I Am Legend: Review By slysnide

May 24th, 2008 by slysnide
"Let me save you!"
  • OVERALL
    2.0
    POOR
  • Story
  • Acting
  • Directing
  • Visuals
I'll agree with most in the confusion that people have when it comes to simplicity and how much a film sucks. But having read this truly classic book that's had 3 filmed adaptations prior to this one, I must say that it's not even deserving of the same title, and is the worst of the 3.

The miracle cure for cancer? That was a clear cop-out. That wasn't in the book, which was more graphic and scary than this film. After all, it was a VAMPIRE story, not a ZOMBIE story. And yes, there is a difference. Just reference George A. Romero's stuff with Bram Stoker or 18th Century vampiric novels and you'll see what I mean.

It had it's jumpy moments, and was alright in that respect, but the ending kinda comes upon me and was sorta anti-climactic. Plus they don't even address the reason why he's a legend as being a theme in the film until the final moment. The reason they give is completely different than the one in the book, and overall, it woulda done way better for fans if it didn't have the same title. The reason of the title in the book was way better and cool, in that it was this: Neville was on a crazed hunting spree of the vampire's cuz he wanted them extinct in his area, but that soon escalated to something to do out of boredom and to avoid insanity, and the resolve to fix the problem. According to the semi-civilized vampires that communicated with each other in their society, Neville was a serious threat that had to be dealt with. The theme encompassed the whole story as well....Sounds a lot cooler than a lady ascertaining that Neville's 3yr endeavor to cure the virus as being legendary.

Fans of the novel must pretend to call this film, what? Like how about: "The Cure." (No. Too much) Cuz they'll definitely not get all the gore/scares and thrills and medical experimentations on innocents to find a means of surviving the future (which was bizarre and creepy) in this film. A change in the title is sorely needed. It brings way too many expectations from readers about the book, and it wasn't like a story that would be an FX extravaganza either, so it coulda been done.

Though even then it still wasn't that scary, and sure a story can be simple, but something has to happen as well. The plot developments are few, and the story is thin in depth in regards to the trials of Robert Neville. The only good development for me was the slow learning process of the zombies, in that what they didn't learn in 3yrs, they learned in 2 days or so. In the book, they never had that dilemma cuz they were way smarter than that.

And the flashbacks were only about 7 minutes or so in length, yet in said scenes, it's clearly stated that the quarantine should only last 2 weeks, not forever!

And sure, that woulda worked if they told it chronologically, but even then viewers would still know where the world would end up, so it lacked a lot in the flashbacks. Just think of all the things that coulda happened in the transition that didn't. It'd be like the chaos of "Cloverfield" except world-wide. Or just the array of things that coulda happened in the post apocalyptic scenes (which is about the whole film). Like say, having to save the dog from running into the...battleship instead of apartment for example. The scenes would last longer in Neville's venture to save Samantha, and be that much creepier cuz you'd be in total darkness for an extended period of time, and not to mention mass claustrophobia would set in right away. Narrow hallways that make echoing noises when you slam against it. Metallic walls that carry screams and shrieks throughout the ship. It'd woulda been way scarier-check that-(or to add to it) it woulda been actually creepy and/or scary.

The visuals of New York were cool, but nothing new to the genre. The musical score added to it though. So those 2 elements are worth a half star in my overall rating.

The only real thing enjoyable about it for me was Will Smith playing the lead. He was great at that. One of his best performances thus far! That earns 1.5 stars in my overall rating.

But overall, this film coulda been much better, and a lot more suspenseful and scary or interesting things coulda happened in the story. The acting alone didn't save it for me.

I mean I just couldn't help but notice 2 things while watching the movie: 1) it was an advertisement for the Ford Motor Company (seriously, every car on the sidelines are fords, or at least the ones you can get a good look at)

And 2) I thought: What was the director thinking when he threw all the good opportunities for thrills and chills out the window on this one!

Fans of Will Smith should like it though, in regards to his acting.

As for fans of the book: I highly recommend the films "The Last Man On Earth" (1960) with Vincent Price (RIP), and "The Omega Man" (1971) with Charlton Heston (RIP).

If you haven't read the book, but are intrigued by it from reading this review, then I recommend it. For it's a quick 180 page read in most hardbacks.

Actually, the best thing for me about paying $10 to see this in theaters at 10:00pm right before I was off to bed: Seeing the teaser trailer for "The Dark Knight" on the big screen.

Do you like this review?

Comments (21)

  1. Phatlightning

    sounds pretty lame, I would get sh*t faced before conversing with him, I tend to delve a lot deeper once inebriated. And to answer your question flre, no the book, not plural, was bad. It was way too short, it almost seemed as though the author himself got sick of writing it and just wanted it to end. The ending of book was terrible and so if you enjoyed the movie, do not induldge yourself in the book, you will only be disappointed in one of the two pending your outlook.

    4 years agoby @sxers2k1Flag

  2. slysnide

    Well, I can understand completely why someone that's not totally into vampires wouldn't like the book, but my only social life right now is with this guy that was literally referred to by all the high school as being: "The living encyclopedia." He's starting to get the same rep in college now, and everyone I know there (which ain't many) think the same thing. All of our conversations are about physics, science, astronomy, economics, history, government, etc. So he got me into vampires and there's nothing else worthy to talk about, cuz I can never hold a normal conversation with him, but h's still cool He actually gets back from a 2wk trip to Spain/Portugal/Tangier tomorrow, and will talk about everything relevant to the interests of his that I mentioned, and will rarely, if ever, talk of the vacation itself. Hence why I'm on this site so much as of May despite joining in February: I have no regular social life. He'll even give me random printouts of articles of data and expect a full fledged conversation on the topic later. It's like an extra class! lol!

    4 years agoby @slysnideFlag

  3. The Narrator: The Better Man

    I never read the books, however if they went along with the book we would know what happens wouldn't we. So i appreciate that. It could have been more scary yes, but wasn't boring, and I actually liked the ending. Oh I agree with you that there is Ford advertising. I like the superman/batman movie billboard in the background. lol.
    Overall the best part was Will's acting. His best ever. over all I give the movie a 4 stars.
    However Pirates 1 rocked, and it was not to b like the song.

    4 years agoby @narratorFlag

  4. Flrep07

    i liked the whole movie. it was very suspenseful and will smith played an amazing role. i did not like the alternate ending. the theater ending was much more meaningful and connected the whole idea of " I AM LEGEND". i heard the ending of the book was good. are the books even good?

    4 years agoby @flrep07Flag

  5. Phatlightning

    first off, this movie was a terrible adaptation of the book, you are correct. They didn't even have the premise correct in that it was a vampire movie, the so called "creatures" in this movie were no where near resembling vampires.

    I would like to disagree with you however at the idea that the book was actually good. The book sucked, the movie sucked, I wish they would just give up on the idea already, how many movies must fail in recreating this terrible story before someone finally puts it to bed.

    The only thing I enjoyed about this movie was the ending, because it was 10x better than that of the book.

    4 years agoby @sxers2k1Flag

  6. Bragg

    Well I'm not reading the whole thing or all these long ass comments, but I haven't read the book for this so I can't compare, but I thought it was pretty good. And these things in the film are more of mutants than zombies...

    4 years agoby @bragg1Flag

  7. slysnide

    okey dokey artichokey. Just watch it. I think it's about 5 minutes long or so. Cuz- Well I can't say until you watch it, or someone else stumbles upon this conversation to give their opinion of it.

    4 years agoby @slysnideFlag

  8. Vamp

    I have that DVD version, I just haven't watched that ending yet, though I don't know why since I went to the theaters for the normal version. Huh. . . .anyway, shhhh! LOL XD

    4 years agoby @vampire2000Flag

  9. slysnide

    Oh okay. It's on the special edition version of the DVD release I think.

    4 years agoby @slysnideFlag

  10. Vamp

    Haven't watched it yet so shhhhh

    4 years agoby @vampire2000Flag

  11. slysnide

    Did you read my review of that flick?

    I just mentioned how I didn't like that the film was reluctant to be about pirates doing sheer "piratey" things, in that it centered around the cursed treasure rather than the elements of the classic song. But I got over it about an hour after seeing it the first time!

    And that bugged me also, that there was always something in the way of having Jack just be his "piratey" self w/out any hidden agenda on his mind, or anything else deterring him from doing "a spec of any honest pirating." (as Gibbs so eloquently put it in P2)

    As for "I Am Legend," the title also doesn't work, cuz Neville doesn't refer to himself as a legend as he does in the book (since in the book he knew that the vampires thought he was a legend). Therefore, since it is the lady that considers him a legend, then it should've been called: "He is Legend." Or since he was dead when said claim was made, then it could've been called "He Was Legendary." But that'd spoil the film.

    And what did you "Legend" fans think of the alternate ending??????

    4 years agoby @slysnideFlag

  12. Vamp

    What was wrong wiht Pirates 1?

    4 years agoby @vampire2000Flag

  13. slysnide

    Probably right. Cuz I don't think he or she is like that one guy that comments on reviews by saying "you didn't see the same movie." That's belligerent and the #1 insult to a reviewer.

    The film actually runs very fast, though didn't seem very fast paced. I only saw it a 2nd time cuz my dad borrowed the DVD from a coworker in late March right after it came out. I'd gotten over it by then, and was ready to give it a second chance, kinda like Pirates 1, but I got over that in like an hour. lol!

    4 years agoby @slysnideFlag

  14. T.Clark

    I don't think link even saw the movie

    4 years agoby @insertusernamehereFlag

  15. Vamp

    You better not be moving in on my territory. . . O.o'. LOL I'm just kidding!!!!!

    4 years agoby @vampire2000Flag

  16. slysnide

    It was only a 95-98 minute film? Do you mean 3hrs cuz it seems that long?

    4 years agoby @slysnideFlag

  17. link187

    this woulda been a really good 10 minute short. way too boring for 3 hours...I didn't read the books but if they have vampires I'll read 'em...I love the lost boys!!

    4 years agoby @link187Flag

  18. T.Clark

    Yeah, if it wasn't will smith, i don't think it would've been as good as i thought it was. lol

    4 years agoby @insertusernamehereFlag

  19. slysnide

    Yeah, I started to like it a bit better AFTER the disappointment of my first viewing. But still had too many expectations from what was in the book, versus what was conveyed on screen. But I get how you guys like it lots. I'd probably like it more if I didn't have the assumptions I had, given the title, hence the title would have to be different. But then I think I woulda given it a 3.5 or so, cuz I still wasn't scared by it. But yeah, still a great Will Smith flick though. I enjoyed his acting immensely.

    4 years agoby @slysnideFlag

  20. T.Clark

    I've never read the book or seen any of the films prior to it, so i understand why u didn't like it, but like vamp said, i'll prolly remain liking it lol Good review though

    4 years agoby @insertusernamehereFlag

  21. Vamp

    Wow. . . I really thought this was an excellent vampire movie, sort of an interesting spin on vampires, like 30 Days of Night was, but after reading your review, I understand completely why you did not like it. I, however, will probably remain liking it, due to the good old phrase "First impressions always last," and that is why I still relatively liked the movie IT, even though it butchered Stephen King's novel, although I also liked it because Clowns are my worst fear of all, and I love it when movies can pray off of your fear. Anyway, I really liked your review, even though it was contradictory to my opinion, and I give you kudos to your impressive review writing skill!!!!!

    4 years agoby @vampire2000Flag