Just saw "I AM LEGEND" last night

[RP33]

That was a kickass movie if I've ever seen one. The suspense will just about drive a person insane.

will smith was great

but i hated the movie..

they RUINED the book, which was awesome..

the movie suffered from a few bad cheesy modernizations.. The Omega Man and The Last Man On Earth were both better movies..

If you remake a remake of a remake, and then add cheesyness to it, you're bound to fail.. hence I Am Legend..

like, oh, of course, the night that they all come to your house, you've finally realized that you FOUND THE CURE.. I mean come on, a 7th grader can write that shit..

Anyone who liked the movie i encourage you to read the book and then reevaluate your thoughts.. the book is completely different and superior.

[armin]

Got to agree with rp33 somewhat, I liked the movie but they somewhat ruined it with that ending! It just seemed so pulled out of their ass...other than that tho good movie.

[DAVIDTUA]

LOVED it!

[ono]

great film

[Douglas]

Got to agree with rp33 somewhat, I liked the movie but they somewhat ruined it with that ending! It just seemed so pulled out of their ass...other than that tho good movie.

Yes, instead of killing himself, he should have pulled the string out of the grenade, tossed it at the mutants, and then jumped in the coal chute with the woman and boy and all 3 of them would have survived. Another thing they could have added was showing them get the hell out of the city and to the town at the end. That would have made the movie just a bit longer (as it is kind of short).

[RP33]

Got to agree with rp33 somewhat, I liked the movie but they somewhat ruined it with that ending! It just seemed so pulled out of their ass...other than that tho good movie.

Yes, instead of killing himself, he should have pulled the string out of the grenade, tossed it at the mutants, and then jumped in the coal chute with the woman and boy and all 3 of them would have survived. Another thing they could have added was showing them get the hell out of the city and to the town at the end. That would have made the movie just a bit longer (as it is kind of short).

i didn't think the movie was short as a whole, but the ending was too quick..

you had will smith living his life on a daily basis and tons of his daily life was shown throughout the movie.. and then BAM the ending hits and everything happens.. this made the movie seem short because the time frame of the first part of the movie seemed dragged, and the ending was too quick..

the book is completely different.. there is a love interest, and she is one of the vampires (btw they're VAMPIRES not MUTANTS or ZOMBIES or anything else people are calling them).. the love interest vampire convinces him to take this pill at the end of the book which kills him..

in the movie they humans have no communication with the vampires and if i remember correctly that bitch and her son weren't even in the book.. completely different..

[Douglas]

Got to agree with rp33 somewhat, I liked the movie but they somewhat ruined it with that ending! It just seemed so pulled out of their ass...other than that tho good movie.

Yes, instead of killing himself, he should have pulled the string out of the grenade, tossed it at the mutants, and then jumped in the coal chute with the woman and boy and all 3 of them would have survived. Another thing they could have added was showing them get the hell out of the city and to the town at the end. That would have made the movie just a bit longer (as it is kind of short).

i didn't think the movie was short as a whole, but the ending was too quick..

you had will smith living his life on a daily basis and tons of his daily life was shown throughout the movie.. and then BAM the ending hits and everything happens.. this made the movie seem short because the time frame of the first part of the movie seemed dragged, and the ending was too quick..

the book is completely different.. there is a love interest, and she is one of the vampires (btw they're VAMPIRES not MUTANTS or ZOMBIES or anything else people are calling them).. the love interest vampire convinces him to take this pill at the end of the book which kills him..

in the movie they humans have no communication with the vampires and if i remember correctly that bitch and her son weren't even in the book.. completely different..

Sounds like the book was better. What about the older movie? Was it better as well?

[RP33]

Yes, instead of killing himself, he should have pulled the string out of the grenade, tossed it at the mutants, and then jumped in the coal chute with the woman and boy and all 3 of them would have survived. Another thing they could have added was showing them get the hell out of the city and to the town at the end. That would have made the movie just a bit longer (as it is kind of short).

i didn't think the movie was short as a whole, but the ending was too quick..

you had will smith living his life on a daily basis and tons of his daily life was shown throughout the movie.. and then BAM the ending hits and everything happens.. this made the movie seem short because the time frame of the first part of the movie seemed dragged, and the ending was too quick..

the book is completely different.. there is a love interest, and she is one of the vampires (btw they're VAMPIRES not MUTANTS or ZOMBIES or anything else people are calling them).. the love interest vampire convinces him to take this pill at the end of the book which kills him..

in the movie they humans have no communication with the vampires and if i remember correctly that bitch and her son weren't even in the book.. completely different..

Sounds like the book was better. What about the older movie? Was it better as well?

in "Last Man On Earth" the doctor's role is played by Vincent Price who i'm a huge fan of.. it's real similar to I Am Legend with a few differences.. I thought this was the best of the three.. "The Omega Man" has Charlton Heston in it, and it's set in the future, and is the most different of the 3.. this was my least favorite..

I'd check out Last Man On Earth if you had a chance clubber, it was cool.. and while you're at it, watch the original House On Haunted Hill with Vincent Price cause it was awesome

[Douglas]

i didn't think the movie was short as a whole, but the ending was too quick..

you had will smith living his life on a daily basis and tons of his daily life was shown throughout the movie.. and then BAM the ending hits and everything happens.. this made the movie seem short because the time frame of the first part of the movie seemed dragged, and the ending was too quick..

the book is completely different.. there is a love interest, and she is one of the vampires (btw they're VAMPIRES not MUTANTS or ZOMBIES or anything else people are calling them).. the love interest vampire convinces him to take this pill at the end of the book which kills him..

in the movie they humans have no communication with the vampires and if i remember correctly that bitch and her son weren't even in the book.. completely different..

Sounds like the book was better. What about the older movie? Was it better as well?

in "Last Man On Earth" the doctor's role is played by Vincent Price who i'm a huge fan of.. it's real similar to I Am Legend with a few differences.. I thought this was the best of the three.. "The Omega Man" has Charlton Heston in it, and it's set in the future, and is the most different of the 3.. this was my least favorite..

I'd check out Last Man On Earth if you had a chance clubber, it was cool.. and while you're at it, watch the original House On Haunted Hill with Vincent Price cause it was awesome

Will do.

[BoxingGorilla]

watch the original House On Haunted Hill with Vincent Pric

I thought the old lady was creepy as hell, but my overall opinion of the film is quite low.

[Douglas]

That was a kickass movie if I've ever seen one. The suspense will just about drive a person insane.

will smith was great

but i hated the movie..

they RUINED the book, which was awesome..

the movie suffered from a few bad cheesy modernizations.. The Omega Man and The Last Man On Earth were both better movies..

If you remake a remake of a remake, and then add cheesyness to it, you're bound to fail.. hence I Am Legend..

like, oh, of course, the night that they all come to your house, you've finally realized that you FOUND THE CURE.. I mean come on, a 7th grader can write that shit..

Anyone who liked the movie i encourage you to read the book and then reevaluate your thoughts.. the book is completely different and superior.

I heard there was an older version of it, but I'd never seen it, and I did not know there was also a book. If I had read the book or seen any of the other 2 versions, I probably would not have like it as much.

[Wayne]

That was a kickass movie if I've ever seen one. The suspense will just about drive a person insane.

will smith was great

but i hated the movie..

they RUINED the book, which was awesome..

the movie suffered from a few bad cheesy modernizations.. The Omega Man and The Last Man On Earth were both better movies..

If you remake a remake of a remake, and then add cheesyness to it, you're bound to fail.. hence I Am Legend..

like, oh, of course, the night that they all come to your house, you've finally realized that you FOUND THE CURE.. I mean come on, a 7th grader can write that shit..

Anyone who liked the movie i encourage you to read the book and then reevaluate your thoughts.. the book is completely different and superior.

C'mon, The Omega Man was the ultimate in Cheese. Being cool with black people must have been nouveau riche back in the 70s as evidenced by Heston's black girlfriend in the flick. And that ending... he died standing?

I can understand if you think "I am Legend" was a poor adaptation of the book, but it was just as good, if not better, than "The Omega Man". It was not a remake but a different adaptation just like with "The Thing". That was a second adaptation of the source material. They couldn't have remained faithful to the novella; nobody would be interested in that as a feature film. The ending was so anti-climactic. With a storyline that involves sci-fi and vampires you HAVE to inject some action, otherwise audiences will be bored.

Will Smith was excellent and at times his performance was almost on par with Tom Hank's in "Castaway". The CGI was godawful; I wish they had just used real actors. They crafted this movie to be right up the alley of a mainstream audience.

[RP33]

That was a kickass movie if I've ever seen one. The suspense will just about drive a person insane.

will smith was great

but i hated the movie..

they RUINED the book, which was awesome..

the movie suffered from a few bad cheesy modernizations.. The Omega Man and The Last Man On Earth were both better movies..

If you remake a remake of a remake, and then add cheesyness to it, you're bound to fail.. hence I Am Legend..

like, oh, of course, the night that they all come to your house, you've finally realized that you FOUND THE CURE.. I mean come on, a 7th grader can write that shit..

Anyone who liked the movie i encourage you to read the book and then reevaluate your thoughts.. the book is completely different and superior.

C'mon, The Omega Man was the ultimate in Cheese. Being cool with black people must have been nouveau riche back in the 70s as evidenced by Heston's black girlfriend in the flick. And that ending... he died standing?

I can understand if you think "I am Legend" was a poor adaptation of the book, but it was just as good, if not better, than "The Omega Man". It was not a remake but a different adaptation just like with "The Thing". That was a second adaptation of the source material. They couldn't have remained faithful to the novella; nobody would be interested in that as a feature film. The ending was so anti-climactic. With a storyline that involves sci-fi and vampires you HAVE to inject some action, otherwise audiences will be bored.

Will Smith was excellent and at times his performance was almost on par with Tom Hank's in "Castaway". The CGI was godawful; I wish they had just used real actors. They crafted this movie to be right up the alley of a mainstream audience.

liquid if you read one of my other posts i elaborated on the Omega Man.. and i said that it was my least favorite of the 3 book adaptations.. I guess i was just remembering my anger after watching I Am Legend when i first posted..

I also said that Will Smith did a great job in the movie..

ANYWAY

Whether you meant to or not, you basically posted the general idea of WHAT IS WRONG with film today..

"With a storyline that involves sci-fi and vampires you HAVE to inject some action, otherwise audiences will be bored."

"They crafted this movie to be right up the alley of a mainstream audience."

So basically what you're saying is that intelligent people read books, and that if you're going to watch a movie it MUST have action in it so that you're not bored.. That's the BIGGEST JOKE i've heard in a while.. This is the problem with film today.. anything "crafted" to fit the main stream audience is horrible, hence those aspects in I Am Legend.. As i said in my original post, if you make a remake of a remake and then add the mainstream elements to it, then it's bound to be horrible.. Sure it will satisfy the "mainstream" audience, which you unintentionally explained as NEEDING action to not be "bored" with a movie.. but the real film lovers will laugh at this movie..

See the problem with society today is reflected in the types of entertainment we choose.. Listen to the radio.. nowadays it's all about "pimps" and "hoes" and "rims" and "ice".. Compare that to older decades where the music could actually be considered "ART".. You know, it actually had some meaning behind it.. Whether it was political or not, it had substance.. Today there are very few kids/teenagers growing up that will appreciate music as it truly should be.. You went from saying "hey mom, i want to learn how to play guitar like George Harrison" to "hey mom, check out how i can shake my ass like those girls in that video"..

The same goes for film.. I think it's funny how many people say "I've never even heard of that film" when all of the films nominated for best movie come out.. It's cause they were too busy watching Bring it on Again 10..
The other current movie thread about No Country For Old Men, which won best picture, is about a film that has substance to it.. YES there was action in it, but it was necessary action.. it wasn't put in the movie as a reason to go see the movie, it just happened to be NECESSARY to the story..

To say that you need to ADD action to a "sci-fi" movie because otherwise it would be "boring" is a joke..

[Wadeb_21]

I have seen "I am Legend" and thought it was a pretty good movie, However I have talked to many that have read the book and tell me the movie is shite compared to the book. I guess the book was written in the 1950's and the story takes place in the 70's if I remember correctly. I'm gonna try and read the book someday if I ever have time.

[Wayne]

will smith was great

but i hated the movie..

they RUINED the book, which was awesome..

the movie suffered from a few bad cheesy modernizations.. The Omega Man and The Last Man On Earth were both better movies..

If you remake a remake of a remake, and then add cheesyness to it, you're bound to fail.. hence I Am Legend..

like, oh, of course, the night that they all come to your house, you've finally realized that you FOUND THE CURE.. I mean come on, a 7th grader can write that shit..

Anyone who liked the movie i encourage you to read the book and then reevaluate your thoughts.. the book is completely different and superior.

C'mon, The Omega Man was the ultimate in Cheese. Being cool with black people must have been nouveau riche back in the 70s as evidenced by Heston's black girlfriend in the flick. And that ending... he died standing?

I can understand if you think "I am Legend" was a poor adaptation of the book, but it was just as good, if not better, than "The Omega Man". It was not a remake but a different adaptation just like with "The Thing". That was a second adaptation of the source material. They couldn't have remained faithful to the novella; nobody would be interested in that as a feature film. The ending was so anti-climactic. With a storyline that involves sci-fi and vampires you HAVE to inject some action, otherwise audiences will be bored.

Will Smith was excellent and at times his performance was almost on par with Tom Hank's in "Castaway". The CGI was godawful; I wish they had just used real actors. They crafted this movie to be right up the alley of a mainstream audience.

liquid if you read one of my other posts i elaborated on the Omega Man.. and i said that it was my least favorite of the 3 book adaptations.. I guess i was just remembering my anger after watching I Am Legend when i first posted..

I also said that Will Smith did a great job in the movie..

ANYWAY

Whether you meant to or not, you basically posted the general idea of WHAT IS WRONG with film today..

"With a storyline that involves sci-fi and vampires you HAVE to inject some action, otherwise audiences will be bored."

"They crafted this movie to be right up the alley of a mainstream audience."

So basically what you're saying is that intelligent people read books, and that if you're going to watch a movie it MUST have action in it so that you're not bored.. That's the BIGGEST JOKE i've heard in a while.. This is the problem with film today.. anything "crafted" to fit the main stream audience is horrible, hence those aspects in I Am Legend.. As i said in my original post, if you make a remake of a remake and then add the mainstream elements to it, then it's bound to be horrible.. Sure it will satisfy the "mainstream" audience, which you unintentionally explained as NEEDING action to not be "bored" with a movie.. but the real film lovers will laugh at this movie..

See the problem with society today is reflected in the types of entertainment we choose.. Listen to the radio.. nowadays it's all about "pimps" and "hoes" and "rims" and "ice".. Compare that to older decades where the music could actually be considered "ART".. You know, it actually had some meaning behind it.. Whether it was political or not, it had substance.. Today there are very few kids/teenagers growing up that will appreciate music as it truly should be.. You went from saying "hey mom, i want to learn how to play guitar like George Harrison" to "hey mom, check out how i can shake my ass like those girls in that video"..

The same goes for film.. I think it's funny how many people say "I've never even heard of that film" when all of the films nominated for best movie come out.. It's cause they were too busy watching Bring it on Again 10..
The other current movie thread about No Country For Old Men, which won best picture, is about a film that has substance to it.. YES there was action in it, but it was necessary action.. it wasn't put in the movie as a reason to go see the movie, it just happened to be NECESSARY to the story..

To say that you need to ADD action to a "sci-fi" movie because otherwise it would be "boring" is a joke..

You're one of THOSE old fogies. Anytime people say things that begin with "The problem with music today..." you've turned into your parents, who turned into their parents, who turned into their parents, all the way back when the first caveman banged two rocks together and his mother grunted at him. The "problem" with music, movies, teens, etc. today is that the prior generation just doesn't get it. The same thing was said of the Beatles, the Stones, Jimmy Hendrix, Ray Charles, Elvis, Chuck Berry, Jackson Pollock, non-rhyming poetry, tattoos and all other forms of art. Art will always be diverse in that it is tailored to fit the tastes of the current age as well as having a minor independent streak that defies the social norm. There is nothing wrong with a movie being tailored to fit a mainstream audience when producers sink MILLIONS into it. They actually would like to make their money back on it plus a profit so they'll be able to make your "Michael Claytons", "There Will be Bloods" and "No Country for Old Mens". Those movies don't make money, but you'd probably describe them as being what is "right". Sounds counterintuitive, right? In order to have that you have to have movies that are formulaic in nature (which are still not guaranteed to make money) to put butts in seats. That's why I stated a sci-fi movie with vampires HAS to have action in it. That type of movie begs for a big budget and the source material is epic in nature. If I described such a movie idea to you would you not imagine that there would be SOME CG in it? Of course you would.

I loved "No Country for Old Men" but I liked "I am Legend" too. Sure it had its problems, but because it wasn't an artistic film up to your standards doesn't mean it doesn't have its place. I like to eat healthy food, but sometimes I just want a #9 from McDonald's. There isn't anything wrong with that and the fact they have over several BILLION served means there's a place for them. Ya-ya's (don't worry, it's only in Michigan and Florida) is healthy for you but no way can they put up those kinds of numbers. Let it be. Just realize that when you say, "(insert your complaint here) these days," it says more about you than anything else.