I know that movies based on books are often a disappointment…


In many ways, I’m ok with that; it isn’t like they took away the book when they made the movie…

LOTR is one of the few exceptions in recent times, although I also enjoyed Timeline (forgive me)… Bourne Identity might have been a good movie, I can’t say because having read the book coloured my view of it too much to handle the changes… I could go on, listing off a variety of movies where I loved the book but found the movie lacking, but that isn’t the point of this post.

Last night I saw a trailer for “I, Robot”.

If you’ve seen the trailer and you’ve read the book(s) then you’ll understand these comments without any more explanation. What soulless person owns that book license and saw fit to sell it without any concern for what type of movie was produced? Wasn’t there a way to turn this into a box office action flick without going completely against the basic concepts of Asimov’s robot stories?

Perhaps I should wait until I see the movie before I pass judgement, but isn’t going to the movie and giving them my money already saying that I think the movie is worth something?

The sad part, to me, is that I was so excited when I saw the first posters…

Comments (18)

  1. Scott R says:

    I had the same feelings (thoughts)

  2. Brendan says:

    One of my favorite examples of this horrible act of defiling a great book into a not so great movie is Battlefield Earth. When I first saw it in the theater a few years back I walked out with a dirty feeling, knowing it just didn’t seem right, and in what way I couldn’t place… then recently I read the book (up until 2 weeks ago in fact (when I finished)). It was a exquisite work of science fiction, who’s theatrical version could not have been much worse or less true to the original.

    Tom Clancy works are about to be added to a “only do one” list for me where I would only see the movie or read the book, not both, because of those I’ve read and watched (Sum of all Fears, Patriot Games, and Clear and Present Danger), it sickens me at times the vast differences between the book and movie.

    Granted… they are each targeted towards a different audiences, it’s still horrible to be aware of such butchering.

  3. Chris Sells says:

    I’ve familiar with Asimov’s work (in fact, I read 19 of the 21 books in his uber-series that takes you through all three of his series in the same universe) and I’m still looking forward to I, Robot. Will you now judge me harshly? : )

  4. AndrewSeven says:

    Look what happened with Dune.

    Frank Herbert was even on the set to "help" David Lynch.

  5. Dave Sussman says:

    Oh dear Lord, what is the world coming to? It looks like the only thing it has in common with the book is the title and the three laws. Sigh.

  6. Philip Wheat says:

    Gack. It can’t be as bad as the movie that had the same name as Heinlein’s "Starship Troopers." I mean, don’t all the characters at least have the correct numbers of legs?

  7. Brendan says:

    Sometimes they get it right. The original Dune was… iffy at best, while the sci-fi miniseries version was far more true to the source.

  8. D. Brian Ellis says:

    I agree about Dune. The mini-series was so much better than the first because it could handle a lot more of the political intrigues that are truly the point of the Dune novels. I just recently watched the "Children of Dune" sequel and was rather impressed. They did pretty well with the material.

    Brian

  9. I have the same reservations about seeing "Troy" and how it compares to Homer’s Iliad. I am eager to see it but I don’t expect to be as pleasantly surprised as I was with the fidelity of LOTR.

  10. +1 for Duncan.

    And Will Smith? WILL SMITH!?!?!

    I mean, he was great in MiB and all, but this is NOT a Will Smith story. I think I’ll wait for cable.

  11. M Knight says:

    Dave Sussman, The "I, Robot" movie only has the vauge concepts of the 3 robotic laws.

    In the books the 3 robotic laws were an intrinisc part of the hardware and an integral part of the entire robotic brain design.

    In the movie, the robotic laws are some software tacked on as an after thought.

  12. jake says:

    moives turn from books come out better i think

  13. Can says:

    One of the better novels that has been transformed into a movie is "The Ice Storm" Visually Ang Lee did a wonderful job as well as keeping faithful to the book.

  14. Can says:

    One of the better novels that has been transformed into a movie is "The Ice Storm" Visually Ang Lee did a wonderful job as well as keeping faithful to the book.

  15. Andrea says:

    The Movie "A Simple Plan" was an amazing film, in comparison to the book. Its not often you see this, but the movie was completely different. The book was much too insane, and the parts that were left out for film were the worst parts of the book. The movie takes a complete turn, for the better, from the book about half wa through. Thats what makes the movie better, the fact that the senseless acts the main character commits throughout the book are left out for the movie, which makes the main character more realistic, and he seems he actually has a soul, rather than having no emotions at all.

  16. Andrea… thanks for that info, I’ve seen that movie, but never read the book… perhaps I am better off in this particular case :)

  17. Sydney says:

    Troy was really off the actual greek mythology. For the most part books are better than their book-based movie..except for some like lotr of course

  18. Bunsen says:

    Okay, I know that movies rarely capture the genius of their originals, but how is it that everyone here is singing the praises of Jackson’s Lord of the Rings? Anyone who actually read those books knows that major character removal and reversal was rampant, and the very world and culture of middle-earth, spelled out so well that one could literally make a movie as an exact replica, was replaced with easier-to-swallow substitution of norse and eastern cultural processes. LOTR disgusted me, and many people I have talked about it with. I Robot, I agree will be horribly innaccurate, much like the book, but that is usually the case with science fiction. Good scifi, such as dick, asimov, clarke, harrison, and heinlein, has always been butchered on film because it makes you think, and the theater doesn’t want you to do that. If you fail to see the message in a complicated story dumbed down to ninety minutes, you walk away upset, and they lose future business. Just look at Starship Troopers, Minority Report, Space Oddysey 2001, etc.

    Movie conversions are the scourge of the reading world.