Jonathon Nolan is adapting Foundation.

[andrewgpaul]

I thought the villain in I, Robot was not so much breaking the laws (in its mind) as reinterpreting them. Ie kill a few humans to impose a new society that will save lives.

That's why I said it's idiotic.

But not totally contrary to the source material; it's an idea Asimov himself used, when he invented the Zeroth Law of Robotics:"A robot may not harm humanity, or, by inaction, allow humanity to come to harm", with the other three being amended so as to be subordinate to it.

[Batman]

That was apparently poorly worded by me. I meant the criticism is idotic. The robots interpreting the laws in unforeseen and usually unwelcome ways is what half the 'Robot' stories are about.

[Irbis]

Though, upon reflection, there might be one reason why Foundation would be not filmable - protagonists manipulating surrounding planets with combination of religion and big business after Empire fell and education together with infrastructure went to shit could be read as jab at modern Republithugs

[LadyTevar]

Though, upon reflection, there might be one reason why Foundation would be not filmable - protagonists manipulating surrounding planets with combination of religion and big business after Empire fell and education together with infrastructure went to shit could be read as jab at modern Republithugs

I think Asimov would find that amusing, as it follows the general ideal of Science Fiction as a way to discuss/critique/parody modern society. Foundation could be seen as a pointed warning about Imperialism and Colonialism, which iirc was in the midst of final breakdown with India and various African nations throwing out their colonial masters.

[Simon_Jester]

(especially with current Hollywood and the series' abundance of no bigass space battles)

Wait, you mean Foundation lacks battles and action scenes? Did I get that right?

IIRC, there are literally dozens of scenes with implied or literal battles in the Trilogy. Even first book, calmest of the three, has warlord about to attack Foundation, with whole scene discussing his battle fleet, even mentioning how awesome one pre-Fall battleship is. Book 2 and 3 are set among period of continuous heavy warfare. How can anyone infer lack of action from that I have no idea.

They totally need to make Bel Riose into Tywin Lannister in SPACE! It will be the most epic thing ever

The Mule, on the other hand, is pretty similar to Tyrion...

That was apparently poorly worded by me. I meant the criticism is idotic. The robots interpreting the laws in unforeseen and usually unwelcome ways is what half the 'Robot' stories are about.

Me, I disagree, I say two thirds.

[Batman]

Half, two thirds, 77 percent, the point was a lot of the 'Robot' stories were about the robots interpreting the laws in ways nobody expected leave alone wanted so criticizing the movie for having a robot doing exactly that is stupid.

[The Romulan Republic]

Though, upon reflection, there might be one reason why Foundation would be not filmable - protagonists manipulating surrounding planets with combination of religion and big business after Empire fell and education together with infrastructure went to shit could be read as jab at modern Republithugs

Except that the Foundation, for all their bastardness, are depicted as the lesser evil. At least until Second Foundation, when they sort of take on the role of bad guys.

But I can't stand them. There's a reason I like General Riose in Foundation and Empire. He basically tried to thwart Seldon's plan. Sure, he lost, and he might not have had pure motives, but he gets some credit for trying.

[Terralthra]

Half, two thirds, 77 percent, the point was a lot of the 'Robot' stories were about the robots interpreting the laws in ways nobody expected leave alone wanted so criticizing the movie for having a robot doing exactly that is stupid.

Sure, a robot, but an overarching theme - both in the short stories implicitly and explicitly from Asimov's own mouth - of the stories was the exact opposite. He wrote to try and counter the idea that robots would rise up against humans en masse, that they would try to enslave us or control us, that the story of humans and robots as inter-related species must be antagonistic. Stories of that nature were already extant and fairly popular when he wrote I, Robot, and he wanted to make the point that robots did not have to be something to fear.

Adapting bits of the short stories and the three laws to make basically the opposite point feels, to many fans of the original, wrong. It's similar to how many fans of ST:TOS and ST:TNG disliked later DS9 for episodes like "Homefront" and "In the Pale Moonlight", for what they see as tearing down Roddenberry's utopian ideal for the human race from the prior series. You may like the complexity and shades of grey of the later DS9 vision of the 24th century, but one can at least see their point.

Whether or not you agree, surely you can at least see their point?

[The Romulan Republic]

I would say I, Robot does not portray robots as inherently bad. In fact, it depicts the protagonist's prejudice against robots as just that- prejudice. It just shows that the three laws are flawed.

[Simon_Jester]

Well, in the same spirit Asimov's later novels (the ones he wrote to stitch together the Robots and Empire timelines) kind of... do subvert the Three Laws in that way, with the formulation of the Zeroth Law.

[SpottedKitty]

He wrote to try and counter the idea that robots would rise up against humans en masse, that they would try to enslave us or control us, that the story of humans and robots as inter-related species must be antagonistic. Stories of that nature were already extant and fairly popular when he wrote I, Robot, and he wanted to make the point that robots did not have to be something to fear.

<nod> I remember coming across one of Asimov's between-story comments that outright stated he wanted the background to be that robots were seen as (and most of the time were) useful tools — complicated and expensive, but just tools. Then he'd toss an authorial spanner in the works to see what would happen.