the I, Robot Movie is not based on the book at all
 

Here's what's wrong with it: it does not follow the book at all. This is something that will always annoy me, but this time it just goes too far. If you've seen the trailers you know that robots go on a murderous rampage. If you've read the book, you realize that's basically on the same level as creating a Harry Potter movie where Harry goes on a murderous rampage. in the name of 'creative license.'

To read about it described in more detail, or if you already agree, visit this petition.

There's very little chance it will accomplish anything, but we can at least have the satisfaction of trying and letting our voice be heard.

Agh! This is what happens when you let Fox has production rights. They ruin everything. Screw you, Fox.

you know what was good? the Dune miniseries. I just watched most of it on the SciFi channel at my gf's house this weekend. That was good shit. It followed the book almost exactly.

im looking forward to the I, Robot movie. i havnt read the books yet, so fi i read them after the movie, i won't be disappointed! But the fact that Azimov is getting a nod like that is cool, even if they are crapping on the pages of his book while they're at it.

Hear, hear.
Come, fellow netizens!
Take up the word! Send out the holy petition to the corners of the earth! Post it on the landing beaches, in the fields and cities! We shall never give up! We shall forever rally against this utter travesty of a film!

Oh, and sign the blurdy petition, spammit!

fools! embrace the popular version! then, if it gets significant attention, then a GOOD movie might seem profitable to some dude with a studio somewhere. like LotR. or the Dune series.

i understand the pain at seeing the story ripped to shredds, tho.

No, no, no. We shouldn't. We should shun crap like this, and watch LoTR and Dune. Because if we support I, Robot even remotely, then that gives the studios a green light to keep doing it. Basically, we can assume that they'll ruin source material until the public no longer likes it. What we have to do is tell them "we don't like this, and you risk alienating quite a bit of your support base by doing this."

But I understand your point, too. In fact, I really will have to resist seeing a movie just because it'll have Asimov in the end credits.

i dont think purists represent a big enough audience to really make a change, tho. Crap movies, while still crap, can at least get somethign popular. If the movie is ANY good, it smight spark peopel to get the book. and getting the book might spark people to say "hey, the book is a billion times better then the movie!"

in otherwords, it can enlarge the purist audience.

that beign said, i fully support people shunning crap movies. we should have SOME standards.

Hey. We purists got *NSYNC out of Star Wars. Of course, that's blurdy Star Wars, and the movie still sucked, but hey. ^^;;

What? They were going to put some boy band in Star Wars!? The nerve!

Anyway, has anyone heard the phrase, "The book was better"? Well, in this case, it'll be trust if the movie is indeed made.

Also, Fox does not have production rights; they simply have releasing rights. The proper person to take this to would be the screenwriter. Then work your way up the ladder to producer, director, and then Will Smith. But, the release date is so close that I doubt much can be done.

I agree with Zeth-mun. Crappy things are good, because then people can always say, "Hey, look at how crappy [insert crappy product's name here] was. I doubt this'll be any worse." And I doubt "I, Robot" will be crappy, since Americans consume violent action movies the way a fat man consumes a Big Mac at McDonald's. The only way to make "I, Robot" crappy is to release it the same opening weekend as "Spider-Man 2," thus decimating the chances anyone will see the former.

how about, just don't go see it?