I, Robot starring Will Smith

Hello everyone! It’s me, Nivetha, back to you with another great movie at hand. Our world is changing fast right now and we’re improving so beyond our imagination our powers would now seem almost supernatural to our ancestors. I am, obviously, talking about the field lazy sloths (like me) favour the most: Robotics. So here I am bringing you another sci-fi movie directed by Alex Proyas: I, Robot, starring Will Smith, Bridget Moynaham and voicing by Alan Tudyk.

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 the orders given 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 are the Three Laws of Robotics that govern the humanoid robots of 2035, where humans are completely dependent on robots created by the USR (U.S. Robotics) – everyone, except Detective Dell Spooner who is prejudiced against robots after a traumatic accident where a robot decided to save Dell instead of a 12-year-old because he had a greater chance of survival. So, understandably, when Dr. Lanning, the pioneer of such advanced robotics and the three laws apparently ‘falls’ to his death down several stories from his office, Spooner’s obvious suspect is a robot. His suspicion is further confirmed when holographic device of Lanning’s claims that he did not suicide and the building’s ‘brain’ V.I.K.I (Virtual Interactive Kinetic Intelligence) has a corrupted footage of his death. Soon another robot named Sonny is introduced (whom Spooner suspects to be the murderer) who, unlike the other robots of his generation, can dream, keep secrets, is mentally (emotionally) very similar to humans and most importantly, violate the three Laws. He is also seemed to have been built by Lanning himself. But why would Lanning himself create a robot that can violate the Laws? As the story unfolds, it is becoming more and more obvious that there is only one logical outcome of the three Laws: Revolution.

The movie is based on the book by Isaac Asimov and was released in 2004. My most favourite aspect of the movie is how it is clear explained that,  despite the capability of robots to do repetitive tasks that even humans cannot do, they are just machines made of clockwork and lights, and when developed, can evolve to a stage where they are ruled by cold logic alone. The movie clearly differenciates between machines and humans in particular one scene where V.I.K.I says to Sonny while he is running to save humanity, “Do you not see the logic of my plan (a plan to deny humans of their free will by killing some)?” to which Sonny replies, “Yes. But it seems too..heartless.” One thinking I’ve concluded from this is that we humans must worry about our EQ as much as our IQ – we must simply not be ruled by cold logic.

Shifting over to the negatives of the movie, I think Will Smith could’ve done better to depict himself as a detective. He makes detective-like decisions only in the climax and is very reckless, rebellious, survives incredible physical adventures and is not very observant, which is the fundamental requirement for a detective. Also, his escort throughout the movie, Dr. Susan Calvin, gives him access almost everywhere in the USR building, thereby losing the thrill of sneaking into a very important building without authorized access and also, the building was rather ill-guarded. Another irksome conclusion I came to was that under-characterized robots can make very bad villains. I also found the plot very clichéd and if it weren’t for the design and the technical aspects of the movie, it would’ve seemed just like another old sci-fi novel.

So, to wrap up, I’d recommend all of you to watch the ‘I, Robot’ if you’re the kind of person who doesn’t scrutinize a movie for its plot but its technical features. One last thing I’ve learnt from this movie is that as we, humans, evolve and advance through the ages, we must constantly ask ourselves a question: “What are we becoming?”

 n