On Thu, 04 Oct 2007 12:58:36 -0400, mimus <tinmimus99@hotmail.com> wrote: > >Yeah, I'd already gathered, just from the occasional clips I've seen, that >it wasn't exactly a tight rendition . . . . > >Ie, at least as much Hollywood cliche as Asimov. > >(How many car-chases were there?) No, you don't get it. Not at least as much hollywood as asimov. The only resemblance between Asimov and that movie is the title and -- from OTHER stories -- several character names. Jasper
Jasper Janssen wrote: > No, you don't get it. Not at least as much hollywood as asimov. The only > resemblance between Asimov and that movie is the title and -- from OTHER > stories -- several character names. It was a Three Laws robot story, and although its core theme and conceit was drawn more from Asimov's later work than the stories actually contained in I, ROBOT, I will note that: (1) Since it is an Asimovian robot story, licensing the rights to Asimov's robot stories is probably the right thing to do. (2) The title I, ROBOT is clearly the title most likely to say, "This is an Asimovian robot story." (3) Asimov never wrote a story called "I, Robot". So it's not like the film producers licensed a story and then used nothing but the title -- they licensed a title that means "Asimov robot stories can be found here" and used the title to mean "an Asimovian robot story can be found here". I probably would have been happier if they'd left the name "Susan Calvin" out of it. (Since the character they applied it to only had a tangential relationship to Susan Calvin.) -- Justin Alexander http://www.thealexandrian.net
On Oct 9, 11:38 am, Justin Alexander <jus...@thealexandrian.net> wrote: > Jasper Janssen wrote: > > No, you don't get it. Not at least as much hollywood as asimov. The only > > resemblance between Asimov and that movie is the title and -- from OTHER > > stories -- several character names. > > It was a Three Laws robot story, and although its core theme and > conceit was drawn more from Asimov's later work than the stories > actually contained in I, ROBOT, I will note that: Except that "The Evitable Conflict" is the first appearance of anything like the Zeroth Law. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Evitable_Conflict
Mark_Reich...@hotmail.com wrote: > On Oct 9, 11:38 am, Justin Alexander <jus...@thealexandrian.net> > wrote: > > Jasper Janssen wrote: > > > No, you don't get it. Not at least as much hollywood as asimov. The only > > > resemblance between Asimov and that movie is the title and -- from OTHER > > > stories -- several character names. > > > > It was a Three Laws robot story, and although its core theme and > > conceit was drawn more from Asimov's later work than the stories > > actually contained in I, ROBOT, I will note that: > > Except that "The Evitable Conflict" is the first appearance of > anything like the Zeroth Law. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Evitable_Conflict Heck, it was a "robots run amuck and kill/enslave their creators" story. Asimov /had/ to be dead for that to happen. Or, had to have a good use for the money. I don't think he was excessively hoity-toity about particular stories. On the other hand... this story didn't / need/ Asimov.
rja.carne...@excite.com wrote: > Heck, it was a "robots run amuck and kill/enslave their creators" > story. Asimov /had/ to be dead for that to happen. Asimov was dead by the time he wrote the robot detective novels? Fascinating. -- Justin Alexander http://www.thealexandrian.net
Justin Alexander wrote: > rja.carne...@excite.com wrote: > > Heck, it was a "robots run amuck and kill/enslave their creators" > > story. Asimov /had/ to be dead for that to happen. > > Asimov was dead by the time he wrote the robot detective novels? > > Fascinating. Haven't read 'em for a while, but robots aren't ever supposed to kill people... unless Daneel Olivaw was secretly assassinating the victims and covering it up. I missed /that/ reading of the text. When you eliminate the impossible, whatever is left must be improbable, and robots killing people is... I suppose I'm probably wrong? ;-)
