Topic: I Am Legend. Spoilers(Book and movie) of course

[Kale]

Well, i definitely did the right thing, to start off. I watched the movie before going into the book. The movie was a piece of flaming cow dung being flung into a cesspit of barf and urine. The book on teh other hand was very good, albeit short and I was unhappy about the main character's reaction in the ending somewhat.

It might not be completely accurate, as I can't remember everything.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~SPOILERS~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Origin
Movie(M) - The cure for cancer goes bad
Book(B) - Germs

Main character's Immunity or atleast speculation
M - Horribly unexplained
B - Robert was bit by a vampire bat, which, he thinks, met with a real vampire (the ones in the story, but in the past and mightve been around since teh bebonic plague or however you spell that.) and it weakened the germ and cause him to gain an immunity to it.

Vampires (or rather, thingies, cuz I dont recall the movie actually naming them)
M - They are all weird mindless things that are weak towards sunlight, water, etc.
B - Only some are mindless, because their brain had deteriorated since some of them came back from the dead. Others though, actually have a mind because they are still living.

Dog
M - A family companion from the start. Dies cuz Robert kills it, after it gets infected.
B - A stray that survived by itself by hiding, and eventually dies. I think it got infected too, Its kind of blurry on how it died.

Girl
M - A survivor like the main character.
B - A spy by the vampires sent in to investigate Robert.

Cure
M - He makes it, and gives it to teh girl to "save teh world"
B - There isn't one.

Resistance
M - Survivors in a camp withhuge ass walls to keep teh vamps away, though I don't see how the walls would exactly help that much, or that long seeing how the vamps figured out things, and coupln'dt get past a wall by stacking thigns up.
B - Vampires, Living ones with the germs, or bacteria, but it had mutated and there is a drug that prevents teh germs to continue growing like it does in the normal ones. Sounded like it was temporary though, so its not a cure, just a stopper of sorts.

Death and Legend
M - I'm assuming hes a legend in it cuz of the title and that he found the cure. And he killed himself to keep teh cure available and taking out the guys who mightve stopped it.
B - Hes a legend because he is the last human. Died because he was caught by the new normals like a beast, feared and killed.

I liked the book, but at the end, Robert seemed a bit too resigned. The movie though, it just seemed to be one of those hollywood's I saved the world thing. This isn't the best comparison and small review you'll ever read but meh, if you aren't planning on reading the book, you find out that the original story was good, it just got screwed when it was made. I haven't seen the other movies or movie (I can't remember if there were 2 or 1 other) of it, but this the new one sucks.

[The Last Belmont]

Everyone I know has said it's just an average okay film and Will's performance is Oscar worthy. The critics said it was descent too. I've been thinking about renting it when it comes into my store in a few months. (I work at Blockbuster) Is it really that bad cuz I won't rent it even as a free rental if it sucks.

[Kale]

I think its worth a watch, and my guess is that most people would probably enjoy it. Its just not raelly worth rewatching.

EDIT: I guess I made it out to suck more than it mightve been for me since the book was a major difference. I think its ok for a movie.

[Aridale]

thats the killing point for me too. Its so vastly different from the book I really cant recommend it to anyone. I LOVED the book. I had no idea how the movie would turn out but I guessed itd suck given how book -> movie usually goes but I really was disappointed.

With a different title and no seeming relation to the book it could be a decent movie and Will Smiths performance was definitely very good. Passed that its shit. If youve read the book or have any desire to read the book Id stay clear of the movie.

[Jorge D. Fuentes]

In Reply To All,

Not to sound like an ignorant Philistine or someone without culture, but I don't care to read those types of books, and I thought it was a pretty alright movie.

When people get upset at a movie because it isn't enough like the book it's based on, I already kind of tune them out, because it's pretty obvious that you will always get either a compressed version of the book or a 're-telling' of sorts.

My girlfriend's friend kept complaining about a Harry Potter movie not being like the book, and I wanted to punch her in the cooch with a spiked gauntlet.  Shut the hell up and enjoy the movie for what it is.

And it's not like I don't read or anything... I just don't read those types of books (I read encyclopedias and technical manuals and instruction books more... I like learning about things more than some fictional story; give me the summary via a movie any day).

[Gecko]

See, I didn't even know about the book until after I saw the movie. Some guys at school were talking about how bad the movie sucked and how the book was so much better. I saw it with no idea it was a book to movie thing, and loved it! It was very well done as a movie itself.

Also, people seem to forget that Dracula came from a book, yet think the Bela Lugosi film was better than Bram Stoker's Dracula from the 90's, even though it's SO MUCH closer to the book it's awesome! Why did the 1932 movie become such a hit in the first place? Easy. People looked at it as a movie itself because hardly anyone had actually had the opportunity to read the book. If a movie can stand solid in itself without knowledge of the book in the first place, it's a good movie. I saw I Am Legend in theaters, and I loved it. I couldn't tell it was based on a book or anything, and it seemed solid in and of itself. Acting was near perfect. The movie's great by itself.

[Kale]

In Reply To #5 & #6

See, I found the movie almost alright, without the book. Its why I read the books after the movie if I can. I found the movie subpar, in and of itself (did I use that phrase right?), without the book's influence. I say the same about Spirits within, though I did have the thoughts of FF when watching it, but even without the chocobos or whatever taht was left out, I still found it unsatisfactory.

As for Dracula. I never really liked it. Maybe because it wasn't my thing ... but book or movie, it wasn't my thing.

As for my rambling about the book and movie differences, I find that Hollywood always does this sort of thing when the original story is just way better. And even if the book was made into the movie exactly, It could actually fit into a 2 hour movie, the book wasn't long.

[Jorge D. Fuentes]

I find that Hollywood always does this sort of thing when the original story is just way better.

This is opinion, though.  It may be better to you, but since it's a work of art, it might not be as good to someone else, since they might have a different mindset.

You can't assume that because you think it's better, that everyone will agree (though usually this is the case; I'm not arguing, just playing Devil's Advocate).

[Kale]

In Reply To #8

I never did, its why I said "I find that Hollywood always" .... rather than "Hollywood always..." I know full well, its only opinion, cuz half the time on Gamefaqs I state that its people opinions, not fact when they do make it out like its fact.

[Jorge D. Fuentes]

In Reply To #9

Yeah, I know.

Thing is, I find people who complain about 'book vs. movie' (especially right after they come out of the movie) rather obnoxious, so it kinda sets me off.

But then, there are movies like Stephen King's "The Mist" in which I got out of the movie with the feeling of "Wow, Stephen King is a sick and twisted dude" and then I found out that his book ending is completely different than the movie ending.

Now with THIS particular scenario, I'm torn as to what to say.  I loved the movie, but its ending gave me a weird feeling.  Finding out that the book's original different was vastly different (and now it's my opinion that the book ending was less bittersweet, thus I like it more) I can't say much else, y'know?

Then there are movies with two endings altogether... based on Region, such as "The Descent" which had a different ending in Europe than it did in the USA.  Argh!

[Kale]

I don't think i've seen a movie with 2 different endings.....though I can see how it would happen, with all the violence laws they seem to have in europe compared to here.

Most of the time, when I complain about the movie changes to a story from a book isn't really that its changed thogh, its just that its changed for teh worst and this is one case, it did and it also changes the meaning to it as well. If there were themes intended for the book and movie. The book would come off as "Majority rules" and the movie would come off as, "Humanity always survives"

[Acunia]

I thought the movie was ok, I liked it as much as i liked the book.

oh as for movies with two endings, add 28 Days later(3 actually) and Army of darkness

[Azmodan]

I don't think i've seen a movie with 2 different endings.....though I can see how it would happen, with all the violence laws they seem to have in europe compared to here.

IIRC, it was actually the US that got the shaft when it came to The Descent. The original European version had like two or so minutes more past where the American version ended. They changed it because that ending was said to be too hopeless.

I think that's what it was, anyways.

[The Last Belmont]

IIRC, it was actually the US that got the shaft when it came to The Descent. The original European version had like two or so minutes more past where the American version ended. They changed it because that ending was said to be too hopeless.

I think that's what it was, anyways.

Aww, that's gay. (Goes to DL Euro version)

[Kale]

In Reply To #12 & #13

I've seen both those movies I think, 28 days was the one about the blood inducing zombies or something right? And Army of Darkness ... the sequel to Evil Dead?

That sucks... but what happened to the original you know? I'd like to knwo the difference. I didn't really like 28 days but Army of Darkness awesome I thought.

As for the Descent, I've never watched it so I don't know. But its usually the non-american sutff that gets screwed. Was the violence chopped out or the story? Like a head chop (violence) or just some part of the story?

It happens in games too, and thats where I'm basing the non american stuff gets chopped out. Ninja Gaiden, for instance, Decapitations were taken out of the European ones. Then there is Valkyrie Profile, where a couple of sections of the story was taken out, which made me a bit more than just lost.