Wait.


I know y'all didn't like it.


Most of you liked 'History of Violence' though, and
liking 'History of Violence' is being tested in hospitals for
being a fail safe means to determine if someone is an:

a)idiot
b)artsy fartsy
c)on crack pipeth


Plus,

'I Robot' had Will Smith, which automatically accumulates
PTP hate, complete with 30 replies saying "Will was good back
in 'Six Degrees of Seperation', but in nothing since"(just
fucking wrong for many reasons).


But let's get on topic here.

I thought 'I Robot' was fucking excellent.

Some of the things:

a)Visually stunning. At the time I saw it, I can safely
say those special effects were among the 10 most impressive
I've ever seen.


b)The way the protagonist is developed is great -- he's
not a random dude caught in a conflict. He's not perfect,
or ultra-principled for no reason(a pet peeve of mine in
action films...perfect protagonists just because). Spooner
has specific beefs with technology and robots, whose roots
might be slightly cheesy, but are overall pretty valid.
Very well done.


c)The story can be watched and enjoyed on many levels.
Unlike 'Minority Report' which INTRODUCES a cool philosophical
concept and completely ABANDONS the concept in favor of a
retarded glitzy whodunnit, 'I Robot' not only REVISITS its
central philosophical themes, but makes them one of the
CENTERPIECES of the entire conflict.

This is what I mean by "over-achieving." It made efforts
to revisit these themes, and did so effectively.


d)That said, the film does not take 45 views to "get" -- It
can be watched on many levels: It can be watched as a fun action/Sci-fi flick.

It can be watched with a date to pick her brain about what
she thinks about artificial intelligence(I've done it).

It can be watched to discuss human nature(I picked the same
girls brain about this, and then...nevermind).

e)The film has almost nothing to do with the Asimov novel,
but still manages to work the three laws into the film quite effectively.

As a big fan of the original novels, I can't
really call this film a "butchering" because it did its own
thing. The one aspect I was worried about did regard the
three laws. It shouldn't be 'I Robot' if the three laws
aren't a centerpiece of the film.


It did a lot more than it had to. A simple robotic who dunnit
could have made some doe. I was surprised the studio actually
decided to make a good film.

I like when films do this.


I'm betting y'all are too scared to reply. Prove me wrong.


----------------------------

O_E: Your Super-Ego's Favorite Poster.

"Any fighter that I face, I say prayers for them every night and that he and I live to fight another day."

(C) Floyd Mayweather Jr.

I just reccomended this to a co-worker today. (disclaimer: he doesn't like movies that much.)

He remains a good person because:
a)he's my boss
b)even though he doesn't like Wong Kar-Wai, or a lot of actors/esses from (i place scarequoteing on) "Hong Kong Cinema," he's my boss and
c)ibid.

"Minority Report" is apparently a very top notch film to him. So, iRobot came to mind immediately. What also comes to mind is the "animatrix" chapter, "The second rennaissance."

*~.~:~.~*~I~*~.~:~.~*

decent story, and i didn't expect the twist at the end.

----
bshelly

"You (Fisher) could get fired, Les Snead could get fired, Kevin Demoff could get fired, but I will always be Eric Dickerson.” (c) The God

I actually watched it earlier today (played hooky from work). I went in expecting standard shoot 'em up, sci-fi fare, but it definitely had some depth to it. Cool movie.

---
We From A Place
Where Dem Boys Still Pimpin' Them Hoes
We From A Place
Cadillacs Still Ridin' On Vogues
We From A Place
Where My Soul Still Don't Feel Free
Where A Flag Means More Than Me(IN MISSISSIPPI)

a)stepped away
b)watching iRobot in other room
c)silent 'cause players haven't yet discussed "over-achievement" as seen in title.
d)none of the above.

*~.~:~.~*~I~*~.~:~.~*

Actually pleasantly surprised by the replies.

Just reading.

I wasn't really looking for a specific response.

Just tryna do me.


>a)stepped away
>b)watching iRobot in other room
>c)silent 'cause players haven't yet discussed
>"over-achievement" as seen in title.
>d)none of the above.




----------------------------

O_E: Your Super-Ego's Favorite Poster.

"Any fighter that I face, I say prayers for them every night and that he and I live to fight another day."

(C) Floyd Mayweather Jr.

FREE CHAI VANG!

Certified Grade A Coon - Inspector Abrock33

http://rjcc.stumbleupon.com - what I'm looking at

www.hdbeat.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

plot was silly, just shitty

--------------------------------------

http://www.yvonneridley.org/multimedia.php
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
250 troops lead by Custer were defeated by the Dakota, they are Sioux Indians.

I thought it was a forgettable popcorn movie. It wasn't bad but it could have been better. It definitely was not as disappointing as Minority Report which had a very cool premise but became excruciating to watch. Oddly enough, I think the directors were perfect for the other film. Spielberg could have raised I, Robot's simple story and basic characters (IMO the screenplay was blah) to a higher level while Proyas' vision (Dark City, The Crow) would have made Minority Report a much better film.

a) "Visually stunning": The visuals are the only memorable thing about the movie. The direction was great and I'm disappointed Proyas isn't working on another film because he is a quality director.

b) The protagonist was nothing special IMO. He was your cop with a history and a grudge. The side characters were lackluster. I think the film had a great premise around which Akiva Goldsman wrote a mediocre screenplay. The one thing he didn't do was beat the premise to death which allows for your next point.

c) Minority Report and AI both had interesting premises that you wouldn't want to talk about after because you just wanted to get out of the theater and get away. I, Robot flirted with the premise enough that you were intrigued but still felt there was a lot more to cover. While that makes it good as a conversation piece, it made it kind of lackluster as a film.

d) "It can be watched as a fun action/Sci-fi flick."

That all it is to me. A good premise but it really is just an action/sci-fi flick. It is definitely better than sci-fi action like Paycheck and it was more enjoyable than Minority Report or A.I. but I wouldn't go so far to say it was "fucking excellent" or that it overachieved. It was what it was and while I wouldn't recommend it, I wouldn't tell anyone not to watch it.

Well, perhaps I could, but not by much.


>b) The protagonist was nothing special IMO. He was your cop
>with a history and a grudge.

Not true. Not a typical "history and a grudge" cop because the grudge isn't about a failed dream, or about a missed opportunity, or isn't a grudge against an individual, or an organization.

Instead, the "grudge" is against the institution of robots in society, which is such a profound, absurd grudge that most people believe him to be delusional. I think the film does a good job pointing out how absurd Spooner looks in the world he lives in.

Its not like me or you being suspect of robots -- robots are as common, or more, in the 'I Robot' world as say...personal computers in our society(probably more). That being the case, Spooner's obsession is a lot more edgy, and not banal like "Detective used to be a CIA agent but was dumbed after refusing to torture a vietamese gorilla and harbors a grudge against hierarchy and authority because of it." Now *that* is hollywood. And lame.


>c) Minority Report and AI both had interesting premises that
>you wouldn't want to talk about after because you just wanted
>to get out of the theater and get away. I, Robot flirted with
>the premise enough that you were intrigued but still felt
>there was a lot more to cover. While that makes it good as a
>conversation piece, it made it kind of lackluster as a film.

I don't understand this at all. I thought 'I Robot' engaged the concepts directly and hit them squarely. What it didn't do(and part of why I love the film) is have several 15 minute dialogues about the philosophies. It worked them into the action.

Some concepts:

1)The suicide angle - brilliant, and believable. What the inventor saw was so distressing, that it led to depression, and a sophisticated suicide in an attempt to make a social commentary....I dug that. That his little experiment worked was a hollywood miracle(Spooner actually getting the message and figuring out the riddle), but I especially like the fact that the message in the end was just that--a message. Not even necessarily a means of stoping the pending doom. Just a big "I told you so." I fuck with that.


2)The whole sunny being "special" angle - brilliant. Sonny was a great, great, "character." Hell, I was more moved by his attempts at being human than I was by Haley Joe Osment's in 'AI' and Haley Joe Osment wsa an actual human playing a robot. Sonny's efforts were obviously forced(he's not actually human), but his special-ness is very charming. Sonny is a very compelling character.

3)The whole Sunny "dreaming" and drawing that picture - brilliant. Very profound. Plays a role in the Spooner riddle, and was another way for the inventor to test his prophecy -- no one knew artifical intelligence like the inventor. For him to program a special robot that understood this prophecy is...well...dope. Remember -- the inventor did not *cause* the conflict. He merely predicted it, and programmed his prediction in Sunny, and through his suicide. Dope. Dope. Dope.

4)the whole violation of the laws hook - brilliant. The way the "ghosts in the machine' concept plays out here is diggety dope.

5)The battle between the old and new robots - brilliant. Sort of like how a dog will defend its master to the death -- it was almost touching in a way seeing the older, out of date robots throwing blows for human beings against their more sophisticated robotic brethren.

The concept that complexity breeds catastrophe in some ways...that the simpler robots were actually better...less lines of code, less opportunity for "ghosts in the machine"....very valid philosophically....just think about it....we want better robots to do our jobs even easier....eventually we get greedy and want better robots that can do even our cognitive tasks for us....making them more human...problem is, the closer you get to building this perfect robot, the closer you get to building a robot that is likely to defy people....a parodoz that the film exposes beautifully.

6)The "ghost in the machine" concept - brilliant. Already discussed.


All of these points where hit squarely on the nose. They just weren't beaten over the head. They also weren't hidden for the sake of hiding them. They just had to be worked into the action for the sake of a non Peter Jackon-length film. I thought it all worked very well.

>d) "It can be watched as a fun action/Sci-fi flick."
>
>That all it is to me. A good premise but it really is just an
>action/sci-fi flick. It is definitely better than sci-fi
>action like Paycheck and it was more enjoyable than Minority
>Report or A.I. but I wouldn't go so far to say it was "fucking
>excellent". I wouldn't recommend it but I wouldn't tell anyone
>not to watch it.

You haven't given very good explanations, but at least you tried.

I think I'm right on this on, potna.


----------------------------

O_E: Your Super-Ego's Favorite Poster.

"Any fighter that I face, I say prayers for them every night and that he and I live to fight another day."

(C) Floyd Mayweather Jr.

I Robot = meh

________________

Smoke?

is that you are trying to say someone is right or wrong about whether they liked something. Taste is subjective.

"Not true. Not a typical "history and a grudge" cop because the grudge isn't about a failed dream, or about a missed opportunity, or isn't a grudge against an individual, or an organization."

Semantics. You say it's not against those things but its against an "institution". What's the difference? Scrooge was against the institution of Christmas. The character who doesn't believe something that everyone else does and is an outcase because of it is one of the archetypal protagonists. It isn't profound.

"Detective used to be a CIA agent but was dumbed after refusing to torture a vietamese gorilla and harbors a grudge against hierarchy and authority because of it." Now *that* is hollywood. And lame."

'Detective was cool until a robot chose his life over a little girl's and now he hates robots' is pretty lame as well. You yourself admitted it was at least somewhat cheesy.

"I don't understand this at all. I thought 'I Robot' engaged the concepts directly and hit them squarely.
"1)The suicide angle - brilliant, and believable. What the inventor saw was so distressing, that it led to depression, and a sophisticated suicide in an attempt to make a social commentary"

This has been done many times. Shit, it was even done in She Hate Me.

2)Again, you bought into the Sonny character. Others were annoyed by it. I wasn't moved either way.

"You haven't given very good explanations, but at least you tried."

You bring a lot more to the film in terms of reading the Asimov novels and being interested in the philosophies that were brought up. For me, I've seen it before and it didn't bring anything new. It didn't challenge any concept or idea that I had. It didn't delve deeper into anything I hadn't imagined. Just because the premise it starts with is intellectual and insightful doesn't make the film itself any stronger.

"I think I'm right on this on, potna."

The key phrase being "I think". There is no right or wrong. It's like War of the Worlds. If you couldn't relate to the family dynamic in the first few minutes of that film, you probably weren't going to like it. You had to bring something to the table to make the film more enjoyable. You seem to be interested in the philosophies of I, Robot so you enjoyed it more than the average viewer.

I, Robot was a Goldsman screenplay: it was accessible but IMO not very insightful. It dealt with the idea of AI much like Beutiful Mind dealt with insanity or A Time to Kill dealt with racism. It presents the issue but doesn't really explore it. (Not that I would expect this film to since it is, as I've said, an action film).

You seem like a decent dude. I won't snap on you, but you getting on my nerves, baby paw.

Just say you don't like the movie.

But don't insult my intelligence.

You come off like an ass when you do that.

>Semantics. You say it's not against those things but its
>against an "institution". What's the difference? Scrooge was
>against the institution of Christmas. The character who
>doesn't believe something that everyone else does and is an
>outcase because of it is one of the archetypal protagonists.
>It isn't profound.

Excuse me, Einstein:

"Christmas" doesn't do your taxes, clean your room, handle your finances, buy your groceries, drive you to work, and guard your home. An entire society is not built upon a reliance on "Christmas" so that Scrooge analogy is plain retarded and wrong.

No, its not fucking semanitcs.

The grudge in this instance is against an institution that the entire society RELIES ON to the extent that anyone with such a suspicion is automatically deemed deviant and near psychotic.

There are few modern parrallels. Perhaps religious skeptics in many countries several centuries ago might qualify...motherfuckers were burned and shit then tho.

Shit.


>'Detective was cool until a robot chose his life over a little
>girl's and now he hates robots' is pretty lame as well. You
>yourself admitted it was at least somewhat cheesy.

Lol.

Isn't that cute.


I could summarize any movie with an oversimplified buzz phrase.

Hell, let me take a crack at it:

"The Star Wars Trilogy was about an underground resistance movement rebelling against a repressive, fascist empire. The resistance finds an allay in a freelancing gambler, and calls upon an ancient, mystic force to defeat evil and restore order to the galaxy."

See how I just did that.

What I just wrote sounded lame as fuck.

Problem is, the Star Wars Trilogy is not lame as fuck.


*swish*

Two points for Orbit.


>"I don't understand this at all. I thought 'I Robot' engaged
>the concepts directly and hit them squarely.
>"1)The suicide angle - brilliant, and believable. What the
>inventor saw was so distressing, that it led to depression,
>and a sophisticated suicide in an attempt to make a social
>commentary"
>
>This has been done many times. Shit, it was even done in She
>Hate Me.

Uh....there are billions of films with suicides. I'm not talking about the mere use of suicide. I'm talking about its context.


Jesus, you are trying too hard to disagree.


>"You haven't given very good explanations, but at least you
>tried."
>
>You bring a lot more to the film in terms of reading the
>Asimov novels and being interested in the philosophies that
>were brought up. For me, I've seen it before and it didn't
>bring anything new. It didn't challenge any concept or idea
>that I had. It didn't delve deeper into anything I hadn't
>imagined. Just because the premise it starts with is
>intellectual and insightful doesn't make the film itself any
>stronger.

Uhhh.

I don't tend to watch films to be fully challenged, nor to necessarily learn new things about the world. Most of my, and I suspect your, favorite films of all time didn't "teach" you any new facts, but instead presented an interesting story by manipulating concepts and ideas that you already knew.

I watch films so that concepts that I know or understand can be placed in interesting, innovative contexts. When I want to read something truly interesting about the mind, human nature, or articifical intelligence, I read Steven Pinker and John Searle. I don't watch movies.

So stop with the whole "I'm so bright, it taught me nothing."

'I Robot' was good to me because it "didn't" try to do too much new -- it took existing artificial intelligence/robot dogma and placed it in a cool context, in a fun story.


Again, you're trying too hard.


>"I think I'm right on this on, potna."
>
>The key phrase being "I think". There is no right or wrong.
>It's like War of the Worlds. If you couldn't relate to the
>family dynamic in the first few minutes of that film, you
>probably weren't going to like it. You had to bring something
>to the table to make the film more enjoyable. You seem to be
>interested in the philosophies of I, Robot so you enjoyed it
>more than the average viewer.


I think you are trying way, way, way, too hard to explain why you don't like it though, and even if you aren't "wrong" in the formal sense, you do look ridiculous, at least.



>I, Robot was a Goldsman screenplay: it was accessible but IMO
>not very insightful. It dealt with the idea of AI much like
>Beutiful Mind dealt with insanity or A Time to Kill dealt with
>racism. It presents the issue but doesn't really explore it.
>(Not that I would expect this film to since it is, as I've
>said, an action film).

What type of nebulous shit is that? I don't understand, at all, what this paragraph meant. I would say its becaue I didn't get it, but I'm pretty confident the reason why I don't understand that paragraph is because it actually didn't make a grain of fucking sense.


Dog, just say you didn't like it.

Your efforts at rationalizing it are coming across as forced and unintelligent, though.

Fareal.

"Just say you like it. Don't insult me and tell me I'm wrong because you think its great.

I think you are trying way, way, way, too hard to explain why you don't like it though, and even if you aren't "wrong" in the formal sense, you do look ridiculous, at least."

I said that I personally thought things had been done before. It was not an attack on you or a pronouncement that I was smarter than anyone. You wanted to know why people didn't like it and I explained why I didn't. It's a matter of taste. I haven't agreed with any points you've made on the film (although I agree with your take on Minority Report) and you don't agree with mine.

I'm sorry if you thought I was insulting you but I disagree with your view of the film. I don't think I ever labeled you as "ridiculous" or "wrong", I expressed my opinion. If you don't like it so be it.

You'll get ARTESTED up in this piece, god. Name a PLACE.


I still say you were reaching though, especially with that Scrooge analogy.

Mang.

>"Just say you like it. Don't insult me and tell me I'm wrong
>because you think its great.
>
>I think you are trying way, way, way, too hard to explain why
>you don't like it though, and even if you aren't "wrong" in
>the formal sense, you do look ridiculous, at least."
>
> I said that I personally thought things had been done before.
> It was not an attack on you or a pronouncement that I was
>smarter than anyone. You wanted to know why people didn't
>like it and I explained why I didn't. It's a matter of taste.
>I haven't agreed with any points you've made on the film
>(although I agree with your take on Minority Report) and you
>don't agree with mine.
>
>I'm sorry if you thought I was insulting you but I disagree
>with your view of the film. I don't think I ever labeled you
>as "ridiculous" or "wrong", I expressed my opinion. If you
>don't like it so be it.
>
>


----------------------------

O_E: Your Super-Ego's Favorite Poster.

"Any fighter that I face, I say prayers for them every night and that he and I live to fight another day."

(C) Floyd Mayweather Jr.

Another twist to that "robot has a heart" concept. Plot was aiight and it's a good enough film to completely hold my attention for a couple hours.


A.W. Enterprises, Inc.
"Proposal Development And Small Business Services"
www.aweinc.net
andrea.wilson@aweinc.net

~>http://hiphopheadz.blogspot.com
~>http://www.myspace.com/hiphopgyrl

and showed how robots/machines took over


!sig!
http://www.myspace.com/gemini2one

Great Scott, Doc
We need to go back in time to when motherfuckers could rock
88 miles per hour, bring it back to the block and get (Mc Fly)
And peel off before the lightning hits the clock - EL-P/Aesop Rock

>and showed how robots/machines took over
>

Very good point.

'I Robot' actually ENGAGES the critical point of HOW EXACTLY Robots do take over in all these sci-fi films where Robots enslave/war with Human beings.

In most films, we just see the effects, not the causes.

'I Robot' actually engages the minutiae--the cognitive tricks that were necessary for a robot to become sentient, and rebellious.

Very good point.
.




----------------------------

O_E: Your Super-Ego's Favorite Poster.

"Any fighter that I face, I say prayers for them every night and that he and I live to fight another day."

(C) Floyd Mayweather Jr.

FREE CHAI VANG!

Certified Grade A Coon - Inspector Abrock33

http://rjcc.stumbleupon.com - what I'm looking at

www.hdbeat.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

___________________

Mar-A-Lago delenda est

!sig!
http://www.myspace.com/gemini2one

Great Scott, Doc
We need to go back in time to when motherfuckers could rock
88 miles per hour, bring it back to the block and get (Mc Fly)
And peel off before the lightning hits the clock - EL-P/Aesop Rock

It was in the Animatrix short though.

***************************************
"Science" and Religion are the two most dangerous weapons of ideology. See holocaust.

Why do "scientists" constantly produce statistics based on "race", a social construct?

Big Mama, I was on the floor. (i'm laughing right now just thinking about it)


But yeah, I'm no film buff but I really enjoyed that movie.

www.twitter.com/luvlee2003

♥♥♥ ♥ ♥ ♥

didnt get too deep and didnt try too hard.

i "got it" the first time around and enjoyed it.

it didnt change my world or completely break down everything i though about robots.

it was just a fun ass ride.

a solid B+ which is more than enough for a summer flick

----------------------------

O_E: Your Super-Ego's Favorite Poster.

"Any fighter that I face, I say prayers for them every night and that he and I live to fight another day."

(C) Floyd Mayweather Jr.

Cosign on a decent summer movie.

I liked Minority Report much better however. Not only were the special effects better but the acting in it was as well. Both had good stories. Will Smith had some nice moments in I-Robot but he also overacts quite a bit 2 a point where we get some great unintentional comedy.

"THE GOD DAMN ROBOTS JOHN!!!"

"CALL THE MAYOR!!!"

"GET OFF MY CAR!!!"

At least they didnt end the movie w/ Sonny walkin off in some Converse. The way they kept talkin about his shoes I wasnt sure if his kicks or the Robots was the central theme of the movie.

I only saw about 20 minutes of it. I waited for the Will Smith "oh HELL no!"� scene and bounced.

I liked what I saw of it though

http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=i_robot

___________________

Mar-A-Lago delenda est

There is nothing worse than an ineffective comedic parody, that isn't funny, nor an effective parody.

Its sort of like an unintelligent nerd or a poor republican.


Admit it. You agree.




----------------------------

O_E: Your Super-Ego's Favorite Poster.

"Any fighter that I face, I say prayers for them every night and that he and I live to fight another day."

(C) Floyd Mayweather Jr.

it was a funny parody. that guy hates everything, that's his schtick.

___________________

Mar-A-Lago delenda est

NOW how do you feel about i, robot?

"i smack clowns with nouns, punch herbs with verbs..."

...it would have been called:

Quentin Tarantino presents:

I, Robot

Based on the novel written by Quentin Tarantino with input by Isaac Asimov

>NOW how do you feel about i, robot?


----------------------------

O_E: Your Super-Ego's Favorite Poster.

"Any fighter that I face, I say prayers for them every night and that he and I live to fight another day."

(C) Floyd Mayweather Jr.

that lavishly praising i, robot while continually bashing pulp fiction invalidates your opinion on pretty much everything.

"i smack clowns with nouns, punch herbs with verbs..."

And also, I don't manufacture the list of movies I like from how accepted it makes me in a circle of artsy fartsy film types.


I think 'Hustle and Flow' is better than 'Finding Neverland' by leaps and bounds.


I think 'Any Given Sunday' was better than 'American Beauty'.


I think 'Barbershop 2' is far better film, CINEMATICALLY speaking, than 'A History of Violence'.

And I think so from an experienced cinematic eye, not from the mind of a 16 year old suburban commando.


And I always argue my points intelligently. I can do so because I don't build my intellectual self esteem from the movies I like.


You guys, on the other hand, carry y'all netflix queues like they are tickets to a social circle.

As to Pulp Fiction:

You guys completely manufacture reasons to like 'Pulp Fiction', and no, "the dialogue" not maketh a full length motion picture.

Some of you say its because of the stupid, deliberate macguffin-tarantino-biter-isms.

Some of you point to it being a brilliant examination of the role of spirituality and miracles.

Some of you point to it being a resounding tale of redemption

Some of you guys say because its a social commentary on the white man's relationship with the black man.

Some of you say its because the film's exploration of the criminal underworld.

Not only are all of these completely artificial, y'all don't even lie about them convincingly. That is why I'm so maligned around here--I make y'all feel uneasy about your own 'Pulp Fiction' views. I mean seriously -- If 'Pulp Fiction' was really about "redemption" it is easily the worst redemption film in the history of humankind. Easily.

Me, on the other hand, laid out exactly what went on and why I liked 'I Robot'.

I can point to scenes that DIRECTLY(as in aren't super insinuated-inside humor-inconspicuous-suitcases and squares)point to a DISTINCT meaning, not some bullshit that needs to be teased apart over 3 gallons of mochafrappamochamochamochamocha.


Don't be mad, doggy.



>that lavishly praising i, robot while continually bashing
>pulp fiction invalidates your opinion on pretty much
>everything.


----------------------------

O_E: Your Super-Ego's Favorite Poster.

"Any fighter that I face, I say prayers for them every night and that he and I live to fight another day."

(C) Floyd Mayweather Jr.

this is the guy who thinks "i, robot" was a brilliant film.

"i smack clowns with nouns, punch herbs with verbs..."

n/m

----------------------------

O_E: Your Super-Ego's Favorite Poster.

"Any fighter that I face, I say prayers for them every night and that he and I live to fight another day."

(C) Floyd Mayweather Jr.

"I feel sympathy for black people who have no Southern roots."
- Maya Angelou

I got my money's worth.

I wished they had played with the paranoia even more. The best scene in the movie is when he's looking for the rogue in the rows of robots that ALL LOOK EXACTLY ALIKE.

My movies: http://russellhainline.com
My movie reviews: https://letterboxd.com/RussellHFilm/
My beer TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@thebeertravelguide

How is it substantively different to have him hold a grudge against robots (or the institution of robots) than holding a grudge against a particular race? That is, how is the way the Spooner character motivated different than, say, the cop whose partner was killed by a black perp and now he hates all blacks, or the worker who lost his job to an immigrant who so he hates all Mexicans or all whoever from whichever country, and also hates the idea of immigration or the way the health care system works for illegal immigrants or whatever? All of these are characters we've seen so often they are cliches even on tv shows. But how are they different from Spooner's grudge against robots?

Well, my answer is that they aren't different. And that's a good thing.

RED
http://arrena.blogspot.com

Hating, or holding a grudge against a race of people is a completely understandable, if lamentable, stance that millions of people have taken on for several millenia.

Holding a grudge/distrusting the institution of Robots is completely absurd in Detective Spooner's society, not because its morally "wrong"(which is why racism is looked down upon), but because people truly believe them to be a)ABSOLUTELY HARMLESS and b)Spooner's society is almost COMPLETELY RELIANT on Robots to function.

Such a stance has far, far, far, far, far, far, less precedent than a racist stance, which is why its automatically greeted with:

"he's psycho."

Society certainly does NOT greet racist people with the "he's psycho" description(In fact, we vote them into office). We might say David Duke is a fucking prick and want to stomp the shit out of him, but we wouldn't say "David Duke is mentally unstable" in the literal sense. In 'I, Robot' people viewed Spooner's views not with moral repugnancy(he was well-liked), but instead with psychological suspicion("that nigga ain't right, Can you believe he don't trust Robots?")

So the two forms of grudge are completely different.

ALSO,

Detective Spooner does not *HATE* Robots. His grudge is not one that is born from VENGEANCE.

It is instead born from DISTRUST.

Very key difference.

A Robot didn't fuck his wife. He does not believe them to be inherently bad. Merely killing Robots won't satisfy Detective Spooner. Spooner's problem is that he dislikes their presence AMONG HOMO SAPIENS and our RELIANCE ON THEM.



Think about it.







>How is it substantively different to have him hold a grudge
>against robots (or the institution of robots) than holding a
>grudge against a particular race? That is, how is the way the
>Spooner character motivated different than, say, the cop whose
>partner was killed by a black perp and now he hates all
>blacks, or the worker who lost his job to an immigrant who so
>he hates all Mexicans or all whoever from whichever country,
>and also hates the idea of immigration or the way the health
>care system works for illegal immigrants or whatever? All of
>these are characters we've seen so often they are cliches even
>on tv shows. But how are they different from Spooner's grudge
>against robots?
>
>Well, my answer is that they aren't different. And that's a
>good thing.
>
>RED
>http://arrena.blogspot.com


----------------------------

O_E: Your Super-Ego's Favorite Poster.

"Any fighter that I face, I say prayers for them every night and that he and I live to fight another day."

(C) Floyd Mayweather Jr.

I think it was an intentional juxtapostion between the two situations. They set up a situation that was entirely relatable to something people are familiar with (hating a entire group based on on specific experience) and flipped it.

I don't think it is accidental that one can compare Spooner's distrust of robots with, for example, a white man's distrust of some immigrant group. In the end, Spooner overcomes his prejudice. What the movie ends up saying is even though Spooner was right (the robots were, after all, trying to take over) it was unfair to paint them all with the same brush. Which is the same message that we usually get from movies and shows that employ this same situation. I thought it was a clever use of a shopworn technique.

RED

You're a sensible dude, so I'll give it some shine.

n/m


----------------------------

O_E: Your Super-Ego's Favorite Poster.

"Any fighter that I face, I say prayers for them every night and that he and I live to fight another day."

(C) Floyd Mayweather Jr.

>I think it was an intentional juxtapostion between the two
>situations. They set up a situation that was entirely
>relatable to something people are familiar with (hating a
>entire group based on on specific experience) and flipped it.
>
>I don't think it is accidental that one can compare Spooner's
>distrust of robots with, for example, a white man's distrust
>of some immigrant group. In the end, Spooner overcomes his
>prejudice. What the movie ends up saying is even though
>Spooner was right (the robots were, after all, trying to take
>over) it was unfair to paint them all with the same brush.
>Which is the same message that we usually get from movies and
>shows that employ this same situation. I thought it was a
>clever use of a shopworn technique.
>>>

See, you cna easily say that this is a cautionary tale against racial acceptance ("their taking over our country"), since yeah Smith's character was right, the robots were just lying in wait. I don't think Smith trusting that one robot was enough to say that he got over his bigotry though. Essentially the robot was "the most human", effectively it's the equivalent of hating all blacks but chilling with Clarence Thomas since "he's not like the others."

At the very least that's the case that can be easily made.

As for the main post, the movie was aight. Will Smith played Will Smith though, there's no getting around that.

All in all the dumb-ass "Save the girl" shit was enough to ruin the movie for me. The fucking world's at stake and this faggot's still shell-shocked and shit.

Fun is the new gritty

>Holding a grudge/distrusting the institution of Robots is
>completely absurd in Detective Spooner's society, not because
>its morally "wrong"(which is why racism is looked down upon),
>but because people truly believe them to be a)ABSOLUTELY
>HARMLESS and b)Spooner's society is almost COMPLETELY RELIANT
>on Robots to function.
>
>Such a stance has far, far, far, far, far, far, less precedent
>than a racist stance, which is why its automatically greeted
>with:

that's been done before in Aliens and probably a bunch of other sci-fi I can't think of at the moment.

___________________

Mar-A-Lago delenda est

My like of 'I, Robot' is not contingent on this characteristic of detective spooner being completely original.

I just broke that down in response to Redeye's argument that Spooner's behavior just like a cop who carries ethnic racism. .

Still,

Even though it ain't completely original, its surely less run-of-the-mill than the "Vengeance-seeking ex-cop." That is what someone described Spooner as above, and I think that is wrong.



>>Holding a grudge/distrusting the institution of Robots is
>>completely absurd in Detective Spooner's society, not
>because
>>its morally "wrong"(which is why racism is looked down
>upon),
>>but because people truly believe them to be a)ABSOLUTELY
>>HARMLESS and b)Spooner's society is almost COMPLETELY
>RELIANT
>>on Robots to function.
>>
>>Such a stance has far, far, far, far, far, far, less
>precedent
>>than a racist stance, which is why its automatically greeted
>>with:
>
>that's been done before in Aliens and probably a bunch of
>other sci-fi I can't think of at the moment.
>
>


----------------------------

O_E: Your Super-Ego's Favorite Poster.

"Any fighter that I face, I say prayers for them every night and that he and I live to fight another day."

(C) Floyd Mayweather Jr.

___________________

Mar-A-Lago delenda est

hating robots is about the same as me having a vendetta against toasters. THAT'S how crazy Spooner sounds to everybody and it makes for a slightly different look at that cop with a grudge theme.

---
We From A Place
Where Dem Boys Still Pimpin' Them Hoes
We From A Place
Cadillacs Still Ridin' On Vogues
We From A Place
Where My Soul Still Don't Feel Free
Where A Flag Means More Than Me(IN MISSISSIPPI)

Hating one minority (say, Mexicans because of illegal immigration) makes about as much sense as hating toasters.

I think that is the subtext of the movie and why I want to give the movie perhaps a little more credit than even you in this regard. I, ROBOT as racial allegory, I suppose. I certainly don't think the robots are a stand-in for any particular race. But it says that every race is important to our society (the ubiquitousness of the robots is just taking the theme to extremes for the purpose of storytelling). It even goes so far as to address miscegenation and self-hatred (with Spooner's robotic arm), showing ultimately how he is better than before thanks to being of mixed race, so to speak.

When you spell it out like this, it all sounds corny and lame. But the beauty of it in I,ROBOT is that it is done with a subtle and light touch. Most racial allegories smack you over the head.

Of course, the movie can be enjoyed without noticing any of this.

RED
http://arrena.blogspot.com

I'm beginning to think you're joking just to see how bizarre a theory you can get us to believe.

No disrespect, but what ur saying here does sound a bit far-fetched.


>Hating one minority (say, Mexicans because of illegal
>immigration) makes about as much sense as hating toasters.


I'm as proud a black man as there is on earth, and even I can say that a week's worth of the 6'oclock news will give me reason to be deathly afraid of black men. This is in fact, how most Americans feel. Though such a fear is "wrong" to many, its far from lacking any substance -- such fear follows logically from watching television, in fact. No fear of toasters follows from watching television. A fear of toasters is something that well....only a fucking psycho would harbor. Spooner is that fucking psycho in his society.


Our entire country is also afraid of "arab looking" men right now, based on stereotype and white-house manufactured fear. Sure, it is stupid, but to say its as ridiculous as someone having a disdain/fear/distrust of an electronic appliance that heats bread to a crisp completely ridiculous.


>I think that is the subtext of the movie and why I want to
>give the movie perhaps a little more credit than even you in
>this regard. I, ROBOT as racial allegory, I suppose. I
>certainly don't think the robots are a stand-in for any
>particular race. But it says that every race is important to
>our society (the ubiquitousness of the robots is just taking
>the theme to extremes for the purpose of storytelling). It
>even goes so far as to address miscegenation and self-hatred
>(with Spooner's robotic arm), showing ultimately how he is
>better than before thanks to being of mixed race, so to
>speak.

Just...wow.


I don't personally think 'I, Robot' had anything to say about race specifically....not at all...not even a little bit. The only connection between the lessons in 'I, Robot' and race are generic ones about tolerance...but tolerance was not really the issue here...the moral was not at all:

"All Robots aren't bad"

or

"We need Robots in our society like we need races in our society"

But insead:

"Spooner was right -- relying on machines that weigh decisions on computation and cold, hard statistics is not good for humanity."

"Be careful what you wish for -- if you want a robot to be intelligent and sentient in order to make your life easier, you run the risk of it being *too intelligent*


In fact, I didn't get the feeling at all that we are supposed to be even judging robots from a "are they good/are they bad" sort of dichotomy, because one of the central themes to me is that they actually *aren't* human....and in fact....we actually learn that Detective Spooner's fears *are* legitimate....hell....did you not get the message that Sonny LEADS A REVOLUTION????

Guess whose expense that revolution is?

Ours.

Spooner's fear was right. He does not *hate* Robots, but he doesn't trust them specifically because the cannot FEEL ANYTHING and base decisions on cold statistics and mathematics.


That theme reads: There *is* something special about humanity, and Artificial Intelligence will never be anything more than that -- artificial.


>When you spell it out like this, it all sounds corny and lame.
>But the beauty of it in I,ROBOT is that it is done with a
>subtle and light touch. Most racial allegories smack you over
>the head.

Dog, whatever.


>Of course, the movie can be enjoyed without noticing any of
>this.


Lol.

Yeah, I was just trying to see how far you would let me go.

I think everything I said is supported in the movie, but it certainly wasn't the intention of the filmmakers.

Really, I was waiting on you to call me on comparing Mexicans to toasters.

RED
http://arrena.blogspot.com

I actually enjoyed the movie...based on the same points you raised.

"Do to others what you would others have done unto you." - The Lord Jesus Christ

SB Video: http://www.youtube.com/soulbrothavideo
SB tweet:www.twitter.com/soulb

Moses reportedly liked Sonny's character development too.


We're in good company.

cause i like will smith a lot...

visually, it was cool, but i mess
around on the internet so much that
its damn near IMPOSSIBLE to impress
me with visual effects anymore...

the action scenes were quite engaging
though, and it was during these that
i forgot my biggest gripe with the
movie...

beyond will smith, there wasn't ONE
character that i cared about. that
chick? that robot? the professor?

they could have lived or died and
i would'na cared a bit...

that made it type boring to me
ultimately...


<--- that new hotness...

F.R.O.D.O. = FOR RIDE OR DIE ONLY

�The spirituality of which I speak in principle, I have never attained to.� (c) wesley

* all comments made about women apply to the formerly single TOREZ only

i wanted it to address the most:

what happens when a robot actually kills somebody.

i WANTED to see a robot with free will
snap that neck, but the movie dodged
that all together...

so, once i realized the robot wasn't
really a killer, i lost interest in
that aspect, too...


<--- that new hotness...

F.R.O.D.O. = FOR RIDE OR DIE ONLY

�The spirituality of which I speak in principle, I have never attained to.� (c) wesley

* all comments made about women apply to the formerly single TOREZ only

only watch the second half of the movie.

as long as you do that, it's great. if you watch the first half, it's eh



FREE CHAI VANG!

Certified Grade A Coon - Inspector Abrock33

http://rjcc.stumbleupon.com - what I'm looking at

www.hdbeat.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

after the MOTHERBOARD takes
over all the robots, that's
when i get bored...


<--- that new hotness...

F.R.O.D.O. = FOR RIDE OR DIE ONLY

�The spirituality of which I speak in principle, I have never attained to.� (c) wesley

* all comments made about women apply to the formerly single TOREZ only

as long as you completely forget all the stuff they talked about in the beginning, the second half is enjoyable.


FREE CHAI VANG!

Certified Grade A Coon - Inspector Abrock33

http://rjcc.stumbleupon.com - what I'm looking at

www.hdbeat.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

a good summer sci-fi action movie? yeah

Proyas made a much smarter sci-fi movie without the product placement issues.

Plus Will Smith spent too much of the movie playing Will Smith, not the character.

It does look great though.

http://www.last.fm/user/Olu/
http://ghanageek.wordpress.com/

"Plus Will Smith spent too much of the movie playing Will
Smith, not the character"

Man,

GTFOHWTBS!


"Breathe" (C) Fabo


That is because in films like this where the character's demographic is fairly flexible, it is the actor's role to inject himself into role, cuz in fact, some of the best acting is ironically not when the actor immerses in the role, but when the actor tatoos the role with himself. This ia fundamental of acting, and yet every single Will Smith movie being commented on in PTP comes with 46 replies saying:

"Plus Will Smith spent too much of the movie playing Will
Smith, not the character"

Oddly,

Mothafuckaz don't say this when Tom Hanks plays Tom Hanks in every single fucking movie save 'Philadelphia', part of 'Cast Away' and 'Forrest Gump'.

People don't say this when Bruce Willis is STILL playing the cop from Diehard to this fucking day in 95% of his roles.

And let's not get into Al Pacino.

People tend to say it about Denzel, but he doesn't get the negativity that Will Smith does. People tend to like the Denzelification of roles.

I mean, seriously -- every actor does just what Will Smith does. Every one. Making Detective Spooner black, fairly cool, fairly goofy, and a sex symbol(no homo) worked in this film. Edward Norton probably could have pulled it off. Mark Wahlberg could have pulled it off. The role only asks that you nail the paranoia of Detective Spooner, and Will does that more than adequately. Because...**newsflash**...I know it illegal to say, but Will Smith is actually a very good(not great, but good) actor.


I'm finna get on MMA shit and start grappling niggaz in posts soon tho.



----------------------------

O_E: Your Super-Ego's Favorite Poster.

"Any fighter that I face, I say prayers for them every night and that he and I live to fight another day."

(C) Floyd Mayweather Jr.

>
>
>"Plus Will Smith spent too much of the movie playing Will
>Smith, not the character"
>
>Man,
>
>GTFOHWTBS!
>
>
>"Breathe" (C) Fabo
>
>
>That is because in films like this where the character's
>demographic is fairly flexible, it is the actor's role to
>inject himself into role, cuz in fact, some of the best acting
>is ironically not when the actor immerses in the role, but
>when the actor tatoos the role with himself. This ia
>fundamental of acting, and yet every single Will Smith movie
>being commented on in PTP comes with 46 replies saying:
>
>"Plus Will Smith spent too much of the movie playing Will
>Smith, not the character"
>
>Oddly,
>
>Mothafuckaz don't say this when Tom Hanks plays Tom Hanks in
>every single fucking movie save 'Philadelphia', part of 'Cast
>Away' and 'Forrest Gump'.
>
>People don't say this when Bruce Willis is STILL playing the
>cop from Diehard to this fucking day in 95% of his roles.
>
>And let's not get into Al Pacino.
>
>People tend to say it about Denzel, but he doesn't get the
>negativity that Will Smith does. People tend to like the
>Denzelification of roles.
ummm, denzel becomes whoever the hell he's supposed to become. a slave to a renegade cop to high school football coach to small town police chief to low budget private eye, etc etc. can't be so similar to the one person. he's as versatile as they've come. and i'm NOT shitting on will, he's a very good actor too, just saying whoever says denzel does what will is accused of is full of it.

>I mean, seriously -- every actor does just what Will Smith
>does. Every one. Making Detective Spooner black, fairly cool,
>fairly goofy, and a sex symbol(no homo) worked in this film.
>Edward Norton probably could have pulled it off. Mark Wahlberg
>could have pulled it off. The role only asks that you nail the
>paranoia of Detective Spooner, and Will does that more than
>adequately. Because...**newsflash**...I know it illegal to
>say, but Will Smith is actually a very good(not great, but
>good) actor.
>
>
>I'm finna get on MMA shit and start grappling niggaz in posts
>soon tho.
so the movie made you creamy that's great. and you wanna stand on top a mountaintop and scream it to all, that's great. there's no need to shit on everyone's reasons for not liking it. it's called SUBJECTIVE.
over-achieved? that all depends on your expectations, which is different in each person. it was an enjoyable action flick but not a movie i'd ever particularly care or feel the need to see again. the underlying themes weren't lost on me but didn't have me leave the theater thinking about it. perhaps if i'd read asimov's novel i'd have viewed it differently but oh well, it's all MY OPINION.

now come and tell me how stupid i am for not agreeing with everything you said.

Dog. I did not make this post to scream on anyone who didn't like the flick. I'm screaming on people who are going out of the way to invent bad reasons to not like the flick.

A simple: "It didn't hit me" would do the trick.


>ummm, denzel becomes whoever the hell he's supposed to become.
>a slave to a renegade cop to high school football coach to
>small town police chief to low budget private eye, etc etc.
>can't be so similar to the one person. he's as versatile as
>they've come. and i'm NOT shitting on will, he's a very good
>actor too, just saying whoever says denzel does what will is
>accused of is full of it.

Uh. Okay.

I'm a huuuuuggggee Denzel fan, actually.

I think Denzel is great specifically because he burns himself into the roles. I acually don't like actors who do the opposite, like Johnny Depp. Depp shape shifts so much he doesn't burn anything memorable into many of his characters imo.

>so the movie made you creamy that's great. and you wanna stand
>on top a mountaintop and scream it to all, that's great.
>there's no need to shit on everyone's reasons for not liking
>it. it's called SUBJECTIVE.

I didn't say you had to agree with me.

Shit.

I'm saying don't manufacture bad reasons just because its me. People don't like me, so they are allowing their disdain for me, and not the movie, bait them into saying shit like "Spooner's grudge against the robots is similar to the Scrooge's grudge against Christmas." I mean, come the fuck on.

>over-achieved? that all depends on your expectations, which is
>different in each person. it was an enjoyable action flick but
>not a movie i'd ever particularly care or feel the need to see
>again. the underlying themes weren't lost on me but didn't
>have me leave the theater thinking about it. perhaps if i'd
>read asimov's novel i'd have viewed it differently but oh
>well, it's all MY OPINION.

That is completely fair. Where did I ever require anyone to agree with me?

Hell, I didn't even RESPOND TO OLU ABOUT THE FILM, I responded in regards to the comment that "Plus Will Smith spent too much of the movie playing Will Smith, not the character" which I think is fucking absurd.


>now come and tell me how stupid i am for not agreeing with
>everything you said.

Strawman. You don't have to agree with me. The explanation you gave above was perfectly fair and valid.





----------------------------

O_E: Your Super-Ego's Favorite Poster.

"Any fighter that I face, I say prayers for them every night and that he and I live to fight another day."

(C) Floyd Mayweather Jr.

FREE CHAI VANG!

Certified Grade A Coon - Inspector Abrock33

http://rjcc.stumbleupon.com - what I'm looking at

www.hdbeat.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

http://twitter.com/phenompyrus

Get Out the Room
http://getouttheroom.podomatic.com
http://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/get-out-the-room/id525657893