Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Dec. 14th, 2007

Saw I Am Legend tonight.

I liked it. The ending was disappointing, and I suspect that the ending I actually wanted was the original ending, but they went with this one to be more happy-ending friendly. It's not really a happy ending, but it's happier than the one that I wanted.

The CGI creatures were sucky. Something about modeling the human face they just can't seem to get right, but even with that in mind, they looked like CGI. Lighting maybe, or reflectance/radiosity issues. The CGI animals were obvious as well (also in one of the trailers-- it's like crappy CGI has become the norm.

On the other hand, Manhattan was awesome.

There were a couple of really awesomely moving moments, one of them just scary/suspenseful.

I'd say 8/10.


( 11 comments — Leave a comment )
Dec. 15th, 2007 06:05 am (UTC)
I agree with your review. Out of curiosity, what was the alt ending you foresaw?
Dec. 15th, 2007 04:06 pm (UTC)
I was hoping that after Sam died, Anna and the boy were figments of his imagination, and that he only realized it when he saw the butterfly tattoo.
Dec. 15th, 2007 03:19 pm (UTC)
After 3 years don't you think some of the flags would have faded or ripped? Where were all the bodies? Out side of that as believable as such things tend to be
Dec. 15th, 2007 03:33 pm (UTC)
Re: Manhattan
So then I'm assuming they once again passed on doing the giant constantly burning pit where all the plague victim corpses are supposed to have been dumped, including Neville's daughter?
Dec. 15th, 2007 04:08 pm (UTC)
Re: Manhattan
No burning corpse pit. And they made it seem that Neville's wife and daughter died in a helicopter crash.

They also never explained how Fred moved, and whether the trap that Neville got caught in was one of his own.
Dec. 15th, 2007 07:12 pm (UTC)
Re: Manhattan
I believe it was implied that that pack of darkseekers set that trap up intentionally as payback for his capture of the female.
Dec. 15th, 2007 07:52 pm (UTC)
Re: Manhattan
I thought about that, but they didn't seem intelligent enough for that. There's also the possibility that he set the trap and forgot it in his descent into insanity.
Dec. 16th, 2007 04:56 am (UTC)
Re: Manhattan
I assumed that Fred was moved by the seemingly somewhat intelligent lead zombie guy who created the trap for Neville by copying what Neville had done at the nest.

Really though I just can't understand why screenwriters doing adaptations always have to mess with perfectly good stories. Why the helicopter crash? Why the happy human civilization in Vermont? Isn't the concept of a new species rising to prominence interesting enough? Isn't the idea that the last human has to die to make way for a new society to rise out of the ashes an intriguing one? Doesn't the notion of Neville having to deal with the death of his daughter, and the reanimation of his wife carry enough emotional storytelling weight? And isn't the voice of his undead neighbor calling his name out every night, while vampiric sluts splay themselves out in the street trying to tempt him out to his death sound a little more intriguing and spooky than mindless angry zombies?

Is it an ego thing? Do they end up feeling like they aren't being creatively challenged enough without reworking the basic story, or theme of a perfectly good book?

I understand that a movie and a book are two separate things and that the movie will always be different than the book. Still, is it so hard to remain true to the concepts? I don't think it has to be.
Dec. 16th, 2007 05:51 am (UTC)
Re: Manhattan
A lot of the problem is because a book is a lot longer than a movie. Witha movie, you have to wrap everything up in 2 hours or so. Getting that much exposition in that time is really freaqkin' hard.

Then you have the studios, and their "audience participation" panels. "We need a happy ending to satisfy the audiences" my ass...
Dec. 16th, 2007 03:08 pm (UTC)
Re: Manhattan
Screenwriters seldom, if ever, have any control over the scripts they write. The produced plotlines (or lack of them) are most often the result of directorial choices, producer meddling, studio demands, preview audiences, etc. Many a film has been ruined by test audiences demanding a happy ending.

Having been a writer for a large corporation, even though I haven't been a screenwriter, I've seen it in spades. People holding executive power who have opinions, but no clue about the original material, the intent of the piece, or story structure.

Blame the director, the producers, or the studio (depending on the flick)... the writers only do what they're told.

I'll have to see this and then do a comparison with "The Last Man on Earth" with Vincent Price. Hey, Marmot... I have it on DVD!
Dec. 16th, 2007 09:53 pm (UTC)
Re: Manhattan
Except in this case it isn't all that long of a book, and even Roger Ebert doesn't understand why they made the changes that they did.
( 11 comments — Leave a comment )

Latest Month

April 2012


Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Tiffany Chow