For my moviegoing public: I Am Legend
Dec. 17th, 2007 04:26 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
grrgoylAs with Beowulf, first a word on my fellow audience. I got there a little late so wasn't the first in the theater, but I took my usual spot in the last row. Directly in front of me was a pleasant-looking middle-aged couple discussing things like future IMAX releases, the new Blade Runner re-release, etc. He made the statement, "You can come close to duplicating great sound at home, but there's just no reproducing THIS" indicating the IMAX screen "in your own house." Too true.
Then they watched as another audience member took their seat a few rows down and pulled out a tray of nachos. "No, not nachos!" the guy whispered in mock horror. I agree completely. Why do theaters sell the loudest food on the planet? If I ever own a theater, the only concessions I'll sell are Gummi Bears and Russell Stover chocolates.
So after silently agreeing with this guy, I was just thinking, "Finally! Some true fellow movie lovers!" when what does he do, but pull out his OWN tray of nachos. What??? I endured listening to him crunch deafeningly through two before I picked up my coat and moved to the opposite end of the row.
As much as I like to think of myself as firmly in the loop of new movie releases, I honestly hadn't even heard of the IMAX exclusive 6-minute Dark Knight prologue before reading some comments on Fandango. Sure, I'm excited for this one: Christian Bale and Christopher Nolan together again, and Heath Ledger as a truly Arkham Asylum version of The Joker (and best of all, the bland Katie Holmes replaced with the much more bearable Maggie Gyllenhaal): What's not to be excited about? Yet this had escaped my notice. (By contrast, I don't want to see Scorsese's upcoming IMAX doc on The Rolling Stones, "Shine a Light," for fear of falling into the 4-story crevasses on their faces.) It turned out to be well worth it, far more than I Am Legend itself in IMAX. If you want to save $13 on IMAX, there's a bootleg version here. Shhhh. Don't tell (but warning: includes stupid fanboys giggling like schoolgirls).
Don't misunderstand me. I enjoyed Legend plenty. But it really isn't necessary to see in IMAX, especially once I noticed that they weren't even using the entire screen. What kind of shit is that? I'm paying 6 extra bucks to enjoy every square inch of this screen. Bollocks.
No spoilers to follow.
The story is simple enough: Will Smith believes he's the last man alive after Emma Thompson's cure for cancer ends up mutating some of the population into animalistic, bloodthirsty monsters (likened to vampires in some reviews, though they're a lot closer to the rage-infected "zombies" of 28 Days Later), who feed on most of the remaining survivors. He's immune, and spends his days scavenging for food with his German Shepherd Sam and working on a cure. His nights are spent curled around an automatic rifle listening to the inhuman growls and screams of the predators outside. Pretty scary stuff.
I wondered how on earth they were going to fill an hour and 40 minutes with the minutiae of his unusual but ultimately pretty mundane existence. It sounds heavenly to me: No other humans for miles, just breaking into homes for food and daily trips to the video store, slowly working alphabetically through the shelves. He sets up mannequins in lifelike postures on the street and in the stores so he can feel a little normal again, and it's when he exchanges light banter with them that you start to get the feeling that he's cracking up just a little. The scenes of his ho-hum routine are interspersed with flashbacks giving us a brief glimpse into the spread of the virus and how things got so bad so quickly.
This is all well and good until he's forced into a dark building to retrieve Sam, and comes face-to-face with the "vampires," a scene bordering on the terrifying.....until we actually see the infected humanoids and they're 100% CGI. This is all just a damn videogame. WHY? Color me supremely disappointed. Sure, they perform some physical feats that would be kind of hard to do practically, but even when he manages to nab one to experiment on, it's obviously just an animation. WHY?? Real people becoming monsters are what make older films scary, like 28 Days Later. I'm only scared of videogame monsters if I'm the one playing the game. I'll admit, my attention waned a bit from this point on.
So, lame monsters aside, the rest of the movie has a lot to recommend it. The scenes of New York City deserted and full of wildlife are fantastic. I liked Sam -- as much as I adore my Francesca Sofia, I'll admit that in the event of an apocalypse, I'd rather have a German Shepherd by my side. And it's obvious this part couldn't go to just any actor, as there are long stretches of just him talking to himself. You've got to have a strong taste for Bob Marley, however, as his 80 gig iPod apparently contains only one song ("Three Little Birds"). Practically the entire budget must have gone in Smith's pocket, since it sure didn't go towards creature effects. My favorite moment in the movie was a truly touching scene, when he's so desperate for human contact that he pleads with the pretty video store mannequin that he's been working his courage up to approach to say hello to him.
Without giving too much away, he meets another survivor and her son, on their way to a camp in Vermont. She turns out to be religious, making the dangerous trip to an uncertain destination out of blind faith. Smith is a scientist who believes in nothing except his ability to cure the virus and save mankind. I perked up a little in my seat. Was this going to become a science vs. theology debate? Sadly no, as the movie ends pretty shortly thereafter, but not before injecting one more healthy dose of Bob Marley idealism into the script. Damn. It almost had the potential to make up for the pathetically unscary creatures.
This JUST occurred to me (which is why I use my journal to organize my thoughts): I am LEGEND. Bob Marley's 1990 album, LEGEND. Coincidence? I don't think so.
3.5 out of 5, for everything up until the introduction of the monsters.
Next week is Sweeney Todd, which I'm almost as excited for as I am for Christmas.
Then they watched as another audience member took their seat a few rows down and pulled out a tray of nachos. "No, not nachos!" the guy whispered in mock horror. I agree completely. Why do theaters sell the loudest food on the planet? If I ever own a theater, the only concessions I'll sell are Gummi Bears and Russell Stover chocolates.
So after silently agreeing with this guy, I was just thinking, "Finally! Some true fellow movie lovers!" when what does he do, but pull out his OWN tray of nachos. What??? I endured listening to him crunch deafeningly through two before I picked up my coat and moved to the opposite end of the row.
As much as I like to think of myself as firmly in the loop of new movie releases, I honestly hadn't even heard of the IMAX exclusive 6-minute Dark Knight prologue before reading some comments on Fandango. Sure, I'm excited for this one: Christian Bale and Christopher Nolan together again, and Heath Ledger as a truly Arkham Asylum version of The Joker (and best of all, the bland Katie Holmes replaced with the much more bearable Maggie Gyllenhaal): What's not to be excited about? Yet this had escaped my notice. (By contrast, I don't want to see Scorsese's upcoming IMAX doc on The Rolling Stones, "Shine a Light," for fear of falling into the 4-story crevasses on their faces.) It turned out to be well worth it, far more than I Am Legend itself in IMAX. If you want to save $13 on IMAX, there's a bootleg version here. Shhhh. Don't tell (but warning: includes stupid fanboys giggling like schoolgirls).
Don't misunderstand me. I enjoyed Legend plenty. But it really isn't necessary to see in IMAX, especially once I noticed that they weren't even using the entire screen. What kind of shit is that? I'm paying 6 extra bucks to enjoy every square inch of this screen. Bollocks.
No spoilers to follow.
The story is simple enough: Will Smith believes he's the last man alive after Emma Thompson's cure for cancer ends up mutating some of the population into animalistic, bloodthirsty monsters (likened to vampires in some reviews, though they're a lot closer to the rage-infected "zombies" of 28 Days Later), who feed on most of the remaining survivors. He's immune, and spends his days scavenging for food with his German Shepherd Sam and working on a cure. His nights are spent curled around an automatic rifle listening to the inhuman growls and screams of the predators outside. Pretty scary stuff.
I wondered how on earth they were going to fill an hour and 40 minutes with the minutiae of his unusual but ultimately pretty mundane existence. It sounds heavenly to me: No other humans for miles, just breaking into homes for food and daily trips to the video store, slowly working alphabetically through the shelves. He sets up mannequins in lifelike postures on the street and in the stores so he can feel a little normal again, and it's when he exchanges light banter with them that you start to get the feeling that he's cracking up just a little. The scenes of his ho-hum routine are interspersed with flashbacks giving us a brief glimpse into the spread of the virus and how things got so bad so quickly.
This is all well and good until he's forced into a dark building to retrieve Sam, and comes face-to-face with the "vampires," a scene bordering on the terrifying.....until we actually see the infected humanoids and they're 100% CGI. This is all just a damn videogame. WHY? Color me supremely disappointed. Sure, they perform some physical feats that would be kind of hard to do practically, but even when he manages to nab one to experiment on, it's obviously just an animation. WHY?? Real people becoming monsters are what make older films scary, like 28 Days Later. I'm only scared of videogame monsters if I'm the one playing the game. I'll admit, my attention waned a bit from this point on.
So, lame monsters aside, the rest of the movie has a lot to recommend it. The scenes of New York City deserted and full of wildlife are fantastic. I liked Sam -- as much as I adore my Francesca Sofia, I'll admit that in the event of an apocalypse, I'd rather have a German Shepherd by my side. And it's obvious this part couldn't go to just any actor, as there are long stretches of just him talking to himself. You've got to have a strong taste for Bob Marley, however, as his 80 gig iPod apparently contains only one song ("Three Little Birds"). Practically the entire budget must have gone in Smith's pocket, since it sure didn't go towards creature effects. My favorite moment in the movie was a truly touching scene, when he's so desperate for human contact that he pleads with the pretty video store mannequin that he's been working his courage up to approach to say hello to him.
Without giving too much away, he meets another survivor and her son, on their way to a camp in Vermont. She turns out to be religious, making the dangerous trip to an uncertain destination out of blind faith. Smith is a scientist who believes in nothing except his ability to cure the virus and save mankind. I perked up a little in my seat. Was this going to become a science vs. theology debate? Sadly no, as the movie ends pretty shortly thereafter, but not before injecting one more healthy dose of Bob Marley idealism into the script. Damn. It almost had the potential to make up for the pathetically unscary creatures.
This JUST occurred to me (which is why I use my journal to organize my thoughts): I am LEGEND. Bob Marley's 1990 album, LEGEND. Coincidence? I don't think so.
3.5 out of 5, for everything up until the introduction of the monsters.
Next week is Sweeney Todd, which I'm almost as excited for as I am for Christmas.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-12-18 03:52 am (UTC)I thought the ending should have been a lot...bigger. Does that make sense? I dunno. I was captivated at first, but then it really lost me.
I also had a lot of nitpicky problems with the story.
Sam was pretty awesome, though.
I've been waiting a long time for Sweeney, so I'm trying not to hype myself up, but damn I CAN'T HELP MYSELF. I wasn't optimistic about Johnny's voice when I first heard about the casting, but after looking at the clips I actually really like it.
And OMG, Johnny and Alan singing Pretty Women together. I almost died.
*ahem* Anyways. I am bracing myself for some extreme awesome. Tim Burton, you'd better deliver!
no subject
Date: 2007-12-18 05:26 am (UTC)I have high expectations indeed for Sweeney, particularly after
no subject
Date: 2007-12-18 07:57 am (UTC)I'm not really too interested in seeing this movie. It sounds interesting, but Will Smith...can't see him as anyone but the Fresh Prince.
no subject
Date: 2007-12-18 04:13 pm (UTC)Wow, way to ignore a man's entire career.
no subject
Date: 2007-12-19 02:47 am (UTC)BTW, the zombies are vampires in the book so that probably explains that.
no subject
Date: 2007-12-19 05:25 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-12-19 04:06 pm (UTC)Still, computer generated would still be better than Interview With A Vampire. ;)
no subject
Date: 2007-12-19 04:29 pm (UTC)I kind of liked Interview. Not scary, but no distracting CGI either.
I am BEAR
Date: 2007-12-21 09:42 pm (UTC)