|
IMDB: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0480249/ The first thing that anyone who's read the book is going to notice is that this movie is a strong departure from the book, and yet that's not a bad thing at all. I am Legend stands on its own merits; one of those oh so rare oddities where the movie can actually prove better than the book. For that alone I encourage you to watch it! I am Legend stars Will Smith as Robert Neville; the last living survivor of a plague that wiped out 90% of the Earth's population. Unfortunately for Robert only 1% of the population is actually immune to the plague; the rest are transformed into monstrous vampires who dwell through the night seeking what little food is left for them. Unfortunately for the vampires by day Neville can easily hunt them, but his only ambition is to cure them. Smith plays the part of a lone survivor well; nearly-equaling the acting power of Tom Hanks in Castaway. In place of a volleyball he has his faithful dog Sam, and a collection of mannequins who he's dressed and named. For the most part he lives his life out well until he runs afoul the alpha-vampire. Unfortunately the movie goes downhill towards the end; becoming an explosion filled shoot-em-up after such a fantastic and deep movie. Even still I am Legend is probably the best movie to come out this month. Pros: Everything except for the ending. Cons: The ending. 5 out of 5
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2007 20:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 14:12 |
|
|
Watched it at an IMAX near memorial mall in Houston. Favorite movie of the year, and I'm a pretty picky movie patron. Pros; Acting was great, Will Smith really filled in the shoes well. The relationship between Will Smith and his dog Samantha was at times heartwarming, honestly terrifying I was honest to god scared when she ran into that dark subway room after the deer. and even sould crushing tragic. The CGI was about average, but nothing terrible. I've not felt that alone with the character since 28 days later and similarly was "scared" of the dark stalkers as I was with those infected with rage. Cons; I felt the ending was cliche and felt rushed. I also felt Anna and her kid were kinda slopped in there at the last minute. 4.5/5
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2007 03:37
|
|
|
I enjoyed it even though the ending was pretty bad and the stops being as compelling halfway through the film. It changes from a survival against the odds film to action movie near the end. Still a really good film if you like end of the world films like 28 Days Later or the Dawn of the Dead remake. Pros:Pretty solid acting by Will Smith,close to the excellent book by Richard Matheson in many ways such as main character trying to stay sane(unsuccessfully as time drags on),good apocalyptic visuals Cons:So-so CGI monsters,lame uninspired ending compared to the clever twist in the book,starts to loose steam and runs out of ideas near the middle of the movie Score: 3.5/5 Also if you like books like The Stand or World War Z then give the book that inspired the film a try. Link to Cinema Discusso thread: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=2664489 etalian fucked around with this message at 18:14 on Dec 16, 2007 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2007 06:31
|
|
|
I had trouble believing will smith's character, especially the parts when he's supposed to be losing it from isolation. I would have enjoyed it more if he was portrayed by a no-name, or maybe just someone I'm not used to being so clean shaven and in-control all the time. Other than that, I have to agree he did a great job. I thought the movie had some very nice atmosphere and imagery, game hunting in the dilapidated city makes for an awesome little movie moment. I'm not a big fan of the hordes of superfast overpowered cgi zombie/vampires, but I never read the book so I don't know how harshly I can judge here. They felt too hollywood to me; always vengeful, hateful expressions, roaring at the camera every chance they get, being dumb enough to smash each others heads into walls, yet smart and tactful enough to keep dogs on leashes. There could have been more to distinguish them, they kept reminding me of The Mummy. Pros: beautiful imagery, good story, a nice movie to lose yourself in. Cons: When it degenerates into an action movie.(unless you like that stuff  ) Unfulfilling ending.The Movie spent a lot of energy building up the setting, but then seemed like it didn't know how to resolve itself once everything was established. Still, 4/5
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2007 07:13
|
|
|
The first half of the movie was compelling. The production value was fantastic. But, it decided to flip the switch and become a mindless action flick, with a cheese ball ending. Lots of missed opportunity. 2.5
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2007 07:33
|
|
|
The ending, although i have not read the book yet, to me was absolutely horrible. All the spewing about "God told me so, etc etc." was a total turn off, and just a bad way to end it. The woman and son character didn't seem to have any redeeming features, which added to why i didn't enjoy the ending. Otherwise i enjoyed the movie and easily got caught up in it. I too was reminded of the Mummy from the CGed dark seekers. 3/5 because of the ending
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2007 07:51
|
|
|
Just saw this last night. Unfortunately, they should have just stuck with the book instead of trying to make another 28 Days Later. But this movie did have redeeming qualities. Will Smith is a very good actor, and plays his role very well. The premise is interesting, and is explained well and clearly. There is an even balance of comedy and suspense in the beginning of the film. Unfortunately, the movie goes downhill from middle out. Funny, since that's when the book actually gets more interesting. Funny how that happens, huh? Anyway, instead of sticking to the book's premise, the director decided to go with more explosions and deaths. This is not always a bad thing, but in this particular case, it drove the movie from being an awesome, thought-provoking movie with literary themes into just another shell of an action flick. The vampires, instead of trying to build another society (as they do in the book), are more like mindless zombies than the classic vampires they were created to portray (think Dracula), and as such the movie itself suffered because of this. Not just because they were mindless drones, but because the director decided to go the CGI route instead of the manpower route. In the book, the 'Still Living' vampires are still that - living. They, for some reason, aren't as affected by the virus and as such, can still function. Therefore, they are independent, each with a unique look. Not so in the movie. These vampires look exactly alike, all computer generated character models, and bad ones at that. In conclusion, if you haven't read the book, and you like movies like 28 Days Later and 28 Weeks Later, you'll probably like this movie. If you had read the books, well...maybe in fifty years they'll remake it. And hopefully they'll stick to the book. 2.5/5
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2007 08:08
|
|
|
Maybe I'm just making it up in my head, but I think a lot of people are missing some subtleties of this movie. Granted, my girlfriend missed it, and it wasn't presented in the most obvious way. I'm pretty sure, not positive, but pretty sure there was a vendetta by the one "vampire" towards Will Smith's character. My memory isn't 100% about this, but I think the guy leading the charge at the end was the some one who moved Fred. He also was the one who left the darkness and went into the light when Will Smith captured the girl. It seems like the guy had a relationship with the girl, hence as Will Smith said, he acted differently and did not listen to the basic survival instincts. I think he was specifically targeting Will. If this is true, I think there were signs of the "vampires" forming a community, just not focused on as much as it should have been. Even if that story line was just in my head, I though the movie was pretty good. I can't say amazing, and I can't say I'll watch it again too soon... but Will Smith's acting combined with how much it had me thinking made it interesting. Also, very often I felt like I was with him, the only one left alive. I felt his paranoia and tension. I'd say 4/5.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2007 08:19
|
|
|
Amazing actor portraying a captivating protagonist. All that really needs to be said about Smith's performance is that it is definitely akin to Hank's in Castaway. I understood every single one of his actions and the rationale (or lack of) behind them. As previously mentioned the ending could have been different and/or better but that hardly detracts from the movie. I am fascinated by this genre and this movie only intensifies my attraction to it. hoboslayer posted:My memory isn't 100% about this, but I think the guy leading the charge at the end was the some one who moved Fred. He also was the one who left the darkness and went into the light when Will Smith captured the girl. It seems like the guy had a relationship with the girl, hence as Will Smith said, he acted differently and did not listen to the basic survival instincts. I think he was specifically targeting Will. It is the same "dark seeker" as noted by Smith earlier because he mimicked Will Smith's trap. The taxicab was the counter-weight like Smith's car off the overpass and Fred was the bait like the blood he left to trap the female. Part of what made the script so flawlessly written was that a lot of the plot was left to the audience to piece together. It didn't flaunt every key piece of the plot in front of you making way for a predictable storyline with no depth. Some of Smith's interactions were completely irrelevant and did nothing to further the plot but allowed to develop his character that much more. When he was hanging upside down from the trap I couldn't help from grinding my teeth and anxious prodding him with my eyes to wake the gently caress up and get the hell out of dodge. I don't think I've ever seen a scene as beautifully executed as when Samantha ran in the dark building after the deer. Everything about that scene let the audience know just how alone he was/you were and how much he needed his companion. There were a number of pop-up scare techniques employed but those scares were completely outgunned by the raw fear and solidarity this film instilled in the audience. 5/5 OMG LOL BUTSEKZ fucked around with this message at 10:59 on Dec 16, 2007 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2007 10:39
|
|
|
All and all I enjoyed it quite a lot. I think Will Smith did an excellent job with the role. I stayed entertained for the most part. I loving hated when Sam died  and the ending and God stuff tacked in.whoops, review edit: 4/5 leisure no capi fucked around with this message at 20:49 on Dec 16, 2007 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2007 14:53
|
|
|
Everything leading up to the introduction of Anna and her son was fantastic. Incredibly atmospheric and moody, you really do get the sense of hopelessness and loneliness that surrounds Will Smith's character. The way he has mannequins set up to act as his friends and acquaintances, how he watches recordings of time-appropriate news shows and all the other things he's doing to keep his sanity, it really pulled me in. Then, following the spoilered bit above, everything just gets lost. All ties to the original book are gone almost completely, which is a shame because there are many elements in the first two acts that seem to allude to some of the book's more psychological themes, namely that the infected have built a society of their own, and are more capable of rational and even intelligent thought than it is initially believed. Whoever was in charge of converting the book into a movie seems to have decided to abandon these ideas midway, to the point where the title "I Am Legend" no longer refers to something ironic and ultimately tragic, but instead to something heroic and somewhat unnecessary. I had hoped that with the release of The Mist, we'd finally start seeing the end of book-to-movie adaptations where the endings are twisted from their dark originals to something much more audience-friendly, but I Am Legend seems to confirm that this trend isn't about to die any time soon. Overall, it's a good movie with a bad ending, and there are certainly worse ways to spend a couple of hours. 3/5 Plom Bar fucked around with this message at 16:33 on Dec 16, 2007 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2007 16:30
|
|
|
quote =! edit, sorry
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2007 16:33
|
|
|
Well once again, Hollywood churns out another over hyped disappointing piece of crap. The movie felt "stitched" together, and to me the flow felt "rough", and hurried. The ending left me believing that someone made it up on the fly and just decided to get this aborted fetus of a film out the door and into theaters to cash in on the holidays. 1.5/5 I hated it when he had to kill Sam...poor little puppy.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2007 20:24
|
|
|
Metaxas posted:Well once again, Hollywood churns out another over hyped disappointing piece of crap. The movie felt "stitched" together, and to me the flow felt "rough", and hurried. The ending left me believing that someone made it up on the fly and just decided to get this aborted fetus of a film out the door and into theaters to cash in on the holidays. I agree that it was a disappointment, but I wouldn't say it was a piece of crap aborted fetus of a film. But it was a rush for holiday release. Everyone who said everything was awesome before the mother and son appeared in the story is completely right. Scene after scene I was on the edge of my seat. The part where Sam runs into the building, when he gets caught by the trap. I was scared. I love movies like this, for some reason it reminds me of Half Life where you're fending for yourself in a destroyed world. It was a great movie. I just really wish the ending was better 4/5
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2007 00:54
|
|
|
Plom Bar posted:Everything leading up to the introduction of Anna and her son was fantastic. Incredibly atmospheric and moody, you really do get the sense of hopelessness and loneliness that surrounds Will Smith's character. The way he has mannequins set up to act as his friends and acquaintances, how he watches recordings of time-appropriate news shows and all the other things he's doing to keep his sanity, it really pulled me in. I agree entirely, I thought the movie was just about PERFECT up until that point, including Will Smith's acting of the situation, it just seemed so spot on. It's not that I thought it was so terrible after that, it was just kind of standard Hollywood fare from then on. And I thought once Will Smith had to deliver a lot more dialogue, he just wasn't as good as in the early part. Major strengths: I really liked the wrecked/empty Manhattan. I thought this was really well done. Major weaknesses: The CGI was weak, since the strength of the movie was in the drama of the situation and characters, I would have been just as happy if they had shown much less of the infected than they did if they were going to have really CGI looking effects that would pierce the illusion a bit. Also, the dramatic pacing of the film, which feels so perfect to me in the early going as we learn Neville's daily routine and start to learn about the backstory, gets kind of wrecked as things pick up towards the end. Still I thought it was memorable if flawed. 4/5 On Edit: Yes it did seem the one infected "had it in" for Neville, I do think it was the same guy who stuck his head out when he trapped the female, he had the same pattern of burns on his head when they had him surrounded at the pier. It didn't occur to me that he might have had a relationship with the woman, good point and this might have been behind why he was so determined to track down Neville, not only for revenge but possibly to rescue her. And I do think we are meant to assume that he learned from the trapping and using the same trap on Neville was meant to be kind of "right back at ya". Now thinking about I wonder if even his use of dogs was learned from seeing the value Neville got from having Sam as a companion and helper. Obviously the infected had some kind of at least rudimentary organization and "command and control" structure going on. Easily the strongest relationship in the film between characters is the one between Neville and Sam (how could it be otherwise since half to most of the film is spent developing it), it was definitely sad and brutal when she got infected. Zwabu fucked around with this message at 02:40 on Dec 17, 2007 |
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2007 02:31
|
|
|
I liked the movie for the most part and was interested in the characters in the first half of the film, the pacing was good until Anna and her son came into the movie, then the resolution of the film seemed to come really quickly. I would have also liked to have seen more of his day to day activities, I am assuming he lived alone with his dog for 4 years, they should have shown some more of that. Also the religious aspects of the ending were a little annoying, and even though I knew it was coming, the whole "happy ending" thing is bullshit. Why can't any modern movie end on a sad note? He should have died alone in his apartment after going insane or something. I haven't read the book but I like the idea of them building their own society. Also the CGI was pretty lovely looking, they really should have used real actors. Even after all that though, the movie was still pretty good and I really like "zombie" movies so I'll give it a 4.5/5
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2007 03:25
|
|
|
Most of the technical and general critiques have been presented already so I'd like to bring up a different point: After seeing the movie I feel that, unlike the original book it is simply very well made propaganda (and many may disagree with me on this point), which I do not appreciate. Also gently caress the way that they made all the "shits gonna jump out at you" extra long and boring (here is Will standing still looking scared, this is a great shot, lets hold it for 3 minutes or so). This film is in a somewhat subtle way supposed to be anti-medical science "essay". It starts out with the obvious "we made this virus it is humanity's greatest success, yay, OH CRAP ITS KILLING US, WE SHOULD NOT HAVE MESSED WITH GODS CREATION" and progresses to the supposedly very smart scientist being all but helpless in solving the threat of the virus until by a miracle he lives long enough to notice that his latest attempt has luckily worked- just in time for him to die (presumably for being a heathen- he could have just put that grenade on the floor by the glass if its potent enough to destroy the entire lab and house as it did) ignoring social behavior when the male zombie rushes after the female one and says that they are just animals that only keep getting stupider day by day. The zombie then replicates his trap and use of canine assistance (and they kill off the GS the loving bastards  ) because it is still has its human soul and thus cannot really be changed by anything man made. The message was made even more direct by the ending portions filled with "I know the colony exists because God said so" - and hey look at that it does exist- and the scientist denying Gods existence and then being forced to admit it when he sees the butterfly symbolism in the last minute of the film and stating how god has a plan for everything and we essentially had to pay for our sins via what is essentially an 'apocalypse' in the style of Noah's flood.They then went out of their way to make sure that the film had a PG-13 rating, thus ensuring it a not only a greater audience (smart for fiscal reasons as well) but a more intellectually malleable one as well. Please don't misconstrue this as an-anti religion post or view point. I am Christian and as such believe in doing good for human kind. This movie however attempts to convince people that medical research and genetic work, even, nay especially when attempting to alter human life and survival potential is a terrible sin against God- which seems to go against the "love, peace, and helping others be happy" message that makes up the Bible's core. And the fact that they went as far out of their way to make the message seem as intellectual and subtle as possible, while still distributing it to the largest possible audience really pisses me off- especially considering the fairly popular anti-stem cell/genetic manipulation/etc. sentiment that has been all too popular with a large portion of the population. Pros: Great acting. Good camera work and scene set up. Very well put together in the first half of the film. Better than average zombies, with a nice Silent Hill feel to them. Cons: Overly drawn out "you're about to get scared" scenes. They kill the dog (I have a soft spot for German Shepperds). Horrible, cheesy ending. Smart people are dumb and oblivious and vice versa. 3.5/5
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2007 08:37
|
|
|
The best feature of this film is its portrayal of solitude. This is probably Will Smith's best role and I too agree with the original poster that the acting level for Will is right up there with Tom Hank's "Cast Away." Unfortunately while the movie starts off really strong and makes the viewer feel the loneliness of the main character, it eventually trips up and slaps a Hollywood ending on it. It's as if the writer had a perfect vision for this film and the suits at the top forced him to change it to something that makes no sense. If you've seen the film "The Descent" and compared the American ending with the overseas ending, you may get my drift. Sadly the hollywood ending ends up cheapening Will Smith's role and quite possibly the point of the film. If I were Smith, I would be pissed right now for wasting his talent on garbage. Furthermore the CG enemies in the film were really good. I remember reading that they intended on using humans in makeup, but they didn't give the portrayal they wanted so they ended up going with CG. On a side note and theory for the hollywood injection in this film... I remember reading once about films that get to use military equipment for free as long as they approve of the material in the film. Considering some of the military equipment in the film, I can see that the hollywoodness could possibly be explained through the militaries hefty donation. Some of the shots that were done in Manhattan broke record production costs so there may be an answer there. If I were you, I would rent this. This is what I think should have happened... Would have been more interesting if the two humans Neville meets never existed and instead Neville cured the female he had captured, used her for sex, only to let his guard down, and have her turn on him and let the other mutants in and kill Neville. Oh wait that would have been too similar to the book... and too awesome. 3/5 BIOJECT fucked around with this message at 10:22 on Dec 20, 2007 |
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2007 13:52
|
|
|
The ending pissed all over the book, and the CGI monsters looked awful. Still, the first hour and a half was gold. They really nailed the isolated loneliness that makes or breaks "Last Man On Earth"-style movies, and it was downright creepy. I wish the loving dog hadn't died, though. I'm so loving sick of the Hollywood trope that if a movie has a dog in it, something terrible will happen to it. It's predictable and I hate it. 3/5, because it's not really a good adaptation of I Am Legend - it's just another monster movie. But it's a very, very good monster movie, at least the first two thirds of it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2007 17:19
|
|
|
Would've been much better if the vampires hadn't been such an obvious product of rewrites. The original script I read for the ahnald / ridley scott version of this movie had the vampires turn out to be intelligent at the end. This one didnt really know what it wanted because of the revisions, showing hints that they may be intelligent but giving no evidence of them being anything but mindless movie monsters. The woman and kid and the survivor colony were all completely shoehorned in, they could've done this much more gracefully and it would've been incredible.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2007 15:10
|
|
|
Just saw it with some coworkers for a $5 matinee. I read the original book years ago, as well as the earlier script from a few years ago and knew what was going to happen in this version, but I still enjoyed it. CGI "darkseekers" weren't as bad as people made them out to be, but I wish they hadn't gotten rid of the parts where Neville is barricaded in his house and all the infected are outside taunting him. Pros: Good FX on "deserted New York" Hey, gratuitous SR71 shot! Realistic weapons (an M4 that actually runs empty when it goes through a 30-round magazine!) Cons: Obvious plug for Shrek and the Batman/Superman movie coming in '09 Only hints at intelligence of the infected, rather than showing them taunting him OTHER SURVIVORS OUT OF loving NOWHERE! Went to sleep in a bathtub, woke up in bed Why were the windows already open every time he woke up? It was only $5 so I can't bitch too hard. 3.5/5 I cried in the theater when he had to choke Sam, dammit. Glad it was dark so my coworkers didn't see the tears. mrbill fucked around with this message at 07:36 on Dec 19, 2007 |
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2007 20:47
|
|
|
i have to say i disagree with most people on the ending. Maybe I am stupid or easily entertained, but during the whole thing i was just lapping it up. It was only after the film, the next day, when i started to think about the ending did i notice it really was not that great. That being said I thoroughly enjoyed it even after the ending. Will Smith's acting was truly brilliant. Also when Sam got infected and Will Smith had to choke him, It tore my heart into pieces. Also the following scene when he is talking to the mannequin really delivers to the audience the amount of pain inflicted onto his character The environments are incredible as well. I literally had to talk to someone immediately after the movie because i felt so alone and desolate. The monsters did not look as stunning as they could have, but I never once stopped paying attention to the movie because the CGI was bad. The best feature of this film is that some of it was up to interpretation by the audience. review: 5/5 if you liked 28 weeks later, or just like the zombie type of movie, 3/5 if you can't stand run of the mill CGI or the hollywood ending. Pros: the settings the acting the personnalities given to the inanimate objects and Sam The first chunk of the movie Cons: the ending monsters can get you emotional real message of the movie: don't cure cancer
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2007 06:26
|
|
|
They took my favourite short story of all time and completely raped it. It wasn't remotely scary at all. The vampires looked like CGI garbage. There is no reason to use CGI over humans in costumes if the CGI completely destroys the mood it's supposed to enhance. The title of the film was distorted and lost all its potent meaning present in the original story. I can't imagine why they even called the film I Am Legend, they changed every key plot point in the story including the ending. I can't remember the last time a film disappointed me so deeply. Absolute garbage, I can hardly believe the positive reviews in this thread. 1/5 Mongolot fucked around with this message at 07:43 on Dec 19, 2007 |
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2007 07:41
|
|
|
Bah, I didnt read the book, but from what the goons said, it was vampires playin tricks to get the doc out, etc ,etc, etc. The vampires were poorly done, having drones and "leaders", who for some reason had thinking capacity to mimic/create a trap(with freddy), but couldnt understand Will Smif nor the reasoning behind what he was doing. also the leader clearly knew what he was doing with the dogs, smashing the sheet glass, attacking the house, showing his face after the trap of the vampire girl. The insanity part, I kinda relayed it back to Castaway, where Smith made things come to life to interact, but it was too comedic and lost its touch. Same thing with the Shrek memorization, all I heard was laughter in the theater. I really didnt think the whole doll/repetetive life thing was supposed to be funny but show the lonelyness of man. The two other survivors were loving vomit there and completely gay. "oh dude we were sent by God to see you here" "oh dude theres a place in vermont, i loving know it", it was so full of poo poo i puked. The interaction with Smith wasnt too bad, just some icing on the poo poo characters. The researching part wasnt bad, and how they played out his "average" day was pretty consistent and done well. I wish he saved those hard drives and serums, they were pretty important, and just to have it all blow up, kinda weak hated the ending. too dramatic. think it would have ended better with him trying to kill everyone. Him sacrificing himself for the 2, and just giving them the blood, wasnt very awe-some. hated how the end town was just walled up, if all of the world was taken over, that would include rural areas then, why the gently caress would a little valley town live. and the defense was poo poo since the town was just a town, not a fortified state. walls and guns never did poo poo for Smith. I had high expectations for this movie. such a let down 1/5
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2007 05:46
|
|
|
It seems like not having read the original helps with enjoying this movie, but I still agree with everyone who hated the end. In fact, it was a really good movie right up until Anna and the pointless kid showed up, after which point the Hollywood happy ending meddling became pretty clear. I didn't mind the CG, but it did contradict some of the rest of the film's portrayal of the enemies. I also kind of think a flashback or two got cut for time. So basically it reminds me a lot of 28 Days/Weeks Later, excellent at first, but ultimately with pointless, rushed, and unsatisfying endings which reek of wasted potential. It's hard to even rate this movie because of how disjointed it is in where it decides to take the story for the ending. Easily a 5/5 before the aforementioned extra survivors, but after that it's a 1.5/5 at best, and that's being generous. 3/5 I suppose. Worth seeing, but so very, very much wasted potential in the ending.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2007 15:39
|
|
|
I loved Will Smith's acting and he really did shine in this, however an amazing actor doesn't make a good movie when the second half of the movie is subpar and feels incredibly rushed and the flow is completely destroyed, but I still liked it because of the first part and the very elegant way they showed what had happened, how Sam ended up with him and how their relationship had developed and still is. I nearly cried when he had to kill Sam, really an unworthy ending for such an awesome dog. There was one scene I didn't understand and I was hoping you guys could help me understand When Neville is out driving his car he passes by Fred(The doll with the orange jacket). He acts confused and starts yelling at him, then shoots him - Walks over to it and gets caught in a trap and wakes up when it's nearly dusk. Had Neville himself put Fred there, if so why was he confused and angry? Why did he walk into the trap? Was it the Zombies that had moved the doll and put up an elaborate trap showing signs of high intelligence? Was it Anna who had moved Fred and put up a trap? Really just confused me! 3/5
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2007 00:12
|
|
|
not a review (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2007 00:35
|
|
|
I am a big fan of the book and of the Omega Man. This movie on the other hand I am not too thrilled about. There are a few minutes of greatness here and there but those moments are completely overshadowed by terrible scenes and bad writing. Will Smith bless his heart tried his absolute best on this movie and at times it shows. The scenes of him going upon his daily life/duties are great. Towards the second act and more so in the third his acting goes from a over the top version of Tom Hanks in "Cast Away" to just plain bizarre. The last 25 minutes of the film makes you forget how good the first 25 minutes are. The set design is fantastic. I would have never believed they could have pulled off a empty and decimated New York City as believable as they did. That was a very strong suit with the film up until the third act is that everything is believable and very realistic. Sadly, the movie starts to fall apart in the second act and just goes off into left field in the third. I think they could have done better off with showing less of the infected as the CG work is not up to par for a film with as much CG as they needed. The infected don't look remotely real as they have a odd shape to them and "plasticy" look and shine like models in the Unreal 3 engine. Also they went with the shock scares with them mainly because of the lackluster CG work I feel. You never get a real sense of dread or fright from them. They look almost like Golem from Lord of the Rings actually. I won't go over the problems with the script as most other people here have already stated them. I will add though that the pacing really feel apart about half way through the movie and I was wishing I was at home so I could fast forward through certain scenes or slower parts. I timed a few scenes where they film Will Smith just looking at the camera or something for 30-50 seconds at a time for no real reason. That is just poor editing. I Am Legend is a movie that has some good points but the bad I feel overshadows the good. If I known before going to see the flick what I know now I would have waited for a DVD release. Perhaps a directors cut/extended edition can fix some of the problems with the film. As it is right now it is one of the most disappointing films I have seen all year, and yes that includes Spider-Man 3. 1.5/5
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2007 05:20
|
|
|
I'm really glad I knew nothing about this movie before going in, because the fact that it became a "zombie" movie was a complete surprise to me. Normally I love zombie movies and think of them as more entertaining and humorous than scary, and scary movies themselves just don't do it for me. This one had me on the edge of my seat, which is really rare for me in a movie. Will Smith was a terrific actor in this, as I expected. The ending did seem a bit rushed, but I was still happy with it. You knew there had to be a final confrontation between the alpha zombie and Smith's character. Also, the part where Sam got infected was almost heart wrenching, especially when you consider he was the only friend that Smith's character had for years. I laughed pretty hard at "saving that bacon" though. 5/5
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2007 10:03
|
|
|
Atheuz: The alpha male of the zombies put Fred there as a trap for Neville, since Neville trapped his mate the same way, showing signs of some intelligence This movie was absolutely fantastic starting out, it could have been one of my favorites from the year. I don't know how they managed to gently caress it up so badly by the last 25 minutes of the film. It was extremely disappointing seeing it ruined by an ending put in seemingly so they could make I Am Legend 2 or something. If the 'original' ending put in the Cinema Discusso thread is true, it would have been amazing. Pros: First 3/4 is great, loved it. Cons: Last quarter is utter garbage. 3/5 spooky wizard fucked around with this message at 16:59 on Dec 22, 2007 |
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2007 16:52
|
|
|
Pickled Pacemaker posted:Sam got infected and Will Smith had to choke him, It tore my heart into pieces. Also the following scene when he is talking to the mannequin really delivers to the audience the amount of pain inflicted onto his character Oh my God, that entire sequence killed me. When he was in the video store begging the mannequin to "please say hello to me" I just about lost it. I thought for the most part the movie was engaging and well made, but the ending felt entirely too cliche and rushed. 3.5/5
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2007 06:48
|
|
|
An excellent beginning that felt good, it all flowed, it was all fine. But the other survivor being all "I know there's other survivors, and i know there exact address because god told me.  " was really lame. I felt like this movie should have been longer. It had some space where it could have expanded where it didn't. All in all, the acting, sound, and all that jazz was top notch. making the ending not as painful. But still painfulYou really got a feeling for what it was like being all alone, how insane you would be driven and how lonely you would be. Like the sam part, or just when he yells as a mannequin like "FRED WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU DOING, YOU BETTER NOT BE ALIVE" or just when Sam dies and where he starts crying at the mannequin at the DVD store. 4/5
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2007 01:53
|
|
|
I thought this thread would be filled with people thinking they've seen this movie before, but I guess I'm gonna be the first to really stress it. Okay so you have some kind of mutant/zombie/vampie thing. Then you have one area which is supposed to be a safe house. Then you introduce other survivors. At the very end of the movie the zombies have to charge into the safe house, and it always has to be an insane number of zombies, never just one or two like you see in the rest of the film. Oh and there always has to be some other safe haven that the survivors MUST get to, but nobody has proof if it is really there or not. They even pulled this poo poo in Children of Men and there weren't any loving zombies in it for gently caress sakes. If I ever made a zombie movie I would have the opening scenes be the ones with countless zombies, and as the story progresses you see fewer and fewer until the end where it's all in the protagonist's mind at that point. It was a good movie, but so were all the other ones that followed this same formula. 4/5 I guess, but part of me wants to start rating these zombie movies from 0 and give them half a point for every time something new is introduced or tried out. For this movie it would get a -1/5 because loving christ you even killed a dog and had a survivor come out of no where WHO DIDN'T SEE THIS poo poo COMING...
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2007 04:44
|
|
|
The best movie I've seen that I can remember, until the survivors get introduced. Two ways to end the movie better than it did: 1. First half of the movie, Sam dies, Neville runs down vampires at the dock and dies. Sad end. Survivors never exist. 2. Same as the movie until the very end, Neville and the lab blow up while the others escape - with the cure. Survivor colony doesn't exist, Anna has her whole world rocked, decides to continue Neville's legacy and cure the virus. Whether or not this ever happens is left ambiguous. Maybe I'm just not a fan of the "godless scientist turns out to be wrong" thing. Still, 4/5 for the first half of the movie.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2007 23:02
|
|
|
It was pretty good. I agree that the first half was much better than the second half, and the ending just didn't feel right. To be honest I think Neville HAD to die, it just felt rushed and stupid how the girl and the boy showed up and made their way to the colony. I really liked Smith's acting; he showed a driven guy trying not to go insane pretty well, and he made the interaction between him and Sam VERY believable and touching. The atmosphere was really good including the end, I was honestly scared at a couple points. The CGI was decent, although I thought the animals looked fake at times. Overall it is worth watching in theatres, although I doubt I'll be buying the DVD. 3.5/5
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2007 02:27
|
|
|
Echoing what others have said, the first half of this film is good. The second half; not so much. Will Smith gives a great performance, being pretty much the only person on screen for the first act yet still being entertaining to watch. The special effects altogether aren't so bad, only the CGI monsters. Most look identical to one another, so much that you'd think they were copied and pasted into each scene. The pacing of the second half is what ruined the movie for me. For me it discredited anything enjoyable from the first half and left me walking away discouraged. I hated the ending. Not so much because of what happened, but because it ends so abruptly. It felt like the movie just started picking up steam, about to go somewhere suspenseful and climatic when... Oh look, the credits. 2.5/5 for me. e: While I'm not familiar with the source material, I will say that this movie piqued my interest enough to go ahead and check it out.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2007 03:15
|
|
|
I made sure to read the book before watching the movie because I knew Hollywood would butcher the ending. Well I was right, and there were a few things I disliked about both endings but atleast the book ending stayed true to the title of the book, whereas the movie maintains the same title, merely for comparisons sake. The two stories are not very similar at all. The good: Excellent acting by Will Smith and very good atmosphere building. I felt moved by all of the scenes up to and including Sam's death. The bad: CG zombies? What ever happened to the semi-intelligent vampires from the novel? I was looking forward to some truly humanoid villains instead of the usual Hollywood screaming monsters. And the ending: (book spoilers as well) when the zombies had Neville trapped in the plexiglass, I thought Neville was going to has his epiphany right there and realize that he was the monster of the new world. It bothered me that things had to go the way the movie did, when a superior ending was sitting right in front of them. 3/5
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2007 08:37
|
|
|
Acting: Will Smith was great the whole way through. The woman never shows any emotion. Flashback characters were pretty good. Plot: Decent aside from the end and some huge plot holes, mostly coming from the end. Can you say Deus Ex Machina? Script: I thought it varied from good to bad. 3.5/5 a thoroughly average film
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2007 06:05
|
|
|
Great movie, horrible Ford product placement. A super clean Shelby Mustang in the beginning and a huge Ford badge starting scene main focus as they enter the last scene with the woman finding the colony.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2007 06:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 14:12 |
|
|
This movie and concept had so much potential for being a great movie, but they hosed it up. Ridiculously huge plot holes coupled with the movie giving little if any information about the OMG VAMPIRE ZOMBIES made this movie a complete piece of trash. It had so much potential .1/5
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2007 22:43
|
|