He came up with the 3 laws but in the context of a fictional story. In real world he made them, in the story/movie the guy who was the dead guy (who built Sonny) came up with them.
bws ----- Original Message ----- From: John Buttimer <[email protected]> Date: Wednesday, April 18, 2012 19:50 Subject: Re: Midkemia on tv To: feistfans-l <[email protected]> Cc: feistfans-l <[email protected]> > I read I, Robot thought the movie was on except they didn't credit > the 3 laws to Asimov which peveed me off. Change the story, fine > but give credit where credit is do! > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Apr 18, 2012, at 10:07 AM, Anthony Johnson < wrote: > > > > > Has anyone on this list read I Robot or I am legend and have watched the > > films? > > > > I think both of these sum up what Ray is saying nicely! > > > > Anthony > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > > > On 17 Apr 2012, at 23:28, "Raymond E. Feist" < wrote: > > > >> > >> On Apr 17, 2012, at 2:59 PM, Strider1974 wrote: > >> > >>> I personally never understood the la-la land mentality that seems to go > >>> like > >>> > >>> OK, we have the rights to this book but it is obvious that we know way > >>> better than the author how this should be done. So we will completely > >>> change the substance of the characters and the tone of book and make > >>> something completely different. > >>> > >>> For some reason they don't feel that that they need the fans to watch/buy > >>> the movie/TV show etc or that these fans are not going to jump on the > >>> internet and trash the production to everyone they can. I get that when > >>> changing the story format from print to live action that changes have to > >>> be made, but in my view there is never a reason to change the tone of the > >>> story or the substance of the characters. The recent productions of Terry > >>> Practchett's books and Game Of Thrones is proof of how wrong this > >>> attitude can be. > >>> > >>> Michael > >> > >> > >> Again I don't mean to imply that people who don't know how film making > >> works are stupid, but rather that ignorance of how an industry works can > >> lead to some very erroneous assumptions. > >> > >> "We know way better than the author how this should be done." Well, ya. > >> Otherwise the author would be a film maker and not a novelist. > >> > >> No one sets out to make a bad film or a bad TV show. Really. There are > >> some seriously fringy bits like Troma and the films of Fred Olin Ray that > >> are sort of in an "Ed Woods-ish" category all by themselves. John Waters, > >> too, but he's more mainstream. But there are people who can't stand > >> Quintin Tarrantino's or Tim Burton's films. > >> > >> So assume you've got a mainstream company. They often make choices that > >> are about what audience they're shooting for, or what the realistic > >> running time for the film is, or any of a dozen other reasons. You can > >> have a screenwriter who read the book and said, "I really like this bit > >> over here, but we need to lose that thing over there, and it works better > >> if the two lads aren't friendly rivals, but bitter enemies. . . " Your > >> milage may vary. Lord of the Rings, the Fellowship is a good example of a > >> bit that improves it. In the book, Aragorn makes a choice to follow Pippin > >> & Merry that makes no sense, given Frodo is the ring bearer and needs > >> protection. In the movie they have an interaction where Frodo convinces > >> Aragorn it's a better choice if he and Sam sneak in so he should go save > >> the pair. It is a small improvement, but it is better writing. > >> > >> Sometimes the train flies off the tracks and you end up with something > >> that just makes no sense at all. Alan E. Nourse sold his story The > >> Bladrunner to the studio because they wanted a cool title for Philip K. > >> Dick's "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?" So, what he saw on the > >> screen looked nothing like his story. Philip Dick's story was changed > >> radically in places, but it's still a hell of a film. > >> > >> And sometimes studios do things for specific reasons. > >> > >> You just never know. > >> > >> The only way to look at it is what Kingsley Amis said after the premier of > >> the film based on his first book, Lucky Jim. A lady friend said after, > >> "Oh, you poor dear. What horrible things they did to your book." His > >> reply: "Why, nonsense. Not one word on the page of my book has changed." > >> It was actually a decent film; it just wasn't his book. > >> > >> Best, R E.F. > >> > >> > >> ---- > >> www.crydee.com > >> > >> Never attribute to malice what can satisfactorily be explained away by > >> stupidity. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > >
