I Am Legend

Zeb Jackson · Post by **Zeb Jackson** » 30 Dec 2007 21:49

vampiric Zombies?

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 30 Dec 2007 22:13

Matt K wrote:Actually they were vampires.

They're clearly not vampires. They were vampires in the original book, but they're far more zombie like in the most recent film. You could argue that they're just infected with a virulent rabies infection, and neither zombies or vampires I guess, but it's widely accepted as a zombie movie, not a vampire movie; I guess much like 28 days later is viewed as a zombie movie.

LEGOMAN · Post by **LEGOMAN** » 30 Dec 2007 23:29

that was a cool movie.

Bringerofpie · Post by **Bringerofpie** » 31 Dec 2007 09:08

They were obviously werewolves.

professor · Post by **professor** » 02 Jan 2008 11:18

Aversion to the sun.
Heavy rapid breathing.
Thirst for blood.

They were clearly albino hobbits.

Post by **Zac Miley** » 02 Jan 2008 12:47

professor wrote:
They were clearly albino hobbits.

Why is there even a debate?

Idiots...

HG · Post by HG » 04 Jan 2008 10:31

'twas a splendiferic film Bilbo!

james_dean · Post by **james_dean** » 05 Jan 2008 18:22

So we've got Vampiric Albino Werewolf Hobbit Communist Zombies? Scary

Yeah the movie was great right up until the whole god/I can save you!! business. That leaves 95% good movie with a disappointing and unnecessary twist on the end, I can deal with that.

I much more liked his monologue "EVERYBODY IS DEAD! EVERYBODY!!!"

And, quote of the movie... "It's just... I was saving that bacon. I was saving it..."

Kljopa · Post by **Kljopa** » 06 Jan 2008 14:59

james_dean wrote: I much more liked his monologue "EVERYBODY IS DEAD! EVERYBODY!!!"

This part ruled.I even started laughing.

Dont be to picky on films.Drop them out and enjoy it, everything can be critized. I loved this movie, i was under impression after it.

I also liked the camera work at the begining as i saw it in a cinema it was satysfying.

sniikeri · Post by **sniikeri** » 08 Jan 2008 10:39

I haven't seen the film yet but am interested in the book, is it worth reading?

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 05 Mar 2008 23:54

All books written more than 10 years ago and still being republished today are worth reading.

There's an alternate ending running around on the web.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TNush82q-6s

Apparently Warner Bro's are trying to have it removed from the internet, so watch it now. This ending is much more in line with the story in the book, and such a better ending.

PoisonTaffy · Post by **PoisonTaffy** » 06 Mar 2008 02:45

sniikeri wrote:I haven't seen the film yet but am interested in the book, is it worth reading?

It's more of an extended short story rather than a book, but for a short story it's a good one. The book I bought came with an extra 5-6 short stories by the same author, perhaps in order to make a thicker book to sell, as most of them were bad, and none was as good as "I am legend". I feel cheated for paying for a short story as if it was a book.

The alternative ending was lame in that it made it obvious that the zombie guy was trying to save his zombie girl, which is something I picked up only retrospectively, and it was good in that it made the zombies more human and not just demented monsters. It's interesting to notice that the real ending chooses sacrifice and violence to solve the conflict, and this one chooses understanding and "turning the other cheek", and for me at least it's obvious that the real ending strongly appeals to the religious crowd.

Post by **Zac Miley** » 06 Mar 2008 17:53

Thanks Jeremy, that was a really cool alternate ending.

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 07 Mar 2008 02:55

InfecedTofu wrote:
sniikeri wrote:I haven't seen the film yet but am interested in the book, is it worth reading?
It's more of an extended short story rather than a book, but for a short story it's a good one. The book I bought came with an extra 5-6 short stories by the same author, perhaps in order to make a thicker book to sell, as most of them were bad, and none was as good as "I am legend". I feel cheated for paying for a short story as if it was a book.

The alternative ending was lame in that it made it obvious that the zombie guy was trying to save his zombie girl, which is something I picked up only retrospectively, and it was good in that it made the zombies more human and not just demented monsters. It's interesting to notice that the real ending chooses sacrifice and violence to solve the conflict, and this one chooses understanding and "turning the other cheek", and for me at least it's obvious that the real ending strongly appeals to the religious crowd.

Are we talking about the same ending here? The alternate ending didn't advocate "turning the other cheek." It said that there are people who we consider monsters, but that's because we don't understand their perspective. I mean here he was, really working to try and save his wife and children (even though he knew he couldn't, that was what was driving him), and prepared to do anything to do it, and then it turned out that the monster was essentially doing the same thing.

Compare it to the original ending where he preaches to them "I can save you" but they won't listen, because they're monsters. So he sacrifices his life to save humanity because God tells him to. Isn't that just the story of Jesus' death? Ridiculed on the cross by people who he could save if they let him, and then sacrificing himself for humanity because God tells him to? It's interesting that you say that the original ending chooses "sacrifice and violence to solve the conflict" because Christianity did exactly that for 1500 years. It wasn't until the enlightenment (which also resulted in the birth of Western Atheism and Science) that Christians started thinking that pulling somebodies intestines out of their body through their anus because somebody accused them of being a witch was probably not the right thing to do.