I Robot: Genius and Predictableness
/I Robot: Genius and Predictableness
The concept of movie or TV show adaptations isn’t something new. In fact, they’re extremely popular. There are good ones, bad ones, ones that should have never existed in the first place. Today, I want to dive into one of those.
The Book
Book Cover Courtesy of Del Rey
I, Robot was authored and released in 1950 by Isaac Asimov. Considered one of the “big three” of science fiction, I, Robot is often viewed as his best work, or very near the top of that list. I can’t confirm if it’s truly his best because I haven’t read all his works, but I find it hard to believe it isn’t. To put it simply, it is one of the best pieces of science fiction ever made.
Asimov doesn’t just make you think when I, Robot. He makes you question everything you think, not just about robots, but everything you might understand and everything you don’t. He invests you in each character, connecting all their stories in such a way that makes perfect sense, and no interactions ever feel forced, or out of place. Asimov’s writing prowess is on full display throughout the book. The dialogue is the strongest I’ve ever read. The philosophical questions and problems he presents always have a conclusion (Not a solution, mind you!) that is genius, and it’s all because of three simple rules.
The Three Laws of Robotics
Every moment, every change in the plot, every conversation always circles back to three sentences. They are as follows:
A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
A robot must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.
Photo Courtesy of Peter Jones
As incredible as the writing is, credit needs to be given for how perfectly the laws complement every problem the characters face throughout the story. Unsurprisingly, a book called I, Robot revolves around robots. Everything from ideas of robotic religion, or how the laws could contradict each other. Asimov wraps it together perfectly with a mix of sarcasm, seriousness, and world-changing ideas.
A lot of the time when there are laws or rules implemented in sci fi, you can tell when the author didn’t really think about how’d they use them effectively. They’re tossed to the side or worked around in lame and boring ways. Asimov, well, you can tell he thought about it. The laws are mentioned at least once every couple of pages, often more, and they’re never anywhere but the forefront of every person’s mind.
The Main Character
I’ve spent a lot of time raving about how great writing and dialogue is. The thing is, you can have great writing, but if the characters are boring, it won’t be interesting. It’s a good thing that Asimov knows how to make characters interesting. The story is told under the lens of an interview with Susan Calvin, the lead robopsychologist for United States Robotics (USR). There are parts told without her being present, but everything circles back to her. It makes sense as well. When questions about robotic sentience and consciousness come into play, who else but a person who studies their minds to be the main character?
The Movie
Poster Courtesy of Twentieth Century Fox.
As much as I could go on about the book for another couple thousand words, unfortunately, the movie has to be mentioned as well. In 2004, I, Robot the movie was released, starring Will Smith. It was… not great. In terms of quality, there is no comparison between it and the book. One if an incredible masterpiece, the other is predictable nothingness. One asks questions that make you think, the other tries that but gives up halfway through in order to throw an hour of boring redundant action at you.
The brilliant characters that exist in the book just aren’t the same. Sure, Susan Calvin (Bridget Moynahan) is in the movie, and sure, she’s a robophychologist as well, but any personality, any interesting moments of dialogue she has are gone. She becomes an exposition machine, only providing information to the main character, Del Spooner (Will Smith). Never once do we get a glimpse of the intelligent, hard and intriguing version of Dr. Calvin.
For a movie that shares the same name, characters names, and rules as an utterly incredible book, I, Robot is a movie that falls short in every measurement of interest.
Nate Brown is a professional writing student at Algonquin College. When he’s not learning the tips and tricks of the craft, he spends far too much time annoying his family with useless movie facts, and every little gripe he has. His first attempt at writing happened when he was 7, and while it didn’t get very far, the writing bug took hold early, influenced by a childhood of reading. Dreams of his own stories turning into books and movies has led Nate to consume every piece of media he can, and critiquing everything was just a natural course to follow.
