View Full Version : I Am Legend
Madcap
12-24-2007, 02:35 PM
The book version of I am Legend is the original apocalyptic zombie story.
Smith's film will probably grow on me (It didn't take long for I Robot to do so, despite not being based on the book at all), it just irks me that in three movie treatments, not one has gotten the story right.
AudreyLeigh
12-24-2007, 03:03 PM
Then again its a movie and most all movies ive seen dont make sense in some parts of the movie .
Flash back to War of the Worlds - when all electronics stop working yet someone drops their camcorder and its still recording and we look thru the screen to see whats going on.... uhm, hello?! If all batteries stop working the camcorder wouldnt be working either.
Small things like that irritate me in movies....
Madcap
12-24-2007, 03:09 PM
Flash back to War of the Worlds - when all electronics stop working yet someone drops their camcorder and its still recording and we look thru the screen to see whats going on.... uhm, hello?! If all batteries stop working the camcorder wouldnt be working either.
Small things like that irritate me in movies....
THAT irritated you in WotW? How about the entire US military getting nuked over that Hill, and the one teenage boy who runs away from his dad and over that hill (I'd prolly choose the aliens over TomKat, too) not only lives, but manages to make it to Boston before Tom and Dakota do?
PrettyCurlieQ
12-24-2007, 09:09 PM
Flash back to War of the Worlds - when all electronics stop working yet someone drops their camcorder and its still recording and we look thru the screen to see whats going on.... uhm, hello?! If all batteries stop working the camcorder wouldnt be working either.
Small things like that irritate me in movies....
I thought that movie sucked. I would have loved to hear it on the radio and be part of that crazy mass panic decades ago, but Tom Cruise ruined it for me.
Although I must admit, when I was younger, when Independence Day came out, I saw some crazy preview or special something about it on TV, and I thought it was a news cast. Apparently the anchors were discussing how space craft were appearing over large cities and how all the gov'ts of the world were trying to figure out what to do. I nearly had a stroke. But I enjoyed it when I realized it wasn't real.
madmaxine
12-26-2007, 05:33 PM
Spoilers:
I saw it & liked it for allegories about human interaction (how much we need eachother and won't understand it until it might be too late.) The part about Bob Marley was a nice thing to introduce to a wide audience (Some people still don't know who he was.)
As for the end, Neville was emotionally bankrupt after so much loss and isolation, what he did made sense to him.
PrettyCurlieQ
12-26-2007, 05:53 PM
...I saw it & liked it for allegories about human interaction (how much we need eachother and won't understand it until it might be too late.) The part about Bob Marley was a nice thing to introduce to a wide audience (Some people still don't know who he was.)...
I said to my bf after the movie: "That is exactly what mankind needs to learn tolerance for difference. There are so many people who have issues with ethnicity/economic disposition/religion/whatever... when mankind has to pull together to survive, we'll all realize how petty those difference are."
After the movie, I saw something on tv, I think the show was "Dumb Celeb Quotes" or something. Apparently Adrienne Curry posted a blog this year about how Black History Month is stupid, and how she wishes aliens would invade the earth so we would all unite. I don't think that's stupid, I had the same exact idea! (not about the holiday, just the unity concept)
xdamage
12-26-2007, 06:02 PM
I just saw it on IMAX. The time went by very fast. I am not sure if it is a movie I'd want to see multiple times, but it had me squirming in my seat a few times, and kept me entertained. The ending seemed okay to me.
needtodance
12-27-2007, 12:38 AM
I enjoyed it... There were a few better endings i thought of htat would have fit in better than the one they chose, and i disliked the "faith" subplot htat emerged with random mom and kid... but still.
The first half was beautiful, i DO almost wish they would have ended it when Sam died.
I've read bits of hte book but not hte whole thing. I can't find a copy. Though desperately i want to. From what i've heard, none of the movies live up... and I'm pretty fond of them in their own ways...
THen again, the only thing I'm a purist for is Harry Potter. Everthing else I'll be mildly interested to see different takes on the same subject matter.
And I am the biggest zombie geek ever, even if these were pretty tacky, IMO... I think that modern films rely WAY too much on CGI. This is where i think 28 days was excellent... doing "fast" zombies using actual dancers.... More eerie than all of the CGI made jumps in the world.
miabella
12-27-2007, 12:47 AM
ok, spoiler nitpick:
vampires with higher metabolisms and therefore WAY higher caloric requirements (probably something like 4k or more calories per day, maybe as high as 10k based on how well-fed they looked) would totally have eaten all their dinner long before three years had passed. it was the kind of niggling implausibility that was worse than the cgi-crappiness.
in the real world, they could have had higher metabolisms and been faster and all that, but they would have to have been VERY VERY SCRAWNY. in fact, that would have been interesting-- neville shown to be utterly frightened of literal scarecrows scrabbling to get enough food each day, and many of them feeding on their own starved dead rather than on neville or anything living. would have been a more intriguing movie-- the possibility that the vampires weren't even necessarily dangerous to the Uninfected.
Tara_SW
12-29-2007, 05:13 PM
Maybe since I haven't read the book I had a more open mind when seeing this movie today because I thought it was quite good, especially Will Smith's acting. I don't usually like this kind movies much either. But this one was well done from my point of view.
I'm kinda wondering why some people here are nitpicking about how this or that could never happen in real life. I mean hello, it's a fantasy movie! It's not supposed be completely realistic, LOL
miabella
12-29-2007, 05:46 PM
even sci-fi and fantasy have to follow rules of internal consistency. if it's set in a quasi-real world that claims to use at least a little 'real-world' physics and such, it needs to be internally consistent about when and where it breaks actual real-world rules and where it preserves them.
ultimately, that's why people nitpick. also, some people simply cannot suspend disbelief AT ALL, so the least wrong thing bugs them. there's also that option. and of course sometimes it is both--you're trying to suspend disbelief, but there's just too little internal consistency in the movie to keep you in that world.
national treasure (the first one) was a silly, implausible fun-fest. and it was internally consistent, which made it easy to suspend disbelief about the fictional bits.
Katrine
12-29-2007, 06:56 PM
Plus, people just love to bitch and argue and complain. Have you ever read the IMDB message boards? It makes our trolls look like stray kittens!
mushi
12-29-2007, 07:22 PM
This was a great movie!! Saw it last night. The only part yes was the last part. He should of lived so they could make a sequel!
Deogol
12-29-2007, 09:27 PM
ok, spoiler nitpick:
vampires with higher metabolisms and therefore WAY higher caloric requirements (probably something like 4k or more calories per day, maybe as high as 10k based on how well-fed they looked) would totally have eaten all their dinner long before three years had passed. it was the kind of niggling implausibility that was worse than the cgi-crappiness.
in the real world, they could have had higher metabolisms and been faster and all that, but they would have to have been VERY VERY SCRAWNY. in fact, that would have been interesting-- neville shown to be utterly frightened of literal scarecrows scrabbling to get enough food each day, and many of them feeding on their own starved dead rather than on neville or anything living. would have been a more intriguing movie-- the possibility that the vampires weren't even necessarily dangerous to the Uninfected.
Geek! ;D
I thought I saw you on a Star Trek Technology discussion board.
holiday
12-30-2007, 07:15 PM
I really enjoyed the film. And about this
ok, spoiler nitpick:
vampires with higher metabolisms and therefore WAY higher caloric requirements (probably something like 4k or more calories per day, maybe as high as 10k based on how well-fed they looked) would totally have eaten all their dinner long before three years had passed. it was the kind of niggling implausibility that was worse than the cgi-crappiness.
in the real world, they could have had higher metabolisms and been faster and all that, but they would have to have been VERY VERY SCRAWNY. in fact, that would have been interesting-- neville shown to be utterly frightened of literal scarecrows scrabbling to get enough food each day, and many of them feeding on their own starved dead rather than on neville or anything living. would have been a more intriguing movie-- the possibility that the vampires weren't even necessarily dangerous to the Uninfected. They aren't Vampires are they? Why all this Vampire talk. They were just infected by the new virus strain that fucked them all up. They were just crazy, rabid, mutant people.
Tara_SW
12-30-2007, 07:46 PM
even sci-fi and fantasy have to follow rules of internal consistency. if it's set in a quasi-real world that claims to use at least a little 'real-world' physics and such, it needs to be internally consistent about when and where it breaks actual real-world rules and where it preserves them.
ultimately, that's why people nitpick. also, some people simply cannot suspend disbelief AT ALL, so the least wrong thing bugs them. hmm. I see your point but I guess I am just one of those people who goes into this kind of movie knowing that suspension of belief is part of the deal. In fact it's a big part of why I am watching this kind of movie in the first place. It never dawned on me that some would expect a sci-fi film to be realistic. Another live and learn experience from stripperweb, my new favorite website!
Tara_SW
12-30-2007, 07:48 PM
They aren't Vampires are they? Why all this Vampire talk. They were just infected by the new virus strain that fucked them all up. They were just crazy, rabid, mutant people.I think maybe that idea comes from them reacting to the smell of blood combined with getting burned up by sunlight.
Tara_SW
12-30-2007, 07:56 PM
I was disappointed when the dog died, no one wants to see a dog die in a movie.
me too but I know right away something bad would likely happen with the dog. I had a flashback of "Wilson" from the Castaway movie. It was a similar type relationship except ofcourse that the dog was alive.
Tara_SW
12-30-2007, 07:59 PM
I think it was the Alpha infected male who set the trap. He had those two infected dogs on leashes and was right there at the trap at dusk. I also got the impression there was something between him and the girl Neville captured.
that was my impression too. I think what happened was Neville let his guard down some after making that comment to the video cam about them having lost all things human. He didn't consider it might be a trap when he saw that dummy. He just flipped out.
scorpiochic
12-31-2007, 04:18 AM
Definitely on the years worst for me.
hyzenthflay
12-31-2007, 07:18 AM
This was deffo one of the most depressing films I've ever seen where I also laughed quite a bit.
When he lost his mind on that 'trap dummy', I couldn't hold back the giggles.
I was pretty pissed off to see him draggin himself, especially when there were two snarling vamp dogs about to be let loose on him. I think I could've run on my hands at that point.