Aug. 10th, 2004

jack: (Default)
I went with a friend to see I, Robot. I was all prepared to hate it, since the trailer made it look rather goofy, but I was amazed. It was true to Asimov. It wasn't at all an adaption of any of the stories in the book, though there were a few nods, but it was very much in the same mould.

Asimov himself said that a goos science-fiction author doesn't emulate his idol by copying them, but by writing novels as innovative now as they were then, and this has a good stab at it. It's not truly new, but it ties together a lot of themes Asimov thought about, and seems to be very much what Asimov would have done now if he was looking at how much more we now understand about AI, and put a lot more effort into characterization than we normally do.

That's the other thing: all the the characters seemed very true, and even where they're prejudiced, it's understandable. I realise people will disagree but I thought Susan Calvin was great. I've always imagined her as beautiful despite being ice-queen-y when she was 20+, and they got the I'm-supercillious-and-love-robots-more-than-people-but-have-a-sense-of-humour-still right, making her obviously annoying, but likable.

The plot worked well. A few things were way obviously telegraphed, (I shouted "plot point" 2 minutes in :)) but the important points kept me guessing until the end, and several things I thought were going to be plot holes or cop outs turned out to make perfect sense if I'd understood them.

The moral message worked well IMHO, in that there were a few robots at different stages of development, and we get to see the flaws associated with each.

In summary, I'm sure many die-hard Asimov fans would disagree, but I thought it was a must-see. It also got a thumbs up from my friend, so with his input I also give it good marks for action, humour ("Achoo! ... Sorry, I'm alergic to bullshit."), tenderness, seeing Will Smith and Susan Calvin naked in showers, optimism, and flashy visuals.
jack: (Default)
Serious, tell me. How is this even physically possible? How can you have read enough to be able to spell the majority of the words recognisably, and yet not have noticed that while half of works have flashbacks NONE OF THE BESSED THINGS USES "***---*** FLASHBACK!! ~~~~~~~" TO SIGNAL THEM? Why would anyone think that's a good idea? Is it likely to gain respect? Is it a bold convention breaking move in the manner of the first poem to mention technology as well as nature? Or does it just suck big time?

But I suppose we have to get the next David Eddings, uh, I mean Tolkien, from somewhere.

And yes, "screaming lesbian fangirls" reference does mean I have been reading the pottersues community; I think it's the best 'comment' text on any lj I've seen :)

Active Recent Entries