The Energon Pub

News Credits: 34 · by **Supreme Convoy** » Mon Dec 24, 2007 11:55 pm

I'm sure there was an I Am Legend thread before the reboot on the board... but I caught it this afternoon and thought it was a fantastic movie! So well done.

It definitely rivals my love for The Mist as my favorite horror movie of the year. :CON:

by **Bumblebee-otch** » Tue Dec 25, 2007 12:17 am

i thought it was terrible. one of the worst endings i have ever seen, and the CGI was just plain bad. the first hour (without the "vompies") was pretty good, though.

by **Death-Shed** » Tue Dec 25, 2007 12:23 am

Read the book, it's 100 times better than the film.

News Credits: 34 · by **Supreme Convoy** » Tue Dec 25, 2007 1:03 am

[quote="Death-Shed"]Read the book, it's 100 times better than the film.

by **The Happy Locust** » Tue Dec 25, 2007 1:39 am

I enjoyed it for what it was; a character study of the last man on earth left alone for three years desperately trying to rebuild humanity knowing that he's the last hope.

The military evacuation scenes were spectactularly done and honestly moving. The ending was somewhat anti-climactic and my friends and I had an honest discussion about some of the flaws of the Nightseeker leader's sentience level, but while I wouldn't recommend it as a must-see. I will say it's good for a 2-hour ticket.

News Credits: 1 · by **Jeep?** » Tue Dec 25, 2007 5:56 am

How does it compare to "The Omega Man"?

by **Just Negare** » Tue Dec 25, 2007 7:37 pm

I actually really want to see this movie and am looking foward to it, comes out next week down here.

I've been trying to get a copy of the book but the local libraries suck like a two dollar strumpet.

by **Bumblebee-otch** » Tue Dec 25, 2007 9:02 pm

there are a few problems i have with the story:

***spoiler alert***

[color=#FFFFFF]-the irish woman said that the safe-zone was in vermont because the virus couldn't handle cold weather. if this was true, then why was new york being evacuated IN THE MIDDLE OF WINTER!?
-how did the woman and her son even get to new york if all the bridges and tunnels were blown? (don't forget, they even drove to vermont at the end)
-neville said that the leader poked his head out into the sunlight because he lost all sense of self-preservation. it was obvious he was pissed because he had one of his own taken from him. he also said that there were no human characteristics left in the monsters. if this was true, then how did the leader set the trap? some doctor.
-when his dog was dying, why didn't he take precautions like he had with the vompie-girl and the rats and detain sam first? he should have known the effects of the cure, if any, and that it would take time to affect the patient.
-i think the biggest problem i have with the story is that he WASN'T the last man on earth. after spending over an hour with a man who has been alone for three years, we feel sorry for him and sympathize with him. then some hollywood writer comes along and not only trivializes his existence, they have him kill himself for no apparent reason. i have never felt more cheated in a movie.

[/color]
end rant/spoilers

News Credits: 1 · by **ChrisR291** » Tue Dec 25, 2007 10:03 pm

i'm just going to make it short and sweet....

The movie wasn't the greatest and i'd love to have my two hours back

News Credits: 49 · by **Senor Hugo** » Wed Dec 26, 2007 9:50 am

[quote="Bumblebee-otch"]there are a few problems i have with the story:

***spoiler alert***

-the irish woman said that the safe-zone was in vermont because the virus couldn't handle cold weather. if this was true, then why was new york being evacuated IN THE MIDDLE OF WINTER!?
-how did the woman and her son even get to new york if all the bridges and tunnels were blown? (don't forget, they even drove to vermont at the end)
-neville said that the leader poked his head out into the sunlight because he lost all sense of self-preservation. it was obvious he was pissed because he had one of his own taken from him. he also said that there were no human characteristics left in the monsters. if this was true, then how did the leader set the trap? some doctor.
-when his dog was dying, why didn't he take precautions like he had with the vompie-girl and the rats and detain sam first? he should have known the effects of the cure, if any, and that it would take time to affect the patient.
-i think the biggest problem i have with the story is that he WASN'T the last man on earth. after spending over an hour with a man who has been alone for three years, we feel sorry for him and sympathize with him. then some hollywood writer comes along and not only trivializes his existence, they have him kill himself for no apparent reason. i have never felt more cheated in a movie.

end rant/spoilers

News Credits: 2 · by **Tekka** » Wed Dec 26, 2007 10:23 am

I just saw it and was suitably impressed. I'd definitely go and see it again given the chance.

News Credits: 38 · by **TheMuffin** » Wed Dec 26, 2007 11:49 am

They changed the whole reason for the title. They changed the ending so it wasn't some "HOLY ****" M. Night Shyamalan twist ending like the book was. Because of that, I refused to see it. When the book is perfect, why must these Hollywood writers change it just to put their brown stained mark on it? No wonder they're underpaid. A good 90% of movies nowadays are based off of things that have already been done. And been done better.

I like Will Smith. I like his movies. I even liked I,Robot even when they dropped everything related to the books besides the three laws. But man they dropped the ball with this one.

It's like Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. The first movie was great because it stayed close to the book. Then Tim Burton got his hands on it, changed so many things, gave people backstory when they didn't need it and everything went to ****. This happens way too often in movies of late and it's sad.

by **Death-Shed** » Wed Dec 26, 2007 3:19 pm

[quote="TheMuffin"]They changed the whole reason for the title. They changed the ending so it wasn't some "HOLY ****" M. Night Shyamalan twist ending like the book was. Because of that, I refused to see it. When the book is perfect, why must these Hollywood writers change it just to put their brown stained mark on it? No wonder they're underpaid. A good 90% of movies nowadays are based off of things that have already been done. And been done better.

I like Will Smith. I like his movies. I even liked I,Robot even when they dropped everything related to the books besides the three laws. But man they dropped the ball with this one.

It's like Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. The first movie was great because it stayed close to the book. Then Tim Burton got his hands on it, changed so many things, gave people backstory when they didn't need it and everything went to ****. This happens way too often in movies of late and it's sad.

News Credits: 38 · by **TheMuffin** » Wed Dec 26, 2007 3:35 pm

EXACTLY! Why change stuff when it's already great to begin with?

by **City Commander** » Wed Dec 26, 2007 3:57 pm

Well, I'm glad to hear it's decent from most of you. Especially as I'm going to see it tomorrow.

by **kevh** » Wed Dec 26, 2007 6:18 pm

Hated the movie, but the Dark Knight trailer at the beginning was worth my money.

News Credits: 2 · by **Moonbase2** » Wed Dec 26, 2007 7:38 pm

I liked the movie quite a bit, save for the fact that the zompires were CG. Other than that I rather enjoyed it. But I knew I would.

by **Grahf** » Wed Dec 26, 2007 9:52 pm

I didn't read the book, so it was alright in my opinion. After hearing what everyone is saying about the book I might have to hunt it down now. I wish the movie didn't fall back on the "things jump out at you fast" premise so much, and watching someone that has been without human contact for that amount of time was interesting to say the least. Overall, it wasn't the greatest movie around, but you could find much worst.

Like Me, Grimlock! on Facebook · by **Me, Grimlock!** » Thu Dec 27, 2007 11:54 am

I thought the movie was well worth the money. I've read the book, and it's better, but if you watch the movie just to have fun, it's fine. I didn't get that the monsters were supposed to have lost all social skills, yet they hunted in packs, communicated, and owned dogs.

And, aside from the virus surviving or not surviving in cold, how can these shirtless, shoeless ex-humans survive in New York winter? I didn't get that.

I can't remember clearly the book's ending (it's been years since I've read it), but I thought it turned out Neville wasn't the last man on Earth in the book, too. Didn't he hook up with a sect at the end, but killed himself? I do remember that the dog was introduced much later in the book.

by **Evil_the_Nub** » Fri Dec 28, 2007 2:19 pm

I would have liked it a lot more if it wern't for the 2 guys sitting right behind me going "huhuhuhuhuh hey Beavis, he crazy huhuhuhuhhuh" through the whole movie, thus ruining the last man on Earth vibe.