PDA

View Full Version : I, Robot



D.C.
June 5th, 2004, 03:25 PM
Is anyone looking forward to the movie I, Robot? Also wasn't there an episode of 'The Outer Limits' that is based on the same source material?

Slainte
June 5th, 2004, 05:10 PM
I'm confused. I thought it was the Caves of Steel, which had R.(robot) Daneel as the detective. I read the Asimov books back in the 50's and 60's.
Will Smith is supposed to be in the movie version.

TechnoBoY
June 5th, 2004, 07:45 PM
From what I know this movie is just using the name and the 3 Laws Safe thing. It has nothing to do with the books. I think.

I want to see it but its not worth going to the theathers. Worth a rent maybe.

Teal'c
June 6th, 2004, 07:23 AM
It doesn't make sense though, because the 3 laws are supposed to stop robots harming humans no matter what happens, at all... at least that's the way it's supposed to be, but Will Smith changes everything! :P *tries not to go see the film, but knows it is enevitable, just like The Day After Tommorrow*

Anubis
June 6th, 2004, 07:50 AM
I have to admit I think this move will really suck

shinyredpants
June 6th, 2004, 08:36 AM
I am psyched for this one!

oh and it is a remake of another movie, supposedly *that's what my dad said*

D.C.
June 6th, 2004, 02:41 PM
I think this movie has the potential to suck, but it could be pretty decent.

SGSlugger
June 6th, 2004, 05:49 PM
It looks interesting, I'll give it that. If I see it, which I probably will since both Stargate and Enterprise are done for the season, I'd be interested in the future technology and how the robots rebel. Although this has already been done before *cough* ep of animatrix *cough* various other shows I don't want to name *cough*

Manic
June 6th, 2004, 10:48 PM
One thing I find funny about every preview of this movie I've seen; all of the action shots seem to come from the same scene. Yahoo! Movies doesn't even list it as an action movie. It's a crime story and thriller, plain and simple-- yet they promote it like an action film.

I've never read any of the original short stories or the other Asimov robot books (thinking about it now, though), but I'm assuming this movie uses an original story. It sounds like Caves of Steel, but the character names are different. From what I've heard about some of Asimov's stories, and if this movie is written anything like them, I doubt we're going to see another "Animatrix: Second Renaissance." Writing this movie anything like "The Second Renaissance" would be a terrible idea after the release and television airing of The Animatrix. So I'm seriously hoping us Matrix fans are thrown a nice, entertaining curveball.

TomSluder
June 7th, 2004, 08:27 AM
Bicentennial Man was based on an Asimov Book. "The Positronic Man" if I recall correctly. It was pretty decent, but it was more of a "personal drama" than an action flick or "crime thriller".

Anubis
June 7th, 2004, 09:27 AM
I still hate the concept that great robts turn evil. So simple

SGSlugger
June 7th, 2004, 11:01 AM
That's one of many sci-fi cliches. An android becomes so sophisticated that it becomes self-aware and starts kiling all humans.

I'm getting tired of that too. :cool:

Jprime
June 14th, 2004, 07:09 AM
In Asimov's books the robots always found loopholes around the 3 laws, it seems there were enough to spawn hundreds of books.

CyberKnight
June 23rd, 2004, 08:32 AM
It doesn't make sense though, because the 3 laws are supposed to stop robots harming humans no matter what happens, at all... at least that's the way it's supposed to be, but Will Smith changes everything! *tries not to go see the film, but knows it is enevitable, just like The Day After Tommorrow*
Spoilers for the book....
I'd hate to tell you but just because the three laws exsisted doesn't mean that a robot couldn't kill. Read the book. It specifically spells out why a robot could kill. Actually it seems like the writers of the movie knows what they are doing. If you look at the website the robots name is the NS brand name. In the books the Nestor brand of the robots had a modified first law of robotics. It was theoritically the only robots that could kill a human being. In fact it almost came close. Also Will Smith's character should fit in the whole scheme. There were plenty of people opposed to robots in the book. In fact you could see that throughout the whole book. The movie also mentions evolution of robots. That is also mentioned in the last story of the book. They had no idea how the machines were built since they were built by more machines.
Also wasn't there an episode of 'The Outer Limits' that is based on the same source material?
Yeah I saw the same episode that I believe had some basis on Asimov's books. It had Micheal Shanks in it. The episode was rather quite good.

petzke_42
June 23rd, 2004, 11:01 AM
That's one of many sci-fi cliches. An android becomes so sophisticated that it becomes self-aware and starts kiling all humans.

I'm getting tired of that too. :cool:

It's funny how they become self-aware, and the only emotion they ever develop is anger. Although I can see how they fee this way, the robots never feel any regret about killing a human. Considering they are made by humans, it seems unlikely they would ONLY develop the ability to hate, as well as not feel any regret for killing their "mommy" or "daddy."

(Although, the Animatrix was a LITTLE different. The robots did try to establish themselves. Only when the humans didn't listen, did the bloodshed begin.)

CyberKnight
June 23rd, 2004, 01:35 PM
It's funny how they become self-aware, and the only emotion they ever develop is anger. Although I can see how they fee this way, the robots never feel any regret about killing a human. Considering they are made by humans, it seems unlikely they would ONLY develop the ability to hate, as well as not feel any regret for killing their "mommy" or "daddy."
Hmm.... IRobot actually discusses this. I forgot which story but it's the same one with the Nestors in them. I think if it is actually done correctly it can result in a wonderful story but if done wrong it is horrible.

Jprime
June 23rd, 2004, 04:52 PM
Spoilers for the book....
I'd hate to tell you but just because the three laws exsisted doesn't mean that a robot couldn't kill. Read the book. It specifically spells out why a robot could kill. Actually it seems like the writers of the movie knows what they are doing. If you look at the website the robots name is the NS brand name. In the books the Nestor brand of the robots had a modified first law of robotics. It was theoritically the only robots that could kill a human being. In fact it almost came close. Also Will Smith's character should fit in the whole scheme. There were plenty of people opposed to robots in the book. In fact you could see that throughout the whole book. The movie also mentions evolution of robots. That is also mentioned in the last story of the book. They had no idea how the machines were built since they were built by more machines.
Yeah I saw the same episode that I believe had some basis on Asimov's books. It had Micheal Shanks in it. The episode was rather quite good.

Yeah i've read ALL the Asimov books, from the Robby(first Asimov Robot) to Runaround (first mention of the 3 Laws) to The Caves Of Steel.

While Law one states a robot can never harm a human being, many times robots found thier way around it, and I think thats the basis of the movies "mystery". I f this is the case, many Asimov fans will work it out within the first few minutes. However some logical storylines are kinda complex (It took a few times reading Runaround for me to get it!), and thats s perfect place to insert some action to keep non-asimovians going.

Remember in Robots Of Dawn (of the last Daneel novel i cant remember) a robot was ordered to kill a human, simply by instructing it that the human was in fact a humanoid robot? SEE! IT CAN BE DONE I TELL YOU! IT CAN! :D

Jprime
June 23rd, 2004, 04:56 PM
Oh darn sorry! Didn't see the spilers in white. The Nestors were created with a strengthened 3rd and weakened 1st Law, because the humans were working in hazardous conditions and you couldnt have bots running in to grab them away from radiation every time they went to work, and since Nestors were expensive.

TechnoBoY
June 24th, 2004, 08:14 AM
If you want to see a trailer that is a lot better check out this Japanese trailer! Its been going around a lot of the entertainment sites. Its a lot better the the american trailer.

http://www.foxjapan.com/movies/irobot/

SPOILER?! I dunno, just wanna be safe.

Somebody at another board I go to posted why the robots can do that they do. Here are the three laws.

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.

How does it work? Well the robots have to take over the humans, why? Because humans kill humans and robots cant let harm come to humans. Simple isnt it?

Jprime
June 24th, 2004, 08:17 AM
Thats not the only way! Theres loads of other loopholes that allowed Asimov to write hundreds of stories without ever making a generic "robot go evil and kill us all" storyline.

petzke_42
June 24th, 2004, 11:27 AM
How does it work? Well the robots have to take over the humans, why? Because humans kill humans and robots cant let harm come to humans. Simple isnt it?

But then they harm humans themselves. Either way the humans will be harmed...so this should create a paradox to the robots, causing their heads to explode.

Jprime
June 24th, 2004, 03:26 PM
Many Asmovian bots were built with alterations to the 3 laws, strenghtening one or weakening another to produce safeguards against Roblock (R.Daneels "brother" was killed this way in Robots Of Dawn), thus paving the way for rebellious robots.

Stargate Agent
June 25th, 2004, 07:01 PM
This movie is gonna bomb soooo bad. It doesn't flow right to me. Does anyone else think the robots look stupid??

Madeleine
June 25th, 2004, 10:15 PM
The three laws of robotics in the 1950s:
1) A robot will protect human lives
2) A robot will obey human orders unless to do so would break law#1
3) A robot will protect its own existence unless to do so would break law#2

The three laws of robotics for the c21st:
1) A robot will protect human lives, unless it conflicts with law #2
2) A robot will obey human orders unless they conflict with law #3
3) A robot will protect its own existence with whatever means necessary, up to and including lethal force. Robots are bloody expensive.

Elwe Singollo
July 17th, 2004, 08:39 AM
Interesting enough, the movie was more than decent, it was even good. Will Smith makes the movie funny, it had some boring parts, but hey, it was talk that i thought was boring, but thats just me :) I would advise people to watch it.

DownFallAngel
July 17th, 2004, 08:49 AM
Its on my to do list.

Elwe Singollo
July 17th, 2004, 08:52 AM
Interesting enough, the main character from 'Holes', has a part in the movie, who doesn't know how to 'cuss good' haha...

TechnoBoY
July 17th, 2004, 12:56 PM
I read a lot of good reviews too! Never judge a movie by its trailer. Will show all those bashers!

I prolly wont watch it in the theather though, still havent seen Spiderman 2.

Elwe Singollo
July 17th, 2004, 02:02 PM
I prolly wont watch it in the theather though, still havent seen Spiderman 2.Yah, i usually wait for movies to come out on DVD because yah, sometimes a theater experience isn't all that great, haha...

DownFallAngel
July 17th, 2004, 02:33 PM
You should really check out Spiderman 2......it was amazing.

Elwe Singollo
July 17th, 2004, 02:38 PM
I give it mixed reviews, haha...