Sunday, August 15, 2004
I, Robot revisited
I finally saw I, Robot last weekend and I thought I would share my thoughts, particularly as they diverge somewhat from my preconceptions (here and here).
Previously I expressed reservations about the film because I felt that the film would not be true to Asimov's vision.
I still feel that way. A massive attack by robots on humans would never happen if Asimov had written the story. Also there's this exchange between Spooner (Will Smith - the detective who doesn't trust robots) and Lt. John Bergin (Chi McBride - the police chief who doesn't believe robots can commit a crime). (paraphrasing)
Protagonists typically reflect the views of the author, and Asimov, an avowed atheist, never could've written the line.
[Warning: Spoilers ahead] All that being said, the movie does inhabit Asimov's universe. The robots left to themselves seem to be sincerely obeying and following the three laws. And like Daneel Olivaw, an AI (VIKI) evolves to conceive of a zeroth law of sorts. However VIKI takes things far further than Olivaw and seeks to protect humans from themselves by creating a police (robot?) state wherein the lives of humans would be carefully regimented. This seems like a reasonable development to me and the story itself is internally consistent and while the plot is obvious, the movie is still entertaining to watch.
So if you're the type that doesn't require your movies to be an exact recreation of the original story, then you'll enjoy I, Robot. Plus if you're a chick or have been struck by Al Qaeda's latest "weapon," there's lots of gratuitous shots of Will Smith's bum. Bum looker. Cheeky monkey.
Comments(0) |
Previously I expressed reservations about the film because I felt that the film would not be true to Asimov's vision.
I still feel that way. A massive attack by robots on humans would never happen if Asimov had written the story. Also there's this exchange between Spooner (Will Smith - the detective who doesn't trust robots) and Lt. John Bergin (Chi McBride - the police chief who doesn't believe robots can commit a crime). (paraphrasing)
Bergin: There's never been a robot who has committed a crime. Why would
this robot? Robots are incapable of commiting crimes - it's in their hardware.
It's like humans walking on water, we just can't do it.
Spooner: Well, there was this one guy.
Protagonists typically reflect the views of the author, and Asimov, an avowed atheist, never could've written the line.
[Warning: Spoilers ahead] All that being said, the movie does inhabit Asimov's universe. The robots left to themselves seem to be sincerely obeying and following the three laws. And like Daneel Olivaw, an AI (VIKI) evolves to conceive of a zeroth law of sorts. However VIKI takes things far further than Olivaw and seeks to protect humans from themselves by creating a police (robot?) state wherein the lives of humans would be carefully regimented. This seems like a reasonable development to me and the story itself is internally consistent and while the plot is obvious, the movie is still entertaining to watch.
So if you're the type that doesn't require your movies to be an exact recreation of the original story, then you'll enjoy I, Robot. Plus if you're a chick or have been struck by Al Qaeda's latest "weapon," there's lots of gratuitous shots of Will Smith's bum. Bum looker. Cheeky monkey.
Comments(0) |
