Just as most people were about the Last Samurai. 
Honestly.. It did him justice. Yeah, it was a good action flick, but it still made you think if you wanted to.
And for us die hard fans of Asimov, yes, it was blindingly obvious that Robertson wasn't really behind it.
Mod fucked around with this message on 07-16-2004 at 07:06 PM.
quote:
Mod Model 2000 was programmed to say:
No, it has Will Smith and his sassy black mother in it and thus is tainted beyond repair by any means other than setting all copies of it to the cleansing flame.
I'd like to see you do better.
quote:
The logic train ran off the tracks when Snoota said:
You're retarded; Will Smith owns.
Owns the least funny comedy actor in the history of crap award you mean HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHALAFFOHAHAHAHA.
quote:
Mod had this to say about (_|_):
No, it has Will Smith and his sassy black mother in it and thus is tainted beyond repair by any means other than setting all copies of it to the cleansing flame.
#1 - You're a moron.
#2 - The movie was good. Not OMFG great, but good. I liked it. I liked it about as much as I liked Van Helsing or Spiderman 2.
#3 - You're still a moron. The grandmother is shown in like, 4 scenes, total. The movie could advance fine without her - she's not a major part of it. Not major enough to screw it up; even if she was a major part of it, she wasn't nearly as bad as you make her out to be. Will Smith did fine in his role. I wasn't disappointed with him. Khyron fucked around with this message on 07-16-2004 at 07:45 PM.
quote:
Khyron got all f'ed up on Angel Dust and wrote:
#1 - You're a moron.#2 - The movie was good. Not OMFG great, but good. I liked it. I liked it about as much as I liked Van Helsing or Spiderman 2.
#3 - You're still a moron. The grandmother is shown in like, 4 scenes, total. The movie could advance fine without her - she's not a major part of it. Not major enough to screw it up; even if she was a major part of it, she wasn't nearly as bad as you make her out to be. Will Smith did fine in his role. I wasn't disappointed with him.
The guy who liked Van Helsing of all things is calling me a moron in a discussion about movies, that's rich, on that point I can agree with you it's about the quality of Van Helsing but hey he like totally blew that robot away with that shotgun, right? Mod fucked around with this message on 07-16-2004 at 07:56 PM.
quote:
Mod enlisted the help of an infinite number of monkeys to write:
The guy who liked Van Helsing of all things is calling me a moron in a discussion about movies, that's rich, on that point I can agree with you it's about the quality of Van Helsing but hey he like totally blew that robot away with that shotgun, right?
No, the only guy who used a shotgun in the whole movie, was the chief of police, and he still got jacked a few seconds later...
And yeah, I'm calling you a moron. Mainly because it's a good movie, yet you're basing your judgement on two actors, one of which has a very, very minor role in the film. The plot was clever, and actually follows the plot of one of Asimov's books rather closely, albeit with more action and a different ending. Even one of the characters, Susan Calvin, comes straight from "The Inevitable Conflict". Even if the story isn't one of Asimov's, I would say it's not unworthy of being so.
That's like saying "Shit, the actor who plays John Jameson sucks! Even if he's only in 3 scenes in Spiderman 2, he's the reason I think the show is gonna suck even though I haven't seen it yet!" Khyron fucked around with this message on 07-16-2004 at 08:14 PM.
1. It's not faithful to Asimov.
Yes it is. The book "I, Robot" was a collection of short stories. Asimov, aside from the Robot City and Foundation series, was a prolific writer of short stories in a futurist sci-fi genre. A lot of the short stories in I, Robot and a number of his other anthologies of robot stories dealt with the so-called Three Laws of Robotics. And if you've ever read stories like "Runaround" you'd know that. Asimov knew the flaws with his Three Laws, and wrote stories dealing with the flaws. "Runaround" was an excellent example, which I invite you to read.
The concept of the movie (which I'm not putting in spoilers, as you can find it on several sites like IMDB, etc, and which I feel was woefully undermentioned in the television spots and so forth) is that an artificial sentience (the computer building the robots of the movie) has been programmed with the Three Laws (which essentially maintain that a robot must NEVER hurt humans, robots must obey humans so long as it doesn't endanger humans, protect itself so long as it doesn't endanger humans, etc). With it's sentience, it's decided that the safest way to accomplish this is to rule the humans and be caretakers of every element of their lives. The tale is told as a mystery/action story, but the core concept is very Asimovian Short Story.
2. Will Smith = Lame
The man did the MiB movies (based off a comic book series), which grossed an INSANE amount of money. He also did Independence Day (tongue-in-cheek homage to a lot of other sci-fi movies), which also grossed an insane amount of money. Bad Boys and Bad Boys 2 also brought in a good amount of money. "Ali" was critically lauded and very popular. About the only think Smith has touched, movie-wise, lately that didn't turn to gold was "Wild Wild West", which was more the fault of the writers and director than any fault of Smith.
So if you don't like Smith, fine, but in all likelihood you're in a minority.
sigpic courtesy of This Guy, original modified by me
quote:
And I was all like 'Oh yeah?' and Khyron was all like:
No, the only guy who used a shotgun in the whole movie, was the chief of police, and he still got jacked a few seconds later...And yeah, I'm calling you a moron. Mainly because it's a good movie, yet you're basing your judgement on two actors, one of which has a very, very minor role in the film. The plot was clever, and actually follows the plot of one of Asimov's books rather closely, albeit with more action and a different ending. Even one of the characters, Susan Calvin, comes straight from "The Inevitable Conflict". Even if the story isn't one of Asimov's, I would say it's not unworthy of being so.
That's like saying "Shit, the actor who plays John Jameson sucks! Even if he's only in 3 scenes in Spiderman 2, he's the reason I think the show is gonna suck even though I haven't seen it yet!"
I've never seen anything that in any way involved Will Smith that I did not utterly hate, he always plays the same nerve-grating guy from his sitcom making stupid quips that are not remotely funny. The fact that his movies make lots of money does not redeem him in the slightest, people are prone to buying tons of useless crap.
No, it's like saying that Spiderman 2 will suck because they're making it from a lighthearted comic movie into a pretentious melodrama with Spiderman being played by Whoopie Goldberg.
Susan Calvin in "The Inevitable Conflict" is an old woman. Mod fucked around with this message on 07-16-2004 at 08:29 PM.
To quote: ""Dr. Calvin,' I said, as lushly as possible, 'in the mind of the public, you and US robots are intentical....'"
So the movie wasn't based on an actual story or novel.
So what? It never claimed it was. Watch the credits. "SUGGESTED by stories by Asimov".
Get off your high fucking horse, go see the movie without any preconceptions.
That's what I did for Last Samurai. And that's what I did for this movie. I liked both.
quote:
nem-x impressed everyone with:
Asimov was a fool.
No. No he wasn't.
nnioR~
quote:
Delphi Aegis had this to say about the Spice Girls:
Susan Calvin was a cornerstone of Asimov's books. At least the ones contained in the I, Robot ones. She was a fixture in the US Robotics and Mechanical Men Inc. company, and was invaluable.To quote: ""Dr. Calvin,' I said, as lushly as possible, 'in the mind of the public, you and US robots are intentical....'"
So the movie wasn't based on an actual story or novel.
So what? It never claimed it was. Watch the credits. "SUGGESTED by stories by Asimov".
Get off your high fucking horse, go see the movie without any preconceptions.
That's what I did for Last Samurai. And that's what I did for this movie. I liked both.
I was talking about Kyron's claims that the Susan Calvin in the movie was "straight out of The Inevitable Conflict" and that it was closely based on one of Asimov's stories, both of which are false.
Removed from any involvement of Asimov I still have no interest in seeing Will Smith shoot at things welding two pistols while doing backflips on a flying bike and making gay jokes. The fact that this movie wastes a license that could have made a really good movie just pushes it from the "Don't care - won't see" category into something that actually pisses me off.
I'm not some sort of art movie snob either, I like well-done action movies, I liked T2, I liked Kill Bill, I liked X-Men, I just hate Will Smith's humor and the one character and type of movie he ever plays. Mod fucked around with this message on 07-16-2004 at 10:41 PM.
quote:
Mod got bored and wrote this:
I was talking about Kyron's claims that the Susan Calvin in the movie was "straight out of The Inevitable Conflict" and that it was closely based on one of Asimov's stories, both of which are false.Removed from any involvement of Asimov I still have no interest in seeing Will Smith shoot at things welding two pistols while doing backflips on a flying bike and making gay jokes. The fact that this movie wastes a license that could have made a really good movie just pushes it from the "Don't care - won't see" category into something that actually pisses me off.
I'm not some sort of art movie snob either, I like well-done action movies, I liked T2, I liked Kill Bill, I liked X-Men, I just hate Will Smith's humor and the one character and type of movie he ever plays.
Then, well, I've lost all respect I didn't have for you.
And yes, you are a snob. "OH NOES IT HAS WILL SMITHZOR" is no excuse not to see a good movie. At the least, you should wait to see it on DVD, but it was still worth my 5.75 (Matinee, you bitches. Eat it!).
Please point to the gay joke, however. I failed to see one in the movie, and I just fucking watched it.
Easily 4 out of 5 in my book.
I don't see what bad things the critics could really say about the movie, except the 'ONO! It's not wordforword out of Asimov's books!!' line. But it was still very entertaining.
quote:
From the book of Mod, chapter 3, verse 16:
Owns the least funny comedy actor in the history of crap award you mean HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHALAFFOHAHAHAHA.
You've heard of the Wayans brothers and Dana Carvey, right? Comparing Will Smith to those people is like comparing Tom Arnold to Kirsten Dunst in a wet T-shirt contest, Smith owns.
Although the large amount of product placement ads were kind of annoying 
JVC, Converse, Audi, and they were not really sneaky about it either x_x
I enjoyed it very much so, as much as I loved "Dodgeball" and that was a great movie
quote:
Delphi Aegis had this to say about (_|_):
Then, well, I've lost all respect I didn't have for you.And yes, you are a snob. "OH NOES IT HAS WILL SMITHZOR" is no excuse not to see a good movie. At the least, you should wait to see it on DVD, but it was still worth my 5.75 (Matinee, you bitches. Eat it!).
Please point to the gay joke, however. I failed to see one in the movie, and I just fucking watched it.
Yes, disliking an actor based on previous movies makes me a true snob.
Oh you thought I was calling you sugar? 
quote:
Khyron was listening to Cher while typing:
Mod : The claims I made about the character Susan Calvin being from the books, and the claim I made about the plot being from the book, were both based on a short synopsis I read regarding the short stories contained in I, Robot. They didn't mention her age, only that she was leading up an investigation into how the robots had started to use the three laws towards manipulating mankind as a whole, rather than simply aiding them in a more immediate sense. In that case, the movie does follow along with the synopsis I read. I assumed that the movie had taken some creative liberty (More action, adding Will Smith's character, etc) with the story, but it had otherwise remained the same.
The "manipulating mankind as a whole" issue is handled completely differently, in the book it revolves around computers slightly manipulating economics to ruin ineffective factories, getting bad directors demoted, etc, not sending out legions of killer robots. Susan Calvin is in most of the I, Robot stories.
Really they could have made this movie without the license just as well, then made a movie that somewhat stuck to the style of the book somewhere down the line and everyone would have been happy.
quote:
We were all impressed when Maradon! wrote:
Clearly, the fact that Mod hates the movie since he can't see past the title and the lead actor proves that his taste in movies is superior to everyone else's
Yes, because we all know lead actors are completely irrelevant to a movie's quality.
quote:
Mod had this to say about (_|_):
Yes, because we all know lead actors are completely irrelevant to a movie's quality.
I don't think you quite understand. Everyone that has actually seen the movie (!=you) has said Will Smith is good in it.
Are we all wrong?
(Yes, I have see it, I really liked it, Will Smith was great)
quote:
OtakuPenguin had this to say about Reading Rainbow:
I don't think you quite understand. Everyone that has actually seen the movie (!=you) has said Will Smith is good in it.Are we all wrong?
Yes, obviously
quote:
How.... OtakuPenguin.... uughhhhhh:
Are we all wrong?
Yes.
quote:
The logic train ran off the tracks when OtakuPenguin said:
I don't think you quite understand. Everyone that has actually seen the movie (!=you) has said Will Smith is good in it.Are we all wrong?
(Yes, I have see it, I really liked it, Will Smith was great)
If he's the polar opposite of him in every other movie he's ever been in you have a point.
quote:
Mod had this to say about Matthew Broderick:
The "manipulating mankind as a whole" issue is handled completely differently, in the book it revolves around computers slightly manipulating economics to ruin ineffective factories, getting bad directors demoted, etc, not sending out legions of killer robots. Susan Calvin is in most of the I, Robot stories.
Yes, because watching a movie in which these things are the center of the story would be so entertaining.
quote:
Falaanla Marr had this to say about (_|_):
Yes, because watching a movie in which these things are the center of the story would be so entertaining.
Not X-TREME enough for you?
quote:
Sakkra had this to say about Captain Planet:
Since when have Mod's opinions ever been considered relevant?
Fuck you too.
quote:
Liam had this to say about the Spice Girls:
I've heard 'through the grapevine' that this movie sucks because Will Smith is in it, someone please confirm/deny.
If this thread is any indication, that is one freaking short grapevine 
quote:
Mod had this to say about Jimmy Carter:
Not X-TREME enough for you?
I don't go to the movies to watch a movie and think deeply about it -- there isn't really enough time to do that in such a short span. If I want to think about what I entertain myself with, I'd rather read. I can read a chapter, digest it, and go back and re read it if I didn't understand something. If I don't catch something with a movie, I can't do jack shit about it in a theater. I go to a theater to watch movies that are entertaining and don't require much thought. So yes, in a way you are right.
That, and there would be no money in it. Many people go to the movies to be entertained. Motion pictures are a whole different form of entertainment. You spend from 80-160 minutes watching a movie with no rewind button. With a book, as I said...you can go back and read it again and again without having to pay any more for it. So, while YOU may want to think while watching a movie, you're in the minority. Sorry, but when it comes ot an industry where money is the key, you're left out. Learn to live with it. But, if you seem to know what the movie going public wants, try to make an hour and a half long movie that uses the themes you've discussed. As much as you may like the idea of it, you'll have a hard time filling two hours, and even if you can...you won't make money off the movie.
Nowhere in the movie did it claim to be a translation of the book to motion picture. Hell, nowhere did it claim to even be BASED off the book. It included the Three Laws of Robotics. It used the title of the book. That's it.
And it was a damn good movie, in my opinion. Falaanla Marr fucked around with this message on 07-17-2004 at 06:33 PM.
