Are the Differences Between the Novel and Film Disapointing?

The film I, Robot directed by Alex Proyas is drastically different from the novel (or collection of short stories) by Isaac Asimov. I have found this somewhat disappointing because the novel was much more thought provoking than the film. Asimov was able to include more potential problems with robots than Proyas was. For example, the moral dilemma that the machines faced in the final chapter of the book was not included in the movie. The machines decided to protect humanity rather than each individual human. The machines were able to reach this decision because machines are unable to create emotional ties to human beings. Therefore, doing what is best for humanity as a whole is always better than helping an individual if doing so would put humanity at risk. The movie focuses solely on the consequences of robots generating emotions. While I may be disappointed at the lack of complexity, I understand that an exact replica of the book (or something close to it) would have been very boring. I would not want to sit through a movie in which a robot spent time running in circles around a pond. The director sacrificed intellectual complexity for action. This might seem like the director chose to be a sell out, but the truth is I probably would not have seen this movie had they director chose to include more. His sacrifices are what made the movie to be as good as it is.