It seems to me the only thing different is that theres not a robot with flesh and blood like the Terminator movies but they even tried that partially by splashing some type of weird rubber skin on thier heads.
The movie is based on the book, so what's your point there? "I, Robot" is the original work, and as I said, that would make most other robot invasion movies the copycats.
Whatever but the fact remains that they didn't make the film until Terminator won all of its fans and popularity. T3 released last year then I, Robot released year after
.....and they didn't make "Titanic" until 85 years after it sank, and Robert Ballard found it. What's your point? There were plenty of other "robot movies" long, long before "Terminator".
Besides, Isaac Asimov is a genius, and I'm willing to bet that nobody bothered adapting he book, because nobody could do it justice.
James Cameron didn,t copy anything he completely created the Terminator story on his own but now I, Robot wants to cash in on the success of Terminator.
You said "basically and early..". You put an extra "d" on "an", to make it read like "and", which read like you were agreeing that "I, Robot" was indeed unoriginal, and an early version of T4.
"I, Robot" came long before the "Terminator" franchise. That's all I am saying. Any similiarities between the two would be on James Cameron.
Where would that put Starship Troopers in the timeline of sci-fi movies? I can't remember the year of Heinlein's book. Not that this has anything to do with the current topic of discussion...
If that were true, why wasn't his movie released 12 years ago, right after "T:2" was released, and made so much money, and not after "T:3" BOMBED in theatres.
Take pride in knowing you're the only one that thinks "I, Robot" was made because of "Terminator".
Screenwriters aren't going to change the entire plot of the book and movie, just to make it mesh with an already existing project, and STILL call it "I, Robot".
Asimov's work came first, by 30 years, and to think that Cameron wasn't influenced by that book by some way is ludicrous. Even more so than thinking this new movie was made to cash in on a failing franchises success.