Quote:
Originally Posted by bbusybookworm
I Robot - Which had nothing to do with the story with title and the story that was used was changed so much that it bears little resemblance to Asimov's writings.
|
Heh, funny story about that one: It wasn't meant to be
I Robot to begin with.
I had this from a friend of mine who at the time was running a site called FilmForce (I'm not sure what's happened to it since then, it looks like it may have been absorbed by IGN.com -- he was also one of the pair who founded
TheForce.net -- he's not involved in either any more, having moved on to found
Red5Comics).
Apparently, what we know as the film "version" of
I Robot was a totally separate script entitled
Hardwired (if memory serves me) but the company also owned the film rights to
I Robot and apparently decided that they'd get more attention for their film if they called it that instead. So they changed a few character names, plot points, and sprinkled in some Three Laws references to make it "sorta" fit.
So I'm not sure I'm convinced that it should count as a movie adaptation.
I thought it was a pretty good flick if you take it on its own terms, but whatever else it is or isn't I agree that it's certainly
not a good "adaptation" of it's nominal source text.
I agree with vivlio that
Battlefield Earth is the worst film adaptation I've ever encountered -- it had less in common with its nominal source text than
I Robot did, and it doesn't have the excuse of beginning life as another story entirely.
However, I rather enjoyed the book, and even still reread it from time to time. Different tastes, and all that.