I Am Legend

Yeah

Yeah

ZFarms said:
because he can... why do it somewhere you could have before the incident? i'd probably be doing it too
Click to expand...

If I'm the only man on earth I'd probably pis off of the Chrysler building for alittle entertainment.

Think about it. Its really silly to think a guy is going to walk 15 block to a driving range when he can drive golfballs anywhere he can imagine. No ones there.
 
Like a couple other people here, I absolutely loved the first two acts of this film. I really can't even comprehend some of the complaints I'm hearing. With few exceptions, I was totally engaged by the slow build and tension. I feel like this film was incredibly well directed, and the technical aspects were all close to flawless.

Then, unfortunately, the third act begins. Will Smith is miraculously rescued in a mysterious fashion, and suddenly we're in a different movie. A movie suddenly overwhelmed with a weird science vs. religion theme that comes out of nowhere, a giant horde of ridiculous and unbelievable creatures (only one of which, curiously, shows any sign of intelligence), and a preachy ending that suddenly creates several new plot holes.

It's like Akiva took the whole movie off and then only showed up with his special brand of schmaltzy pap in the last 20 minutes. Sigh. Stay at home, Akiva. Move somewhere but Hollywood. Anything. Please.

I'm still very impressed with this film. Sadly, it reeks of a last-minute studio reshoot. I understand that the source material ends on a pretty bleak note. So, fine, maybe you have to make a change or two. I just feel like this was not the best compromise they could have made.
 
dougspice said:
Then, unfortunately, the third act begins. Will Smith is miraculously rescued in a mysterious fashion, and suddenly we're in a different movie. A movie suddenly overwhelmed with a weird science vs. religion theme that comes out of nowhere, a giant horde of ridiculous and unbelievable creatures (only one of which, curiously, shows any sign of intelligence), and a preachy ending that suddenly creates several new plot holes.

It's like Akiva took the whole movie off and then only showed up with his special brand of schmaltzy pap in the last 20 minutes. Sigh. Stay at home, Akiva. Move somewhere but Hollywood. Anything. Please.

I'm still very impressed with this film. Sadly, it reeks of a last-minute studio reshoot. I understand that the source material ends on a pretty bleak note. So, fine, maybe you have to make a change or two. I just feel like this was not the best compromise they could have made.
Click to expand...

Yeah, you make many good points...

I did like the film as a whole, but I stopped asking questions of it in the first act, so that helped.

In an island of 8 million (or more) people, one guy survives? One? I know that the creatures ate many of the living and all that, but the sheer mathmatics would suggest a handful of people making it so far...

When he found that nest, why didn't he destroy it? I know he wanted to save humanity, but these things were a very real threat...

Also, wasn't one of the rats getting better? Couldn't he have quarantined the dog as soon as he got home and shot him full of stuff for the heck of it? I know rats and humans share many traits (insert joke here), but it may have helped the doomed dog...and it couldn't have hurt more than the alternative, could it?

How did that chick save him, exactly? How did she last out there all that time?

As for the ending, sometimes sad ones are best...couldn't the lesson be that we should really be careful about how we manipulate science and nature, 'cuz it can come back and bite us on the ass big time?
 
I finally realized why the zombies didn't bother me (and since I know how much you guys care, I'll tell you why). Since I'm not a big zombie-movie guy, I don't dissect the look of zombies. To me zombies are otherworldly. They don't exist. So the fact that they looked all computery didn't have an effect on me.

Desica, but it's so much cooler when you can say, "The last man on earth." And the reason he couldn't save the dog is because then he couldn't have the oscar bait dog-killing scene. That's why these guys take these films! The chick saved him by using her super-zombie-killer purple light gun.
 
I might be mistaken, but I'm pretty sure he DOES inject Sam (the dog) with the antidote. But it's too late? I don't know.

And he does go over the math of the handful of people who survived with Anna at some point. Whether you buy it or not is up to you, but it's there.

I'm pretty sure he can't kill them (except when absolutely necessary) because he needs living ones to research... and someday hopefully to cure? Also, presumably he'll run out of ammo someday. I don't think he'd win a stand-up fight with a whole roomful of those things, regardless.

I guess I found the unreal CG zombies in this movie easier to believe than Charlton Heston's stilted performance in Omega Man. Yeah, they were bad, but it's pretty ridiculous in my opinion to let something like that wreck a movie for you. Unfortunately, if they'd been up to par, this movie would be a frontrunner for a VFX Oscar... New York looked fantastic and completely believable. Oh well.
 
dougspice said:
I might be mistaken, but I'm pretty sure he DOES inject Sam (the dog) with the antidote. But it's too late? I don't know.
Click to expand...

Could be...

And he does go over the math of the handful of people who survived with Anna at some point. Whether you buy it or not is up to you, but it's there.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I know he does...and he assumes everyone who was immune was eaten...but how does he explain the chick and the kid? If he really thinks everyone is dead, then who is he transmitting to....?

I'm pretty sure he can't kill them (except when absolutely necessary) because he needs living ones to research... and someday hopefully to cure? Also, presumably he'll run out of ammo someday. I don't think he'd win a stand-up fight with a whole roomful of those things, regardless.
Click to expand...
Dude...they sleep in the day. A couple of jugs of liquid Tide detergent and a molotov cocktail could work wonders on those stains....and since he was an army guy, he might know where to locate some explosives. as for saving them, there are plenty left to save according to his math...getting rid of a couple of dozen here or there couldn't hurt.

Charlton Heston's stilted performance
Click to expand...
This statement is redundant....the dude is such a ham, the Hollywood money men needed a Kosher butcher to edit anything he ever was in...

And still, he was better than Al Hansen as the gas station guy in Wayne's World 2.
 
Last edited:
dougspice said:
It's like Akiva took the whole movie off and then only showed up with his special brand of schmaltzy pap in the last 20 minutes. Sigh. Stay at home, Akiva. Move somewhere but Hollywood. Anything. Please..
Click to expand...

I've always thought he's the most overrated writer in Hollywood. He's the Joe Eszterhas of our time.
 
DeSica said:
Could be...

Yeah, I know he does...and he assumes everyone who was immune was eaten...but how does he explain the chick and the kid? If he really thinks everyone is dead, then who is he transmitting to....?
Click to expand...

This is a good point. However, I think you can introduce the element of denial - a powerful human defense mechanism - into the mix. Deep down he truly believes everyone is dead, but he's in denial about it - hence the transmission.

Or you could make the argument that he never truly believed he would see anyone again - hence his irrational lashing out at the woman that everybody's dead.
 
I had no problem buying into the transmission and everything that goes along with it. After all, in a world with no social interaction, what could be more important than routine (especially for a military man)? That just might be enough to keep you going.

You're right, DeSica, he could kill them if he wanted to. But I think it's important to keep in mind that he really DOES believe that he can save them, restore civilization.

Anyway, I've defended this movie enough. I thought it was quite good, but a satisfying conclusion short of being great, and yes, it has at least a handful of plot holes and lingering questions. Still, I'd rather watch a movie that leaves you with a few questions than one that tries to answer every single one, any day.


I dream of someday seeing a movie written by Akiva Goldsman, directed by Michael Bay. I just want to sit back and watch the universe implode.
 
Well he and Bruckheimer can fight it out.


FYI Blaine, your quote is slightly wrong. It's "If it ain't, it'll do 'til the mess gets here." Terrific, terrific movie.
 
brianluce said:
I've always thought he's the most overrated writer in Hollywood. He's the Joe Eszterhas of our time.
Click to expand...

Apt comparison. He and David Koepp are really very mediocre writers. Their only talents are providing concepts and structures that allow good directors to sink their teeth into. But on a scene per scene basis, their dialogue and dramatic craft is workman-like at best, terrible at worst.
 
I still am left with the feeling that they didn't complete the special effects passes on the zombies.

It looks like they stopped rendering half way through.
 
SPZ said:
4- The Infected are capable of climbing tall buildings, but are not capable to invade the colony's walls...
Click to expand...

The colony's real protection is it's distance from anything else. What Zombie/Vampire in their right mind is going to venture out that far away from shelter (from the sun) just to look around?


The CGI zombie/vampires were a total let down. If they look that bad on the big screen you can be assured they will look even more cartoonish on DVD. 20 years ago they would have found actors with natural extreme bone structure (or even deformations) and then start designing makup to exaggerate it (Rocketeer). This is still the way it should be approached IMHO. CGI should be a last resort, not a scene staple.

It seems to me they wanted to change the underlying bone structure of the gouls to make them even more goulish. Trouble is it really didn't fit the story: it was a recently contracted virus, so how in the world will it change bone structure? If its fantacy, then run with it, but if you are trying to make it realistic then you have to confine yourself to every realistic detail of the story.

Bob
 
Bob Gruen said:
It seems to me they wanted to change the underlying bone structure of the gouls to make them even more goulish. Trouble is it really didn't fit the story: it was a recently contracted virus, so how in the world will it change bone structure? If its fantacy, then run with it, but if you are trying to make it realistic then you have to confine yourself to every realistic detail of the story.

Bob
Click to expand...

It always bothers me in films like this how much different infected humans are then regular humans. Not only bone structure but also how athletic they become, towards the climax when the zombies are running at the house and climbing up the sides they are doing acrobatic feats that only a few humans can preform yet they all seem to be experts.


The zombie CGI bothered me a bit but I was more bothered by some of the city shots, specifically when he's driving, the car seems so disconnected from the ground...
 
I really enjoyed the film up until its final 2 minutes. Yes there are a number of things that probably would have worked better (linear intro instead of flashbacks, human actors playing the vampires, non-appalling ending etc.). But the tension, and sense of isolation that the film built up worked really well. I think Smith did a great job of carrying the film.

The main problem it suffers is its ending, I just got back from a screening and the whole audience (myself included) really bought into the world. Sure the vampires looked kinda rubbish, and the girl and kid arriving wasn't handled too well - but I would have forgiven it all of its flaws if the ending hadn't been so goddamn awful. The entire audience in my screening went from buying right into the film to: "huh?!" in the two minutes it took the credits to arrive.

I still consider it a good movie, just really let down by it's closing minutes.
 
Grug said:
The main problem it suffers is its ending, I just got back from a screening and the whole audience (myself included) really bought into the world. Sure the vampires looked kinda rubbish, and the girl and kid arriving wasn't handled too well -
Click to expand...

That's when the film kind of fell apart for me, I really liked it up until then because it was just Will Smith alone and I think he did a good carrying the parts where it was just him. Michael Phillips referenced Cast Away in his review on At the Movies which I thought made sense, because it really had that one man show quality about it like Cast Away did.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top