I, Robot

It's 2035, robots are everywhere in people's lives. Chicago Police Detective Del Spooner (Will Smith) is not a fan of robots due to something that happened in the past. He's sent to investigate the murder of Dr. Alfred Lanning (James Cromwell) the top robot scientist at U.S. Robotics. Spooner believes that a new NS-5 robot killed him, but the three laws of robotics make it impossible. Company scientist Susan Calvin (Bridget Moynahan) can't believe him until all heck breaks loose.

This is a movie derived from Isaac Asimov ideas, but turned into little more than a popcorn summer flick. It's yet another Will Smith blockbuster but it could have been so much more. The three laws were never introduced properly. They were just listed like so many assembly instructions. This is a big disservice because it's integral to the twist ending. The action and the CG are fun and impressive. I just wish this was more than a simple mechanical thriller.

The maker of a film adaptation has three choices. First, he can try to translate the original medium as faithfully as possible, striving as much as possible to preserve the spirit and content of the original while re-imagining the story as a film. Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings films exemplify this approach. Second, he could instead try to capture the essence of the original, while largely abandoning the particulars of the original, as in the intelligently satirical but hard-hearted film version of Starship Troopers. Third, he can try to do something original with the material, drawing inspiration from the written story, but creating a unique film with a unique vision. I, Robot is more the the third than the first or second. While little remains of Asimov's stories in this killer robot metropolitan fantasy, the film is informed by, and offers no disrespect, to the good Doctor's creations.

Will Smith plays a Jack Slater-styled maverick cop. If it's old, it's good.

He wears vintage converse, listens to Stevie Wonder, and apparently regards sweet potato pie as a food group. Will Smith's acting is a naturalistic shuffle, a Columbo-like pastiche of mumbling, sarcasm, and unexpected outbursts of charisma and off-balancing interrogation techniques. He delivers his one-liners with unnecessary seriousness. While in Men in Black, he aimed for the ballparks with his power-swinging action-comedy style, here his conscientious style gets in the way, suggesting a character who stands in front of the mirror practicing his zingers like a Tuesday night comic. It's not entirely Smith's fault, as the movie itself can't seem to decide if he's standing in for Bogart or Schwarzenegger, or if the character had a life of his own before the film starts rolling. His performance is intelligent, marred by occasional "Gotcha, suckaz!" moments that remind us that all films made in Hollywood are made in Hollywood.

His opposite, Bridget Moynahan, fits her role more surely. She's an ice queen in the classic action movie tradition, a stiff-necked, self-important, lonely woman who has been absorbed by her work so completely she remains a teenager at heart, awkward, vulnerable, and searching for the approval of others. Moynahan's bug-eyed discomfort and clipped, TV-sarcastic delivery are those of the quintessential comedy sidekick. Nonetheless, in rare moments, she invests the character's personal revelations with warmth, doubt, and a glow of determination and moral purpose. While Smith vacillates between supercop and Bogie, Moynahan seems to have found a happy medium between the Saturday matinée and the midnight marathon, a mixture of fun and humanity with a carriage of seriousness appropriate to what is essentially a monster movie.

The robot, Sonny, is a character himself, a curious, frightened creature that seems capable of anything. Could Sonny be the murderer? We hope not, and yet, we see the grim possibility that a machine might consider itself more than a human being. We understand Sonny's drive to live and grow. As human beings, we know what lengths we would go to to ensure our survival, whatever the moral charges facing us.

A top scientist has been murdered, and there are no human suspects, so the powerful US Robotics corporation (no relation to the modem manufacturers) convinces the powers-that-be to consider his unexpected death a suicide. Spooner (Will Smith) alone searches for the truth of the matter, fueled by hatred for robots and a personal debt to the dead scientist. Dr. Calvin (Moynahan) feels his intrusive investigation is unnecessary, although new pieces of evidence appear that gradually shake her confidence. Robots are programmed by the Three Laws to serve humanity, but Spooner is convinced one of the new NS-5 units, a unique prototype, is the murderer. As Spooner gets deeper to the heart of the mystery, the story explodes with robotic violence. Like all good mysteries, the real question is not "Whodunnit?" but "Why?" The heroes do some things for the wrong reasons, and the villains do some things for the right, rational reasons. Although I, Robot hardly pauses for introspection, it does asks us, "What makes a human being superior to a machine?" There are twists and surprises, although in the end, the movie plays out in the only way it can, a band of brave heroes trying to throw the ring into Mt. Doom while the armies of evil march. And yet, the movie leaves us wanting more. What is the future of humanity? How will we control our machines, and how will we prevent the machines from becoming our masters?

While not as ambitious as A.I., it is more successful, and while not as intelligent as Robocop, it is better played. While the movie does suffer from inconsistencies in mood and philosophy, such hiccups are secondary to the emotionality and drive of the film, its fury of thought as well as action. In moments, I, Robot is a terrifying vision of the future. Too few science-fiction movies manage to scare us with the power of technology, but future shock is vital to the science-fiction story. Modern science-fiction truly began with the detonation at White Sands. The Atomic Age has given way to the Digital Age, but we still have not solved the problem of how to wrest the power of technology from the creatures of the id.

According to Isaac Asimov, the Three Laws of Robotics are:

1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm. 2. A robot must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law. 3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

Now you don't have to be a web designer/hilarious movie reviewer with a Bachelor's in Electrical Engineering and an MBA to realize that some sort of interpretation of the old "rules were made to be broken" adage is gonna take place. And that, my friends, is the nut that the story's shell encases.

My friends: Um, what?

Oh, uh, sorry, I was just trying to sound cool. Anyway...

If you're the type of person who likes to prejudge and make assumptions about movies based on trailers (unlike me, of course), then you may initially think this movie is just all silly action. But that's not the case. Oh, there's definitely some silly and unrealistic action. Whenever you have Will Smith SURFING AWAY FROM AN EXPLOSION ON A FRONT DOOR then you know there's some stuff you're just gonna have to take with two pinches of salt and a dash of sugar, but I, Robot does a good job of developing and revealing its story, all while mixing in the right amount of rump cheek-kicking.

There is no denying that the special and visual effects are great, and they are the major selling point for this movie. The car scene in the tunnel is worth the price of admission, and the last 15 or 20 minutes really kick things into 1969 Camaro overdrive. If you've gotta go to the bathroom or get a refill on popcorn, then definitely do it before these last 20 minutes. But I found myself genuinely interested in the story. The movie manages to maintain a good amount of suspense and tension throughout, and it throws in a couple of twists just to keep things fresh. Are the robots as evil as they seem? Is Bruce Greenwood the bad guy he appears to be? Why exactly does Will Smith hate robots so much? Is Alfonso Ribeiro somewhere sucking his thumb and crying, wondering why Will won't return his phone calls?

The acting is pretty solid throughout. In general, I like Will Smith. But if you've seen Wild, Wild West then you know he's not immune to starring in crap. Thankfully, that's not the case here. Will Smith pretty much plays Will Smith, so take that for what you think it's worth. He's basically a cop with an attitude who likes to wax sarcastic and be all rebellious and stuff. And he has some good back-and-forths with the ever-adorable Bridget Moynahan who, as Dr. Susan Calvin, is an expert on robot psyches and has great lips - much better than the over-sized bananas Angelina Jolie has plastered below her nose.

Going into the movie, I had my reservations. After all, when I first saw the robots in the trailer, I thought they looked about as silly as Tom Cruise with his gray hair in "Collateral." But the robot special effects are actually well-done. I came away impressed. They look pretty realistic (more human than Al Gore, to be honest), especially in their mouth movements (George Lucas - take note). And Mrs. Shade made a good point - if you're putting a robot in every home, then you probably don't want it to look evil and menacing. The fight scenes between the robots are quite cool without looking too fake. This is a good sign that we may be moving away from CGI being too obvious.

I don't know if I'll add this to my DVD collection, but I definitely want to at least rent the DVD one day, assuming that it's loaded with cool special features. Just one question, which encompasses one of my complaints about the movie, why do so many action movies insist on having a scene where the hero saves an animal in peril? I DON'T WANT TO SEE ANY MORE CATS OR DOGS BEING SAVED IN THE NICK OF TIME! I don't want to see animals die or anything, but I'm just tired of pointless "I must risk my life to save this animal" scenes. It's a cheap ploy to get audiences to go "Awwwww." It works, but it makes me dry heave.

Rating: 3.5 (out of 5)

I thought the concept of the storyline was good, as it could be conceived as realistic. Given the ever increasing advances in modern technology, one can, indeed, conceive the possibility of this kind of future occurrence.

I did not really see any flaws in this movie or in the actor's character but the philosophical aspect of the movie questions at what point does artificial intelligence cease to be artificial and true consciousness arise? Anyhow, I did like the A.I. in this movie and would definitely recommend, especially if you like Will Smith movies are the Terminator series. I do, however, prefer there to be no sequels to this movie due to the fact that a sequel would probably be no more than a revamped version of the first one. With that being said, I recommend seeing it. 8/10

The film shares the same name as Asimov's novel, but with some adaptations. But in general, it doesn't break the three laws. This kind of science fiction film, which integrates human nature and ethics of science and technology, triggers our deep reflection. Human beings and robots have advantages and disadvantages, no matter when, in front of any biological species, we always have the freedom to choose.