I, Robot

Like the Matrix and many other major movies, I, Robot has its foundations in philosophy, in its case the question of epistemology(The study of knowledge itself and computers being self-aware).

Will Smith is Spooner, a cop with an apparent attitude problem. Set in the future, I Robot sees Spooner embarking on a puzzling case of suicide where he believes it was actually murder. By a robot.

In this future society (With more than a homage to Blade Runner) robots are used as slaves of humans in all facets of life. They have 3 rules of conduct hard coded into them which essentially state they cannot harm humans. So the postulation by Spooner that a robot killed a man after a history where no robot had ever committed so much as a mugging presents a big problem to both his peers and his boss.

Suffice to say the story's plot thickens and a number of twists and turns emerge before the truth is revealed.

Will Smith is an absolute surprise here. Having previously been a light-hearted comedy actor he puts in a truly excellent and believable shift as a wise-cracking cop with a dark past.

However, the real star is the special effects and visual trickery. Impossible but ingenious camerawork and some jawdropping animation really make I, Robot feel truly alive and utterly believable, while never being dull for a second.

It arguably doesn't delve too deep into its philosophical undertones, but it doesn't really need to. It's a traditional Hollywood blockbuster action flick but it unquestionably has a brain and is a clear cut above the likes of Armageddon et al.

Very enjoyable.

Director Alex Proyas, helmer of such cult favorites as 'Dark City' and 'The Crow', steps into the Hollywood limelight with his first attempt at a mainstream Hollywood blockbuster.

'I, Robot' chronicles the life of Detective Del Spooner (Will Smith) who has a techno-phobic view of the world's newest appliance, a life-like robot created by the world's leading technology giant US Robotics. A link in Spooner's past is linked to his phobia of the automaton movement sweeping the nation. According to US Robotics, there will be eventually 1 robot to every 5 humans.

Spooner is called to the offices of US Robotics when a leading scientist (James Cromwell), with a secret link to Spooner, has apparently committed suicide. His death seems to have mysterious circumstances which could link to a robot. With man's complete trust in the new robot technology, it seems too ludicrous to every one except Spooner.

As the mystery deepens, Spooner unravels the very fabric of the robotic giant, locks horns with CEO Lawrence Robertson (Bruce Greenwood) and learns more about his automated enemy with the aid of scientist Dr. Susan Calvin (Bridget Moynahan). Through the course of these events he may learn more than he could ever imagine.

It is hard to defend a film like 'I, Robot' but I am going to try. For sci-fi purists, Isaac Asimov's legendary work about the robot and how he will intricate into our society has filled the minds of readers for over 50 years. But the similarities between the film presented here and his work are few and far between. Kind of like last week's release of Jerry Bruckheimer's 'King Arthur'. Both films take sacred subject matter and re-invent it with a new twist. I would have to say that 'I. Robot' is better in a lot ways.

At the core of 'I, Robot' beats the soul of Asimov as his 3 laws regarding robots are sacredly left intact and the film does abide by them. Also a lot of the characters have similar names to the people in the text. It is almost like taking Star Trek's 'prime directive' and some of the now classic characters and setting them in a new idea of the future. The core is left intact but in some ways it has been updated and refreshed.

The story, special effects and extremely zealous direction, however, all seem to be brought forth by the collaborators who cobbled this film together. There are influences of 'Robocop', 'Short Circuit', 'Blade Runner' and even the classic comic-book series 'Magnus: Robot Fighter'. Each of these robot influences echo back to what makes 'I Robot' so intriguing, a joy to watch and memorable.

Sure the story does have a lot of sci-fi influences and clichés aside from robot films including 'Star Wars' and 'Planet of the Apes' but don't these benchmark sci-fi films influence everything coming down the turnpike these days. It even has the classic sci-fi cliché of the social outcast claiming there is an invasion coming except no one believes him. But that is not what should bring us into the film.

You really need to give credit to director Alex Proyas because it is his magic as a filmmaker that holds this film together. He knows where to play it straight and where to let his lead actor bring on the charm. Also you really have to admire the man's technical ability. His brilliant inter-laying of robots into the photography is astounding. Proyas is an A-list director in the making and 'I, Robot' shows that he can deliver a big Hollywood film.

I also give credit to Will Smith who starts out being very unapproachable with his character but as the film goes we really become fond of his hero. Smith's Spooner does have a lot of his previous sci-fi heroes inter-laced into Spooner but it comes off as more of a homecoming than an annoyance. In some ways I think Proyas had something to do with that especially in the chase down scene towards the beginning of the film. It almost felt like 'Men in Black' again.

As for Smith's co-stars, Cromwell's Lanning is a throwaway character used mainly for effect, Moynahan is timid and sometimes robot-like but it is a sturdy performance and Greenwood is menacing and a good match to face off against the rebellious Smith.

The reason I was so fond of 'I, Robot' is because for once it was a summer film that didn't apologize for trying to be entertaining. The special effects, the performances and the direction are all what people want to see in the summer and this film is loads and loads of fun. It is a great giant popcorn film with a light layering of message.

My only small problem with this film was that it is supposed to be set in Chicago in 2035. I didn't buy it but if it was 2135, then maybe.

Sure the film doesn't pave new ground but why does every film have to. It is pure summer fun and what is wrong with that.

If you want Asimov and sci-fi purism then you can always read the novels. Stop apologizing and most of all stop belly-aching, just give the film a chance. If you like science fiction films and want to be remembered how much fun they used to be then this picture is the perfect ticket for you. So Says the Soothsayer.

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.

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)

This is a really good movie with a lot going for it. Some good action, good story and a good twist at the end. I wouldn't say it is flawless in terms of acting but that's not necessarily what you are looking at in this movie.