.
Lastly and in a point that has nothing to do with the movie and more to do with questions brought up by it-- It took until a day later and thinking about the movie some more that I realized that "I, Robot" was also very socially different. As in two of the main characters, including the hero are black males, one woman, and one (male) robot. I didn't find this odd at all in watching it, perhaps because Will Smith is such a recognisable character, but after thinking about it, I felt that this is a very positive sign. It shows, to me, that society is changing. I feel that I wouldn't have been able to see that, even 10-15 years ago and thought nothing of it. I've noticed this before though... that the most gender/social equal views seem to come from science fiction in our media... it is interesting.
Now, of course the movie does bring up some ethical questions like if it's all right to make a servant/slave class out of robots, etc., but all in all I really liked this movie. Any movie that makes you think is a good movie, any movie that gives you fun, drama, action, mystery, and makes you think is a great movie. Thank goodness I, Robot is all of the above.
Could have been more than a popcorn flick
SnoopyStyle25 October 2013
It's 2035, robots are everywhere in people's lives. Chicago Police Detective Del Spooner (Will Smith) is not a fan of robots due to something that happened in the past. He's sent to investigate the murder of Dr. Alfred Lanning (James Cromwell) the top robot scientist at U.S. Robotics. Spooner believes that a new NS-5 robot killed him, but the three laws of robotics make it impossible. Company scientist Susan Calvin (Bridget Moynahan) can't believe him until all heck breaks loose.
This is a movie derived from Isaac Asimov ideas, but turned into little more than a popcorn summer flick. It's yet another Will Smith blockbuster but it could have been so much more. The three laws were never introduced properly. They were just listed like so many assembly instructions. This is a big disservice because it's integral to the twist ending. The action and the CG are fun and impressive. I just wish this was more than a simple mechanical thriller.
This is a movie derived from Isaac Asimov ideas, but turned into little more than a popcorn summer flick. It's yet another Will Smith blockbuster but it could have been so much more. The three laws were never introduced properly. They were just listed like so many assembly instructions. This is a big disservice because it's integral to the twist ending. The action and the CG are fun and impressive. I just wish this was more than a simple mechanical thriller.
Just because it doesn't follow the book doesn't mean that it is not good
KnightsSayNI16 July 2004
From reading the comments posted by others I got the impression that people mainly rated it low because it did not follow the book. Just because a movie does not follow the original work like the Bible does not mean that the movie should not be given a chance. I read the Asimov book, and I went to the theater with my friend who has not. She enjoyed the movie just as much as I did, if not more. I was fascinated by the angle Proyas approached in the novel, and I did not mind one bit that the movie was completely different than the book.
Another element of the movie that receives an unfair "bad rap" is the acting. It's no worse than the acting in the Spider-Man movies. I am by no means a fan of Will Smith, but I was a fan of Willem Dafoe, and that mirror scene in Spider-Man made me cringe. Might of worked on stage, Willem, but not on the big screen. I did not find myself cringing at any acting in I, Robot. In fact, the only thing over-the-top sometimes was the special effects. Other than that, nothing made me slink down in my seat and cover my face in shame.
One actor that deserves a shout out is Alan Tudyk. I read many comments where people think he just voiced the character of Sonny. Actually, Tudyk pulled a Gollum. This means he put on a weird looking body suit and actually acting out the scenes. Later, CGI used his performance to model the computer graphic robot. Except for a few obvious actions scenes, Tudyk *was* Sonny. My complements to his performance.
Hopefully, people will give this movie the chance it really deserves, and not base their decisions on how close it followed the book. I give I, Robot a 7.5/10
Another element of the movie that receives an unfair "bad rap" is the acting. It's no worse than the acting in the Spider-Man movies. I am by no means a fan of Will Smith, but I was a fan of Willem Dafoe, and that mirror scene in Spider-Man made me cringe. Might of worked on stage, Willem, but not on the big screen. I did not find myself cringing at any acting in I, Robot. In fact, the only thing over-the-top sometimes was the special effects. Other than that, nothing made me slink down in my seat and cover my face in shame.
One actor that deserves a shout out is Alan Tudyk. I read many comments where people think he just voiced the character of Sonny. Actually, Tudyk pulled a Gollum. This means he put on a weird looking body suit and actually acting out the scenes. Later, CGI used his performance to model the computer graphic robot. Except for a few obvious actions scenes, Tudyk *was* Sonny. My complements to his performance.
Hopefully, people will give this movie the chance it really deserves, and not base their decisions on how close it followed the book. I give I, Robot a 7.5/10
clever idea which starts badly and finishes well
TheNorthernMonkee31 March 2005
Warning: Spoilers
SPOILERS Artificial Intelligence and our dependency upon machines. A subject area so frequently asked, that it's a wonder we ever get anything done. Stretching back to the 1920s and "Metropolis" cinema has raised this topic many times, and often the end result has been negative. In 2004's "I, Robot", the notion of robots and their role in society was brought up. In a story involving artificial intelligence and a not too distant future where robots were everywhere, the film deals with the subject area brilliantly. Led by a surprisingly good performance by Will Smith, it is an enjoyable film which is ruined only slightly by it's ridiculously large number of product placements throughout.
The year is 2035 and robots are everywhere. Doing small jobs like rubbish collection and dog walking, they are humanities friends. That is the view of everyone that is except for Detroit cop Del Spooner (Will Smith). With a strong hatred of robots, Spooner feels something is going to go wrong. Unfortunately for humanity, he just might be right.
"I, Robot" starts off badly. Attempting to set the scene by introducing our character and his surroundings, the film manages to contain more product advertisements in it's first twenty minutes, than you get during the entire of the Superbowl. From Spooner's interest in 'classic' shoes through to the emblem on his car, the film's beginning smacks of product placement. Luckily for the film and the audiences however, this placement does eventually stop.
After some of the film is paid for by the lucrative advertising connections, the story does actually take off at a decent speed. Introducing the idealistic robot psychologist Susan Calvin (Bridget Moynahan) and the 'unique' robot Sonny (Alan Tudyk), we slowly begin to become immersed in a tense 'who dunnit' story with large amounts of action and a detailed philosophy on existence.
The philosophy involved is remarkably logical actually. Far too often in Hollywood the combination of philosophy and action is ridiculously unbalanced. Whether in the second Matrix film where they stupidly fitted a complex and confusing philosophy into one ten minute period, or in other styles, far too often the action is either corrupted by the philosophy or vice versa. Therefore it is actually quite a pleasant surprise for a film to be so exciting, yet so logical.
Thanks to the original writings of Isaac Asimov, the story of "I,Robot" works well because the philosophy is an already recognisable one. Asimov's theories on artificial intelligence have been mentioned in countless different films, but few have truly considered the implications of the rules and how you interpret them. For this in itself, "I, Robot" deserves a lot of praise.
In terms of acting, "I, Robot" is a surprising experience. When Will Smith first wakes up with his hat on, the first question is how long until he really begins to grate. Amazingly though, like the product placements, after the first twenty minutes, Smith really begins to fit into his role and provides an appealing performance as the pessimistic Spooner.
Smith is also assisted by a decent supporting cast. Using the same technology as was used for Gollum in "Lord Of The Rings" Alan Tudyk is brilliant as Sonny the robot with emotions and a heart of gold. The highlight of the supporting stars though is the always brilliant James Cromwell as the deceased creator of robots everywhere. Cromwell has made some excellent career choices over the years and once again he shines throughout.
It's always a pleasant surprise to encounter an action film which has thought in it too. Adopting the theories of Asimov, "I, Robot" is a well made film with huge amounts of action and some deeply philosophical questions about existence. Sadly though, the film is let down due to an irritating first twenty minutes. Setting the scene and exploring a leading character is never a problem, but when a film sells it's soul with excessive, not even subtle, product placement, any dignity it has goes out the window. Whoever chose to allow such blatant disregard for the intelligence of the viewer should know better, mainly because "I,Robot" deserves more than that.
The year is 2035 and robots are everywhere. Doing small jobs like rubbish collection and dog walking, they are humanities friends. That is the view of everyone that is except for Detroit cop Del Spooner (Will Smith). With a strong hatred of robots, Spooner feels something is going to go wrong. Unfortunately for humanity, he just might be right.
"I, Robot" starts off badly. Attempting to set the scene by introducing our character and his surroundings, the film manages to contain more product advertisements in it's first twenty minutes, than you get during the entire of the Superbowl. From Spooner's interest in 'classic' shoes through to the emblem on his car, the film's beginning smacks of product placement. Luckily for the film and the audiences however, this placement does eventually stop.
After some of the film is paid for by the lucrative advertising connections, the story does actually take off at a decent speed. Introducing the idealistic robot psychologist Susan Calvin (Bridget Moynahan) and the 'unique' robot Sonny (Alan Tudyk), we slowly begin to become immersed in a tense 'who dunnit' story with large amounts of action and a detailed philosophy on existence.
The philosophy involved is remarkably logical actually. Far too often in Hollywood the combination of philosophy and action is ridiculously unbalanced. Whether in the second Matrix film where they stupidly fitted a complex and confusing philosophy into one ten minute period, or in other styles, far too often the action is either corrupted by the philosophy or vice versa. Therefore it is actually quite a pleasant surprise for a film to be so exciting, yet so logical.
Thanks to the original writings of Isaac Asimov, the story of "I,Robot" works well because the philosophy is an already recognisable one. Asimov's theories on artificial intelligence have been mentioned in countless different films, but few have truly considered the implications of the rules and how you interpret them. For this in itself, "I, Robot" deserves a lot of praise.
In terms of acting, "I, Robot" is a surprising experience. When Will Smith first wakes up with his hat on, the first question is how long until he really begins to grate. Amazingly though, like the product placements, after the first twenty minutes, Smith really begins to fit into his role and provides an appealing performance as the pessimistic Spooner.
Smith is also assisted by a decent supporting cast. Using the same technology as was used for Gollum in "Lord Of The Rings" Alan Tudyk is brilliant as Sonny the robot with emotions and a heart of gold. The highlight of the supporting stars though is the always brilliant James Cromwell as the deceased creator of robots everywhere. Cromwell has made some excellent career choices over the years and once again he shines throughout.
It's always a pleasant surprise to encounter an action film which has thought in it too. Adopting the theories of Asimov, "I, Robot" is a well made film with huge amounts of action and some deeply philosophical questions about existence. Sadly though, the film is let down due to an irritating first twenty minutes. Setting the scene and exploring a leading character is never a problem, but when a film sells it's soul with excessive, not even subtle, product placement, any dignity it has goes out the window. Whoever chose to allow such blatant disregard for the intelligence of the viewer should know better, mainly because "I,Robot" deserves more than that.
Great Special Effects, Looked Real And A Good Story Overall.
IndianaFord2 January 2005
I thought the concept of the storyline was good, as it could be conceived as realistic. Given the ever increasing advances in modern technology, one can, indeed, conceive the possibility of this kind of future occurrence.
I did not really see any flaws in this movie or in the actor's character but the philosophical aspect of the movie questions at what point does artificial intelligence cease to be artificial and true consciousness arise? Anyhow, I did like the A.I. in this movie and would definitely recommend, especially if you like Will Smith movies are the Terminator series. I do, however, prefer there to be no sequels to this movie due to the fact that a sequel would probably be no more than a revamped version of the first one. With that being said, I recommend seeing it. 8/10
I did not really see any flaws in this movie or in the actor's character but the philosophical aspect of the movie questions at what point does artificial intelligence cease to be artificial and true consciousness arise? Anyhow, I did like the A.I. in this movie and would definitely recommend, especially if you like Will Smith movies are the Terminator series. I do, however, prefer there to be no sequels to this movie due to the fact that a sequel would probably be no more than a revamped version of the first one. With that being said, I recommend seeing it. 8/10
Quite watchable despite the Hollywood gloss and artificiality
Leofwine_draca6 August 2016
Warning: Spoilers
The first big-budget adaptation of sci-fi writer Isaac Asimov's work isn't particularly faithful to the book; rather, it is "suggested" by the original stories to be found in Asimov's collection I, ROBOT. The main elements which recur are the three laws of robotics and the character of Susan Calvin. Whilst other events are taken straight from Asimov's fiction, for the most part this is a typical Hollywood blockbuster with a brainy idea grafted onto it.
I have to admit, when I first saw the casting for this film, I was less than impressed. Comedy man Will Smith in a serious, go-it-alone science fiction movie? He's no Tom Cruise, now is he? But, despite occasional unwanted touches of humour and dumbness, Smith's character is plot driven and focused, and Smith doesn't lark around too much or become too overbearing. The sub-plot of the detective investigation is certainly clichéd, with yet another cop who nobody believes and who has his badge taken back, but there are a few bionic surprises to keep viewers interested.
The whole story of the robots, however, is very well handled. It was always a difficult and rather deep concept to grasp, and whilst I, ROBOT only skims the surface, it does so with some skill. One of the main characters is a robot named Sonny, brought to life using the same technology as Gollum, and whilst not quite as sympathetic, he proves to be a unique and engaging character. The best thing to say about the effects is that you forget Sonny wasn't really "there" on set, filming; CGI characters have now become the norm and blend in perfectly with the actors. The rest of the effects, from futuristic cityscapes to huge ball-wheeled robot lorries, are generally impressive, with only the introduction of the 'robot army' looking like something out of STAR WARS.
Director Alex Proyas (DARK CITY) always goes for interesting material and this film is no exception. Not only does it raise interesting questions about the humanity of robots, but it also provides the thrills and spills essential to any Hollywood blockbuster. There's an OTT car chase with robots attacking Smith's vehicle, which is cartoonish but cool; and some fun robot destruction towards the end of the movie. Moynahan, as female lead Calvin, is surprisingly wooden and her character seems frail, whereas I think a wily, intelligent heroine would have suited the character better. Otherwise we get Bruce Greenwood chewing it up as the stock corporate baddie and James Cromwell doing another of his intelligent old man personas. Although not always successful, I, ROBOT proves to be a watchable movie with potential for future viewings.
I have to admit, when I first saw the casting for this film, I was less than impressed. Comedy man Will Smith in a serious, go-it-alone science fiction movie? He's no Tom Cruise, now is he? But, despite occasional unwanted touches of humour and dumbness, Smith's character is plot driven and focused, and Smith doesn't lark around too much or become too overbearing. The sub-plot of the detective investigation is certainly clichéd, with yet another cop who nobody believes and who has his badge taken back, but there are a few bionic surprises to keep viewers interested.
The whole story of the robots, however, is very well handled. It was always a difficult and rather deep concept to grasp, and whilst I, ROBOT only skims the surface, it does so with some skill. One of the main characters is a robot named Sonny, brought to life using the same technology as Gollum, and whilst not quite as sympathetic, he proves to be a unique and engaging character. The best thing to say about the effects is that you forget Sonny wasn't really "there" on set, filming; CGI characters have now become the norm and blend in perfectly with the actors. The rest of the effects, from futuristic cityscapes to huge ball-wheeled robot lorries, are generally impressive, with only the introduction of the 'robot army' looking like something out of STAR WARS.
Director Alex Proyas (DARK CITY) always goes for interesting material and this film is no exception. Not only does it raise interesting questions about the humanity of robots, but it also provides the thrills and spills essential to any Hollywood blockbuster. There's an OTT car chase with robots attacking Smith's vehicle, which is cartoonish but cool; and some fun robot destruction towards the end of the movie. Moynahan, as female lead Calvin, is surprisingly wooden and her character seems frail, whereas I think a wily, intelligent heroine would have suited the character better. Otherwise we get Bruce Greenwood chewing it up as the stock corporate baddie and James Cromwell doing another of his intelligent old man personas. Although not always successful, I, ROBOT proves to be a watchable movie with potential for future viewings.
Should not have taken any credit from Asimov
bismuthine23 February 2007
Warning: Spoilers
This was so disappointing. I thought the movie was truly inspired from Asimov's short stories... quite the opposite, actually. As other users have pointed out, this is a disgrace to Asimov master piece. The ending is so predictable and irrelevant. Beside, many would argue that such a scenario would have been examined by robot engineer. Nothing new with the trivial motto 'mankind is the worst danger for its own security'. The book was so much more subtle in the psychology of the robot and their interaction to human being. Sigh deeply my friend and don't waste your time if you are a real SF aficionado.
Another point, this movie will age very very badly if one judges by the costumes only. Already, completely out of fashion!
Well, of course it was not a complete fiasco. 5 stars for the usual nicely oiled Hollywood machine. Consider reading the book and evolving toward real SF literature and Cinema (even beyond Asimov).
Another point, this movie will age very very badly if one judges by the costumes only. Already, completely out of fashion!
Well, of course it was not a complete fiasco. 5 stars for the usual nicely oiled Hollywood machine. Consider reading the book and evolving toward real SF literature and Cinema (even beyond Asimov).
Excellent film
pawsplay21 July 2004
The maker of a film adaptation has three choices. First, he can try to translate the original medium as faithfully as possible, striving as much as possible to preserve the spirit and content of the original while re-imagining the story as a film. Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings films exemplify this approach. Second, he could instead try to capture the essence of the original, while largely abandoning the particulars of the original, as in the intelligently satirical but hard-hearted film version of Starship Troopers. Third, he can try to do something original with the material, drawing inspiration from the written story, but creating a unique film with a unique vision. I, Robot is more the the third than the first or second. While little remains of Asimov's stories in this killer robot metropolitan fantasy, the film is informed by, and offers no disrespect, to the good Doctor's creations.
Will Smith plays a Jack Slater-styled maverick cop. If it's old, it's good.
He wears vintage converse, listens to Stevie Wonder, and apparently regards sweet potato pie as a food group. Will Smith's acting is a naturalistic shuffle, a Columbo-like pastiche of mumbling, sarcasm, and unexpected outbursts of charisma and off-balancing interrogation techniques. He delivers his one-liners with unnecessary seriousness. While in Men in Black, he aimed for the ballparks with his power-swinging action-comedy style, here his conscientious style gets in the way, suggesting a character who stands in front of the mirror practicing his zingers like a Tuesday night comic. It's not entirely Smith's fault, as the movie itself can't seem to decide if he's standing in for Bogart or Schwarzenegger, or if the character had a life of his own before the film starts rolling. His performance is intelligent, marred by occasional "Gotcha, suckaz!" moments that remind us that all films made in Hollywood are made in Hollywood.
His opposite, Bridget Moynahan, fits her role more surely. She's an ice queen in the classic action movie tradition, a stiff-necked, self-important, lonely woman who has been absorbed by her work so completely she remains a teenager at heart, awkward, vulnerable, and searching for the approval of others. Moynahan's bug-eyed discomfort and clipped, TV-sarcastic delivery are those of the quintessential comedy sidekick. Nonetheless, in rare moments, she invests the character's personal revelations with warmth, doubt, and a glow of determination and moral purpose. While Smith vacillates between supercop and Bogie, Moynahan seems to have found a happy medium between the Saturday matinée and the midnight marathon, a mixture of fun and humanity with a carriage of seriousness appropriate to what is essentially a monster movie.
The robot, Sonny, is a character himself, a curious, frightened creature that seems capable of anything. Could Sonny be the murderer? We hope not, and yet, we see the grim possibility that a machine might consider itself more than a human being. We understand Sonny's drive to live and grow. As human beings, we know what lengths we would go to to ensure our survival, whatever the moral charges facing us.
A top scientist has been murdered, and there are no human suspects, so the powerful US Robotics corporation (no relation to the modem manufacturers) convinces the powers-that-be to consider his unexpected death a suicide. Spooner (Will Smith) alone searches for the truth of the matter, fueled by hatred for robots and a personal debt to the dead scientist. Dr. Calvin (Moynahan) feels his intrusive investigation is unnecessary, although new pieces of evidence appear that gradually shake her confidence. Robots are programmed by the Three Laws to serve humanity, but Spooner is convinced one of the new NS-5 units, a unique prototype, is the murderer. As Spooner gets deeper to the heart of the mystery, the story explodes with robotic violence. Like all good mysteries, the real question is not "Whodunnit?" but "Why?" The heroes do some things for the wrong reasons, and the villains do some things for the right, rational reasons. Although I, Robot hardly pauses for introspection, it does asks us, "What makes a human being superior to a machine?" There are twists and surprises, although in the end, the movie plays out in the only way it can, a band of brave heroes trying to throw the ring into Mt. Doom while the armies of evil march. And yet, the movie leaves us wanting more. What is the future of humanity? How will we control our machines, and how will we prevent the machines from becoming our masters?
While not as ambitious as A.I., it is more successful, and while not as intelligent as Robocop, it is better played. While the movie does suffer from inconsistencies in mood and philosophy, such hiccups are secondary to the emotionality and drive of the film, its fury of thought as well as action. In moments, I, Robot is a terrifying vision of the future. Too few science-fiction movies manage to scare us with the power of technology, but future shock is vital to the science-fiction story. Modern science-fiction truly began with the detonation at White Sands. The Atomic Age has given way to the Digital Age, but we still have not solved the problem of how to wrest the power of technology from the creatures of the id.
Will Smith plays a Jack Slater-styled maverick cop. If it's old, it's good.
He wears vintage converse, listens to Stevie Wonder, and apparently regards sweet potato pie as a food group. Will Smith's acting is a naturalistic shuffle, a Columbo-like pastiche of mumbling, sarcasm, and unexpected outbursts of charisma and off-balancing interrogation techniques. He delivers his one-liners with unnecessary seriousness. While in Men in Black, he aimed for the ballparks with his power-swinging action-comedy style, here his conscientious style gets in the way, suggesting a character who stands in front of the mirror practicing his zingers like a Tuesday night comic. It's not entirely Smith's fault, as the movie itself can't seem to decide if he's standing in for Bogart or Schwarzenegger, or if the character had a life of his own before the film starts rolling. His performance is intelligent, marred by occasional "Gotcha, suckaz!" moments that remind us that all films made in Hollywood are made in Hollywood.
His opposite, Bridget Moynahan, fits her role more surely. She's an ice queen in the classic action movie tradition, a stiff-necked, self-important, lonely woman who has been absorbed by her work so completely she remains a teenager at heart, awkward, vulnerable, and searching for the approval of others. Moynahan's bug-eyed discomfort and clipped, TV-sarcastic delivery are those of the quintessential comedy sidekick. Nonetheless, in rare moments, she invests the character's personal revelations with warmth, doubt, and a glow of determination and moral purpose. While Smith vacillates between supercop and Bogie, Moynahan seems to have found a happy medium between the Saturday matinée and the midnight marathon, a mixture of fun and humanity with a carriage of seriousness appropriate to what is essentially a monster movie.
The robot, Sonny, is a character himself, a curious, frightened creature that seems capable of anything. Could Sonny be the murderer? We hope not, and yet, we see the grim possibility that a machine might consider itself more than a human being. We understand Sonny's drive to live and grow. As human beings, we know what lengths we would go to to ensure our survival, whatever the moral charges facing us.
A top scientist has been murdered, and there are no human suspects, so the powerful US Robotics corporation (no relation to the modem manufacturers) convinces the powers-that-be to consider his unexpected death a suicide. Spooner (Will Smith) alone searches for the truth of the matter, fueled by hatred for robots and a personal debt to the dead scientist. Dr. Calvin (Moynahan) feels his intrusive investigation is unnecessary, although new pieces of evidence appear that gradually shake her confidence. Robots are programmed by the Three Laws to serve humanity, but Spooner is convinced one of the new NS-5 units, a unique prototype, is the murderer. As Spooner gets deeper to the heart of the mystery, the story explodes with robotic violence. Like all good mysteries, the real question is not "Whodunnit?" but "Why?" The heroes do some things for the wrong reasons, and the villains do some things for the right, rational reasons. Although I, Robot hardly pauses for introspection, it does asks us, "What makes a human being superior to a machine?" There are twists and surprises, although in the end, the movie plays out in the only way it can, a band of brave heroes trying to throw the ring into Mt. Doom while the armies of evil march. And yet, the movie leaves us wanting more. What is the future of humanity? How will we control our machines, and how will we prevent the machines from becoming our masters?
While not as ambitious as A.I., it is more successful, and while not as intelligent as Robocop, it is better played. While the movie does suffer from inconsistencies in mood and philosophy, such hiccups are secondary to the emotionality and drive of the film, its fury of thought as well as action. In moments, I, Robot is a terrifying vision of the future. Too few science-fiction movies manage to scare us with the power of technology, but future shock is vital to the science-fiction story. Modern science-fiction truly began with the detonation at White Sands. The Atomic Age has given way to the Digital Age, but we still have not solved the problem of how to wrest the power of technology from the creatures of the id.
This Film Isn't Going Anywhere.
GeorgeRoots26 August 2014
Warning: Spoilers
With many of these Blockbuster films that came out in the mid 2000's, I ended up pretty much giving them a 7/10. I was surprised at just how much I enjoyed Roland Emmerich's "The Day after Tomorrow", and both of these movies ended up being part of the family DVD collection. Since then, I've ended up doing a little research and realised that "I, Robot" shares very little with it's source material, but then is one of those adaptations that strangely never bothered me.
In 2035, robots are used as servants for almost everything, and none seem to display any negativity or objection. Programmed with the three Laws of robotics directives: Never harm a human or let a human come to harm, always obey humans unless this violates the first Law and finally to protect its own existence (Unless this violates the First or Second Laws). The co-founder of U. S. Robotics, dies after falling several stories from his office window. His death is ruled as suicide, but Detective Spooner (Will Smith), who knew Lanning as a friend believes otherwise.
Will Smith is very good as a hard-nut detective. Of course he is one of the most likable stars and I had hoped from all the trailers and marketing they showed, he would keep it up consistency throughout the films running time and he really did. Alan Tudyk did a wonderful job as the voice of Sonny. I'm really glad that the character is developed so well, but I wish there had been more screen time dedicated to him. The female scientist played by Bridget Moynahan however, looked pretty lost when it came to filming certain scenes and feels greatly underwritten.
Final Verdict: If you're looking for a decent pop-corn flick, "I, Robot" will more than enough satisfy. However, I don't think it's going to entertain enough to live a longer life than the year it came out. 7/10.
In 2035, robots are used as servants for almost everything, and none seem to display any negativity or objection. Programmed with the three Laws of robotics directives: Never harm a human or let a human come to harm, always obey humans unless this violates the first Law and finally to protect its own existence (Unless this violates the First or Second Laws). The co-founder of U. S. Robotics, dies after falling several stories from his office window. His death is ruled as suicide, but Detective Spooner (Will Smith), who knew Lanning as a friend believes otherwise.
Will Smith is very good as a hard-nut detective. Of course he is one of the most likable stars and I had hoped from all the trailers and marketing they showed, he would keep it up consistency throughout the films running time and he really did. Alan Tudyk did a wonderful job as the voice of Sonny. I'm really glad that the character is developed so well, but I wish there had been more screen time dedicated to him. The female scientist played by Bridget Moynahan however, looked pretty lost when it came to filming certain scenes and feels greatly underwritten.
Final Verdict: If you're looking for a decent pop-corn flick, "I, Robot" will more than enough satisfy. However, I don't think it's going to entertain enough to live a longer life than the year it came out. 7/10.
I never thought it will be that good...
thenightspark16 July 2005
I am not really a big fan of this kind of movies (the sci-fi movies), and I rarely watch movies that takes place in the future, may be because I'm realistic and love realistic movies.
Anyway, even though I don't usually like that kind of movies but I totally loved this one!! The story was so good and the acting was great, I like all Will Smith's movies, and the way the subject was presented was somehow innovative and makes the audience feel the story behind the movie, it's not only the action and the sci-fi, there's good drama too.
I never thought it will be that good, but it is! It is very good.
Anyway, even though I don't usually like that kind of movies but I totally loved this one!! The story was so good and the acting was great, I like all Will Smith's movies, and the way the subject was presented was somehow innovative and makes the audience feel the story behind the movie, it's not only the action and the sci-fi, there's good drama too.
I never thought it will be that good, but it is! It is very good.
A film done right even if not entirely
orourkec-292-26915527 September 2014
Warning: Spoilers
For me, what I find impressive about the new technology of today is the fact that any SF movies that take place in a futuristic Earth or any other SF movies that have a bright and colorful sun, sky and clouds are computer generated images pasted onto green walls and I, Robot which is a futuristic SF film obviously has it. If you just stopped doing whatever you're doing at the moment and thought only about the green walls and then the final computer generated but real-like images put on screen and successfully achieved like that somehow because of the green walls involved your mind is just blown away about the basic idea(s) of the process and that's the case with me. I just find that whole idea of filmmaking so interesting. Now, for what I personally think of I, Robot first of all is that the special effects are powerfully irresistible! These special effects are so, so good that the Academy Awards should have definitely given it the Oscar but I'm disappointed that it was beaten down by apparently even better special effects from the Spider-Man 2 movie. I've seen the Spider- Man 2 movie and in my honest opinion I think it is I, Robot that best deserved the Oscar. Furthermore I thought that the special effects of the robots added with the red light on their chest is so spectacular! What's more is that I, Robot's narrative is gripping, its gun fighting car action sequence is exciting, so wild and devastating and finally when it comes to the Will Smith's character he has the perfect charm and really intrigued me. I also forgot to say that I think that the exploration of what developed technology in the near or far future can hold for mankind is more than essential cinema. The main problem about this movie however is that it isn't thought- provocative enough, the action feels a bit routine and does not have enough of an independent feel to it and lacks in being amazingly spectacular and the result from it is that I, Robot is less than a fully poignant action-SF movie. Sad. And the ending was a little unclear. But, despite these flaws, I, Robot stays a film done right My rating for the movie: 7.1/10
Simply Amazing
svlehtinen16 July 2004
I knew this movie was going to be good before I even went to the theatre, but I didn't know it would be as good as it was. It was pretty intense from beginning to end and I left my seat quite satisfied.
"I, Robot" is set in the year 2035 and is centered around a cop named Del Spooner (Will Smith) who investigates the death of the top scientist at U.S. Robotics. Suspicious, as always, Det. Spooner immediately suspects that a robot has something to do with the crime and as he continues his investigation and delves deeper into USR the truth starts to unfold about what is really going on.
First, I must say that if you are a true fan and follower of Isaac Asimov you probably won't like this movie because you'll be too hung up on the slight, or not-so-slight, differences between the movie and Asimov's original. You should, however, try to take it with a grain of salt and not worry about silly things like that. The basic ideas are still there, they just threw a little "Hollywood" in there. You have to expect that nowadays.
Some people also seems to have an "issue" with Will Smith that I've never been able to figure out. He's witty, charming, funny and looks the part. His acting is great as per usual and his two co-stars Bridget Moynahan (playing Susan Calvin) and Alan Tudyk (playing Sonny, an NS-5 robot) deliver top-notch performances as well. Alan Tudyk especially, did a wonderful job as Sonny. You really feel for him at times.
Considering that this is an action movie at heart, as you would expect, the fight scenes and action sequences are very, very well done. There were a few times that I realized I hadn't breathed in the last two minutes or so because I was too "in" to the movie.
The story was nicely laid out and the ending will not disappoint you. The director (Alex Proyas, Dark City) did an amazing job shooting this film.
The one thing that never left my mind the whole time I was watching the movie was how well each scene was shot and how one scene transitioned into the next.
Overall this movie did not disappoint me in any way. The story, the acting, the directing...all pretty much flawless.
Rating: 10 / 10
"I, Robot" is set in the year 2035 and is centered around a cop named Del Spooner (Will Smith) who investigates the death of the top scientist at U.S. Robotics. Suspicious, as always, Det. Spooner immediately suspects that a robot has something to do with the crime and as he continues his investigation and delves deeper into USR the truth starts to unfold about what is really going on.
First, I must say that if you are a true fan and follower of Isaac Asimov you probably won't like this movie because you'll be too hung up on the slight, or not-so-slight, differences between the movie and Asimov's original. You should, however, try to take it with a grain of salt and not worry about silly things like that. The basic ideas are still there, they just threw a little "Hollywood" in there. You have to expect that nowadays.
Some people also seems to have an "issue" with Will Smith that I've never been able to figure out. He's witty, charming, funny and looks the part. His acting is great as per usual and his two co-stars Bridget Moynahan (playing Susan Calvin) and Alan Tudyk (playing Sonny, an NS-5 robot) deliver top-notch performances as well. Alan Tudyk especially, did a wonderful job as Sonny. You really feel for him at times.
Considering that this is an action movie at heart, as you would expect, the fight scenes and action sequences are very, very well done. There were a few times that I realized I hadn't breathed in the last two minutes or so because I was too "in" to the movie.
The story was nicely laid out and the ending will not disappoint you. The director (Alex Proyas, Dark City) did an amazing job shooting this film.
The one thing that never left my mind the whole time I was watching the movie was how well each scene was shot and how one scene transitioned into the next.
Overall this movie did not disappoint me in any way. The story, the acting, the directing...all pretty much flawless.
Rating: 10 / 10
Enjoyable, but..
niriath14 March 2020
I,Robot
clayton3632013314 June 2007
The first time I saw this movie,I was just really surprised!What a good movie,it's just my taste.I love it,and I've seen it for about four times,and I can still watch it for another four more times!It's full of Sci-fi and action,they're both my favorite genre.
Sometimes I'm thinking about the robots in the movie,I think the thing that happens in the movie will come true in the future,how will the human in that Age,I believe there'll be a hero who'll save the world from being dominate by those cunning robots,they have no hearts,no love,no emotion,they just have an empty metal body.What'll happen if we're really ruled by them?I can't imagine how it could be,people are doing hard works while the robots are whipping them,how terrible.
Now,science and technology are well developed,human will use robots, let's think about our future,please care about ourselves.
Sometimes I'm thinking about the robots in the movie,I think the thing that happens in the movie will come true in the future,how will the human in that Age,I believe there'll be a hero who'll save the world from being dominate by those cunning robots,they have no hearts,no love,no emotion,they just have an empty metal body.What'll happen if we're really ruled by them?I can't imagine how it could be,people are doing hard works while the robots are whipping them,how terrible.
Now,science and technology are well developed,human will use robots, let's think about our future,please care about ourselves.
Clever and fun but little more than a blockbuster
MovieAddict201612 December 2004
Chicago, circa 2035: there are four humans to every robot, and Det. Spooner (Will Smith) has a strong dislike for them. Due to the "Three Laws" of Robotics, no robot can directly or indirectly harm a human being - but due to a past incident involving a robot, Spooner finds it hard to consider them totally harmless.
After a robotics engineer (James Cromwell) leaps to his death from a skyscraper, Spooner is called in to investigate - and stumbles upon the frightening prospect that a robot may be the murder suspect.
If you've seen the ads for this movie you know what is going to happen. It tries to deliver some surprises within its running time but the final "twist" is hardly shocking (at least not on the same level as a Verbal Kint-style surprise) and the movie is filled with many loud action sequences that place it in the blockbuster category.
This isn't too bad. I really enjoyed the movie. It's not great, but it's certainly not bad at all and does what it should: entertain. I expected little from the film after viewing the appalling trailer, and was pleasantly surprised.
However, I do feel that had the project been touched up by a better writer than Akiva Goldsman, and had a better cast (including director) been assembled, it might have been better in a deeper way. I do enjoy Proyas' direction but it seems a bit superficial at times and the marketing plugs and everything seem to combine, resulting in a schmaltzy overtone to the film that seems heavily reliant on Hollywood rather than brain power.
Will Smith really needs to stop playing these tough guy roles, because he's not exceptional at them. He fits the part fairly well but Spooner is a bit too sarcastic and flippant to find totally likable - he treads a thin line and passes over it a few times, mainly because he doesn't really seem to have a purpose for being as obnoxious as he is. It reminds me of Eddie Murphy's Axl Foley from "Beverly Hills Cop" (and not because they're both black actors!) - he is a loudmouth tough guy cliché who no one believes, etc. But Murphy was 10x better at playing this sort of thing because his character was actually a great deal more likable.
Also, the movie is too heavy on its themes - its source material is strong and that's why I believe a more talented cast might have made a truly marvelous science-fiction film, but Alex Proyas merely tries to take the themes and insert them in a mainstream Hollywood blockbuster - not a pretty outcome. The whole racist overtones surrounding the movie are certainly prescient, but will suffocate many viewers looking for subtle viewing.
I seem to be bashing the film, but I don't mean to. It's a lot of fun, delivered more than I ever expected. The CGI are some of the best I've ever seen (and I'm not a fan of computer animation), and overall it's just a really fun film and will entertain you throughout - as long as you're not expecting too much depth.
After a robotics engineer (James Cromwell) leaps to his death from a skyscraper, Spooner is called in to investigate - and stumbles upon the frightening prospect that a robot may be the murder suspect.
If you've seen the ads for this movie you know what is going to happen. It tries to deliver some surprises within its running time but the final "twist" is hardly shocking (at least not on the same level as a Verbal Kint-style surprise) and the movie is filled with many loud action sequences that place it in the blockbuster category.
This isn't too bad. I really enjoyed the movie. It's not great, but it's certainly not bad at all and does what it should: entertain. I expected little from the film after viewing the appalling trailer, and was pleasantly surprised.
However, I do feel that had the project been touched up by a better writer than Akiva Goldsman, and had a better cast (including director) been assembled, it might have been better in a deeper way. I do enjoy Proyas' direction but it seems a bit superficial at times and the marketing plugs and everything seem to combine, resulting in a schmaltzy overtone to the film that seems heavily reliant on Hollywood rather than brain power.
Will Smith really needs to stop playing these tough guy roles, because he's not exceptional at them. He fits the part fairly well but Spooner is a bit too sarcastic and flippant to find totally likable - he treads a thin line and passes over it a few times, mainly because he doesn't really seem to have a purpose for being as obnoxious as he is. It reminds me of Eddie Murphy's Axl Foley from "Beverly Hills Cop" (and not because they're both black actors!) - he is a loudmouth tough guy cliché who no one believes, etc. But Murphy was 10x better at playing this sort of thing because his character was actually a great deal more likable.
Also, the movie is too heavy on its themes - its source material is strong and that's why I believe a more talented cast might have made a truly marvelous science-fiction film, but Alex Proyas merely tries to take the themes and insert them in a mainstream Hollywood blockbuster - not a pretty outcome. The whole racist overtones surrounding the movie are certainly prescient, but will suffocate many viewers looking for subtle viewing.
I seem to be bashing the film, but I don't mean to. It's a lot of fun, delivered more than I ever expected. The CGI are some of the best I've ever seen (and I'm not a fan of computer animation), and overall it's just a really fun film and will entertain you throughout - as long as you're not expecting too much depth.
A brilliant movie
scarlet_carsons_x1 August 2005
Warning: Spoilers
When I saw the trailer for 'I, Robot', I knew I was going to like it. And that is not because I am a huge Will Smith fan (the trailer does not show the shower scene, nor do I particularly want to see him in the shower), or because I am an Asimov fan (I read the books afterwards). It was just very simply because I liked the idea of a robot committing a murder, because its a bit different to the usual summer action films of swords/guns/kill/maim.
Once in there the film started (well, my friend spilt her nachos with cheese sauce everywhere during the trailers and we spent about five minutes clearing it up, but luckily we did not miss any of the actual movie) and I found the beginning very attention-grabbing. Then suddenly you are catapulted into Will Smith's bedroom and this Stevie Wonder music starts playing, and then you see that Will Smith's character dresses like Shaft but with Converse. I do not think that this movie is a two-hour converse commercial. It is just a way to point out that Spooner is a technophobe. The scene with the woman pointing out that Spooner is an *ass***** cracked me up, as did the look on Spooner's face when she said it, so the movie was so far so good. I liked Spooner's character already. When Spooner heads to USR, everyone in the cinema kind of breathed a longing sigh when they saw that lovely Audi. I don't think anyone took their eyes off it until they put it into the car park. And then everyone went 'ugh' when they saw Lanning's blood on the floor.
As the movie progressed I liked it more and more, especially when the character Sonny was introduced. Sonny has to be the best CGI character I've ever seen, and he is ironically the movie's best way of expressing emotion. One of the only things I didn't get was why Spooner didn't notice that Sonny has these bright blue eyes and the others don't - is the guy a homicide detective or not? But that can be overlooked.
The last action scene where Spooner has to destroy VIKI was breathtaking, and I found the ending one of the best a movie has ever had...I mean, it was just so sweet the way Sonny's dream came true.
So, I, Robot - I would very highly recommend it. Its my favourite movie (and my brother's), and you should see it just for the character of Sonny alone, especially if you are an action/sci-fi/mystery junkie. Enjoy!
irobotfan
Once in there the film started (well, my friend spilt her nachos with cheese sauce everywhere during the trailers and we spent about five minutes clearing it up, but luckily we did not miss any of the actual movie) and I found the beginning very attention-grabbing. Then suddenly you are catapulted into Will Smith's bedroom and this Stevie Wonder music starts playing, and then you see that Will Smith's character dresses like Shaft but with Converse. I do not think that this movie is a two-hour converse commercial. It is just a way to point out that Spooner is a technophobe. The scene with the woman pointing out that Spooner is an *ass***** cracked me up, as did the look on Spooner's face when she said it, so the movie was so far so good. I liked Spooner's character already. When Spooner heads to USR, everyone in the cinema kind of breathed a longing sigh when they saw that lovely Audi. I don't think anyone took their eyes off it until they put it into the car park. And then everyone went 'ugh' when they saw Lanning's blood on the floor.
As the movie progressed I liked it more and more, especially when the character Sonny was introduced. Sonny has to be the best CGI character I've ever seen, and he is ironically the movie's best way of expressing emotion. One of the only things I didn't get was why Spooner didn't notice that Sonny has these bright blue eyes and the others don't - is the guy a homicide detective or not? But that can be overlooked.
The last action scene where Spooner has to destroy VIKI was breathtaking, and I found the ending one of the best a movie has ever had...I mean, it was just so sweet the way Sonny's dream came true.
So, I, Robot - I would very highly recommend it. Its my favourite movie (and my brother's), and you should see it just for the character of Sonny alone, especially if you are an action/sci-fi/mystery junkie. Enjoy!
irobotfan
Creative,but gets far-fetched at times
Ref6521 March 2008
I find this movie creative and far-fetched.I think it's creative because it is set in the year 2023 and robots have been invented.I think it's far-fetched because it seemed that the makers were trying to make the film longer by adding some stuff that wasn't necessary.It's about this scientist or doctor who designs a more up to date version of the other robots.When the scientist happens to commit suicide one detective gets very suspicious about the new robots and tries to find the missing answers to the scientist's death.When the new robots get delivered to the city,they have a revolution and set up a curfew.The detective tries to shut down the main machine but will he succeed?
I enjoyed this movie,but I found a bit of it far-fetched and made me give it a seven.I,Robot can keep many entertained with the action.Will Smith put on a good performance as usual.Recommended to Will Smith fans ,sci-fi fans and if you liked the movie "Robots".I thought it was great,but I didn't love it.
I enjoyed this movie,but I found a bit of it far-fetched and made me give it a seven.I,Robot can keep many entertained with the action.Will Smith put on a good performance as usual.Recommended to Will Smith fans ,sci-fi fans and if you liked the movie "Robots".I thought it was great,but I didn't love it.
STUPID Frankenstein
vhilden6 January 2008
For any fan of Isaac Asimov, this film is a total fraud.
Dr. Asimov went to great lengths to explain his motivation for writing his robot stories in the introduction to "The Rest of the Robots", an anthology published in 1968. In Dr. Asimov's words, "... there seemed only one change to be rung on this plot -- Robots were created and destroyed their creator; ... I quickly grew tired of this dull hundred-times-old tale. As a person interested in science, I resented the purely Faustian interpretation of science".
The film is totally at odds with the philosophy Dr. Asimov defended, and totally different from all the robot stories he wrote. Only a few names and the "three laws of robotics" were copied, but the central point in all his stories, that a robot could never be made to violate the three laws, was not respected. The Asimov robot stories are fun because they try to find situations were there is enough contradiction in those laws to create interesting situations.
"I, Robot", the movie, is just one more remake of that old, old, old story Isaac Asimov hated so much, it's Frankenstein again. If you insist on seeing that same story again, better get Mel Brooks' version, it's funnier.
Let's close with Asimov: "Never, never, was one of my robots to turn stupidly on his creator for no purpose but to demonstrate, for one more weary time, the crime and punishment of Faust".
Dr. Asimov went to great lengths to explain his motivation for writing his robot stories in the introduction to "The Rest of the Robots", an anthology published in 1968. In Dr. Asimov's words, "... there seemed only one change to be rung on this plot -- Robots were created and destroyed their creator; ... I quickly grew tired of this dull hundred-times-old tale. As a person interested in science, I resented the purely Faustian interpretation of science".
The film is totally at odds with the philosophy Dr. Asimov defended, and totally different from all the robot stories he wrote. Only a few names and the "three laws of robotics" were copied, but the central point in all his stories, that a robot could never be made to violate the three laws, was not respected. The Asimov robot stories are fun because they try to find situations were there is enough contradiction in those laws to create interesting situations.
"I, Robot", the movie, is just one more remake of that old, old, old story Isaac Asimov hated so much, it's Frankenstein again. If you insist on seeing that same story again, better get Mel Brooks' version, it's funnier.
Let's close with Asimov: "Never, never, was one of my robots to turn stupidly on his creator for no purpose but to demonstrate, for one more weary time, the crime and punishment of Faust".
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
