رجل المائتي عام

AMAZING AND WELL ACTED This movie deserves atleast a 10 rating. it's full of good jokes, beautiful and sad emotions. I really felt like I was part of it , watching something beautiful unfold before my eyes. how I wish to read the book next.

This may be the most depressing movie I have ever seen. It is full of the rankest sentimentality designed to lull you into missing the message. Andrew, the robot, in a two hundred year quest to make himself human discovers the following human traits: 1. Our ability to laugh at ourselves. (he's a comic) 2. Being moved in the soul by great art and music (he loves classical) 3. Our unquenchable desire to create beauty (he builds clocks) 4. The joy of love 5. The desire for freedom 6. The quest for friendship with others (he searches 20 years for other robots like himself) 7. The creation of a special place for yourself (he builds a home) At the end of all his journeys and discoveries of human condition, the the one thing that makes him human is that he can die. Ugh! And the topper in a perversion of Asimov's wonderful 3 laws of robotics, his lover suicides by having her robot helper turn off the life support. Great, humans can die and robots can kill. I'm crying in my beer and watching Toy Story 2 again.

This film was based - loosely based - on Issac Asimov's story 'The Bicentennial Man', also printed as 'The Positronic Man' It's not unusual for a movie to not be as good as the book it is based on (which was certainly the case here), and my problem with this film isn't that it didn't live up to my expectations from the original story, it was that it completely missed the point of the original story. Before I get into that, let me first say that even if this film had not been based on any book, it was still very weak; Robin Williams has talent, but not enough to make up for such a weak story. This was just a series of cute little silly sequences where Andrew the robot flip flops between putting his foot in it and then turning on the warmth now and then. It's TV movie material, I don't know how else to put it - it does everything you expect, and nothing you don't, then ends tied up with a sweet little bow. There is little imagination expended on the character of Andrew...really, any Star Trek episode featuring Data provides a greater exploration of this movie's subject matter, and that is managed in less than one hour. One of the biggest complaints I had were Andrew's motivations for wanting to be deemed a man in the first place; why throw in the inane love story? Does Hollywood truly believe that moviegoers will short-circuit if they found themselves sitting through a film where the main character did not have a corresponding 'love interest'? Andrew did not take a lover in the book - Andrew's desire to be officially considered a man was all about being human, and all of the freedoms that come with being human. Andrew's journey was a very long one, but he always struggled forward for that reason - not for love, and especially not for the love of one person in particular, which I thought was a ridiculous throwaway and completely changed the point of the whole story. Andrew (kind of like Data in Star Trek) wants to become human because he feels that is a goal worth achieving; for all of its reasons, because he feels that being human is something unique and special. Of course, both Andrew and Data may have changed their minds about us had they been forced to at some point sit through this stinkburger. In the end of the book, Andrew chooses death because gaining mortality is the one last step which at that point separates him from humans. In the end, Andrew finally achieves his goal, and spends his final hours as the man he had struggled his whole life to become. He didn't tell jokes (we know Robin Williams is a comedian, it was forced and pointless to showcase that fact), he didn't fall out of windows and run around like an idiot, he never fell in love with anyone (except perhaps the affection he felt for the original 'Little Miss' who he took care of as a child, but the affection was platonic). If it hadn't been based on the book, this movie would have been simply another forgettable sci-fi failure from that conveyor belt of cookie-cutter, second-rate Hollywood drivel. Since it is based on the book it's a complete travesty; Asimov must have twisted in his grave when this thing hit the theaters. It has probably also ensured that fans of the original will never see it done right.

One did not like this movie. One found it to be totally lacking of any genuine insight or originality. One realizes that one was supposed to feel sad and touched by this movie, but one was more touched by the Police Academy movies. One thinks that beautiful actresses (Embeth Davidtz, Monica Potter from Patch Adams) and talented actors (Oliver Platt, and Philip Seymour Hoffman from Patch) will have to start a support group for those whose careers have had to suffer through a Robin Williams "How I am a better Human than You" type movie. One could not understand why Sir (Sam Neill's character) would think the audience is so dumb that he would have to say to Andrew Martin (Robin Williams) "You stopped referring to yourself as One" when the constant referral of one's self as One was extremely irritating to this viewer (er...one). It's like pointing out that someone has finally stopped dragging their fingernails across a chalkboard for 40 minutes. One would notice that one's self, Sir. One is grateful that Hallie Kate Eisenberg was in this for a relatively short time. One thinks that is the only good decision Chris Columbus made regarding this movie. One found the humor completely lame and it seems that the actors (besides Williams) did too b/c their laughter was extremely fake. One thought that the female robot dancing to "A Little Respect" by Aretha Franklin was the most horrifyingly awful 15 seconds of cinema ever produced. One found the characters to be one-dimensional, especially those who hate the android for no reason other than the trite script requires them to hate Andrew. One especially did not like Andrew, b/c he falls in love with someone only because they look exactly like her grandmother who he was in love with. Also b/c he insults a rival for his "love" based on physical appearance, and not the rival's character. One considers this movie to be cinematic wallpaper. A completely flat, monotonous dreadful movie that should only be seen if it is playing in the background of another, better movie. Finally, yes you guessed it, One gives this movie a 1 out of 10.

In 1976, for the U.S. bicentennial, a publisher asked several well-known authors to write short stories for a collection. The only stipulation: that the word "bicentennial" be used in the title. From this particle of an idea, Isaac Asimov developed what would become one of his most poignant and beloved stories. So it's a shame that the usual committee of fools in Hollywood got their hands on the tale, rather than someone who really appreciated it. Just as with the later "I, Robot", this movie takes a nicely written Asimov theme and repackages it for a generic audience with the taste, intellect, and attention span of a ten-year-old. There are a lot of poorly-made movies out there (sometimes I think I've seen all of them) but rarely am I as profoundly disappointed as I was with this film. Not only did director Chris Columbus miss the point of the story, his movie entirely missed the FEEL of the story. There was no need to have pointless humor here, nor a love interest, nor any number of other distractions (not to mention lightweight comic Robin Williams in the lead; this would have been a perfect role for an understated performance by someone like Kevin Spacey.) It's a pity that the executives chose the low-and-easy road rather than for once challenging, ever so slightly, their audience. A case in point: the profoundly stupid (no other word for it) scene near the beginning, when Asimov's famous "Three Laws of Robotics" are introduced. These were a recurring theme in his robot fiction, a logical hurdle the author placed in his characters' way to provide a scaffold on which to build the plots. The laws are key to the events in "Bicentennial Man" as well. Understandably, since not every viewer would be familiar with them, some method was needed to explain the laws to the audience. Yet rather than simply beginning the movie with these stated on the screen, they were trotted out to quite literal fanfares and fireworks. This silly approach seemed, frankly, a bit insulting. Implicit in the spectacle was Columbus' disdain for science fiction and all who enjoy it, as if to say (to all the non-fans in his audience) "hey, here's the silly premise for this geek movie!" If you've never read "Bicentennial Man, it's conceivable you may well enjoy this film somewhat, as a typical mildly entertaining Robin Williams vehicle. But if you have read and appreciated the story, just go read it again. If you see this movie, you'll only ruin it for yourself.

I thoroughly enjoyed the first act of the film, which was fresh, funny and interesting. My interest dwindled during the second act and I completely lost interest towards the end, which became nothing more than a sentimental journey. A simple, enjoyable idea became preposterous as the bicentennial man, Andrew (Robin Williams) became more human, acquired more feelings, and then - god forbid - fell in love. The love story wasn't interesting at all. If this was supposed to be romantic, the very idea of it attempting to be is rather creepy! The 'romantic' scenes were uncomfortable to watch knowing she was human and he was nothing more than a robot, regardless of his outer appearance and apparent 'working parts'. One also has to feel sorry for a woman who longs to spend her life with a robot instead of a man. That's just downright illogical and no matter how hard they tried to justify her actions, I simply won't swallow what they shove down my throat!