I, Reviewer

[SurfD]

Just got out of a prescreening of I, Robot.

Surprisingly, it was much, MUCH better then I had hoped.  For everyone who was worried that it would be just another will smith action fiasco, you may lay your fears aside.  The movie actually has a decent amount of plot, some good characters, and a few nice twists.

It also stays a bit more true to the heart and soul of the Asimov books then the trailer would have you believe, with a decent focus on the three laws and what glitch in them is driving the robots gone wild in the movie.

All in all, I would reccomend you go see it.  You will likely be pleasently surprised.

[Signe]

I'd like to see this movie.  I'm not a big fan of Issac Asimov's fiction, but Will Smith is ever so cute.

[daveNYC]

I'd rather see a two hour version of the Futurama episode where Mom's robots took over the world for her.

[Murgos]

All in all, I would reccomend you go see it. You will likely be pleasently surprised.

No.  Either the movie is an utter farce of Asimiov's robot stories or someone in Hollywood purposefully decided that make trailers that totally missrepresent the actual movie (A trend that I find very annoying, sell me the movie you made not the one you think I will pay for).  Asimov's stories have been in and around the best seller lists for over 50 years - if they think selling I Robot as a Will Smith action extravaganza (with from the trailers a plot that resembles no story by Asimiov I ever read) is going to net them extra dollars I can only do my part to disabuse them of this idea and hopefully help end the practice.

I'll catch it when it comes on HBO or something.

[Paelos]

Whenever I get the urge to watch a movie based on a book I haven't read, I just buy the book. It tends to be more rewarding than watching James West, i mean Smith, fight r0b0ts in teh fu7ur3!!!!1!

[WayAbvPar]

Whenever I get the urge to watch a movie based on a book I haven't read, I just buy the book. It tends to be more rewarding than watching James West, i mean Smith, fight r0b0ts in teh fu7ur3!!!!1!

Heh- I do the same thing. I don't want some Hollywood hack ruining my perception of the book as I read it.

[Alluvian]

Just got out of a prescreening of I, Robot.

Surprisingly, it was much, MUCH better then I had hoped.  For everyone who was worried that it would be just another will smith action fiasco, you may lay your fears aside.  The movie actually has a decent amount of plot, some good characters, and a few nice twists.

It also stays a bit more true to the heart and soul of the Asimov books then the trailer would have you believe, with a decent focus on the three laws and what glitch in them is driving the robots gone wild in the movie.

All in all, I would reccomend you go see it.  You will likely be pleasently surprised.

I was one of the more vocal opponents to the movie, or at least the title.  I still think it should have had a different name, but the movie was not that bad at all.  I liked it overall.

[Flashman]

I think part of it is when you go in with zero expectations, most of the  time you'll end up pleasantly surprised. heh.

Saw it last night, wasn't expecting too much. Will Smith plays the same guy he plays in almost every movie (he's sassy..with an edge) , some nice action scenes, couple plot twists,  not bad.

[Ookii]

I saw it over King Arthur because the place where I was (Edgewater, NJ), happened to have a DLP showing.  I also liked the movie, but the thing I remember most is that it looked amazing :-)

[SirBruce]

I just saw it tonight, and I have to say I, Robot was a lot better than I expected.  The ending was kinda ehh, and many parts were predictable, and it has little to do with Asimobv's stories.  But I was a fine sci-fi film, lots of cool action yet surprisingly few big explosions.

Bruce

[Rodent]

I saw it over King Arthur because the place where I was (Edgewater, NJ), happened to have a DLP showing.  I also liked the movie, but the thing I remember most is that it looked amazing :-)

It's good that you passed King Arthur, that movie needs to die.

[HaemishM]

I plan to see it sometime, if only because I'm a fan of Alex Proyas since he directed The Crow. I do not expect it to be like anything Asimov wrote, however, and think the ads actually do the movie a great disservice.

[Samwise]

No.  Either the movie is an utter farce of Asimiov's robot stories or someone in Hollywood purposefully decided that make trailers that totally missrepresent the actual movie.

Option 2 is much closer to the mark.  I would go so far as to say that the basic plot (if not the dialogue) would not have been out of place as one of the short stories in the original book.  I admit it's been a while since I read the book, but I'm usually very critical of movies-based-on-books deviating from the source material, and in my judgement this movie passed muster.

The trailer very much sells the movie short.  I'm guessing that they were aiming to pull in the larger "dumb action movie" demographic right off the bat, hoping that the smarter "decent sci-fi flick" demographic would either see it out of curiosity or hear good things about it on the Web after its release.

[SirBruce]

Yeah, the movie was really about Zeroth Law, although they never called it such, and it was more than just a bunch of action.  It's certainly nothing Asimov would have written -- if he had, he would have been a more popular author -- but it is true to the ideas and concepts of Asimov's Robot universe.

Bruce

[Mediocre]

All in all, I would reccomend you go see it. You will likely be pleasently surprised.

No.  Either the movie is an utter farce of Asimiov's robot stories or someone in Hollywood purposefully decided that make trailers that totally missrepresent the actual movie (A trend that I find very annoying, sell me the movie you made not the one you think I will pay for).  Asimov's stories have been in and around the best seller lists for over 50 years - if they think selling I Robot as a Will Smith action extravaganza (with from the trailers a plot that resembles no story by Asimiov I ever read) is going to net them extra dollars I can only do my part to disabuse them of this idea and hopefully help end the practice.

Protest purchasing only works when part of a concerted, meaningfully sized effort.  I don't think there's going to be a "grassroots Asimov fan uprising" anytime soon.  I don't mean to single you out, but this whole "I have principles, damnit, I won't see that sci-fi movie based on how they altered the original / messed with the casting / promoted it disingenuously" thing is so... I hate to say hypocritical, but more a collossal mix-up of priorities.

With very few exceptions, the people who say "Well, I'll take a stand with my dollars on this one!" will still buy gasoline from companies which engaged in real-life, gen-u-ine slave labor in Burma, buy their clothes from companies which deal with the worst sweatshops, and in general make no ethical qualms with most of their major purchases, and just go by free market self-interest.  But when it's a treasured story told in movie form not quite how you imagined it, all of a sudden everyone is a crusader for Truth, Justice and the American Way.

Blah.

[Murgos]

Protest purchasing only works when part of a concerted, meaningfully sized effort.  I don't think there's going to be a "grassroots Asimov fan uprising" anytime soon.  I don't mean to single you out, but this whole "I have principles, damnit, I won't see that sci-fi movie based on how they altered the original / messed with the casting / promoted it disingenuously" thing is so... I hate to say hypocritical, but more a collossal mix-up of priorities.

With very few exceptions, the people who say "Well, I'll take a stand with my dollars on this one!" will still buy gasoline from companies which engaged in real-life, gen-u-ine slave labor in Burma, buy their clothes from companies which deal with the worst sweatshops, and in general make no ethical qualms with most of their major purchases, and just go by free market self-interest.  But when it's a treasured story told in movie form not quite how you imagined it, all of a sudden everyone is a crusader for Truth, Justice and the American Way.

Blah.

Jesus Crist shut the fuck up and go away.  I can not go see the fucking movie if I don't fucking want to without you making crap analogies between my not seeing a movie and some other shmuck who  cries over the worlds ills but doesn't do shit about it.  Not going to be a grass roots Asimov fanboi rally?  So fucking what?  That doesn't mean I need to toe the line and put on the feed bag.

I haven't seen the movie and I'm not going to see the movie.  What are you trying to convince me of?  That I should go see just because you happened to like it?  Who are you and what the fuck do you know?

[schild]

Heh.

It was a pretty fun movie though.

[Murgos]

Maybe, but I don't feel the need to be coerced by Mediocre to spend 20 bucks to watch Will Smith crap on my childhood either.

[Logain]

Maybe, but I don't feel the need to be coerced by Mediocre to spend 20 bucks to watch Will Smith crap on my childhood either.

This is off-topic, but, what are local ticket prices like around the U.S.?
I live in a dallas suburb in Texas and it costs $4.50 for an evening ticket and $2.50 matinee.

Comments like the one above just make me wonder if this is freakishly low or something.[/quote]

[Rasix]

8.50 in Tucson. 5.50 for a matinee.    4.50 for a movie? They have running water in that town?

[Comstar]

I give it 8 out of 10. It loses one mark because Smith NEVER ran out of bullets.

NOTE: SPOLIER WARNING **************************************




I have a LOT more appircation of the director. He did a fine job. I was worried about Will Smith.

But that's the point. Smith IS the wrong person. That's the point of a large chunk of the movie (and my I add, the Policeman character in the original Azimov "The Caves of Steel" novel.

It lost another mark for the first 5 minutes showing off Will Smiths Bad Ass.

It also used Matrix effects in good ways, though a tad overused, it worked well at the end.



I trust I am not spoling anyone when I say NEVER TRUST AN AI THAT LOOKS LIKE SHODAN! Soon as I saw THAT...well yes. I kept expecting her to refer to Smith is a small creature running through her. Then again, Shodan was insane, and this AI wasn't it (Zeroth law and all that|).

**************

END SPOLIER WARNING.

[Mediocre]

I haven't seen the movie and I'm not going to see the movie.  What are you trying to convince me of?  That I should go see just because you happened to like it?  Who are you and what the fuck do you know?

I haven't seen the movie and don't plan to.  My point wasn't "you shouldn't see the movie", but "people seem to be doing this whole 'I'm not seeing X movie out of principled protest' thing a lot lately and it's dumb."  Sci-fi fans sometimes tend to be several orders of magnitude more self-righteous with their movie-viewing habits than everyone else.

I live in a dallas suburb in Texas and it costs $4.50 for an evening ticket and $2.50 matinee.

10 for a normal ticket, 8.00 for a matinee here.

[HaemishM]

$4.50 for an EVENING movie? Shit, it's $5 for a matinee here, and maybe $7 for an evening show? I don't go to evening shows anymore, because though I love movies, that's just too much money for some of the movies I've seen over the years.

I mean, I'd have been pissed off if I had paid $7 to watch Solo.

[Alkiera]

In Rochester, NY, it's about $8.50 for a normal ticket, $5.75 for matinee.  For some movies, I wait till they're at the cheap second-run theatre, where it's like $1.50 for a normal ticket, and as low as $0.50 for matinee on certain days.

--
Alkiera

[WayAbvPar]

$4.50 for an EVENING movie? Shit, it's $5 for a matinee here, and maybe $7 for an evening show? I don't go to evening shows anymore, because though I love movies, that's just too much money for some of the movies I've seen over the years.

I mean, I'd have been pissed off if I had paid $7 to watch Solo.

I don't mind the monetary costs as much as the time wasted and damage done to my psyche and what is left of my soul that I really regret. Seeing things like Planet of the Apes makes me execeptionally stabby, even if I hadn't paid to see it.

I guess I am just old and cranky- unless a movie is can't miss spectacular, I could give a shit if I see it in the theatre these days. I mentioned this over at corpnews on one of the movies threads, but will repeat it here- my wife and I went to see Dodgeball a couple of weeks ago. $8.50 x2 for tickets and a $4.00 Cherry Coke is $21. I could have saved that $21 and bought the DVD and a fucking case of Cherry Coke in 6 months, with the added luxury of being able to watch it in my boxers and revel in its mediocrity for eternity.

[daveNYC]

The last movie I saw that I felt truely deserved my money was Mystic River.  The most recent movie I've seen was Bourne Supremecy, I felt it was OK, but not really worth the cash.

I think I'll probably start going with buying the DVD, or just waiting for it to show up on cable.

[Capt_XplOrOrOr]

All in all, I would reccomend you go see it. You will likely be pleasently surprised.

No.  Either the movie is an utter farce of Asimiov's robot stories or someone in Hollywood purposefully decided that make trailers that totally missrepresent the actual movie (A trend that I find very annoying, sell me the movie you made not the one you think I will pay for).

  Actually ALL movie trailers are not intended for the Audiance. Read on...
All movie trailors are made, put together, and intended, for viewing by the moneymen, bidders, bondspeople, etc... The idea is to make a trailor that in roughly 5 to 15 seconds will get a Hollywood exec to say "YES! I will put my money behind your short trailor and fund the making of the rest of your movie. I will fund the distribution of your movie. I will put up the bond for your movie."

 IF you, me, or anyone here, could film 10 to 15 minutes of quality looking footage, and edit it into a 15 to 30 second trailor, we would have a movie in the eyes of Hollywood, the suits and ties, moneymen, bondsmen, etc... And get 5 million to 50 million dollars invested in it to finnish it and make it 2 hours long.

  In a better world, two trailors for every movie would be made. One to sell the movie to the Hollywood suits and ties. One to give the audiance an idea about the movie enough that they want to see it. Instead 1 trailor is suppose to cover both goals which are 100% different. Too much of a movie is shown to the audiance, or a misrepresentation of it is shown to the audiance since the trailor is originally made with a different goal for a different group (the moneymen, bondsmen, distributors, etc...)

-------

 "I, Robot" ended up being a very NICE movie. It touches on two of Issac Assimov's books - I, Robot and the phenominal Robots of Dawn. Robots of Dawn is not a sequal to I, Robot. But takes place in the same universe as I, Robot. With different characters, setting, story, plot, etc...
 Even though the movie is not a 100% adaptation of both the two books it is based on, the movie ends up reaching the same exact goal as both books. This is what makes the movie so nice. It does not end up mutilating both books. It stays 100% true in spirit, intention, and goal.... even though 80% of both books were omitted because of time constraints.

[HaemishM]

/sigh

It's TRAILER. And AUDIENCE.

This might help.

And Trailers that get shown to money men are not shown to audiences in theaters. Generally speaking, they are purpose-cut by a different director than the one who did the movie, in order to market it to audiences.