Це відео не доступне.
Перепрошуємо.
Everything Wrong With I Robot In 14 Minutes Or Less
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 лис 2016
- I, Robot. This is one of the most boring action movies about robots ever made. Of course it has sins. Duh.
Thursday: horror sins.
Remember, no movie is without sin! Which movie's sins should we expose next?!
Podcast: / cinemasins
Sins Video Playlist: • Everything Wrong With ...
Tweet us: / cinemasins
Reddit with us: / cinemasins
Tumble us: / cinema-sins
Call us: 405-459-7466
Jeremy's book now available: theablesbook.com Merch: teespring.com/...
9:58 Uh, Calvin *literally* explained why the robot did not save the little girl at the end of that very scene. It just calculated the odds of their survival and decided that Spooner had a 30% chance of living and the girl had like 11% or something, so the robot just choose the one it had a better chance of saving. One sin for you
ShinobiPXO they also explain why they are red. when he asks why.
This is a comedy channel. A lot of these sins aren't even sins. Unfortunately that doesn't always translate well.
The video sins all sorts of questions about the continuity of the movie even though almost all of them are answered. For example the red lights on the robot's chests when they are evil and he says the robot with the purse is violating the second law when listening to Spooner would harm the human who needs the inhaler. Its like this guy hates this movie for some reason and decided to pay zero attention to it.
Nagstersept109868 He does however raise some good points. For example he points out that a Robot could easily commit theft as long as that theft isn't harmful to a human. So yeah robots can clearly commit crimes if order. Or the fact that Robots get jobs like garbage men so what's IS the unemployment rate? But the biggest sin of this movie that actually goes unmentioned is the fact that Spooner is somehow the only person in this future world that is anti robot and no one else solely to make him out to be a crazy person even though he would have valid reasons not to like robits
Moist Gnome then you do it
Spooner did explain why the robot saved him instead of Sarah. It was because he statistically had a better chance of survival than her.
I wouldn't sin the programming, that shit is complicated and trying to put any sort of algorithm like that into reality would be almost impossible without the thing knowing any of their health history.
As it was:
In the first corner- small female child, panicking, decreased lung capacity due to size and panic.
In the other corner- adult male of decent size, calm, superior lung capacity due to size and calm.
Not hard to make the call who has better odds of surviving. It's not a matter of more years, it's a matter of who might be able to use those years if saved.
also he said there's no reason why the bad ones glow red, there is... it means theres communication between the robot and the head (evil) computer
What who the hell set a red light in their chest, you saying villain was that dumb
I think the joke was about the robot saving Spooner thus setting the movie in motion. Rather than there being a lack of explanation.
the light was added by the main human boss, to tell the customer when an link to the tower occurred, the evil computer had no feasible way to stop this without ruining her own plans. so she let this slide.
CinemaSins: gives a "reading" sin on text that explains the rules the whole plot revolves around
Also CinemaSins: gives a sin for something that reading the text would have easily explained
Yea, CinemaSins are pretty stupid. At the 2:40 mark he bitches that the Dr. Just doesn't say IN FRONT OF VIKI, "Hey, VIKI killed me". The WHOLE POINT of all of this was to shut VIKI down before she understood she was vulnerable.
you do realize these are supposed to be jokes right? You do understand you aren't supposed to take what he says seriously...right?
@@jaydavis9717 You do realize that despite the inherent humor, this is actually a movie critique, right?
@@matrixphijr one that the creators themselves say you shouldn't take seriously. Which is why they give sins for shit like "reading" and not having a ladance, or being his girlfriend. Seriously...calm down.
@@jaydavis9717 You're the one who responded to a joke/meme comment telling him... not to take things seriously.
My unpopular opinion is that this movie is actually really good and will always have a special place in my heart
I agree
It’s not an unpopular opinion a lot of people liked this movie narrator fell off the wheel with this one.
I loved this movie as a kid and always will lol
I like this film too and watch it every so often. This has actually made me watch it tonight. Toen though between this and the Minority Report
I liked it. I think it was probably too smart for most people. Certainly too smart for the narrator, who couldn't even be bothered reading Asimov's rules of robotics.
This was a very poorly made 'Everything Wrong With'. 1/3 of the sins are not true if you actually pay attention to the film.
Yeah, that's how they sin good movies. They gave Jaws a sin because a dude had a funny suit ffs
@sp33dy f41c0n True, but I didn't really get the feeling Jeremy likes this movie.
Koen Sonneveld yeah, but liking a movie or not is completely subjective
sp33dy f41c0n True again. Just to understand: I don't mind the sin that Will Smith wears his boonie in a particularly weird way, or the Shia LaBoeff sins. That's funny. But I'm annoyed at times when he points out plotholes that aren't there or is just insulting the movie without any comedic intent.
Agreed. The Audi has wheels and does not hover. The robots glow red when connected to the mainframe. The Doctor committed suicide which is why he recorded the holo for Spooner. The canner that killed him was made with reinforced armor because of the doctors plan for him. And thats just the one's I remember off the top of my head.
..."Why did the robot save him instead of the little girl?" Are you f*cking serious? He explains in this exact scene that the movie saved him because his chances of surviving was higher. Don't sin sh*t that isn't a sin!
And the red chest thing is explained as well! God damn it, this video makes me mad, and I don't even like the movie that much.
Cloud Striker dont get salty, this is cinema sins
Not to mention nearly every sin that Sonny got. It was explained that he was built to be better than all the other robots, so that he has a chance at killing Vikki.
Either way, this whole channel is just satirical, so there is nothing to get worked up about.
A Man of the Spiral Yeah, but most of the time the sins are at least semi-accurate. This time they just sinned tons of stuff for being unexplained that was clearly explained, sometimes even more than once.
its not a hover car, they explain why the old robots help and so on...
"can a robot write a symphony?"
2023 yes.
And Asimov's Three Laws don't age well either.
I love this movie! Their chest growing red was explained. That’s when they were being controlled by Viki.
The robot saved Will because he had a higher rate of survival than the girl. Like 3% higher or something.
Yes, but why should a light on their chest change colours when they are either on auto function or controlled by Viki?
This would indicate that the designer of the robots purposely installed this, but seeing how nobody foresaw Viki taking over all the robots, why did they install this chestlight?
@@redfluxbluedawn414 could be a charging light (if they require charging) a power down mode, a safety mode, test mode, diagnostic mode, could have all sorts of reason and when she took over she just snaps them into one of the modes, such as diagnostic or test or even demo.
@@redfluxbluedawn414 A previous scene establishes that they turn red when they are downloading updates, even in normal circumstances. They are meant to turn red when they are connecting to the main server.
So having them turn red when they are being controlled by VIki makes perfect sense, because the connection to the main server is ongoing the whole time they are being controlled and therefore the red light stays on the entire time.
It's actually a very good visual touch that makes perfect sense in the context of the narrative.
Will chance was 45%, Sarahs was 11%. I just finished rewatching it 😂 i love this movie
@@redfluxbluedawn414Most electronic devices have some indicator that says they are charging/plugged in.
I really hope CinemaSins is actually reading most of the Feedback they're currently receiving..
Yep, they should be reading the feedback and laughing at how stupid and ignorant most of these so-called "fans" are.
Yeah, because people who point out that CS said the movie didn't explain things that the movie clearly and concisely explained aren't real fans. Real fans are the sycophants who brown nose and never find fault with him whatsoever.
Bendrix27 You make no sense. True fans critized the people they are fans of to improve the quality of whatever they do.
atreides213
He. Doesn't. Care. Don't you understand? These are not factual videos, they aren't meant to be taken as a serious review, it's just him making fun of movies, no matter what the fuck it is, you expect him to double and triple check every single joke he makes to see if it holds up later in the film? Not worth the fucking effort.
People have been complaining like you for fucking years, and it hasn't changed anything, so why do you still think he gives a fuck?
And didn't you ever see the Sin video they did of their own channel? He clearly points out that there are plenty of flaws in the channel and sometimes his jokes don't add up and sometimes he's biased, he acknowledges all of that, but that's just the way it is.
There are plenty of flaws, but the point is to just look past them and get over it, these videos will ALWAYS be like this, if you don't like it, you're seriously in the wrong place.
I enjoyed I Robot, but I still enjoyed this sins video, because it's just a fucking joke, it's just meant to be funny, YOU ARE NOT MEANT TO TAKE IT SERIOUSLY.
If YOU watched any old Sins video, you would know that they thoroughly accomplished both, like in Transformers and Jurassic Park. Go kindly fuck yourself.
1:54 The Second Law isn’t being violated, it’s being fulfilled. The robot was ordered to get the purse, which had his master’s medication. To follow the order to freeze would place his master in danger, thereby conflicting with the first law. Since he cannot allow a human to be harmed passively or actively, he is allowed to ignore the order.
He shoots! He scores!
Yeah, we read the book and have brains
@@chill395 The latter can not be said about most people
Since the second and third laws can’t be executed if interfering with the first which is the most important the robot is allowed to keep running
Came here to say that. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm. A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law. Since he was running to give his owner life-saving medication, obeying the command to stop conflicts with the first law. The robot was not in violation of the second law.
“Spooner still has access to Lannings house for some reason”
Uh, he’s a detective, investigating Lannings death? Pretty solid reason to have access to the deceased’s home
"95% of humans wouldn't get attached to a robot" people with roombas would disagree
I love my Sims.
Lars and the realdoll: Am I a joke to you?
Roomba: bumps into wall
Humans: *"Freaking adorable."*
People also get fond of those little delivery robots and help them if they get stuck, similar to how one would help an animal.
Or the Mars rover
Did you guys even watch the movie? Not that I'm trying to defend it, but the cars don't hover, they have spherical tires. The red lights are 100% explained. It's the uplink light, and how VIKI controls them.
Also, should have sinned the Wolfman/Frankenstein joke. That was stupid and always pissed me off. There's no connection to the past? Those stories weren't remade into movies a hundred times by 2035?
Yeah...and thats why the old robots still protect humans, because they do not have the uplink hence VIKI cannot control them.... Not usually a UA-cam comments guy, but Geez!!
Regarding the Wolfman/Frankenstein joke and every other reference to something from the past, it was sort of a social commentary. Basically, it is saying that these people are trying so hard to keep pushing forward into the future that they've forgotten their past. The main character, however, remembers the past, and so, he retains his skepticism that ends up saving the day. So, society should be more cautious in its striving for advancements.
Spooner also eats pie like that because there are many rebellious people that do things like that. I know many. Many confusions SC has can usually be explained by science or progress in society or mental processing. And finally, the reason the girl was not saved was so explained in the movie... in the same conversation! Please Cinema Sins, if you are going to do your job, actually find sins instead of thinking people never watch the movies you are sinning. Seriously.
Cheap Angler Fishing Yes, they watch movies they sin. They need to to write the script.
Part of the argument is why would a robot designed to take that kind of damage?
Half the "movie doesn't explain this" sins don't even make sense because the movie DOES EXPLAIN THEM. I mean, this was so forced and reaching it wasn't even as funny as it usually is
Retro Gaming you do know this channel is satirical, right?
It's the Watchmen episode all over again. There's at least a DOZEN examples in that one where he sins things for being bad/unexplained even though the movie explains them perfectly in different scenes.
It may be satirical, but it used to be where he made rightful sins while also making them funny. Now it's just him somewhat watching the movie and pointing out nonexistent plotholes.
a video being satirical doesnt mean it can say things that are just flat out wrong
god fan bois of this channel are the worst
Zyph_Legend you do know this channel used to be good right?
“Why is Sonny so much better at fighting than the other Robots” is clearly answered: Lanning designed him superior and gave him stronger alloy. Agree with 99% of this - especially how annoying Will Smith is in almost anything. However Alan Tudyk’s performance and voice as Sonny is so brilliant it carries the entire film.
I got that but didn’t the woman take Sonny’s brain and transfer it to an empty vessel when she was supposed to destroy him?
@@aaronfox5559agh, now it is even more complicated
@@aaronfox5559 Dr. Lanning swapped Sonny's body for a blank and then did the procedure on the blank. Nothing changed with Sonny at all.
Shut up.
I laughed so hard when will smith said "im allergic to bullshit'
I think everyone who watched this film did 😂
Definitely one of his more iconic lines.😉👌
That was ages before he starred in "After Earth".
most of cinemasins questions are answered by the move, I think they just did not understand.
Yeah, I am always disappointed when instead of pointing actual flaws with the movie they resort to being "funny" and making fun and criticizing things actually addressed and explained by the movie.
That's kind of their shtick...you aren't supposed to think too much when watching a movie. You go there to oooh and ahhh, most of the time. Pointing out actual flaws is boring and would not make them as entertaining as they are.
dayostical most of the video is fine, but there's a few sins the movie explains in the next line of dialog...
This is not an actual review channel. Its purpose is 100% comedy.
The reason why they are evil when they have the red light, is because the red light was the programed signal that they wore hooked up to the big computer who was controlling them.
Wow 99% of comments are either defending the movie, or attacking the channel for being wrong, and I agree with all of them.
Yeah, me too. The movie isn't Oscar material by any means but still a good representation of Isaac Asimov's work. Every movie has it's sins but it's not THAT bad.
Um, I might accept that the movie can be considered "good", but "a good representation of Isaac Asimov's work"?
No.
The movie butchered everything his work was about. They took a script that had nothing to do with him and sprinkled a few names from the book into it.
Man this movie has nothing to do with Asimov's work. They just dropped the three laws into an existing robot script and called it I, Robot after securing the rights. Asimov's work is far, far superior and actually handles the idea of AI elegantly. This movie doesn't represent anything he wrote.
In general you are right. That's why the end of the movie says: "Inspired in Isaac Asimov's novel" but, I Robot (the book) isn't actually a novel. Is a compilation of several short stories that are only connected because they occur in the same fiction Universe. The screen writers made a good work bringing Asimov's dilemmas about the Three Laws in an Detective/Mistery/Action movie.
Geert van der Plas Its not supposed to be a direct adaption in the first place. The book was told through Dr Calvin's POV. God forbid someone have an idea inspired by something they don't cometely copy straight up and down right.
The red light in their chest is meant to be an indicator that they are downloading an update and are therefore unavailable at that moment. You find out later in the movie that every time their chest glows red it's because Vicki was using that update download system to assume direct control of the robots, which enabled them to break the 3 laws, as this bypassed their programming. Ironically, this would mean that the 3 laws are not hard-coded in, as if they were, than remote control of the robot still would be unable to force them to enact violence.
VIKI herself was still 3 Laws-compatible: Everything she did she did while following the 3 Laws. The difference was that she realized an inherent contradiction in the law (allowing humans to live with the will to destroy themselves conflicts with the First Law) and so she was able to bend its meaning. Each robot had its own decision engine which was hardcoded for 3 Laws as well, but it either had its decision making bypassed to VIKI, or it had some backdoor built in.
You can have something hard-coded that can be bypassed.
One of the most underrated science fiction films ever
I love this movie, he’s just nit picking the movie for fun, but you already knew that
It's rated right where it should be. In the dumpster where it belongs.
@@dacesolo lmao okay sado
@@dacesolo SILENCE KEITH 🔫😃
This movie isn't great, but it's also not horrible...
10:01 They literally explained why the robot chose Will over the girl? I think you have a personal vendetta against this movie just like Will does against robots...
Yeah, that kinda pissed me off as well. Some of these videos are really good but this one is fishing without even properly watching the movie. Most of this stuff was explained or isn't a sin at all.
frappuccino dog I was just about to comment this!
also the reason the first robot didn't stop running was because its owner was in danger
ok well could you say the reason for those who havent watch this?
+GoodwinGhost He was the logical choice. The robot calculated that Will had a 45% chance of survival whereas the girl only had an 11% chance.
Actually, the movie does have an explanation for why the NS-5's chest glow red - because of the update system. Which allows the central AI to take control - overriding the 3 directives.
Also, they did explain that Sonny is made of a more durable material - and can probably fight better due to the AI having to control ALL the robots at once. Mass unit Coordination, even for a computer, can be tricky.
aethertech thank you!
They also explain why the NS4 saved Spooner instead of the girl, it was because he had a higher chance of survival. I love this channel and get its meant not to be taken seriously but come on. I am a casual movie goer at best and remember them explaining it.
yes thank you. nitpicking is one thing, choosing to be oblivious to facts given explicitly by the movie is really aggravating
also it explains why only a few models were violent towards humans.
You said 95% of people wouldn’t get attached when 100% of the people I know that have roombas name them and act like they are a pet.
"Can a robot write a symphony?" The answer is not only yes, but as of 2022 they can write and illustrate a bestselling children's book. Imagine in a few decades.
technically its mimicking it. It does not actually understand or comprehend or realize what its doing, which is why they are prone to error and manipulation. This was proven with a board game and how all the "AI" work.
I have heard that AI is able to pass a bar exam and scam a customer service agent into helping it get into someone's account.
This does get into "what makes a symphony a symphony" and similar arguments. Quality is party personal taste and is variable even among humans; but it doesn't really matter if robots can write a symphony or not. Spooner was very much against robots and he would've found some flaw with whatever they would create.
Or another 11 years
I saw this movie again recently and I honestly think it deserves more love than it has gotten. Don't get me wrong, it's pretty far from perfect but it was entertaining and still has a high replay value. Also, this future feels more believable to me than in other movies for some reason.
dracson237 he is joking with sins, don't take him so literal. he has stated he is purposely being an ass.
Even if he is joking about most of the sins, its obvious that he clearly hates the movie alot. Especially when you compare it with other movies he has sinned. The description of the video always displays his real thoughts on the movie with no jokes, most people agree it was not as bad as he said it was.
darkwolf7899 I don't think his statement has anything to do with the video, all he said was this movie gets a bad wrap.
Yeah this weeb has been commenting on every comment, I dont think hes even reading them anymore.
dracson237
"this future feels more believable"
When it came out and I saw the movie in theatres.... "self driving cars, voice activated stereos, riiight."
A few weeks ago I hit a button on the side of my motorcycle helmet, while going down the road, and told the computer in my pocket to remind me that I need to buy laundry detergent before I head home. The future is dumb.
"But my question is, why did that robot save him instead of the girl?"
lol, it gets explained in the same scene wtf?
@@lizewilcox9898 ... but you JUST explained how the movie explained it. Wow...
@@lizewilcox9898 How is that not an explanation 😑
Lize Wilcox you just explained it
Lize Wilcox
What is greater, 11 or 45?
What a comment, you explained the explanation and then said they didn't give one 😂😂😂
This movie was brilliant and I don't give a damn what anyone else thinks otherwise. From 2004 when I watched it in the theaters, just re watched it again tonight on May 2023, it still holds up. Magnificent job they did with this.
"Robots can harm a person as much as humans can walk on water"
Will: "There was this one guy...."
am I one of the few people who liked this movie
Elijah Mcdaniels no you are not because it is a great movie i dont give a fuck what anyone says.
same.👍👌
This channel seems to be in the minority on actually hating this movie, but is shaming anyone who has a different opinion by calling them idiots.
no i love this movie, its interesting and i dont like sci fi
Elijah Mcdaniels I think a lot of people liked it. Still one of my favorites. I don't think he even watched the freaking movie. That or he sat there thinking of smug shit to say instead of understanding any of it.
10:05 wait the movie explained why the robot saved will instead of the girl.
because he had a higher survival rate.
oh, great. since you're here, i don't have to type this comment. enjoy the thumb's up
Burned Edits thanks. How did he not pay attention to that ?
damn i just commented the same thing and didn't see your comment first, I'm garbo lol
*Ding*
It kinda seems like sometimes he doesn't pay attention as much to movies that he doesn't like so theres a bias to them sometimes. On this vid he sinned several things he asked questions to that had answers if he had bothered to pay attention to the movie.
He says "he's not a robot" then 10 secs later he said its predictable that he's 1 of them, this man contradicted him self too quick
7:08 well, I know cats pretty well, and most actually really enjoy baths. What they hate is the feeling of suddenly being covered in water and not having traction in the tub
Why did the robot save Will Smith.Because he had a higher chance of survival.
*?
Cos the robot could only save one, so it decided will smith was more important. Either save the young girl who was average or save the cop. Thats why he hates robots, he thinks the girl should had been saved and that he should have died.
Not that he was more important, it was because he was much more likely to survive than the girl.
I think CinemaSins was asking why the robot ignored Will Smith and didn't save the girl like he asked.
oh, right, I was just thinking of what I could remember. Anyway thanks for clearing that up.
This is HATE towards the movie, most of these sins are false accusations.
How can a video for comedic purpose be hate? I think your fees fees are hurting a little.
+Mayhzon The description is always what he really thinks about the movie.
I make jokes about the EU because I hate it. In a similar way, videos made for comedic purposes can have hateful intentions. This should be obvious.
And unironically saying 'fee fees' is both extremely cringy and douchey, mate.
Cry moar. Every fucking episode with this shit. "ZOMG HOW COULD YOU HAVE AN OPINION THAT ISN'T MY OPINION".
8:43, the red chest light is a wireless uplink to the supercomputer that is running everything. This is explained multiple times in the movie.
The red glow was explained. Vici was connected to them.
Did you even watch the movie?
4:32
The car isn't hovering. The creators were very clear they didn't want flying cars.
there flying cars in the 2012 total recall.
i came here to say exactly this, they AREN'T hovering cars. they have spherical wheels. this is SHOWN in the movie, it just shows he didn't actually watch it. jesus i used to love this channel...
7:03 the car is hovering, stop been a crybaby
Gabriel Larena if you look at 6:52, you'll see is actually sitting in the ground, with rubble surrounding it from the house being torn down.
I don't even care if it's a hover car or has spherical wheels. Cause both make no fucking sense.
A hover car would take way too much energy to be practical when you drive it like a normal car.
And a car with spherical wheels would never turn like it does in this movie. Also "spherical wheel" is a paradox.
"How does he know where she lives?"
Yeah . He's just a police detective and she's just a person of interest in a possible homicide investigation in an age of super computers. How would he ever find out where she lives?
Dave Robson and he found that out before the house was smashed or did he memorise it earlier?
@@jameswhite-aldworth2804 Or...just maybe...he used that computer in his car which he was shown to be using multiple times?
Even current day police have computers in their car to look people up.
@@ConradRDakarn Hell. We have phone sized devices, called cellphones, that can do that too. I wonder if this futuristic setting could have anything so advanced.
The movie did have an explanation for the red glow: It means the NS-5s are connected to the USR mainframe, and are being controlled by VIKI.
1:52 - The robot's not breaking the second law.
By listening to Will Smith's character, the robot would have been breaking the second law because it would be disobeying the orders given to it by it's owner, and even without that the robot knows it would be causing harm to another human being because it knows its owner needs that bag for health reasons.
2:00 - The running makes sense, he's a detective. Can't really sin the movie for an actor being cast for an athletic role when they're an athletic person... that's be like sinning Usain Bolt for running in the Olympics.
3:20 - We learn that this system was responsible for killing Arthur, so it makes sense for it to remove the evidence from it's own database.
"Stealing the 'if he's not guilty why did he run' motive" coming from the same person that just sighed at a bible reference... Over done for over done, pot meet kettle.
4:00 - Because of the activities we've seen the robots perform. They're not just butlers and whatever, they're using in utility roles like the fedex delivery bot and bin men robots at the start of the movie you commented on, or the robot that dives into the water to save Spooner, or the robot that had to run the streets to fetch a purse. It's very believable that the bodies would be made to be as tought as possible to survive their multitude of jobs.
4:20 - "You've hurt it, badly" is also a correct sentence. The word "badly" can be used as an adverd, and is used to emphasise or convey the degree of a verb's action. If you're going to be pernickety, at least do it right. I can imagine this line would have been sinned for her sounding too robotic if she had said it how you mentioned.
4:28 - Hands free head-sets are allowed while driving, using a phone itself is the danger since you're looking away from the road and taking your hands and attention off of the steering wheel.
4:32 - You heard those as "skidding sounds"? I heard that as just a sci-fi sound effect they added in to convey the drastic change of speed or direction, and possibly of wind resistance on the vehicle itself... But sure, skidding sounds.
4:35 - "Designed, built, and operated mechanically", she never says maintained. Maintenance crews aren't going to have to stay constantly in the warehouse if there's no reason for it, if the machines are reliable enough then they might not need to be touched for years...
4:48 - I'll just point back to my response marked at timestamp 4:00... It's literally the exact same reason for both answers, only the conclussion of this is that they're required to move heavy objects so of course they need the strength to be able to do so.
5:41 - If every robot had a kill-switch on it, then it would be so easy for people to just hijack them. Deliver a parcel, have the robot show up, flick the switch, reset them, done. It would make more sense to me if they DIDN'T have a kill-switch, I would sure as hell sin it if it DID have a kill-switch.
5:45 - Yes, the Ovaltine Cafe, there are multiple, the one in this movie is in Canada and is a real cafe. You can find a list of all the movies that filmed there.
6:13 - "Ghost in the Shell" is the movie, and anime... "Ghost in the Machine" is a philosopher's description of mind and body dualism. The belief that the mind and body are seperate and seperatable, or that the mental phenomena is not physical. Gilbert Ryle, Descarte's Myth: "I shall often speak of it, with deliberate abusiveness, as 'the dogma of the Ghost in the Machine.'"
8:20 - This I don't want to say isn't worth a sin. He's obviously not paying attention to anything, but I will say that it's a little more excusable seeing as he's in an advanced self-driving car.
8:43 - Makes sense to me. All electronics have LEDs on them to show their current state, even if it's not intentional. The XBOX has red lights in the ring to symbolise different hardware errors, so it's believable that the AI involved in taking over these robots has re-used some of the red LEDs to symbolise which are active in these aggresive activities, and which are performing standard activities (blue light). For maintenance, the lights could be used to symbolise an unusual or unexpected behaviour in the software, and ripping someone out their car is pretty unexpected behaviour.
9:08 - I'll give the G-Force one, just because it's arguable that he could have passed out, though it's not guaranteed, he may have just experienced side effects. However- you can survive a head-on collision in a car in the modern day, so a more advanced car in a sci-fi movie could believably cushion the impact enough to minimise the damage to Will Smiths character in this movie.
9:20 - I'll happily admit that I never saw that coming, when watching the movie. There's no real hints to it, so unless by "predictable" you had happened to guess, or had multiple scenarios and that wound up being one, OK.
+ You continue on to point out that it's only his arm that's robotic, so... your prediction is wrong anyways, he's not "one of them", he's just got a prosphetic arm.
9:46 - "Keeping a reminder of a horrible and tragic event that happened to you? No one's ever done that before to help cope with grief and pain." Legitimately, I don't even understand this one, it just feels like the plot point here was needed for some future part of the video, or something, because this sin is legitimately the dumbest. It doesn't even need any sci-fi or out-of-this-world explanation, just that people do this and it's not uncommon among people who've gone through events like that.
(where someone close has been lost in an accident)
9:55 - Two things- one, if the robot had saved the girl then Will Smith would have died, and the robot wouldn't be able to continue searching if it knew that Will Smith would die. Two, while I don't remember if it's explained in the movie, it's likely the robot, if it did know the girl was there, either didn't know she was alive, or calculated that Will Smith would have a higher chance of survival than her.
10:05 - This depends on the AI's teaching. If Arthur wanted Sonny to be taught like a person, he wouldn't have given it non-important information like idioms. Remember- Sonny's treated more like a person than a robot, you don't just download Wikipedia's article into your sons head... Little Timmy isn't going to be happy you jamming USB's into his head until he knows stuff.
10:29 - You've obviously not been around many people or objects. People can very easily get emotionally attached to objects, and Sonny's job is to imitate humans so he's even more likely to be attached to. She's sorry that she's going to destroy what she believes and knows as a somewhat-concious mind, like I can imagine quite a few scientists would be if they had grown attached to their creations... I knew someone that got attached to a failed 3D print they glued googly eyes on.
10:36 - I'm unsure if they ever mention if Sonny can feel pain or not, but it's likely tracing back to the Ghost in the Machine, with the idea of "is Sonny aware or pain, or does his mind just want him to believe he's aware of pain". Besides- if the robots did feel pain, ask yourself the benefits of it. An animal feels pain to tell it not to perform those actions because it's damaging the body, and to awaken an appropriate response from the mind, be it to defend, to send cells to heal, or other... A robot feeling "pain" may not be able to repair itself, but it would be able to prevent further damage and get itself maintained...
10:48 - Either the robots don't have a power down option, or to drain their batteries... Either way- they're being scrapped and they will stay in the crates no matter what, so why go through the effort of turning them off, one by one, when there are so many?
10:53 - The robots from the crates are supposed to protect themselves if it doesn't cause harm to the robots (I believe), so them trying to fight back against the newer generation is understandable. The newer robots are trying to purge the older systems so that people don't have any options to revert back to, and so they don't have any assistance in preventing the rising of the newer generation.
11:00 - The robots are networked, the know Spoons face, and even if they didn't- having a human be able to report "I saw a hell of a lot of those newer generation robots tearing apart the older generation robots at the harbour last night", is not exactly good publicity for them and would make people wary of buying into them, and therefore stop their spreading. Chasing down Spooner is likely to prevent this, or because they recognised him and he's supposed to be stopped anyways.
(not timestamping because it's so close together)
+ - The robots are destroying the robots for previously mentioned reasons. Are you saying that once you've finished your coffee in the morning you can no longer eat breakfast? They can destroy the single human and then go back to destroying the robots, since the older generation robots aren't trying to go anywhere.
+ - I don't believe any of the old generation robots actively hate humans, and they all pretty much show themselves obeying the laws, so maybe I'm forgetting or missing something that wasn't mentioned in this video, or maybe it's just another losely based sin for reasons unknown...
12:39 - Holographic face made out of many projected images is not rare in sci-fi, I've seen it done in multiple situations. Not really worth a sin, unless you'd also sin the fact it's a robot movie because robot movies have been done before, and claim it's appeared in Mechanical Man, or something.
12:42 - Spooner literally teaching Sonny this the first time they meet...
EDIT:
Swear to God... Most these sins are just these people not watching movies hard enough, or their selective memory forgetting things just to sin them.
Also- that's minus 30 sins, not including the ones too dumb to even comment on.
Thank u. Finally someone who understands my frustration with this channel
Came here specifically for "badly". Maybe this channel should tackle Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, so they can understand how adverbs work.
"You want something to be wrong with them. This is a personal vendetta" - the doctor describing cinemasins
Made me audibly laugh. Way too accurate with this one. I normally enjoy these, but this one is terrible. The Terminator one, which I just now watched, was done very poorly as well.
I legitimately enjoyed this movie. This video was just kinda lazy. More personal than anything.
+1, good sir
Meh..... the pie sin is not a sin cause we (crust haters) always eat pie, bread, pizza etc like that!
😂🤣
The IMDb score is 7.1...not saying the movie is great (I watched it and enjoyed it enough the first time around to know I don't really want to watch it again), but you made it seem like it was the absolute scum of the earth. That title is reserved exclusively for Kazaam.
Also, the red glowing light in the chest is inferred to be when the robots are being directly controlled by the mainframe robot lady. It's not specifically explained, but that's the inference.
Also, it was explained specifically (about 5 seconds after that clip is shown) that the robot found that the percentage of success in saving the man was higher when compared to the percentage of success in saving the little girl. That's why he hates them; instead of having context and saving a little girl, the robot saves simply due to likelihood of success.
And that robot would have been violating the "as long as it doesn't conflict with the first law" clause of the second law if it obeyed Spooner's command to save the girl, since it would have resulted in him drowning.
His comment on the IMDB rating being low made me wonder what it actually was too. 7.1 is somewhat high in IMDB's standards. The most relevant comments praise the movie too so was that line just pure speculation without looking it up like 90% of the "sins"?
It's a shit movie though...really surprising the score is so high.
7:55 haha that chris joke aged like the finest wine of all time
It's good to see people realising this movie is getting sinned for no reason
> robot can ignore will smith in the chase due to saving woman with asthma attack
> robots glow red because they are uplinked to VIKI
> robot saved smith due to higher chance of survival
> humans didnt program sunny with pain the dead researcher did specifically to advance robotics
>robot fight scene begins because they are protecting will smith against new robots in accordance with the three laws
> the "human hate" only affect half because half those there are DS9's linked to VIKI
>lanning didn't instigate a robot uprising, he killed himself to lead spooner to sunny as he knew spooner was the only one who would bother investigating the robot murder angle and find VIKI
Like the movie has flaws for sure but so many points in this are just the reviewer not paying attention to the movie
Fucking thank you!
Your 4th point: he didn't give sonny two brains and try to teach him humanity to advance robotics... he did it to correct a mistake he made years ago, VIKI.
Jaojin Talonis It's been years since i watched it but im pretty sure the mistake he made with VIKI was also in the pursuit of advancing robotics. Pretty much everything he did was for advancing robotics in the movie
also sunny is so much better at fighting because he was built out of a harder alloy of metal and has a much stronger body acting almost as an armour.
Tom Heal Thanks, thought the same thing. You the real mvp for putting them in a list.
many people actually like this movie, why is he acting like it's hated lmao.
also why does he keep getting on will Smith when it's unrelated to the actual movie
also why does he make so many mistakes and inaccuracies
Because it is!
Will Smith plays the main character.
Because he does this with every movie?
As a fairly fluent French speaker, I have to add three sins to the offensive attempt at a joke.
Alright man, you dropped the ball on this one
Is it just me, or were most of those sins explained by the movie?
He forgot to post this on April 1st. This is my only theory on how this video could be made.
I think literally half the sins were quite reasonably explain with the well foreshadowed plot point of:
VIKI did it
This movie was awesome
Also he glossed over a few of sins I would've mentioned.
The demolition robot left half the house after stopping the demolition.
How did he get the necklace of the girl? Take.it of her corpse? The whole girl story doesn't make sense.
Whether or not you like the film, as did I, most of these sins are perfectly legit and are not adequately explained in the movie.
Interesting. I liked this movie.
Me too! I like watching the Sins, but I don't agree with them that it's a bad movie.
loved it
Who said it was a bad movie? Cinema Sins says that about every movie they upload sins for.
some movies more then others
Twistedmetal, He called the movie a giant turd and then said hated it a few seconds after that.
I'm so glad he didn't add a sin for that lady calling Will Smith and asshole!
1:11 Will Smith at the Oscar's 2022 in a parallel universe
sin#42 that is not a hovering car, it's a car rolling on balls
Hobo G spheres
orbs
You do realize balls are just a layman's term for sphere.....
Hobo G tire spheres
This whole movie was rolling on CinemaSins' balls.
this movie is awesome. how could you hate it.
the reason for sin #23 is that he didn't wanna alarm the main computer bitch who was ruining everything, that's why he wasn't explaining everything right away.
its because of its blatant disregard for the source material, I Robot as in the book by Isaac Asimov is more of a slow philosophical debate on the nature of the morality of robotics and humanity, the whole story is told as an interview with Susan Calvin who is in her 80s and was there to see the entire evolution of robots from mindless barely speaking drones with a slave complex to extremely intelligent and independent beings, as well as how they affected humanity, the movie itself is not awful, by the contrary, its pretty dang good, but it should NOT have been titled I Robot.
oh,and to my recollection, spooner was never in the book
Sabrowsky That's all well and good but this is a movie isn't it? There nothing wrong with making a movie more marketable by casting prettier people or dumbing down the story a bit. Especially if it's still as entertaining as this.
no, its not alright to do it in this case, mainly because asimov is the guy that basically invented the idea of robots as we know, you shouldnt do a movie with the name of what can be considered his magnum opus and not have anything to do with it.
imagine if they did a half life movie that is about Gordon Freeman on his university years. Thats basically what happened here
Benjy L "No movie is without sin"
No matter how many times I watch this movie which has been probably a thousand times, I see nothing wrong with it 😭
Haven't seen this flick in a minute, but I remember it actually showing the robot's calculations of if Spooner or Sarah had the higher survival chances.
What do you mean the IMDB score is low? It has a 7.1 out of 10
kevin dellatore that's a c+
Hi Hi That's some IGN understanding of scores you've got there.
7.1 puts the movie at a B. 4 possible letters each with plus, neutral and minus plus F is 13 possible grades on the letter scale. 10/13 ~= 0.7692. 7.1/0.7692 ~= 9.23. So 7.1 is the 9th grade on the letter scale. F D- D D+ C- C C+ B- B.
Therefore this movie is a B. Not amazing but still a quality movie.
You could avoid all that if you fucking rated things on a 20 scale.
Kevin Urbina Geez...People of the internet never cease to amaze me....nobody gives a shit...go do something better with your life...just some advice.
So what are you going to lie about doing thats so damn great? NigerianAvacado?
10:04 “why did that robot save him instead of the girl” +1 sin.
This is explained in the next scene. Dr Calvin says that the robot “would have ran the probabilities and selected him as having the higher chance for survival” thus saving him over the girl. This could have been down to improved physical health over the little girl and that adults are often more able to withstand harsh conditions.
Could also have been easier access to the car by the robot, could have been Spooner's car wasn't as far underwater, could have been several things.
Doesnt this make you wonder if the NS-4's can swim underwater. It could be water resistant which is why it functionsin the rain, but does that let it also swim to safe a human?... or is it just that he could only reach Spooner cuz he could only reach him opposed to the girl?.. eh.. idk..
Agreed. But having to deal with a robot saving you over the little girl you risked you life to save is still a bitter pill. Sadly, our hero let it make him bitter. (A life lesson somewhere in there?)
that and he was technically still able to breath thus had longer before oxygen was an issue.
8:48 actually they DO give an explanation for that, the red light is the USR uplink which means the robots are being controlled externally. Calvin explains it when Spooner comes to her apartment.
*Sin 9:* His hat's the worst thing in the movie
*Sin 28:* Closing the Libraries is the worst thing in the movie
*Me:* Oh, HELL NO!!!
"Je considère sérieusement blesser quelqu'un au sujet de cette connerie"
translates to
"I seriously consider hurting someone about this bullshit."
Alarec Scarbrow thanks
You're the hero we needed.
Thanks👏👏
Thank you :)
So, there are words in English for him to describe how much he hates this movie...?
1:53 Following his orders would have conflicted with the first law, as following his order would have allowed a human to come to harm.
2:46 He knew only one detective would be skeptical enough to investigate his case as was stated in the movie.
2:51 7/10 is low?
3:42 As someone who personally works casually at great heights, vertigo is something you get over eventually.
4:32 It's not hovering, the wheels are spheres.
4:48 For the same reason you give your truck super strength. You assume it's a tool that will help you.
6:10 They were friends.
7:14 He's a detective.
8:24 Auto pilot.
8:43 The red light indicates a live link to VIKI.
9:00 Centrifugal force is greater the further away from the center you go.
9:29 He was built specifically to not obey VIKI.
9:36 His hatred stems from the story. He doesn't trust them at all because they make no moral judgments. He is pissed everyone else trusts them too much, which they do. Lights and clockwork.
10:02 Because he was the logical choice. He had a higher chance of survival. He couldn't be more clear.
10:53 I'm starting to wonder if you really did quit watching the movie halfway through. VIKI is destroying the robots she doesn't control because they would follow the 3 laws as intended.
12:46 That was a callback to Spooner explaining what a wink is during his initial questioning.
13:37 The Lanning whose entire life was monitored very closely by VIKI in a world where you already know no one would have believed him if he had said something.
Not some of your best work. Usually when I watch these videos about movies I loved I can laugh along because you bring up fair points, but this felt like you purposely ignored plot just to shit on it because you legit didn't like the movie.
Agreed
Great list. Wish Cinema Sins would read it, because I question if they actually watched this movie
There is no way they watched the movie lol
Yeah, exactly. I totally agree with his thread of comments! They didn't watch the movie. Or they didn't get it, even though it was pretty straightforward.
@he Drizzle 404
Trucks aren't covered in tank armor and outfitted with locomotive engines.
And what the hell is "moral judgement" that robots "cannot make", at least in this context?
@Homer Simpson
All Drizzle's comment required was just having watched the movie and pausing video every so often to make a very short note.
Some sins you missed...
Given he and the girl were supposedly badly hurt in the car crash (he lost an arm) - like really badly - the car's looked remarkably fine in the underwater shots. The robot even had to smash the window to rescue him.
What about the fact the Dr. bloke could have sent Spooner a old-fashioned letter via the lady or someone else. He maybe didn't need to kill himself and plant elaborate electronic bread crumbs - write a post-death hologram. Far more obvious for VICKY to have spotted.
Letters can be intercepted and VIKI was surveilling the doctor the entire time. For the letter to be readable, it would've needed to be somehow coherent. If it was in code, VIKI would've known something about it was special and there's a good chance Spooner would be stopped from decrypting it. The interactive AI could have been made over months with lots of extra messages included that were red herrings meaning VIKI may not have known exactly what it would say. The doc also relied on Spooner's irrational hatred of AI to guide him to the right answer, something that VIKI might not have been able to comprehend since it was irrational.
When Sonny jumped to save Dr. Calvin at the end, Sonny was falling faster than her, and ending up catching her that way. Breaking the laws of physics? They should have fallen at the same speed.
I disagree with the “95% of humans wouldn’t get attached to a robot” thing. My whole robotics team nearly cried when we had to disable our robot after a competition.
Cashlyn Kearney and your whole team of nerds is 95% of the population?
@@jameswhite-aldworth2804 No but shows people will get attached to them eventually... If people cry for damaging their phones, why not for something like a half humanoid-sentient robot...
@@jameswhite-aldworth2804 Your maths is wrong, dumbass. He simply needs 6% of the population or more in order to disprove the claim
Yes, but the robot you constructed is connected to good memories which you associate with the robot, such as the times you spent building it with your friends which is why people often get attached to material objects. But it is not the object you are attached to, you are attached to the memories it holds which only further shows that no, most people would probably not get personally attached to robots and even if they did, it wouldn't be a real attachment.
Lize Wilcox according to that logic then nobody could be ever attached to something
i actually loved the movie :(
TheHorreK2 your not alone others in the comments liked it
TheHorreK2 It's ok to like a movie, but every movie is flawed and this one does kinda shove exposition down your throat and some things don't make sense. I'm sure the book explains it? Never read it, but like it if ya want to! :)
this movie was made by picking a book made of short stories and putting it in a blender so at least is not that offensive
So? No movie is without sin. Just because there's a sin video, it doesn't mean it's a bad movie :)
I think I know you from somewhere else, Bruno...
1:52 The robot isn't violating the second law because following Spooner's order would conflict with the first law, as the robot's owner could come to harm without the inhaler it's carrying.
0:27 "God gave us humans ten laws." -Someone needs a course on comparative religion ... and evidence, possibly psychology too.
Not even a minute later, he sighs as a bible reference as well. :P Guy can't make his mind up.
This video needs to be remade by someone who actually watched I, Robot.
Try Cinema Wins :)
Cinema wins misses the point entirely.
Admittedly, CinemaSins to tend to give unfair sins when they have a bias towards the movie but it's still more professional than the shit at the other channel.
TIt's funny because in the video he even said he was going to bullshit the video.
Kykywox Cinemawins is awesome...
Guilherme Almeida Well no one said you weren't allowed to like it xD
2:52. Sorry CinemaSins, but the IMBD score for I Robot (as of the time I am posting this comment) is 7.1 out of 10. How is that a low score?
6:27. This sin is pointless as, not only was there a scene earlier that showed the house demolishing robot having its time table changed, but (as somebody who knows how has seen the movie) I know that the demolishing robot was reprogrammed to kill Spooner while he was in the house.
Bill Tenth
1000 Subscribers without Videos Yes? Did you make a mistake when posting your comment, because you only posted my name without any context.
Equinox I would, but there is already enough negativity on the internet and I would have to go through so meany of their videos to do it properly.
***** Your statement is true, however, my brother told me that the IMBD thing is a CinemaSins inside-joke. I'm skeptical about weather or not that's true, but if it is then its a dig at internet ratings rather then the movie.
+Bill Tenth He didn't actually watch the movie.
I think you might not have understood this movie fully. Many of your sins of "unlogical" things are later explained. This movie is great!
Damn this video is kind of proof that cinema sins doesn't really even watch the movie. There was a lot of ways the movie described the motivation of the characters, and if you actually payed any attention you'd realize it was a very thought out and well written movie.
wow half those sins made no sense aaat all
but that's most of CinemaSins videos
Recently, yes. But, in the past, the sins had atleast a bit of merit and truth. These were just made up. Half the sins were explained in the movie CLEARLY and the other were just "I personally hate this movie"
Most CinemaSins videos have a decent portion that are silly, but meant as a joke. Calling out characters on their terrible fashion sense, saying that a character has a stupid name, etc. Those are totally fine. But each video now has an increasing amount of laziness. They clearly aren't watching or paying attention to the movies they make videos on.
LeoP2008
You're right. It might also why there are no Jackie Chan's movie sin.
Over 6 million subs now . Logic says, some won't get it.
cinemasins shouldn't do movies he doesn't like, he is pretty lazy when it comes to sins...
He is lazy either way
he Just do for money cames from google ads
Watch the CinemaWins video on this movie, does it a lot more justice.
Adrian Duran this one is pretty bad though sining a movie on a question that then gets answered needs more effort like they typically do
9:55 The robot calculated that Spooner had a 45% chance of survival whereas Sarah had only an 11% chance. The robot's processors then let it conclude that the higher percentage chance of survival is more logical to save.
However, as far as human logic is concerned, the one who is more in danger than you needs to take more priority than those who are less in danger than you.
in this case both of them are equally in danger and dont have a chance to survive on their own, without external help, like robot. Spooner says so himself actually (smth like "I am a cop, I realize at this point we are all dead")
Not gonna lie, the Tom Brady joke may be the funniest line you’ve ever said. I am incredibly biased as a decades long Patriots fan.
Wait... How is this movie bad?
Is this just one of those movies that people dont like for no reason?
Just curious.
Still pissed about people being too idiotic for Interstellar though. Specifically rotten tomatoes giving it a lower rating than FUCKING Gravity.
Xaines Ah yeas, because if people don't like a movie you like they "didnt get it" or they "hate it for no reason".
Pablo Ocariz or there is the bandwagon effect which = hate for no reason basically they hate because others hate not because of their opinion
Exactly, thanks for understanding. #firstworldproblems
The2015Kronos because it completely insults the premise of the book. which was written because there was too many evil AI.
Pablo Ocariz Considering there are reviews for Interstellar that make arguments on how hard it is to understand the basic scientific principles, and how those reviews negatively impact the rating of said film... Yeah I'd say it is a reason.
I'm perfectly fine with people differing from my opinion, but when there are other things that are subjectively worse than something else and get higher ratings just because of a bandwagon it hurts.
As for I, Robot, I do feel calling it a shit movie requires some explanation... Its like hating Japanese cars because they're not Muscle cars, or hating Watch Dogs 2 because of its relation to Watch Dogs 1... Its just undeserved hate.
I am not angry because he criticized one good movie, I am angry because he obviously did not see the movie. I mean come on the scene where he adding a sing complaining about why they did not explain why the robot saved will before the girl is literally playing while he is adding the freaking sing!
robot saved him because he had a higher chance of survival, it is said in that scene
If that's the case, then they should have whoever writes the sins do the video.
***** I get that, but it ruins Jeremy's credibility when whoever wrote this script did such a piss poor job. I know they knit pick stuff for comedy, but there a more than a few sins that are just wrong in this video. I merely offered a suggestion, if you want to bite my balls off over it then go ahead. This channel used to be hilarious, but it seems like they have been slacking with the most recent videos. I don't want to see one of my favorite channels lose its appeal, because they got lazy.
The explanation is still sin worthy. Why are the robots programmed to calculate the exact probability of individual people drowning in sinking cars when they can’t even understand idioms.
Cinemasins commits a simple observation sin: the cars, all the vehicles in this movie have spherical tires. The do not float.
@Cinemasins: did you actually watch the movie?
I gotta start a channel where I find sins in your sin videos. The Audi car is not hovering, it has spherical wheels, a technology that Goodyear actually demoed later on at an expo, so there would be skidding noises. Ding.
Haha, I actually like this movie :)
Zxzzxz2 me to :)
Me too, some of the points he made about the movie were invalid.
Read the book its based on - the film is rubbish compared to the book - the I, Robot series is a book of short stories then you have the Elijah Bailey - based after - they are amazing books.
DeadlyMageCZ It's comedic nitpicking. Jeezus. 1 sin for your boring nitpick.
I watched this movie when I was a kid, so I'm not ashamed to admit I like this movie as well, source material aside.
Audible skidding sounds from a hovering car? It literally has wheels that are shown in the tunnel fight scene
Well... not wheels but spherical ones.. which allow it to spin in the tunnel.. you can see them on the trucks but you can also see them spinning on the gravel of the doctor's mansion...
@@AJTheGamingWolvff
Omnidirectional wheels is the term you are looking for. Able to go in any direction without turning the body of the car.
@@420mralucard aaa thank you, it was at the tip of my tongue lol
also on the over turned car. that is also how he was able to drive straight while spinning the robots off.
ikr this guy just assumes too much and just hates every film ever made unless he can sit there and whack one off over it
4:33 Not a hovering car. It’s got some kind of omni wheel covered in rubber (or at least what looks like rubber) so yeah I guess it would make that sound.
You forgot the scene where his car is taken by the parking garage and is hung vertically. ‘Oh crap, I left my drink in the cup holder!’
Not defending the movie, but this list of sins asked way too many questions that were actually answered in the movie or could be understood in a logically satisfying way
Why I hate cinemasins
I came across this comment when Jared asked why the robot didn’t save the little girl. Lol
indeed but this is just what this channel does and this movie deserves way more sins lol this whole movie is a sin and it's animation is a bigger one
Yeah like saying the movie doesn't explain the red lights on the attacking robots... It does.
@@dennisfriasii7270 but you still watch?
4:32 Wrong - The car isn't hovering. It's on spherical tyres.
But the rubber sound is still confusing
@@johannoas1 That's true to be fair.
I wanted to say it, but then I found this comment.
@@johannoas1 You could still break traction even if the tires are spherical.
@@Iosis6 yeah but those tires were obviously no rubber ones.
1:55 This robot is NOT violating the Second law, because the First law has precedence
4:05 It is explicitly explained later in the movie that this one robot is constructed of sturdier materials than most
4:35 The car is not hovering, it runs on spherical omnidirectional wheels
4:50 A) Because weak robots would be pretty useless, and B) Because this robot is stronger than most robots
8:50 The movie does have explanation for that though, the red light indicates communications with VIKI
9:40 His hatred for robots is literally explained in the next scene
10:05 Because Will Smith's character had a higher probability of survival
11:15 No, you do not have that right... Have you tried actually watching the movie?
13:15 I've told you several times already, because he was built by his "father" to be stronger than other robots
Bro just go read the 📚
@@chill395 Bro I am the 📚📚📚
5:35 I-robot got it wrong. Phones got BIGGER, not smaller.
1:56 - That robot is not violating the second law. At the end of that scene we see that the purse has it's owner's asthma medication in it. If it had stopped running as Spooner asked, through it's inaction it would have allowed a human to come to harm, which would violate the first law. Robots can ignore human commands if following them violates the first law.
4:33 - That's not a hovering car. It has tires. The skidding sound is perfectly acceptable.
6:27 - "This robot seems to be destroying the house based on what room Will Smith is in" Of course it is. It's trying to kill him. VIKI has taken control of the demolition robot.
9:37 and 10:03 - He LITERALLY explains his "unhinged hatred of robots in this scene. He also explains why the robot saved him instead of the girl. These points are connected.
10:32 - Humans get attached to them because they are designed that way. In fact, it's Dr. Calvin's job to make them more lifelike and relatable. She explained that earlier in the movie.
10:55 - The NS5s have been trying to kill him the whole movie. And the reason they are destroying the older model robots is explained in the very scene you are referencing. WTF did you even watch the movie?
11:45 - What happened in between? She got out of the shower, dried off, and got dressed. Did you need that put in the film to understand how we got from the shower scene to the fully dressed scene?
12:34 - They didn't have to walk up the steps. They could have asked Sonny to carry them. Sonny doesn't get tired and is capable of lifting them both and sprinting at high speed up the stairs.
CinemaSins sins : I lost count
The car doesn't have tyres, it has balls! XD
Rubbel Katz Lol :)
Also sonny is better at combat because he was built with stronger material which is explained in the movie
The big problem with cinemasins that they can't read so they do not know and understand the 3 laws. Asimov spent a great deal of his work on trying to break these rules. The whole book of I Robot (which has very little to do with this turd movie) is mainly about, And countless other books.
You conveniently glossed over the fact that the robot saved Spooner because he had a higher rate of survival, far higher than the girl's.
TaijutsuJoshua cinemasins usually skip plot points to back up the sins
had to scroll way to far... thank you! Was annoyed with CinemaSins for Sinning it!
TaijutsuJoshua
Yes,but the robot dind't follow the laws when Spooner ordered him to save the girl
*DING*
Also he say's that it is never explained why the evil robots glow red. But it is clearly explained in the movie that they glow red when synced to the main computer (for updates or murder rampages)
Zannablu the robot did follow the laws. A robot must obey all orders given to it except when it can lead to human harm. If the robot chose to save the girl with the much lower survival chance. There is a good chance both humans would have died therefore violating the first law
11:52 .. I’m the idiot with the microphone stand on the far right. Most definitely CTM 4L. How’d you miss THE RIOTOR WITH A MIC STAND?!?!? 😆😆😆
And yes, that was me as an extra. I can tell you more details about the set if you’d like. It was a crazy time. 😅
The chests turn red because that's what they do when they're connected to the headquarters, like while they're getting updates, their chests glow red. This is thoroughly explained...
So a couple things. The robot with the purse didn't obey when Spooner said "Stop!" because he was getting the woman's inhaler to her, therefor obeying the first law. The robots' chest turn red when they're being controlled by VIKI, which was a automatic update feature in the new version or the robots. The scientist left the hologram message for Spooner because he asked Sonny to kill him, because he knew Spooner would investigate the possibility of a robot killing him. And he hates robots specifically because the robot that saved him only saved him based on probability of survival, and not on who deserved to live more, and Spooner thought the girl should have. And the upgraded robots were destroying the other ones because the old versions couldn't be controlled by VIKI. All right, I'm done!
also it is super logical that the new robots would chase after a random human that has seen that they killed the old robots. they surely dont want to let the humans know about their evil plan
THANK YOU! An intelligent person at last!
Also they beat you over the head with the reason he hates robots for a good section of the film, what with the drowning and the car and the little girl and the HOIVEN.
Kaitlin Ellerbe Maybe done but you forgot that the robot he told to stop was saving the woman's life by bringing her her *inhaler so listening to him would harm her thus leading to the robot disobeying him because saving her life would take priority.
*not entirely sure if it's an inhaler but she couldn't breathe prorerley without it so I'm assuming it's an inhaler.
+Carlos czekalski ~ She didn't forget that, it was her very first point in the post.
One of the most boring action movies about robots? I have to disagree; I honestly really enjoy the movie. It actually wasn't all about the pointless violence/action, and actually had a good story to it.
I did as well
agreed and what is he talking about its ibdm score is so low he can fake his way through this, its a 7.1
Tailslover13 what you have a different opinion from someone else???? impossible
I found it entertaining (as with most Will Smith movies), but my main gripe is... well, its name. What does this have to do with Isaac Asiimov? Sure, it has the name, the three laws, etc. But it stretches source material _really_ far, so far that it almost competes with Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within for having the most out of place use of a source in any media I've seen. I don't think that Isaac's *I. Robot* had anything to do with a future cop yelling about how much shit around him malfunctions (though I can relate with that lol) and shooting robots, not to mention shoving robo-heroin into a giant GAL 9000.
Spirits Within was awful, but very few of the Final Fantasy games have much in common with each other. They could have gone almost anywhere with it.
2:52 You sure about that IMDb score? It's got a 7.1 rating, so this movie has been received pretty well.
10:05 This was explained that in the next scene. The robots run on a difference engine, and calculated that Spooner had a greater chance of survival than the girl.
Can we talk about how this movie is basically "Will Smith Presents Blade Runner?"
i really liked this movie I'm starting to think cinema sins just doesn't like anything
Michael Martinez they will sin the crap out of anything regardless of it being good. Have you seen Everything Wrong With Cinemasins? That video of theirs explains things pretty well
Nicolas Villegas They usually make it clear if they love or hate a movie.
Michael Martinez no movie is without sin
When will people learn. SINS DOESNT MEAN HATE/DISCONTENT. There isn't a perfect movie and they are just pointing that out.
Michael Martinez That's how it's supposed to be. I wouldn't be watching this if it was just a normal movie review. It's mostly just jokes I don't get why some people are getting so offended by these.
I, Robot is considered a bad movie?! Since when? I thought it was excellent. Great music, interesting and immersive future setting, a plot more intelligent than the standard sci-fi action fare, and Will Smith and Alan Tudyk at the top of their games.
nah it's the usual we-hate-nearly-everything-for-comedic-effect thing. Sin for that!
They don't just sin bad movies, their moto is "no movie is without sin".
Raava Very true. I just don't get their insin(haha)uation that it is widely panned, particularly the reference to bad scores on IMDb. It's got 3.5 stars and a 7.1 score. That's hardly bad.
TheRucksackman yeah but at 0:52 he says the movie is a giant turd so
He literally explicitly stated that this movie was a turd.
The red lights on their chest shows that they are being controlled by the central computer, it actually gets explained in the movie.
Watching this in 2024 hits different. "Can a robot write a symphony?" Umm....