Well, I hate to judge a movie before I've watched the whole thing.... but from the trailer this looks like (as someone at IMDB said) Will Smith vs. the Killer Robots. However, since this is one of my favorite books and previews have been known to lie, I still hold out hope.

As I perused the Sci-fi movies board this morning, I noticed this board for I, Robot, and thought, "Oh, wow, they're making a new movie from that book? Cool!"
Then I saw Merat's post mentioning that Will Smith is going to be in it. Merat, I feel for you... it's hard indeed not to judge a film before it's been seen.
Mind you, that's just my initial reaction, anticipating yet another standard Smith character in a sci-fi flick (like ID4, both Men in Black's, Wild Wild West). So, I'll try to keep an open mind and give this film a chance, if I can afford to go see it. (It'll have to get in line behind a bunch of others I want to see first, though!)
Who knows? Maybe Smith will do something a little different than his usual stuff and surprise us. (I don't think he's a bad actor; I just think his range is somewhat limited. In sf films, at least.)

Another thought just occurred to me: How many people are going to see this film because of the classic story it's based upon, and how many are going to see it just because Will Smith's in it? (Personally, I'm going for reason #1.)

Me too. That and Firefly's Alan Tudyk (Wash) is going to be playing the robot.

Apparently though the movie isn't inspired by the book (or any of the short stories contained therein) but on the classic Outer Limits episodes of the same name. I can only hope the writer(s) injected something of their own, for better or worse, otherwise there's now way in hell the moive can succeed (or fail for that matter) on it's own merits.

Merat: However, since this is one of my favorite books and previews have been known to lie, I still hold out hope.
Luigi Novi: What I heard is that it's not based on any of the 9 stories in the book, but has elements from all of them in it.

Did Issac Asimov write that episode? I ask because I've seen this movie being advertised as based on the book by him.

I just saw the trailer for this before Kill Bill Vol. 2, and I'd have to say the reaction the audience had pretty much sums up MY felings. Silence. Even the Van Helsing trailer snagged a few groans. For that matter so did the trailers for Troy and King Arthur. The only trailer to get a positive reaction of any kind (a few chuckles from a few people, myself admittedly and ashamedly included) was the one for The Stepford Wives re-make.

Personally the ads for this film make me think of Runaway, the 1984 film starring Tom Selleck as a cop in the near future trying to find out what is causing domestic robots to go wild and kill their owners

Well, I thought that this movie was pretty good. I've never read the stories that this movie is "suggested by", so I guess that it helps give me a more objective view of it. Anyway, a nice sci-fi, future world flick. The visuals create a cluttered and very advanced look of the future, though perhaps a little too clean. Though with so many robots around, perhaps we've got a whole army that cleans up litter and trash.

As for the performances, most are fairly standard for a summer blockbuster. Smith can still deliver the one liners (I love his mention of his "allergies"). Bridget Moynahan does a fine enough job as Dr. Calvin, and I do like seeing Chi McBride in more and more roles. No one can say "world" quite like him. Or shoot a shotgun through glass.

Anyway, it's a fun sci-fi and action movie that lets its characters prevent it from getting bogged down in too much technobabble while still keeping some age old ideas about robot philosophy present in the story. I recommend.
Grade: B+

I haven't see the film yet. Is Will Smith an obnoxious smart aleck like he is in Men in Black?

The effects scenes I've seen don't look all that fresh. I've already seen scenes with thousands of look-alike robots in SW:The Phantom Menace and SW:Attack of the Clones. The trailors also show a gloomy world somewhat reminiscent of that which was depicted in the Matrix movies.

I haven't see the film yet. Is Will Smith an obnoxious smart aleck like he is in Men in Black?
Uh, yeah, pretty much.

The trailors also show a gloomy world somewhat reminiscent of that which was depicted in the Matrix movies.
Gloomy didn't really come to mind while I was watching it. Maybe crowded and squeaky clean. They do have robots cleaning up after them.

By the way, the DVD of I, Robot is due out this month. Mind you, why is the Region 2 disc/discs out before the Region 1 set...?
(Region 2 DVD is due out on Friday, 3rd December, while the Region 1 DVD is not out until the 14th...)

I just got the DVD and I thought the movie was great. A real surprise at the end.

I really liked this film. I thought it was very well-written, with a good plot that held together well, a good murder mystery, some nice ruminations on the nature of life, and a good character arc for both Sonny and Spooner. I was pretty surprised when I found out that Steve the Pirate from Dodgeball voiced Sonny.

--NITS:
30 years into the future, and people are still treating thier asthma with inhalers? Geez, the writers of this film may have an optimistic view of the future of robotics, but a pretty pessimistic view of that of medical technology, don't they?

When Spooner asks Calvin in the beginning of the film if he seemed suicidal near the end, she says no, but then she says he became a virtual recluse, sealing himself off from human contact in favor of machines. If he became reclusive, then she really wouldn't be very qualified to comment on his mental state, and indeed, reclusive behavior in itself would be somewhat consistent with someone who is suicidal, wouldn't it?

Why is Calvin such a dunce? All machines at one time or another either malfunction or can be tampered with. Yet she refuses to believe a robot could kill a human, simply because the three laws are hardwired into them. Why does it not occur to her that someone or something would cause them to simply malfunction? Or that someone could reprogram them?

After the demobot’s attack on Spooner, he goes to Calvin’s and asks her what she knows about “Ghost in the Machine.” She says it was a phrase from Lanning’s extrapolated theories about the three laws, in which he postulated natural evolution among the robots. Actually, it was a 1967 book by Arthur Koestler, in which he examined the notion that the parts of the human brain structure which account for reason and emotion are not fully coordinated, and may explain the paranoia, violence, and insanity central to human history. (This was also the inspiration for the 1981 album by the Police.) You’d think in 2035, Spooner could just look up the term on his PDA or something, instead of going all the way to Calvin’s house to ask her this.

Wow, what a coincidence that the character who won the lottery granting her a free NS-5 just happened to be the next of kin of the main character who happens to go up against them, eh?

Near the end of the scene in which the NS-5’s attack Spooner in the transit tunnel, one of them confronts him after their vehicles crash, and much as the Hulk did in the Hulk TV show, doesn't break Spooner's neck when he gets his hands on him, but just throws him or flips him.

Even if the robot that saved Spooner from his submerged car decided to save him instead of Sarah Lloyd, why didn’t he go in after her after he brought Spooner to the surface?

Sonny is led to his “execution” by two other NS-5’s and a group of security personnel. Wouldn’t it be easier to just detach his limbs and roll him on a cart to the room in question? (Yeah, but then we wouldn’t get a dramatic “dead man walking” scene.)

There really is a company called US Robotics. They make modems and stuff.

Luigi about the positronic brain of asimov's robots. the three laws are not just hardwired into them they are physically a molecular level construct of the positronic matter and cannot be tampered with in an easy manner, nor can they malfunction because any malfunction of the core would cause the bot to shut down as ALL prcesses go throuhg the three law potentials.

some of the stories that best describe this are in the I Robot collection especially the ones involving mike donovan and his buddy.

Oh and the company in the asimov universe that makes the robots is US Robots and mechanical men.

The real US Robotics was named after the companey in the book "I, Robot".

Well, first of all, R, I don't recall her or anyone else saying that in the film.

Second, how can a program or law exist on the sub-molecular level (I say sub-molecular, since you said "positrons.")?

Quantum computing?

Sorry I havent seen the movie and was going on the accepted statements within the books.

I do know this:
The brains are a spongy mass of positronic matter.
The three laws are a core part of the robots brain.
If any imbalance in the potential values of the robots actions go against the three laws then the robot will either shut down, freeze into immobility or otherwise become inactive as the three laws are weighted to shut down the robot if any imbalance exists.

Spooner uses an awful lot of sugar for such a small cup of coffee.

Hence his name.

Har! And is there any significance to only showing raw sugar in the film or was that just added to make things seem futuristic?

In a way, this movie reminded me of "Tron"

(Both movies involved a guy entering a computer to fix a glitch)

At one point, Sonny hides in a robot warehouse full of newly built NS5 units. The inventory lists 1001 units, one of which is Sonny and the others are that day's normal production.

Ok, I had a close look at the configuration on the robots to see if those numbers made sense. As depicted in the movie, the robots stand 31 deep and at least 35 wide in the warehouse, which makes at least 1085 robots instead of just 1000. The most compact rectangular configuration you can get with a thousand units is 25 deep by 40 wide. These numbers would have made more sense, they would have looked just as good on screen and would actually have tallied with the stated inventory numbers.

Complete rubbish, IMO.