Can Robotic Characters Carry A Story?

[Mastercylinder]

I was watching a video where someone was talking about the upcoming movie "Real Steel". He was complaining that, because the fights in the movie aren't with any human characters, that they couldn't carry any emotional weight or be of any interest to him.

This got me wondering how many people felt the same way. I know I can feel sympathy or be concerned about robots in movies, games, T.V., fiction etc., but why exactly would another individual not be able to? Poor characterization or just the fact that it isn't a human being and therefore unrelatable?

Say you saw a movie where most of the main characters were robots, a few were vaguely human others more machine-like. Would you be not as invested just due to the fact that the characters are robotic.

Are there movies you just can't watch for this reason?


Thoughts? Opinions?

EDIT: This is not my opinion. I think they can, I'm curious about what you think.

 

[popparik]

I think WALL-E pretty much proves that robots can carry a story.

 

[randomsix]

It's not about what a character is, it's about who a character is.

 

[Faux Furry]

Transformers (the franchise as a whole), Wall-e, Astro Boy, A.I. and the Mega Man series, for starters, say yes.

 

[R.Nevermore]

Well of course they can!

Portal anyone? GLaDOS and Wheatley are both incredible characters!

 

[Impluse_101]

Watch this, why does this have relivence? Because I think that robot is possibly one of the best in history. Next to HK-47, and WALL-E.

And yeah, watch WALL-E like poparik said... so adorable

 

[ZeroMachine]

Spoiler

You tell me.

 

[Agayek]

I think WALL-E pretty much proves that robots can carry a story.

/thread

Nothing more needs to be said, and anyone who has seen WALL-E and still says otherwise has no soul.

 

[Wharrgarble]

I grew up watching Transformers so... I figure they can! You know, as long as they're given the CHANCE to actually carry the story, rather than just be extraneous pieces in a human-dominated movie/game, etc.

WALL-E is another fantastic example.

 

[Raddra]

They just need a personality is all.

Full true AIs like transformers, Glados, etc can as they have personalities. It comes down to them having personalities.

 

[Thaius]

Watch Wall-E and I, Robot. Question answered. Wall-E a bit more so, but I, Robot does a great job characterizing Sonny.

Basically, think of any story where you would be sad if a robotic (or otherwise non-human) character died. Star Wars, Halo, Final Fantasy VII... well actually we wanted that annoying thing to die in the latter, but you get the idea. If robotic characters can get love from the viewer/player/reader, than your question is already answered.

EDIT: Also, Portal 2. Wheatly. The end.

 

[Dragonpit]

I was watching a video where someone was talking about the upcoming movie "Real Steel". He was complaining that, because the fights in the movie aren't with any human characters, that they couldn't carry any emotional weight or be of any interest to him.

This got me wondering how many people felt the same way. I know I can feel sympathy or be concerned about robots in movies, games, T.V., fiction etc., but why exactly would another individual not be able to? Poor characterization or just the fact that it isn't a human being and therefore unrelatable?

Say you saw a movie where most of the main characters were robots, a few were vaguely human others more machine-like. Would you be not as invested just due to the fact that the characters are robotic.

Are there movies you just can't watch for this reason?


Thoughts? Opinions?

Your friend has obviously never played Portal 2. Most of the characters were robotic, but they carried the story rather well. It's not so much as what you characterize so much as how you characterize it.

 

[infohippie]

Yeah, of course robots can carry a story. I don't see any need for a character to be human in order to empathise.

I found this tidbit on Wikipedia BTW: "Real Steel was initially scheduled to be released on November 18, 2011, but it was moved earlier to October 7, 2011 to avoid competition with The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn."

Now that seems a bit odd to me. Who on earth would be wanting to watch a film like Real Steel, but decide "No, I'm gonna go watch Twilight instead."? Not a lot of audience overlap there, I'm thinking.

 

[WouldYouKindly]

Characterization is possible no matter what the character is, just so long as there's some personification. Watching two utterly emotional robots fight would be weird but allow them to be more human with feelings, emotions, and creativity then you have a character that can be as good as any other.

 

[spartan231490]

Legion, anyone? his is one of the most interesting stories in ME2, and he's a robot. Look at Edi as well.

 

[thedoclc]

This entire question rests on an equivocation of human and robot. If the characters are unemotional and truly metallic without any possibility of being cognizant, I couldn't care. However, speculative fiction writers have been giving life and humanity to the emotionless golems and robots since pretty much forever, so such a characterization is naturally going to make humans personify the robots and care.

The same is true of animals. Simply personify a bit and suddenly it's not hard to make something we usually feel fairly indifferent to (say, foxes chasing hares) into a struggle we do empathize with.

If robot is taken in its original sense, mindless slave automaton, then who cares? Robot comes from Eastern European words which make it clear the thing is supposed to just drudge along like a tool. Sure, there's cheap tricks a writer can use (Companion Cube, anyone?), but then there's no punch for me when you do that. However, once you humanize the creature and give it some kind of consciousness, you open up the story to all the already-done questions about what counts as a person and so forth.

Which is the short way of saying if you give the character human qualities, even if villainous, then we can give them some sympathy. Consider the Predator; when we learn it's an honorable warrior culture, we stop thinking it's just a monster and start actually liking the horrible bastard. Their fan-boy made canon crossover opponents, the Aliens, get no characterization besides HUNGRY and so do not gain the audience's sympathy. No meaningful Alien on Alien conflict could be written unless you actually give them motivations, goals, and reasons for us to care - which means humanizing them.

 

[Vault101]

I think WALL-E pretty much proves that robots can carry a story.

damn right..I mean the romance between him and EVE was alot more sincere and touch thing the so-called "roamnce" of any romantic comedy

hell even more so than the notebook

 

[Vault101]

This entire question rests on an equivocation of human and robot. If the characters are unemotional and truly metallic without any possibility of being cognizant, I couldn't care. However, speculative fiction writers have been giving life and humanity to the emotionless golems and robots since pretty much forever, so such a characterization is naturally going to make humans personify the robots and care.

The same is true of animals. Simply personify a bit and suddenly it's not hard to make something we usually feel fairly indifferent to (say, foxes chasing hares) into a struggle we do empathize with.

If robot is taken in its original sense, mindless slave automaton, then who cares? Robot comes from Eastern European words which make it clear the thing is supposed to just drudge along like a tool. Sure, there's cheap tricks a writer can use (Companion Cube, anyone?), but then there's no punch for me when you do that. However, once you humanize the creature and give it some kind of consciousness, you open up the story to all the already-done questions about what counts as a person and so forth.

Which is the short way of saying if you give the character human qualities, even if villainous, then we can give them some sympathy. Consider the Predator; when we learn it's an honorable warrior culture, we stop thinking it's just a monster and start actually liking the horrible bastard. Their fan-boy made canon crossover opponents, the Aliens, get no characterization besides HUNGRY and so do not gain the audience's sympathy. No meaningful Alien on Alien conflict could be written unless you actually give them motivations, goals, and reasons for us to care - which means humanizing them.

there was the hive mother in Aliens, I mean sure shes still a "*****" but we see she is just an animal doing her thing, and she cares abotu her children

doesnt stop us from cheering when she gets spaced however

and Alien vs predator was silly....it felt like a cheap teen slasher film, I mean it was ok but doesnt hold a candle tot he originals, or even the more recent Predators (which was a blast)

 

[YoungPeaches]

I think almost any character could carry almost any story if it is done well. As was said previously, Wall-E is a great example.

 

[Fiend Dragon]

It's not about what a character is, it's about who a character is.

Very well said sir. It's all about the way the character acts that allows someone to empathize with them, and a character that acts and feels like a real personality can carry a story with emotional and dramatic weight will do so regardless of their physical manifestation, or even regardless of their actual 'humanity'.
It's easier to make someone care about a character that shares values shared by them, but a character with completely unusual values to the viewer can still root for a character.