Comments on: I, Robot (2004)

By: suzero

suzero — Wed, 20 Apr 2005 20:31:49 +0000

I liked this – but there are indeed some annoying details, like the unlikely ‘ventilation shaft’ entrance mentioned above.

I felt the relationship between Will Smith’s character and Dr. Calvin was rather forced. They met once while Will was at USR on cop-business and next thing you know he’s knocking on her door after he’s been attacked and helping himself to her whisky.

And what was the sideline with that young boy that he kept telling not to “cuss”? Totally pointless character.

Also, the three laws… aren’t they the same as the ones in AI?

However, regarding the CGI which everybody seems to be bitching about recently: it didn’t bother me in the least here. Perhaps I don’t have an eye for it or perhaps I WANT to believe but I couldn’t see the difference most of the time. There was the occasional badly lit key effect, but the robots were great I thought.

And the “impossible” camera angles at the end I actually liked. I don’t mind if that means it’s humanly impossible. It added to the feel of the fight occasionally. Earlier on though, when Will was fighting Sonny, Proyas uses the almost stroboscopic effect of increased shutter speed which makes everything slightly jerky and very difficult to see what was going on.

By: weefselkweekje

weefselkweekje — Wed, 01 Sep 2004 14:41:33 +0000

As a big fan of Isaac Asimov’s writing I was amazed to find this movie actually had quite an Asimovian story. With all the shooting and running they could have easily forgotten that.

Some plot twists are silly, but the main ouline is one that the old master could have thought of himself… in fact I think he did. In a story that unfolded entirely different, but still…

By: PiP

PiP — Wed, 04 Aug 2004 07:43:42 +0000

Beautifully true…

Actually one thing that I do love about movies these days is the incredible sound quality/surround sound. That’s progress…

By: Paco

Paco — Tue, 03 Aug 2004 22:26:05 +0000

Not only has vinyl that ‘vintage’ feel to it, the sound quality is actually richer. You’d need some really hyper-expensive Super-CD-whatever stuff to duplicate the fulness and richness of good analogue vinyl-sound. So it’s not only the crackling sound that is pleasing

By: PiP

PiP — Tue, 03 Aug 2004 19:24:38 +0000

It’s funny but I don’t actually like ‘perfection’ (i.e: digital). For example, what I love about vinyl as opposed to CDs, are the crackling sound you hear when you play a record – especially an album. I love it when it goes quiet in between tracks and starts really crackling as you know it’s a track which has been played over and over again… the needle placed in the same groove of the record.

It gives it history. Same with film. And why I love watching old copies of movies which bear a sense of that history and of their making. I know a lot of today’s generation simply refuse to watch black & white movies or one’s without sound (and with live musical accompaniment instead). To me, they’re some of my favourites. You can really get transported back in time…

By: arjan

arjan — Tue, 03 Aug 2004 18:41:58 +0000

well you’re right but what I would give for good flawless copies of films (so: digital)! I agree with you: movies, sex and music…

By: PiP

PiP — Tue, 03 Aug 2004 17:23:26 +0000

Mmm… Even when things get cheaper (i.e. the small cost of producing one CD or DVD), it’s never reflected in the price the consumer pays. Anyways, with cinemas, it’s not just about the film: the ticket pays for the venue, the staff etc. So, I doubt digital projection will make things cheaper.

And what about the price of popcorn? (I make and take my own!).

And sorry, have to disagree with you too with the ‘crappy downloaded version on a PC screen’. Lots of downloaded movies are incredible quality: you wouldn’t know the difference. Some work in DVD players and anyways, there’s not much difference between a computer screen and (small) TV screen…

And if you have a powerbook, even better. Can watch movies at the airport and (if you travel First Class in a train on England you can even plug your powerbook into the train’s electricity supply. How cool is that).

All that said, going out to a cinema to see a film is still one of my favourite things in life to do… Right up there after sex and ski-ing.

By: arjan

arjan — Tue, 03 Aug 2004 13:54:45 +0000

well cinema is expensive… especially considering the fact I paid over 8.50 euros to see King Arthur and even more for I, Robot…. my answer is: digital projection: making copies and distribution will be much cheaper… at first the consumer will have to pay for the new digital installations of cinemas but eventually going to the movies will be cheaper…

I don’t find any charm in seeing a crappy downloaded version on a pc screen… but that is a matter of taste.

I don’t condemn people who download; it is just not my thing and it probably never will be…

and DVDs are becoming cheaper.. I buy a lot of these at the 3 for 33 euros discounts (latest purchases: Pirates of the Carribean, The Game and Fight Club)

By: Paco

Paco — Tue, 03 Aug 2004 12:12:22 +0000

Same here, Pip. If I really like a DVD or CD I’ll buy it. I only download stuff that is hard to find or which I deem not worth seeing in the cinema (I prefer to see good movies on the big screen).
I wonder how long it takes before the industry comes to understand this stance -which a lot of people have.

By: PiP

PiP — Tue, 03 Aug 2004 10:23:36 +0000

I don’t have any qualms when it comes to downloading movies. It’s like the music industry. It’s all a big bucks industry with us, the consumer, footing the bill…

That said, I go to the cinema regularly, support independents, buy a mass of DVDs (and vinyl if I’ve downloaded a song I like) so I feel it all balances out in the end…