| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Downtown 
"Welcome back, Billy Buck"
|
 Posted - 12/25/2007 : 21:26:02
|
| Meh. It was certainly a better overall production than the original, but it wasn't necessarily better storytelling. I think making the darkseekers essentially rage-zombies (that somehow can set sophisticated traps) instead of a complex society with a bizarre religion was kind of a mistake, it took an interesting element out of the story. The ending was very abrupt, it seemed to have just run out of story. And I guess you have to believe the (barely mentioned) idea that what happened was God's will, otherwise it's a heck of a coincidence that Anna showed up the day before he discovered the cure. |
|
|
MisterBadIdea 
"PLZ GET MILK, KTHXBYE"
|
Posted - 12/26/2007 : 07:10:38
|
I really liked it.
At least, you know, the good half of it.
You know what I mean. |
 |
|
|
turrell 
"Ohhhh Ohhhh Ohhhh Ohhhh "
|
Posted - 12/29/2007 : 00:15:26
|
| I thought this was a fun thriller - not a great story for sure, but nice effects and pretty scary. Watched this with my family after Christmas dinner and my brother scared all the girls by lunging around the couch. By no means a great movie but a good winter popcorn platform. |
|
|
|
duh 
"catpurrs"
|
Posted - 12/29/2007 : 05:45:59
|
| My assistant trainer saw it and wasn't thrilled with it. My best friend said she's heard from her other friends that it was good. |
|
|
|
silly
"That rabbit's DYNAMITE."
|
Posted - 12/29/2007 : 20:13:45
|
I liked it. I'm also a Will Smith fan, so whatever that means. If you don't like him (at least some), you'll not like the movie, since he is pretty much it for most of the film.
Love the shots of NYC, and the way they don't really tell you what happened as much as let you fill in the blanks with snippets of flashback and things you see in the frame (newspapers stuck on bulletin boards, etc.) |
|
|
|
Rovark 
"Luck-pushing, rule-bending, chance-taking reviewer"
|
Posted - 12/31/2007 : 21:51:30
|
Saw this yesterday and it was a good 3 and-a-half star film. Unfortunately we don't do halves here, so it gets 3 stars.
The cinema was pretty well attended for a sunday afternoon and I thought I've seen better films, less full. Then I realised why. There really is nothing else on. There's no competition. The only other film for 'grown ups' at any of my 3 local multi-screens is "We Own The Night" Everything else is family or kiddie orientated. Jesse James was on 1 week last month and then dissapeared. I missed it. I'm pretty sure if it had been released now it would have attracted more interest.
Switch off brain and enjoy the ride, just ignore the whole "God arranged the happy-ish ending for a few hundred people after allowing the extermination of the other 5 Billion" issue.
|
|
|
|
bife
"Winners never quit ... fwfr ... "
|
Posted - 01/01/2008 : 00:46:08
|
*** BOOK AND FILM SPOILERS ***
I hate to ask it ... but ... why change the ending from the book?
The book, one of my favourites, is actually decidedly average in many respects, what sets it up as above the norm was the ending - Neville's realisation of his place in the new world, his conclusion that he is, indeed, 'a legend' within it, his death as the last uninfected human marking the beginning of a new civilisation amongst the vampires
I saw the trailers for the film and wasn't epecting much - it looked like it destroyed most of the story from the book. So I was pleasantly surprised, right up to 15 minutes from the end, that although it did deviate significantly from the original story it did seem to be sticking true to the major precepts of the book, and in fact managed to successfully improve on a number of 'plot weaknesses' existing in book.
About 15 minutes from the end it began to dawn on me that Anna wasn't going to be a vampire after all - I'd been struggling with why she'd saved him from the vampires (now more like zombies) when her role in the book had been to lure him to them - and that there was going to be a crappy hollywood ending.
Even if this hadn't been derived from an original story, what the hell was that ending? When a perfect ending had already been written, it becomes doubly inexcusable to have such a wishy-washy nonsense
Yes, this was better than I expected, it was an anjoyable 90 minute action flick. But it could have been so so much more, and the sad thing is, it nearly was.
For anybody who hasn't read it - dig out the book. Admittedly far from a literary classic, and with its own plot weaknesses, it is nevertheless far superior to this version. |
Edited by - bife on 01/01/2008 00:49:48 |
|
|
|
Downtown
"Welcome back, Billy Buck"
|
Posted - 01/01/2008 : 01:10:50
|
quote:
I hate to ask it ... but ... why change the ending from the book?
Because it's not a film version of the book, it's a remake of the first film based on the book. It has a very similar ending to the original film, so I guess your question is about 30 years too late.
Anyway, it's a little silly to ask why Hollywood would want an "everything gets fixed" happy ending. |
|
|
|
silly
"That rabbit's DYNAMITE."
|
Posted - 01/02/2008 : 22:48:21
|
quote:
Originally posted by 16-0
Because it's not a film version of the book, it's a remake of the first film based on the book.
It was also in the works for about fifteen years (according to one of those "specials" where the actors and directors talk about the great movie they just made). Considering how many people have had a hand in it at some point, I thought it came out quite well.
It was supposed to have Arnie the Android as Neville and Michael "blow shit up" Bay directing, at one point. |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 01/05/2008 : 19:10:30
|
I Am Legend
Stopped reading the above when I got to bife's post - I had wondered whether to read the book and now might, for the contrast.
I enjoyed it, although it fell flat in various ways. Smith's character descending into mild insanity is very plausible but not convincingly portrayed. The God stuff is indeed only touched on and therefore seems a bit pointless, as do the woman and child. The survivors' camp at the end is just dull. |
|
|
|
benj clews
"...."
|
Posted - 01/05/2008 : 19:27:23
|
I enjoyed it until the whole God thing came in and then I thought "Oh... it's one of those films". I seriously think that, just like with violence, etc... there should be a warning about films with such messages. After all, couldn't this be seen as insulting to those religeons that don't believe in one (or any) God? I dunno... maybe I'm just waffling now, but I really was enjoying it until that element came in.
Oh another note, if Neville was working on a cure and convinced he would one day find it, why didn't he stick the dog in a little cage until he had? |
|
|
|
Animal Mutha 
"Who would've thunk it?"
|
Posted - 01/05/2008 : 19:56:31
|
quote:
Originally posted by benj clews
Oh another note, if Neville was working on a cure and convinced he would one day find it, why didn't he stick the dog in a little cage until he had?
I was thinking the exact same thing. Maybe if he had, I wouldn't have got something in my eye at that bit  |
|
|
|
bife
"Winners never quit ... fwfr ... "
|
Posted - 01/06/2008 : 01:56:34
|
quote:
Originally posted by Animal Mutha
quote:
Originally posted by benj clews
Oh another note, if Neville was working on a cure and convinced he would one day find it, why didn't he stick the dog in a little cage until he had?
I was thinking the exact same thing. Maybe if he had, I wouldn't have got something in my eye at that bit
The whole 'Neville saves the world' thing was badly thought through nonsense.
He was immune, and the reason was his blood.
He spent years analysing his blood to find out why he was immune, finally discovered a cure based on something in his blood, he injects an infected girl with it, she is cured, her blood is now 'normal', or at least has the same benefit that his blood has, and his contribution to the human race is then what?
He gives the 'safe colony' a sample of her blood!
For what? So that they can start the same years of research that he did? Except that they don't have the leading specialist in the country any more ...
Just bollox. Happy ending bollox! |
|
|
|
Beanmimo
"August review site"
|
Posted - 01/08/2008 : 15:26:22
|
Spoilers
I've always had trouble with the Book vs Film debate. Switching perspectives as I get older, back AND forth. Sometimes watching the movie first and other times having read the book first.
But lately I have come to the conclusion that it doesn't matter if the movie deviates from the book as long as the movie works within itself.
I didn't read the book.
In this case I enjoyed 'I am Legend', in spite of Smith's lack of acting enthusiasm in the lead role yet there was enough going on around him to support that. I mean the overgrown NYC, the animal and his friends the mannequins and his sense of isolation.
The Infected were a little over the top (Giant Gollums anyone??) but sure wasn't it a Hollywood blockbuster. And there were a few times that I jumped halfway out of my seat.
Though I would have preferred it if the Brazilian lady and her young companion had turned out to be figments of his imagination and he was alone to face The Infected...but that is the storyteller in me coming out...enough of that! |
Edited by - Beanmimo on 01/08/2008 15:28:08 |
|
|
|
silly
"That rabbit's DYNAMITE."
|
Posted - 01/08/2008 : 15:39:50
|
I loved the NYC scenery, I'm a bit of a nut for end-of-world scenarios.
It seemed to me that Will was trying to keep in the "isolated survivor" mindset, instead of his usual Men-in-Black persona. It worked for me - the counting everything, timing everything, rituals of the day (exercise, explore, etc)
My favorite bit (spoiler) was when he went nuts over the bacon he was saving. I've got a bit of that in me, too  |
|
|
|
Beanmimo
"August review site"
|
Posted - 01/08/2008 : 16:08:49
|
The Shrek allegory was kind of funny too,
It's MY Swamp... |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
I Am Legend (spoilers)
