The bastardization of a classic: I, Robot

Since I was a kid, I have been the fan of the Asimov series of "Robot" books. Like many nerds, I was excited to see that someone was making a film based on the the first book of the series, "I, Robot". Before viewing the trailer, I pictured all the things that happened in the book and how the story could be told with excellent special effects and decent acting.

Sadly, I was let down when I saw the trailer. So let down that I now refuse the see the film based entirely on the trailer. This was all brought on by a review of the film by out very own deker.

The film does the typical thing of taking a classic story and turning it into a completly different thing than the stories in the book. There were never any rumors of the Nestor series of robots having any kind of personality disorder that is hinted at in the trailer, infact, the one story that features a Nestor 5 robot features a robot who risks life and limb to save its human companion.

You see none of this in the book. The main characters are made out to be gluttonous, greedy individuals who are only in it for their personal gain. Infact, "I, Robot" is the exact opposite. But you will never see that in a hollywood version of the book.

Sometimes, I just wish hollywood would stop making films from books altogether.

You haven't seen the movie yet... What are you doing giving a review?!

I heard the same thing about the movie though. It didn't hit on any of the "real" messages from asimov's book and so on. I think I'm going to see it anyways.

I don't think it'll be as bad as Battlefield Earth.

Dudes books and movies are two different things. In most cases, if a movie stuck 100% to the storyline and plot elements of a book, it would be boring as ****.

Also generally if you've read a book before a movie, it'll never live up to your expectations, because when reading the book you imagine everything exactly the way you want it. It's your own little perfectly directed interpretation. Then when you see someone else's interpretation, it is "wrong" just because it isn't exactly like yours. Movies aren't great literature, they are generally much more entertainment focused so deep, thought-provoking thoughts are not as common as in books. Plus you can spend several dozen hours reading a book, whereas they have to cram an entire story and character arc into two hours when writing a screenplay.

I haven't read Asimov's books, but it was a good movie in my opinion, and I'm sticking to it.

And yeah, at least watch the movie before you review. Or just review the trailer I guess...

For me it’s not the different interpretations that bother me. It’s if the movies completely different than the book. Why base a movie on a book and advertise that it’s based on such and such a book and then change the story?

That’s what I was hearing about I Robot.

I mean movies based on books can be done well. The Lord of The Rings trilogy was great, and Fight Club was really close to the authors interpretation.

But then if you take say a 1000 page book like battle field earth and turn it into a two hour movie it’s going to be lame. Not just because the acting and all the other movie elements sucked but because the story wasn’t loyal to the book. I think that’s the key. Interpret it the best you can but don’t make a movie about say romance and turn it into a horror or something. (Just as an example.)


I still need to see it and judge for myself. Without comparing it to the book I think it looks great. I can’t wait to see it.

I have not seen I Robot yet, bt judging by the trailers, it looks entertaining.

Innacurate, but entertaining.

I have not read many of Asimov's works, but of those which I have read, many would make an entertaining movie. Asimov's subject matter is not what anyone would call middle of the road entertainment. Many different people can enjoy it, but few people realize that the direction of his body of work is vastly more humanist than many even understand.

His accounts of artificial intelligence reaching an asymptotic near-parallel with human thought, emotion, and intelligence is not something that all people are quick to accept. Thus, the book has been watered down, and released in a chewable, sugary summer-blockbuster format that looks more like a zombie flick with robots as stand-ins rather than the original story.

If it were a word-for-word retelling of the story, no one but a small niche market group of moviegoers would see it. And given that film studios see movies as investments, there's no way that they'd make a movie just for those die-hard Asimov afficionadoes, because they obviously comprise too small a part of the market to warrant the budget that such moviegoers would demand, to drive the special effects that a story of that scale would deserve.

A more accurate retelling of an Asimov story The Bicentennial Man a film adaptation of which was released under the name Bicentennial Man was a far more faithful retelling, but did terrible at the box office. I do imagine, however that that was a far better movie than I Robot will be. However, Hollywood doesn't do what they do to maintain accuracy, they do it to make money.

I think books and movies are totally different in the aspect of enjoyment. For a book to be good, you have to be able to visualize and see what is happening. This is achieved through good description and rich vocabulary. It has to be captivating and make you want to read it and find out what happens. Well, obviously, in a movie, you can already see what is what's happening. Movies capitalize in using other elements besides the imagination it takes to read a book. Sounds and visual effects make a movie a lot different from a book. A movie puts you directly into the action, the way the producer interprets it. (obvious information eh?) While some things in books add to the story, they can't be easily replicated in a movie. And if they could, would it add to the movie? Probably not. It would seem redundant. In a book, it wouldn't, but if directly translated to a movie, it would. I don't think movies should follow the storyline 100%, but they should atleast get the mood for the movie correct, and have pretty close to the same story the book has. And plus, if the movie was just like the book, why would you want to see it if you have already read the book? Point is, almost no one wants a movie JUST like the book. If movies followed the story line 100%, there would be almost no real difference between books and movies, except for the way they are communicated (reading vs watching)

i kind of agree and disagree, for me the movie going experience is to go see something that keeps me on my toes and guessing. Movies that are made from books are usually pretty good, in a book there is a lot of discription that i dont think should be put into movies as you all have all ready said, but it does bother me when movie story lines are changed from the books. Its my feeling that if you are going to put the book to film atleast follow what happens in the story. Its something that kind of bothers me, but i also realise that this would make for a VERY long movie, so i kind of cut my losses. The big thing that got to me was how they butchered the end of the 3rd lord of the rings lol

Dudes books and movies are two different things. In most cases, if a movie stuck 100% to the storyline and plot elements of a book, it would be boring as ****.

Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas? A Clockwork Orange? (Fear and Loathing especially because almost the whole thing was a narration of the book, it was very true to the original book)

"In most cases..."

Plus I haven't read either of those books, or watched either of those movies.

I'm not reviewing the movie. I am stating why I won't see the movie and hollywood will not receive my 7.50. The point is, the movie is nowhere near anything that the book was about. At least, in most cases, when some director takes a book and does his interpretation of it, they keep some of the storyline around. In this movie, they've done nothing but turn US Robotics into the evil megalopoly instead of your typical world wide corporation who's building a product that some people need. There is NOTHING of the Asimov books in the trailers I have seen.

If they wanted to make a movie where the robots take over the world, they should not have named it "I, Robot".