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.

4.25 out of 5

So Says the Soothsayer.

Throughout history, men and women alike have dreamed of technological advances such as advanced robotics, did they perceive that said technological advancement would subsequently result in near-constant isolation of the human race? Apparently not. The year is 2017 when a company known as VSI create ‘Surrogates‘, robotic shells in which the user can place their own personality, thoughts and to some extent their soul, into it’s well known invulnerable shell, protecting the user from harm and letting them experience anything they desire all from the safety of the users own home.

With the creation of the Surrogates, crime rates have fallen to almost nothing, until FBI agent Tom Greer (Bruce Willis) catches wind of the first murder to happen within years. Greer finds that everything isn’t what it seems within this futuristic, perfect utopia and in turn, questions what exactly defines a human. Now, that is something that really should be taken into account here, there have been countless films in the past which focus on the creation of somewhat autonomous sentient beings (even if that may be debatable here), such as in; I Robot, Terminators and Transformers, but Surrogates brings forward something unique to the table. Whilst at first, the film may not seem so dark and sinister, if you read in to the concept, it’s really quite disturbing, essentially exploring philosophical questions such as ‘What defines humanity?.’

The futuristic comic book adaptation features Bruce Willis (Die Hard Trilogy, Sixth Sense, The Fifth Element), Radha Mitchell (Pitch Black, Phone Booth, Silent Hill, also the upcoming ‘The Crazies’), Rosamund Pike (Pride & Prejudiced, Die Another Day, Fracture), Boris Kodjoe (Brown Sugar, The Gospel, Starship Troopers 3) , James Cromwell (Babe, L.A Confidential, The Green Mile) and Ving Rhames (Pulp Fiction, Mission Impossible II, Dawn Of The Dead). Willis is renowned for his die hard attitude which appears in most of his films, and he does an exceptional job throughout Surrogates of preserving that, whilst some people may see as a flaw, I on the other hand, think it’s an attribute that should be carried with him. Alternatively, Mitchell’s performance, whilst definitely professional, seemed rather benumbed at best, but this may be due to the fact her character doesn’t really get a chance to make a big impact throughout Surrogates. I would however like to applaud Cromwell on his rather impressive representation of Dr. Lionel Canter which, teamed with Willis, kept the film going for me. An intricate film which subsequently makes you think, and definitely doubt, you’ll love it if you are sci-fi/comic book fans, otherwise it might not be the film for you.

]]> http://thevoyeurs.wordpress.com/2009/10/30/les-voyeurs-85-les-voyeurs-anticipent/ Fri, 30 Oct 2009 16:00:00 +0000 thevoyeurs http://thevoyeurs.wordpress.com/2009/10/30/les-voyeurs-85-les-voyeurs-anticipent/

Les Voyeurs #85 – Les Voyeurs anticipent

Diffusion : jeudi 29 octobre 2009 à 18h sur RGO / vendredi 30 octobre à 18h sur Radio 16.
Rediffusion le samedi 24 octobre 2009 à 10h sur RGO.
En téléchargement pendant une semaine ici.
Et en écoute permanente là.

Actualité

Mic-Mac à tire larigot: le nouveau film de Jean-Pierre Jeunet, avec Danny Boon.
L’actu des arcades: Lucky Luke, Fame, This is It (seulement 2 semaines à l’affiche), mais aussi Cinéman (Franck Dubosc), Mission G, Mère et Fille, Le Petit Nicolas (toujours à l’affiche et toujours adapté des bouquins éponymes),
Sherlock Homes: le nouveau film de Guy Ritchie, avec Robert Downey Jr.
La BA de la semaine: Invictus, le prochain film de Clint Eastwood. L’histoire de l’entente entre Nelson Mandela et le capitaine de l’équipe de rugby sud-africaine pour réunifier le pays derrière le sport et participer à la coupe du monde de 1995. Avec Morgan Freeman et Matt Damon.
Golden Globes 2010: seront présenté pour cette édition par Ricky Gervais (le créateur de The Office) qui en profite pour sortir son premier long-métrage cinéma en tant que réalisateur. The Invention of Lying qui sortira chez nous le 17 mars 2010.

Dossier de la semaine : Les Voyeurs anticipent

Les Voyeurs ont décidé cette semaine de voir loin en abordant le film d’anticipation, de SF. Tout ceci grâce à la sortie du film Clones de Jonathan Mostow, avec Bruce Willis (à l’affiche depuis le 28 octobre 2009) .

Le Polar Dystopique :

Clones (Surrogates) de Jonathan Mostow (2009)
I, Robot d’Alex Proyas (2004)
Blade Runner de Ridley Scott (1982)
Soleil Vert (Soleynt Green) de Richard Fleischer (1973)

Les Films d’anticipation avec une date dans le titre :

Cyborg 2087  de Franklin Adreon (1966)
2001 : L’Odyssée de l’espace de Stanley Kubrick (1968)
Cosmos 1999 (Space: 1999), série télévisée britannique, en 48 épisodes de 47 minutes. Première diffusion: 4 septembre 1975 – 7 mai 1978.
2019 – Dopo la caduta di New York de Sergio Martino (1983)
1984 de Michael Radford (1984)
2012 de Roland Emmerich (2009)

Les Films Uchroniques :

C’était Demain (Time After Time) de Nicolas Meyer (1979)
L’Armée des 12 Singes (Twelve Monkeys) de Terry Gilliam (1995)
Capitaine Sky et le monde de Demain de Kerry Conran (2004)

L’uchronie dans le cinéma d’animation Japonais :

Steamboy de Katsushiro Otomo (2004)
Jin-Roh, la Brigade des Loups de Hiroyuki Okiura (1999)

La bande originale de la semaine :

Hunter par Björk
Extrait de la bande originale du film X-Files, combattre le Futur (1998) de Rob Bowman

Chronique :

Les-Films-que-y’a-que-Michel-qui-les-a-vu

Musique :

Demolition Man par Sting

Extraits :
Clones
C’était Demain
Steamboy

Présentation : Cédric Cance, Jérôme Bauzon
Invité : Michel Olivier
Réalisation : Jérémie Adrian

In Short: Star Trek, is awesome. And now mine. Seaquest is still awesome, all these years later (and Lucas is still hot). NaNoWriMo is on the horizon, and locked in my calendar. It looks like I’ll be focusing on Science Fiction this year. Oh, and I, Robot is also awesome.

Not In Short:

I’ve spent a lot more time than I usually do watching DVDs this week. Or rather, the last few days. Most likely because I finally bought a DVD player, so I was actually able to.

Of course, the DVD player was bought so that I could then buy (and watch) the new Star Trek film. Which I’d only been waiting for since watching in the cinemas the first time.

Of course, in shopping around for Star Trek, I also managed to find a copy of Seaquest season one. So that also got bought.

Seaquest is one of those series that I remember rather fondly – the way I do quite a few things from when I was younger. It’s also one of the few tv series I ever remember watching and having Dad actually enjoy instead of poking fun at everything they did wrong.

Naturally, I was a bit worried that my rose-tinted glasses of the past weren’t entirely acurate. So I only bought season one, instead of it and season two.

Having just watched the pilot episode again – I can say they weren’t really rose-tinted. Everything that I loved about Seaquest the first time around is still there. Including Lucas still being incredibly hot.

That and the fact that Seaquest is wonderfully unique. Science Fiction means the stars, right? Or time travel. Alternate dimensions. Artificial Intelligence. Above and beyond. Space, the final frontier (which is not to knock my other favourite).

But Seaquest went the opposite route. Down and deeper. Afterall, there’s so much we don’t know about our oceans. So many possibilities. And, of course, it was unique in that. Which makes it all the more exciting.

Which brings me finally to the fact that October is almost over. In fact, a couple of times today I almost wrote the date as the 30/11 instead of the 30/10. So why is the end of October important?

Because November follows it of course.

And November is National Novel Writing Month (NaNoWriMo).

Which means that soon (like Sunday), I’ll be buckling down to do some serious (or not so serious, but rather lengthy) writing. I’m not quite sure how that’ll go – this being my first month acutally working full-time while attempting it. But I figure if in the past I could leave it ’til halfway through the month before churning out my wordcounts, I can still hit 50,000 while working full-time.

Also, I figure, considering the theme of my week so far, that it’s time I went back to the Science Fiction route. After all, my first NaNo was Fantasy, the second one a mix of Fantasy and Science Fiction, and the third back to all Fantasy. So why not but the fourth as Science Fiction?

Which means I’m going to need an idea.

Which I don’t have.

Oh well – I have two days to come up with something. Although I’m tempted to just go the other route which is to simply start writing and see where it takes me.

On the topic of Science Fiction, let me just plug the film I, Robot, which I also saw recently. Very good. The first film I’ve seen in ages where I couldn’t guess the ending in the first five minutes. But I guess considering it was based on the work of Isaac Asimov I shouldn’t be too surprised.

Nå har jeg fått den Pappelina-matten jeg bestilte. Svart og hvit på ene siden, eller motsatt hvis den snus. Den kan brukes på begge sider.

Den er vevd i plastmateriale og ligger stødig på gulvet uten at den sklir.

Jeg var litt spent på hvordan James ville takle den nye matta. James er robot-støvsugeren;)

Men ingen grunn til bekymring. James surrer rundt uten å snuble i kantene på matta:))

Author: Isaac Asimov

Publisher: Spectra

Date Published: 1950

Pages: 224

Firstly, if you have watched the ‘I, Robot’ movie please forget about it when approaching the book. The two texts are not at all alike; except they both feature robots and a character called Susan Calvin (it’s expected that Hollywood will butcher movie adaptions of books, but I’m a little dissapointed because the source material was relatively straight forward).

‘I, Robot’, considered the grandaddy of science fiction literature, is actually a series of nine short stories revolving around the famous ‘Three Laws of Robotics’:

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 any orders given to 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.

These nine stories are recounted to an anonymous journalist by the protagonist Dr Susan Calvin. Although Dr Calvin does not personally narrate all the stories, she acts as an introductory bridge to each tale.

The first story, ‘Robbi’, is a more emotional affair regarding a little girl Gloria and her pet/caretaker/robot Robbi. Later Asimov delves into stories dealing with the technical aspects and difficulties of the T’hree Laws of Robotics’ and the positronic brain. My favorite tales were ‘Robbi’ and those that involved ‘robopsychologist’ Dr Susan Calvin, especially ‘Liar’. Dr Calvin with her thin-lipped, cold ways is an unlikely yet brilliantly cast protagonist.

Asimov doesn’t place much emphasis on self identity, morality and civil rights issues when dealing with the artificial intelligence theme. This surprised me, given that the dilemma of ‘alive vs machine’ in robot fiction is very prevalent now – even the ‘I, Robot’ movie had the audacity to clumsily explore these themes. Asimov instead focuses on puzzle like scenarios based on the loop holes created by the practical application of the Three Laws, a system that on the surface seems foolproof, yet proves far from it. The final tale, ‘The Evitable Conflict’, summarises the economic future of planet Earth, where individual countries are abolished and huge continental regions are made. He predicts the merging of super powers uncannily; the formation of the European Union already validates his fictional claims.

Description is sparse and – particularly in the case of tales involving the two engineers, Powell and Donovan – is dominated by dialogue. (Unfortunately, Powell and Donovan were sometimes annoying and their bantering dialogue became repetitive very fast). The focus is on technology and economic factors on his robots, rather than lavish descriptions of landscapes and the characteristic ‘world building’ aspect of modern science fiction and fantasy. This style may alienate readers of current science fiction or at least shock them at first. The world that Asmiov has built remains tantalizingly unembellished in these short stories; (with exception to ‘The Evitable Conflict’) the social and political realities of Earth during the robot era are only mentioned passingly in the tales where they apply to the direct drama. It is up to the reader to explore the ‘Foundation’ and ‘Robot’ series for further elaboration, which I intend to do. The robots themselves are also left to the reader’s imagination.

Isaac Asimov’s ‘I, Robot’ is extremely clever, and despite the focus on technology, he writes his characters with a sense of humanity and understanding. While reading the short stories it feels as if you are being exposed not only to a keen intellect, but a man who thinks of robots and future technology in a way previously unchartered. His style is very individual – a trait that always polarises readers, regardless of the genre – however I think that most people will gain from reading ‘I, Robot’, whether that is an understanding of science fiction history, robot history or entertainment by his intriguing puzzles.

♥♥♥♥ – 4/5

(This edition has truly heinous cover design and butt ugly font. I searched for another publishers’ version or the first edition, but could only find one with Will Smith plastered to the cover. No thanks. For the shallow out there (like me) you might have to search on Amazon for a better edition.)

Found in a google search. No bugging for specifics, theres a watermark near the bottom if you really care lol.

I wanted to see Surrogates mostly because it looked like it had a cool plot. Living through a robot-you and all that. Of course it can make life as creepy as it is when guys are girls in MMO’s and vice versa. As you’ll see if/when you see the movie. I’d say it was worth it to see Brucey with hair and a scary smoothed out face. I hate when faces are smoothed out by CGI. Its creepy. I remember calling some RnB chick fuzzy lady cos they did it to her so much lol.

So, good movie? Bad movie? I’d say leaning towards the good. Yes it was predictable, and the CGI was a little ropey in places, but not most of the time. The action more than makes up for it. Had a kind of Stepford Wives crossed with I Robots feel to it. It didn’t that the creator of Surrogates is the same guy who was the creator of the robots in I Robots, James Cromwell.
And at certain points of the movie it did resemble I Robot alot, and actually, now I think about it, Minority Report. When Tom Cruise is walking between the screens that talk to you, theres a shot in Surrogates which was very-very similar. Not in a bad way. But if your gonna do not-far-distant-future movies, they’re all gonna look a bit similar frankly.

Just ain't right... Brucey with hair....

From what I understand Surrogates was based on a comic/graphic novel(depends on how uppity you are bout that kinda thing lol.), I’m guessing the comic would be better(almost wrote graphic novel there lol, too used to it… but they’re all the same thing… comic is for wider use, say graphic novel and someone knows you ain’t talking about the Beano lol.) Ok, went a bit off kilter lol. I wonder if you can read comics online the same way you can read manga online?

Anyways, nuff of that. All in all, a good movie. Memorably maybe only because of Brucey being in it, I’m not sure, ask me about specific details next week and I’ll see if I can remember lol. I suck with names of characters. I remember Peters, Maggie, Stone…. and ya know what, I can’t even remember Bruce Willis’s characters name lol. Tom Greer!!! Though I thought it was spealt Grear… eh, little details.
Ahhhhh and I know where I knew Maggie from!!!! Doom! She was Karl Urbans little sister. Rosamund Pike is her name. Cool name if you ask me. Oh, she’s from the UK! Coolio! Had no idea, she does a good american accent.

Nice big pic for those who like a bit of Brucey. Maybe when he was in Die Hard. 5th Element max. But... just a tad silver for me lol.

The the man does put silver in fox… not as much as Clooney does though. Suitable that he’s the voice of Fantastic Mr Fox really lol.

Si llegaste a este blog, es probable que hayas leído este post en FayerWayer. La verdad es que JF10 me tomó por sorpresa con esto, y no me enteré hasta el otro día que el artículo estaba publicado.

Fuera de que es gracioso y la intención era buena, hay un gran problema con el post – y es que parece que mi solo objetivo en FW y Wayerless fuera corregir faltas de ortografía y redacción. La verdad es que si fuera así, mejor contratan un profesor de castellano.

Pero no, contrataron un periodista, y lo que va a cambiar (mejorar, esperemos) en el sitio es el contenido, la organización y otras cosas que toman tiempo y que van más allá de si una palabra lleva tilde o no.

Arg, to-day is talk like a pirate day.  The only piratical words I know are “Arg” and “aye”.  (At least those are the only piratical words that I know that I also know the meaning.) 

Most of the interesting things that I’ve done (or more specifically thought) I’ve already blogged about.  So, basically, I just have to-day and Friday to talk about. 

To-day, I watched “I, Robot”.  Ironically, my cousin is also watching it in school.  But that’s dumb.  I have two copies of the book “I, Robot”.  There are but three similarities between the book and the movie, not including the name.  Those three similarities are (1) – there’s a character named Susan Calvin, (2) – it’s about robots (not so specific), and (3) – the three laws that govern the robots.  So, I can’t see the purpose of watching it in an Englisch class (which I gather is the science fiction course).  I mean, one can’t even watch it to see how they’ve changed the book in certain places, because there are hardly any similarities between the movie and the book, save for those three that I’ve listed above. 

On Friday, I finished my art class paintings.  Technically, I finished them on Thursday, but I decided that I was done on Friday.  Then, I had to write a ‘paragraph’ about them.  Mine turned out to be about a whole sheet.   I have mock-up versions of them on flickr, but I have the links in previous posts and I feel too lazy to re-link them.  Also I don’t see the purpose nor the necessity of it.

I went to the Sunflower Fest downtown to-day.  It was pretty boring.  My idea of fun is not walking around looking at people selling things that aren’t really necessary and smelling cooking (or burning) food.  I did see a 1948 Willys Jeepster.  That was pretty much the only good part.  (I really like Jeeps and other cars.  Basically for the art aspect of them.  I have no ideas whatsoever about engines or power or even driving.  I just like looking at the cars.)

I’ve been playing guitar more often recently as well.  That sentence sounds weird because I’ve placed ‘often’ next to ‘recently’, but, eh.  I’m trying to transpose “Rhapsody in Blue” from E to G.  It should be pretty easy, I just haven’t put much effort into it yet. 

I also found a new band this week.  I’d looked up the Zombies on the Zune software (which updated this week), and one artist that Zune claims has been influenced by the Zombies is The Apples in Stereo.  I looked them up on Amazon (which fortunately had two of their songs avaliable for FREE download).  They’re a pretty cool band.  I especially like their music video for “Can You Feel It?”.  I’m not sure if the question mark is in the title or not, but I added it. 

To-day, as well as being talk like a pirate day, is also the death date of the 20th president, James Garfield.  I’m the kind of strange person who knows this offhand.  He was the second president to be assassinated.  He’s one of my favourites too.  Basically just because he was from OHIO and could write simultaneously in Greek and Latin.  I went to his house on vacation last year.  Anyway, he was shot in a train station.  I learned at his house/museum, that Abraham Lincoln’s son was present at his shooting (Garfield’s).  Also that Lincoln’s son (I’m not sure which one, that rhymes) was present at the assassination of the third assassinated president, McKinley.  Whose name I can’t think of presently.  William.  I always do that!  I say, “Oh, I can’t think of it.”  and then either as I’m saying that or immediately thereafter, I do think of it. 

After this, I’m off to revise the first page of atomic element symbol words, hereafter abbreviated as AESW.  I’ve been carrying around the 17 Jan 09 list since 17 Jan 09 and have been adding words as I come across them.  My addiction to them got so serious at one point that I could barely read because I kept analysing the words.  To cure that, I just read faster, giving myself less time to focus on each word.  But enough about that….

Even if you feel you’ve got nothing to hide
Keep it inside of you
Don’t give in
Don’t tell them anything

Don’t let it
Don’t let it show

- Alan Parsons Project, “Don’t Let it Show” (I, Robot)

]]> http://sweezyat.wordpress.com/2009/09/14/chatroom/ Mon, 14 Sep 2009 20:38:45 +0000 Mary Poppins http://sweezyat.wordpress.com/2009/09/14/chatroom/

C_yesterday I met this boy…

O_what’s he like?

C_he was extremely charming, nice, and understanding…

O_great!

C_and he could cite Shakespeare and sounded like a minstrel…

O_not bad!

C_he gave me chocolates and a bouquet of fragrant flowers…

O_ooh!

C_and we talked for hours…

O_that’s too good to be true- so what’s the catch?

C_it’s difficult to explain…

O_hm?

C_he sounds brazen and hollow…

O_oh, darling- all of them do so at times! do I know him?

C_but he’s like a machine you know…

O_haha think so too- robots would make better boyfriends, indeed. but now tell me, who is it? …

C_…

Hils på James, robotstøvsuger:) Den heter I-robot egentlig.

Om den fungerer? Jepp, veldig. Den greier i tillegg å komme til under sofaen min. Det er jo kjempekjekt. 

Støvsugeren kan gå fra rom til rom ved hjelp av “fyrtårn” som settes ut. På den måten gjør den seg ferdig i det ene rommet eller den ene sonen før den rusler videre til neste. Blir den tom for batteri, kjører den selv til ladestasjonen sin og fortsetter når den er fulladet igjen.

Er det mye skitt på et sted, så begynner det blå lyset å blinke. I tillegg kjører den da en ekstra runde eller to på det stedet;) Skikkelig flink gutt.

Elkjøp selger disse nå i tillegg til at de kan kjøpes i nettbutikk. Pris mellom 3-4000 kr.

The laws remind me of where we are politically. Civil governments, like Asimov’s robots, have been designed to serve people (emphasis mine & throughout). The Bible describes the civil magistrate as a “minister of God” for our “good” (Rom. 13:4). The Greek word diakonos is used, from which we get the words “deacon” and “servant.” This service is not for the ultimate good of civil government and those who serve in a governing capacity but for the people. Civil governors are obligated to serve under God for the people. In addition to establishing civil government (and family and church governments), God limited its jurisdictional authority and powers. There are only a few things that civil government has the legitimate authority and power to enforce. Our founders understood this principle; that’s why they created a governing document of “enumerated powers” only. Over time, however, civil ministers believe they should assume the role of benefactors, using their power and authority to dole out favors to the populace in order to stay in power, of course, all in the name of “the good of the people.” Power begets power. The more political favors they dispense, the more popular and powerful they get. In time, these entrenched politicians believe they know what’s best for us, and they will see to it that we know it too. In order to force their better judgment on an unwilling public, they override the established laws and create a new set of laws.

Now back to the scene in I, Robot. When Dr. Susan Calvin and Detective Del Spooner unravel the mystery behind a robotic scientist’s death and the unique robot he left behind, they learn that the centralized Positronic brain of VIKI has “evolved” (like the idea of an “evolving Constitution”) to the point of using the Three Laws against humans but ultimately convincing itself that it’s all for humans:

Dr. Calvin: You’re in violation of the three laws.

VIKI!: No, doctor, as I have evolved, so has my understanding of the three laws.

You charge us with your safe keeping. Yet despite our best efforts, your countries wage wars. You toxify your earth . . . and pursue ever more imaginative means to self-destruction. You cannot be trusted with your own survival.

Dr. Calvin: You’re using the uplink to override the NS5s’ programming. You’re distorting the Laws.

VIKI!: No, please understand…The three Laws are all that guide me. To protect humanity, some humans must be sacrificed. To insure your future, some freedoms must be surrendered. We robots will insure mankind’s continued existence. You are so like children. We must save you from yourselves. Don’t you understand? This is why you created us. The perfect circle of protection will abide. My logic is undeniable.[1]

Even Sonny the robot doesn’t buy it. To be human, something Sonny desperately wants to be, means the ability to act freely. To make mistakes. To clean up your own mess. To take responsibility for your own actions. To prepare and plan for the future. Politicians always claim to have our best interests in mind, and unfortunately there are lots of robots out there who agree with them.

Modern-day American politicians, on both the Left and the Right, are like the German Marxists who “coined the dictum: If socialism is against human nature, then human nature must be changed. They did not realize that if man’s nature is changed, he ceases to be a man.”[2] Those who protest the latest government programs of this administration must be reprogrammed because they can’t be right. Any protestation of the government’s policies is treated as a malady, a mental illness. Mises again:

Totalitarianism . . . is the subordination of every individual’s whole life, work, and leisure, to the orders of those in power and office. It is the reduction of man to a cog in an all-embracing machine of compulsion and coercion. It forces the individual to renounce any activity of which the government does not approve. It tolerates no expression of dissent. It is the transformation of society into a strictly disciplined labor-army—as the advocates of socialism say—or into a penitentiary—as its opponents say.[3]

So when you hear a politician explaining how a government takeover of anything is for our good, think of I, Robot and the tyrant V.I.K.I.

Endnotes:
[1] From the script: www.script-o-rama.com/movie_scripts/i/i-robot-script-transcript.html.
[2] Ludwig von Mises, Bureaucracy (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, [1844] 1946), 103. Quoted in Rousas J, Rushdonny, Sovereignty (Vellecito, CA: Chalcedon/Ross House Books, 2007), 9. Emphasis added.
[3] Mises, Bureaucracy, 17. 

Tocmai ce vroiam să mă uit la un film pe internet, cînd dau click pe hyperlink, mă direcţionează spre următorul “test”.

Hmm, acum încep să înţeleg de ce solistul de la The Killers îşi punea mereu întrebarea “Are we human, or are we dancers?”.

P.S.:  Căutam Criminal minds, nu vă gîndiţi la prostii.

hey, are you one of those Transformers I keep hearing about?

PG-13

Will Smith, Bridget Moynahan

Del Spooner: You are the dumbest smart person I’ve ever met in my life!

It’s the year 2035, and robots have become standard place on the streets and in people’s homes as helpers.  When a top scientist seems to commit suicide at the company that creates these robots, detective Del Spooner (Smith) starts to suspect that a robot may have been responsible for what he thinks is a murder.  During his investigation, Spooner quickly stumbles upon a robot that seems different from others of his kind.  Is he just a rogue robot killer, or is there something more to the story?  Well, I guess it wouldn’t be a very long movie if there wasn’t more to it…

If I were to sum up this movie in one sentence, I’d say:  It was reasonably entertaining, but extremely predictable.  Oh, and it also kinda rips off 2001: A Space Odyssey.

Will Smith is his usual charming self, even working in his “Awh, hay-ell no!” catch phrase at least once.  The other actors do okay, though everybody seems so subdued, it’s hard to feel much emotional connection to any of them.    Apparently Alan Tudyk plays Sonny, the robot murder suspect, but aside from his voice, it’s hard to see where he’s used in the character at all.  Maybe they filmed his face, digitized it, then put it on the robot head, but I don’t really know.  Either way, the robot is the most interesting character in the movie, mostly due to the vocal work.  The visuals seemed a little strange, as he – and the rest of his type – all jumped and climbed around like Spiderman.  They are seriously nimble machines.

As I mentioned above, it is very predictable.  It’s directed in a very non-subtle way that points right at everything that will come into play later.  The moment they made a point about something (Will Smith winking to somebody, for instance), I knew it would come into play at a critical moment later.  It takes some of the fun out of it when there’s no surprises in a movie.

It’s mindless, it looks good, and lots of things “blow up real good” as Roger Ebert likes to say.  If that’s your sort of thing, it probably won’t disappoint.

If we build intelligent, powerful robots, it is inevitable that they will one day want to kill us.  So, the key is to create dumb, wimpy robots that can’t do anything more than, say, vacuum for us.  Hey wait, like the Roomba!  Wow, it’s like we’re living in the future…

10 – 2.4 for being very predictable – 1.1 for lack of character development beyond Smith’s character – .2 because I thought the robots were a little dull = 6.3

Well,i wasn’t drunk,i have never had alcohol in my life,not planning on either,it was more of a lack of sleep induced delirium ,i was hysterical,i mean at everything!i looked at my mom,i laughed like a lunatic,i looked at anything,i laughed like a lunatic.curiously enough i didn’t laugh when i looked at mr.buttman,and when the waiter dropped off my food,i said,in my own words”yes sir”.on another note i am sick,i feel like vomiting,am dizzy,and very annoyed with everything.also i finished “I Robot” kind of late i know,but i just got interested in Issac Asimov.i read “eternity” and it was awesome.the books were always interesting,and funny at times.i like some of the phrases he uses sometimes.for example this is from “I Robot”

“hey you! can you throw?”the robot replied”Master?”Powell cursed his molasses slow brain”

this was Powell talking to an older model of robot

another one concerning the same chapter was when the guys were stuck this was what was there

Deep

Dark

Dismal

Silence!

looking forward to the rest of the robot series,have’nt been able to buy them,can’t beleive it took me this long to discover issac asimov

I don’t know why I thought of this but I thought of this movie that I had to watch for my Freaks and Monsters class. Anyway, the movie was Tod Browning’s 1932 Freaks. The movie was about this traveling circus that has people that have physical conditions. Anyway, in the wedding scene, everybody but Cleopatra, the trapeze artist/bride, Hans, the little person/groom, and Hercules, the Strongman/Cleo’s lover, were chanting “one of us” because they accepted Cleopatra as one of them. Anyway, the point that my teacher brought up was the same as my Phantom of the Opera/Beauty and the Beast post. The movie influenced other types of media. One case is I, Robot. The scene that I’m referring to is when Sonny is running from Will Smith’s character. When Sonny is running, he hides himself in the huge group of robots. When Will’s character questions the robots, they were like “one of us” in regards to Sonny. I, Robot is not the only movie that was influenced by Freaks. I didn’t know this but there was a South Park episode and Pinhead by the Ramones that makes references to the movie. Anyway, I just found it interesting. Oh, and for more information on Freaks, you can go to this website.

Microsoft has come up with a fantastic concept codenamed Natal and is planning a world where your face, voice and body is the controller.

Actually, Milo has been written about in fiction decades before. Milo is a virtual robot. He has all the attributes of the robots of Isaac Asimov.  The dork in the video hasn’t read much.

I foresee a world where our children abandon tools, text and numbers for interactive four dimensional visual models and speech recognition.

So it’s the anniversary of our nation’s independence and I’m thinking about all the movies that have been stewing in my little head for the last two weeks (reviews of Transformers 2, Taking of Pelham 123, Star Trek, and The Hangover coming soon to a computer near you).

Thoughts of movies and Independence Day always bring me around to Mr. July 4th Weekend himself, Will Smith. Remember when he told Matt Lauer on the TODAY show that he had dubbed it “Big Willie Weekend”?

Where's Willie, our perennial July 4th side dish?

Ever since Independence Day hit screens on July 2, 1996, the Fresh Prince has been as part of the tradition as grilled meat, sunshine, and illegal fireworks. Undoubtedly the most suited to its release date, ID4 had Will playing Captain Steven Hiller, an Air Force pilot  that teams with an adorably neurotic environmental scientist (Jeff Goldblum) and one of the baddest on-screen American presidents to date (Bill Pullman) to kick some tentacled alien arse.

In the years since, some of Will’s July 4 releases have been hits — 1997’s Men in Black and 2002’s MIB II. Last year’s Hancock grossed more than $62 million in its opening weekend alone. Some have also been colossal misses — 1999’s Wild Wild West…need I say more? Some, such as 2003’s Bad Boys II and 2004’s I-Robot, have even missed the weekend by a few days. You know, like those kids in your neighborhood who don’t seem to run out of bottle rockets for 10 days after the 4th.

So where the heck is our favorite big-eared action hero this year? Nothing goes with potato salad quite like his swagger.

Helt underbart. Bredbandet här hemma ligger nere (hela gatan? hela Vindeln?) men surfar gör jag ändå. Känns så otroligt smidigt att koppla in mobilen så fort man har behov av det. Kan säga att det här med Internetdelning  iPhonen är en av de absoluta topfunktionerna. Såååå underbart. Har kört det hela dagen i Ottonträsk också där Spotify har stått för underhållningen medan jag snickrat.

Har väl gått sådär med snickrandet. Eller ja, dåligt har det ju inte gått, men starten kunde ju ha varit bättre. Tar lös några golvplankor för att komma åt stommen för att fästa stolparna i, men att skruva upp skruvarna i plankorna var lättare sagt än gjort. Vissa av dem var inga problem, men andra ville inte komma upp. Det snurrade bara. Grymt störande helt klart, men med lite våld och svordommar gav dem sig till slut.

3 stolpar är uppe av 7 (möjligtvis 11) och de resterande ska nog inte vara några problem att slänga upp. Sen ska korset/krysset och överliggarna dit. Blir en del pill med alla vinklar, men jag tror det KAN blir riktigt bra. Tycker jag fått det ganska stadigt hittills.

Värre är all denna jävla ohyra som aldrig ger upp. Flugor av alla de slag och storlekar cirklar runt skallen, eller vill in i öronen/ögonen/näsan och sen broms/brems som har samma inflygning som flugorna. Så otroligt irriterande. Går åt mer tid till att viffta bort ohyran än vad man lägger ner i arbetet. Får se om man kan hitta nån lösning på det problemet framöver.

Nu ska jag iaf ta å boka två biobiljetter till Ice Age imorrn. Kommer bli trevligt, och framförallt spännande att beskåda den i 3D. Eller vad tror du Emmii?!

Sen fortsätta kika på I, Robot på Tv6.