Slashdot Mirror
Will Smith as I, Robot
BuR4N writes "It looks like Asimov's sci-fi classic, I Robot, is going to be a movie. Shooting starts April next year staring Will Smith and directed by Alex Proyas (Dark City and The Crow).
Being a huge Asimov fan I have not made up my mind if this is a good or bad thing.
"
I'm not sure the Asimov-worlds my mind has made can coexist with Hollywood ones though.
it's in my head
When a movie comes out based on a book, it stirs people to read the book. If the movie never came out, then those people would never read it.
Outdoor digital photography, mostly in New Engl
If so, WHICH one of them? Like all of Asimov's writing, some of it is very good and some of it is less good.
I just hope that the casting is done right.
Is this going to be a comedy or is Will Smith making another attempt at being taken as a serious actor?
"Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"
Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
Is it just me or does Will Smith seem like a very bad choice for this film?
I'm a big Asimov fan (robot/foundation series), but I really can't see Will Smith playing in this. Even in his most serious films (have not seen Ali yet, so I don't know about that one) he's often playing a comic character, and this doesn't exactly fit in the "I Robot" story.
Anybody else that have read the book(s) that like to comment on this?
--
\ Christian A Strømmen
They're not using Harlan Ellison's script. So I expect that this will suck rocks.
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood
It would be a real pain to make movies. The first books are short stories collections, so i'd rather see a mini series.
The second point is that the story isn't particularly spectacular itself. I mean, fine, save humanity & such, but no real fights, it's more political, psychological, about ideas (so can't easily be ported to screen) than anything else...
I'm also a big Asimov fan (haven't seen Bicentennial Man though), but i'd rather have Foundation not adapted than adapted in a bad movie ^_-
Tsuyoikoto ha taisetsu da ne, dakedo namida mo hitsuyousa (Strength is an important thing, but tears too are necessary)
Robin Williams automatically makes a movie suck, and Will Smith only might make a movie suck? wtf?
And he did a fantastic job in the role too..
He also did a great job in Ali.
Yes, Will Smith is famous for Being the fresh prince of bel air, a MiB, and a fighter pilot fighting aliens... but when hes serious, the guy can really act.
Pity hes rarely serious.
no
I really doubt it. If it's a serious movie (and it seems like it would be), then his rap wouldn't really fit. He didn't rap for Bagger Vance (at least, i don't THINK he did).
I'm surprised that more people haven't pointed this out, but isn't I, Robot a collection of short stories, some of which are set decades apart from one another? I can't imagine this being a good thing(TM) for the book's reputation, since anyone reading the book because of the movie will be surprised to find that the two are nothing alike. I just hope that they leave Bradbury's The Martian Chronicles alone. Someone produced a terrible miniseries from it years ago, and I can only imagine how bad a condensed, 2-hour version would be.
I wish that my inferiority complex were as good as yours.
-RenderHead
Foundation, Ender's Game, many of Arthur C. Clarke's novels, and lots of other sci-fi classics are proposed every year, sometimes several times a year to different studios.
Usually, there is some sort of timing or technological issue that makes them unacceptable, such as an interested director being available along with the requisite actors, and interested studio, a period of time since the last sci-fi movie was released, the belief that they can convincingly and interestingly sell the message of the book and still make a tidy profit, etc.
With Ender's Game, the issue is the number of capable child actors needed for the film. In the case of the Foundation series, from what I understand, most script writers have a problem balancing the story between highlighting the ideals of Hari Seldon (the decay of civilization, the development of psychohistory, etc) and an action packed engaging film. Most scripts have either been snoozers (i.e. geeks would probably like them, but everybody else would... YAWN.... zzzz) or an overly action packed filmed that would alienate the diehard fans and make the movie seem to be The Fast and the Furious II: The Psychohistorian's Gambit.
I won't be seeing it unless the advance reviews are extraordinarily good. (And by that I mean reports that the film cures cancer, backaches, blindness, etc.)
From what I recall, Asimov endorsed Harlan Ellison's wonderful script before he died - to make a movie using any other script, especially one barely connected to the stories, is an insult. Guess there aren't any serious sf fans in the Fox executive ranks.
Why not Jodie Foster? She did an excellent job in Contact, and this is a similar kind of role.
Plus: Proyas
:)
Never underestimate the directors ability to bring out good performances.
Evidence: Keanu Reeves in The Matrix
We all know that could have been a large ouch.
I just type my sig in the reply form...
"Being a huge Asimov fan I have not made up my mind if this is a good or bad thing."
FFS people who say stuff like this piss me off... How can it possibly be a bad thing if somebody makes the worst possible movie about an aasimov story.... is the Judge Dredd comic any worse because they let stallone do that *thing*? Do the original batman movie or comics suck now because of the torture that was batman forever? Is the postman suddenly a crappy book? I'm always happy when there's a sequel or a book -> film adaptation of something I like, because if it sucks like dredd, I'm no worse off (except my friends wanted to kill for saying we should see it)... but if it rules like LOTR it only heightens my enjoyment of an already great story and universe.
</rant>
Send lawyers, guns, and money!
Is about the classiest, most distinguished, eloquent and intelligent character that Asimov ever came up with. I am desperately praying that they did not make that Will Smith's character.
"I went on a diet, swore off drinking and heavy eating. And in fourteen days, I had lost exactly two weeks. Joe E. Lewis
Yeah, cos his rap in "The Legend of Bagger Vance" was great...
Oh wait, he didn't rap in that.
Did he rap in Ali?
Oh, he didn't?
Enemy of the State?
Nope there either...
I know, I know... he's made a few bad rap songs for a few questionable movies, but cut the guy some slack. He hasn't done a rap video for *EVERY* movie.
At first this seemed like a wonderful thing. I, Robot has been impossible to make into a movie because it's been sat on by the movie houses.
Then I took another look. Will Smith is a perfectly acceptible choice, but the article states that the movie is about a detective investigating a crime possibly by robots? "Since humankind is dependent upon robots, there is nothing to stop robots from taking over the world"? [paraphrase] Where did this COME from?
What is worse is that there is a perfectly brilliant script available and perfectly do-able with today's technology, and they ignored this in favor of other sciptwriters. Probably because the brilliant script was written by none other than Harlan Ellison, and people don't like dealing with him.
Get that script (available in book form.) Read it. Create the dream cast in your head. Heck, Will Smith might be a good choice for the central reporter character. But realize that Hollywood doesn't care about quality unless it will bring in the cash, and science fiction is only a euphemism for "futuristic action thriller" to them.
Actually I am a lab rat in an elaborate plot to take over the world.
Because if you're the kind of person who likes to share your favorite things with friends, and Hollywood makes an extremely bad movie out of one of your favorite books, chances are the people you know who haven't read the book are going to laugh and scoff when you mention one of your favorite things. Not worth weeping tears of blood over, but disappointing nonetheless.
That, and for some people, movies tend to imprint images on their imaginations that become somehow indelible. For example, Judge Dredd might be terrific, but I find it impossible to even think the words "Judge Dredd" without envisioning Stallone bellowing "I AM DA LAW!"
If they had cast Stallone as Aragorn in the LOTR movie, and I had seen him bellow "YO, ELENDIL!" as he fights some Orcs -- yes, I might very well think of that every time I read Fellowship again. And that would be bad.
I think he'd be miscast as R. Daneel Olivaw, but as plainclothesman Elija Baley he'd be fine.
Remember, while the rest of earth society was freaking out at robots, Elija accepted them and found them useful (if inconvenient at times). He was also a bit of a rebel (having to always be "fetched", reprimanded, and ultimately accepting the Outdoors) and stood out from everyone else. He was very good at skipping around the transit system (moving walkways), and was pretty good with his fists.
He also has strong emotional reactions to things like Spacer culture (revulsion and admiration). Smith has no problem with this at all. He even went as far as to have an affair with a Spacer (gasp! horrors!).
Get off my lawn.
I've also read Ellison's proposed script. It is a perfect blend of science, robotics, and humanism. After all, at the heart, the "Robot" series of stories are not just puzzles or murder mysteries, but they touch on what it means to be human. Ellison, more than any other sf writer alive, understands this and addressed it with great insight in the script.
However, he's known for being a cranky pants, plus he's expensive, plus he'd probably want final script approval. In the movie industry's eye, that's three strikes; no movie producer would want to take a risk on something like that, even though the product would be far superior to anything currently on the market. (We could start another thread on the industry's business-before-art motivation, but that's a whole different nasty mess that we'd have to wade through.)
In sum, I don't hold out much hope for a script that's billed as an amalgamation of Vintar's script "Hardwired" plus "I, Robot" plus script doctoring by Hillary Seitz and Akiva Goldsman, and is going through the usual studio mill. My guess is this will be a lowest-common-denominator "thriller" with "dark overtones" aka Bladerunner, but not nearly as intellectual, insightful, visionary, or entertaining.
Good luck to 'em, but I'd much rather see Ellison's script produced. If you can, go find a copy and read it. It's quite a remarkable story, along with insight into the studio process and the fight to get it produced despite the best efforts of studio toads.
Personally, I don't understand why is Hollywood (apparently) fascinated with Asimov's robot stories. They're not very cinematic (in a Hollywoodesque sense), as they tend to focus on philosophical, social and ethical consequences of his Three Laws rather than an interesting plot. Thus, they're not very approchable in cinematographic terms without losing an essential common denominator, namely, forcing the reader to think about the real social ramifications and implications of creating autonomous non-human intelligence. Strip an Asimov robot story of this cold intellectual factor, and you get a mediocre and innocuous tear-jerker.
A much better choice for a Hollywood flick would be The End of Eternity, for several reasons,
You're bound to be unhappy if you optimize everything. --Donald Knuth