i am legend | xltronic messageboard
 
You are not logged in!

F.A.Q
Log in

Register
  
 
  
 
Now online (1)
DADONCK
...and 177 guests

Last 5 registered
Oplandisks
nothingstar
N_loop
yipe
foxtrotromeo

Browse members...
  
 
Members 8025
Messages 2613814
Today 36
Topics 127525
  
 
Messageboard index
i am legend
 

offline cygnus from nowhere and everyplace on 2007-12-25 22:39 [#02157960]
Points: 11920 Status: Regular



what a stupid ass movie!!!!!!!


 

offline Zephyr Twin from ΔΔΔ on 2007-12-25 22:44 [#02157962]
Points: 16982 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



yeah, to be honest I really didn't think it was very good.
If it had been a bit longer and with narration to explain
the finer details of the setting, I think it would have been
a bit better. The CGI sucked, and the movie grew pretty
ridiculous about half way through. Everyone seems to be
raving about how great Will Smith was, and to be honest I
don't see it. I think he does an alright job, but I wouldn't
consider his performance Oscar-worthy as some people
apparently do.


 

offline bogala from NYC (United States) on 2007-12-25 22:51 [#02157964]
Points: 5125 Status: Regular



I'm all about the Tim Burton film. I fucking love his films


 

offline magicant from Canada on 2007-12-25 23:23 [#02157969]
Points: 2465 Status: Lurker



As a secular humanist, I strenuously object to the new Will
Smith film I Am Legend. The movie concludes in such a way
that forcefully suggests that there is a God. The character
Smith portrays tells another character that he is
"listening," which was obviously a way of recanting his
previous statement in the film that there was no God; for he
realized that he must give up his life for the sake of some
greater good. I was turned off totally because I know that
people will watch this film and think "Wow this film really
makes a statement about God" when really the character is
suffering from a schizophrenic delusion, just like all
people who think there is a God.


 

offline Zephyr Twin from ΔΔΔ on 2007-12-26 00:05 [#02157971]
Points: 16982 Status: Regular | Followup to magicant: #02157969 | Show recordbag



well said. That is partly what I was referring to by saying
that the movie became ridiculous half-way through, I just
didn't feel like getting into it. I'm glad someone is,
though.


 

offline Zephyr Twin from ΔΔΔ on 2007-12-26 00:08 [#02157972]
Points: 16982 Status: Regular | Followup to Zephyr Twin: #02157971 | Show recordbag



someone is = someone does*

gew=few


 

offline b6662966 from ? on 2007-12-26 03:41 [#02157983]
Points: 1110 Status: Lurker



The CGI set design of the post-apocolyptic New York were
beautiful.

The CGI of the deer, lions, dogs and Night-walkers were
fuckin horrendeous, once again proving that the human
eye/brain will make it nearly impossible to ever reporoduce
natural movement through CGI.


 

offline marlowe from Antarctica on 2007-12-26 04:36 [#02157990]
Points: 24587 Status: Lurker | Followup to b6662966: #02157983



I thought the CGI in King Kong was very good.

RE: the movie. I have the book and love it: I haven't seen
the film but I know that a) the colour of the protagonist
has changed, and b) it has moved from L.A. to New York.


 

offline Indeksical from Phobiazero Damage Control (United Kingdom) on 2007-12-26 06:39 [#02158001]
Points: 10671 Status: Regular | Followup to magicant: #02157969 | Show recordbag



Agreed once the movie headed into religious discussion I got
completely turned off. The eventual revelation about the
meaning of the repeated butterfly symbols made me cringe.
However, I thought the first half was very engaging despite
the rubbish animals. Overall, very disappointing.


 

offline FlyAgaric from the discovery (Africa) on 2007-12-26 08:11 [#02158015]
Points: 5776 Status: Regular | Followup to Zephyr Twin: #02157962



you say that like winning an oscar means something.


 

offline epohs from )C: on 2007-12-26 08:44 [#02158027]
Points: 17620 Status: Lurker



It wasn't very good at all.


 

offline Sano on 2007-12-26 08:49 [#02158029]
Points: 2502 Status: Lurker



I don't watch movies with Will Smith on them.


 

offline bogala from NYC (United States) on 2007-12-26 08:53 [#02158031]
Points: 5125 Status: Regular



i liked six degrees of separation, but yeah, thats about it


 

offline Zephyr Twin from ΔΔΔ on 2007-12-26 09:18 [#02158035]
Points: 16982 Status: Regular | Followup to FlyAgaric: #02158015 | Show recordbag



Yeah, I'm not saying actors are second-rate unless they have
an oscar, I'm just going by what I've been reading on the
IMDB.com forums of what other people have been
saying about his acting.

and I agree with b266966jennyigotyournumber8675309, though.
The special effects rendering NYC were spectacular. It's the
rubbery, cartoonish faces and bodies of the infected that
continually pulled me out of the movie.


 

offline BoxBob-K23 from Finland on 2007-12-26 14:48 [#02158098]
Points: 2440 Status: Regular



but you have to agree, will smith IS a legend


 

offline marlowe from Antarctica on 2007-12-26 15:18 [#02158105]
Points: 24587 Status: Lurker | Followup to BoxBob-K23: #02158098



* bell-end


 

offline fleetmouse from Horny for Truth on 2007-12-26 15:41 [#02158106]
Points: 18042 Status: Lurker



I read the book recently. I rate it 3 out of 5. A pleasant
evening's vampiric diversion. Great premise; unfortunately,
Matheson is more of a short story writer than a novelist and
it feels like a short story with filler. I mean, not that it
isn't consistently amusing - just that it should have had
more character development and plot for the length it was.


 

offline Barcode from United Kingdom on 2007-12-26 16:10 [#02158107]
Points: 1767 Status: Lurker



Smith was freshhhh... now he stinks.


 

offline Wolfslice from Bay Area, CA (United States) on 2007-12-28 04:55 [#02158480]
Points: 4899 Status: Regular



yeah I didn't care for this either.

the cgi suuuuucked and there were a handful of plot holes.


 

offline The_Funkmaster from St. John's (Canada) on 2007-12-28 05:37 [#02158497]
Points: 16280 Status: Lurker | Followup to magicant: #02157969



Well that's really just your opinion ain't it? So quit
talking like it's fact, because it's not.


 

offline Barcode from United Kingdom on 2007-12-28 05:41 [#02158500]
Points: 1767 Status: Lurker



I think you can take it for granted that every opinion
expressed on here is representative of the poster in
question unless he or she directly quotes another poster or
equivalent outside agency.


 

offline DirtyPriest from Copenhagen (Denmark) on 2007-12-28 05:42 [#02158501]
Points: 5499 Status: Lurker | Followup to Barcode: #02158500



The mistakes that he made lingers on!


 

offline futureimage from buy FIR from Juno (United Kingdom) on 2007-12-28 09:03 [#02158542]
Points: 6427 Status: Lurker



It was made a whole lot better by his interpretation of Bob
Marley.


 

offline epohs from )C: on 2007-12-28 09:35 [#02158548]
Points: 17620 Status: Lurker



Heheh, the Bob Marley stuff was corny as shit.


 

offline Ead1528 from Bucks County, PA (United States) on 2007-12-28 09:47 [#02158550]
Points: 203 Status: Lurker



You people are missing the biggest flaw with the movie. The
ending.
It had a horrible christian overtone. I don't want an ending
in which the christians prevail. That would mean that the
rest of man-kind would become a fucked-up christian society.
the Christian religion has already done it's damage to
society. That ending just put me in a bad mood.

I should have watched that Sweeney Todd movie.


 

offline epohs from )C: on 2007-12-28 10:04 [#02158555]
Points: 17620 Status: Lurker | Followup to Ead1528: #02158550



It sucked and was cheesy and I wouldn't want a christian
society to fill a real life void... but, it wasn't real life
and that didn't seem like a "flaw" in the film.

What seemed like the biggest flaw to me is that the
dark seekers were developed in a schitzo manner. On the one
hand they were smart enough to build a fairly elaborate
trap, but they were totally brainless mute dumbshits. And
absolutely no attempt was made to clarify that.

And the CG looked straight out of 1998.

And the kid played no role whatsoever other than being an
annoying wierdo.

And, how did the girl drive onto the island when the bridges
were destroyed?


 

offline epohs from )C: on 2007-12-28 10:15 [#02158559]
Points: 17620 Status: Lurker



Actually, now that I think about it it does seem like a
flaw, because how did she know about the colony in Vermont?
It probably would've been better if George Burns had come
down out of the clouds and said "see i told you it was
here." when she drove up to the gates.

So many things happened in this movie without any attempt to
explain or justify them. And, its not like they were going
for the whole 'mystery' thing.. it's like whoever wrote the
screenplay wasn't smart enough to see the wholes.



 

offline swears from junk sleep on 2007-12-28 10:24 [#02158562]
Points: 6474 Status: Lurker



I am a big fan of "The Omega Man" is it nothing like that?


 

offline Ead1528 from Bucks County, PA (United States) on 2007-12-28 10:37 [#02158563]
Points: 203 Status: Lurker



I think all apocalypse movies made now are over-shadowed by
the film
"28 Days Later". That is by far the best post-apocalyptic
movie made in the past 10 years. Just because of it's
realism, (and the fact that it was made with British
actors). That's why I was pissed that they used american
actors for 28 Weeks Later.


 

offline swears from junk sleep on 2007-12-28 10:40 [#02158566]
Points: 6474 Status: Lurker | Followup to Ead1528: #02158563



The girl from that film is in some really rubbish band now,
like goth for 12 year olds.


 

offline epohs from )C: on 2007-12-28 11:01 [#02158575]
Points: 17620 Status: Lurker | Followup to swears: #02158562



No... well, yes it is similar to that, but the zombies don't
interact with Nevell at all.


 

offline Indeksical from Phobiazero Damage Control (United Kingdom) on 2007-12-28 12:02 [#02158589]
Points: 10671 Status: Regular | Followup to swears: #02158562 | Show recordbag



The Omega Man is far superior IMO.


 

offline epohs from )C: on 2007-12-28 12:30 [#02158594]
Points: 17620 Status: Lurker



Me 2 IMO.


 

offline Indeksical from Phobiazero Damage Control (United Kingdom) on 2007-12-28 12:33 [#02158595]
Points: 10671 Status: Regular | Show recordbag



IMO.


 

offline futureimage from buy FIR from Juno (United Kingdom) on 2007-12-28 13:00 [#02158597]
Points: 6427 Status: Lurker | Followup to Ead1528: #02158563



This film was a blatent wannabe of 28 Days. There were also
many elements from Children Of Men, I realised that when the
woman and her son were driving down that road to the colony
- how similar to CoM was that???


 

offline FlyAgaric from the discovery (Africa) on 2007-12-28 13:09 [#02158599]
Points: 5776 Status: Regular



imhotep


 

offline magicant from Canada on 2007-12-28 19:34 [#02158775]
Points: 2465 Status: Lurker | Followup to Ead1528: #02158550



we've discussed the film's implications of God... didn't u
read the beginning of the thread?


 

offline X-tomatic from ze war room on 2007-12-28 19:57 [#02158779]
Points: 2901 Status: Lurker



I guess they ran out of money for their CGI department after
creating an empty and greenish NYC, cos the CGI on all
creatures stank. How do you call these things, not
zombies,not vampires, well they looked like the CGI mummy
from 1999 "The Mummy". Funny that the best creature CGI
still hails from Jurrasic Park. Bring back the mix of
robotics and CGI anyday plz
And 28 Weeks later was superior to 28 Days Later.


 

offline DirtyPriest from Copenhagen (Denmark) on 2007-12-29 04:12 [#02158808]
Points: 5499 Status: Lurker



The part where the CGI sucked the post, was when the 3 dogs
attack him. They look EXACTLY the same! Also, the creatures
look more or less the same, and their mutation is very
boring looking. How about some hideously disfigured ones?
And the zombie thingies should probably have been make-up,
with cgi details in stead. Would have made it cooler.

Other than that, i did feel somewhat entertained watching
the movie, i must admit.


 

offline Indeksical from Phobiazero Damage Control (United Kingdom) on 2007-12-29 06:26 [#02158818]
Points: 10671 Status: Regular | Followup to DirtyPriest: #02158808 | Show recordbag



Agreed, look at the new breed vampires in Blade 2. Thats how
I think they should have done this, real people with CG
enhancements. none of the things in I Am Legend had any
visual character. The only thing that made one different
from another was the ratty clothes they were wearing.


 

offline thecurbcreeper from United States on 2007-12-29 10:25 [#02158847]
Points: 6045 Status: Lurker



saw this last night at a friends house (illegal DL action)

i thought it was meh. like most people said:

first half was good
plot holes
not good cgi
needed more time to expand and explain

i could see the book being much better


 

offline Sido Dyas from a computer on 2007-12-29 10:45 [#02158849]
Points: 8876 Status: Lurker | Followup to thecurbcreeper: #02158847



"first half was good
plot holes
not good cgi
needed more time to expand and explain

i could see the book being much better
"

Yeah that kind of sums it up for me too.



 

offline bogala from NYC (United States) on 2007-12-29 11:32 [#02158864]
Points: 5125 Status: Regular



They should use stop motion.


 

offline Zephyr Twin from ΔΔΔ on 2007-12-29 12:16 [#02158886]
Points: 16982 Status: Regular | Followup to bogala: #02158864 | Show recordbag



haha, would've actually been an improvement over the CGI.
That is not an exaggeration.


 

offline Sido Dyas from a computer on 2007-12-29 12:30 [#02158901]
Points: 8876 Status: Lurker | Followup to Zephyr Twin: #02158886



Seriously! The zombies looked like the "I Robot"'s with a
different skin rendering. Fucking lazy hollywood .


 

offline horsefactory from 💠 (United Kingdom) on 2007-12-29 12:33 [#02158906]
Points: 14867 Status: Regular



yeah the zombies were awful, it looked like they'd used the
same model for each one.


 

offline J198 from Maastricht (Netherlands, The) on 2007-12-29 12:34 [#02158912]
Points: 7342 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag



i m legend, u r history


 

offline Sido Dyas from a computer on 2007-12-29 12:46 [#02158926]
Points: 8876 Status: Lurker



Well maybe there will be a decent remake in 2250 .


 

offline Zephyr Twin from ΔΔΔ on 2007-12-29 12:49 [#02158931]
Points: 16982 Status: Regular | Followup to horsefactory: #02158906 | Show recordbag



I thought that, too! Did you notice the scene where the
"alpha male" is directing the waves of infected at Neville's
house and one of the mutants runs past the Alpha male
wearing almost identical clothing? It looked as though the
animators made 2 models, a male and a female, and copied and
pasted them around the screen, making only minor adjustments
to the clothing. sloppy filmmaking.


 

offline Ead1528 from Bucks County, PA (United States) on 2007-12-29 14:36 [#02159002]
Points: 203 Status: Lurker



The only thing I liked about the film was the fact that it
was in New York.
Especially the scene in the Met.

The film must have been made by a religious nutjob. Notice
how the outbreak happened in a progressive and artistic city
such as New York, and the safe haven was found in some small
middle-american religious town in Maryland.


 


Messageboard index