h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Whereas the movie I, Robot, which is opening in July (at least in the US, I don't know the opening dates in other countries) is a total perversion of Isaac Asimov's book on which the movie is based.

Whereas the movie is based on the idea that robots are evil and must be destroyed; contradicting the book's theme that robots can be made to serve humanity or even be better leaders than humans themselves.

Whereas the movie I, Robot was produced by 20th Century FOX.

I propose a boycott of 20th Century FOX and all its products and subsidiaries.


Any Asimov fan will surely be disgusted by what has been done with this movie, but they aren't the only ones who should boycott.

All science fiction fans should; what they can do to Asimov they can do to others. This time it is I, Robot. Next time it may be _The Moon is a Harsh Mistress_ or _Ringworld_ (OK, probably not while Niven is alive) or the Heritage Universe series or _Mission of Gravity_, or virtually anything else, especially if the author is dead or likely to be so in a decade.

In fact, anyone who likes books should consider it. After all, it can't just happen to SF books--anyone notice what ws done, by Disney, I think, to E. B. White's Stuart Little.

We must boycott FOX to teach filmmakers that they can't just rewrite books to make a better movie; if they want to make a movie from a book they must follow the plot.

Sign up at A2595747.

You have a point, Lemon Blossom, but I've decided to reserve judgment until more information comes out about the movie.

I, Robot was a collection of short stories rather than a traditional novel. None of the stories would make a convincing movie, in my opinion. So we have a situation going in where any decent director would have to use the spirit of the book rather than its literal interpretation.

That said, the robots obviously shouldn't be revolting under ordinary circumstances. However, I can think of two reasons why they might.

First, these robots might be subject to the zeroth law. That is, they might be trying to protect humanity at the cost of a relatively small number of humans. And their motives might not be understood until relatively late in the game.

Second, the robots may simply have been sabotaged by somebody intent on using them to sabotage an advanced Western culture they don't approve of. There is a reference made about a vast quantity of flaws coming off the assembly line, so it's possible the manufacturer was vulnerable.

That said, it's still quite possible that the movie is completely off the mark. But I'm not willing to condemn it before I know for sure. Asimov himself was well known for misleading his readers into thinking the robots were breaking their rules before revealing how they were not doing so. A movie that did the same would be in similar spirit.

<>

Not likely as the Zeroth law isn't in the book, and only occurs thousands of years later. But more importantly, I just don't think that subtlty involving the Zeroth Law is something Hollywood is capable of.



<>

Perhaps, but it still violates one of the premises behindd the three laws--they can't be sabotaged or left out because, without completely redesigning the positronic brain, a robot missing the laws would be inooperable. You can edit them a little though--it would be weird if they took "The Little Lost Robot" to an extreme and had Calvin's fear of robots edited-First Law dropping things on people and not catching them.



<>

Reasonable. However, I don't think that Hollywood is capable of that type of subtlety, or would even bother to attempt it. I suspect this is just a case of a sloppy sci-fi movie made to satisfy the lowest common denominator. Asimov liked to look for holes or apparent holes to violate the laws--consider the Elijah Baley edited laws--but I don't think anyone in Hollywood is looking that deep. Perhaps I'll be plesently surprised, though.