Goodreads Bookshelf
Film Review: I Am Legend
Yesterday, Lauren and I went to see Will Smith's new film I Am Legend. Throughout most of the film, we were absolutely hooked. Smith plays Robert Neville, the last man living in a New York City that is otherwise infested with creatures rather like light-sensitive 28 Days Later zombies, caused by--of all things--a cure for cancer gone wrong. Whoops. Part survivalist, part scientist looking for a cure to the virus that has wiped out the majority of earth's population, part stir-crazy man looking to maintain some grip on sanity, Smith plays Neville quite well. It's clear that he's going crazy, talking not only to his dog (who doesn't?) but also forming interpersonal relationships with mannequins. It's only his daily routines (which border on obsessive-compulsive) and his scientific work that seem to keep him on the right side of insanity, and Smith plays this balance perfectly.
The action is good and the suspense even better, as the film did a good job balancing tension, ratcheting up of tension, and the release of tension. The first hour and more is a fairly compelling drama.
Unfortunately, the ending almost completely ruined the film for me (much the same way that the end of Signs ruined that film for me). After a great story of this man working to save humanity and his own sanity, we get a trite, deus ex machina ending that rings false. Now, of course, part of the reason it rings false for me is that I don't believe in stories of God intervening pretty much directly into human affairs, and that's what we get. God tells Anna (Alice Braga) where to find Neville to save him and ultimately we're shown Neville (after denying God's existence and influence, arguing from the way He apparently let 6 billion-ish people die only to now maybe save a handful) embrace this faith too and apparently become the savior of humanity in the process. The Noah story in a zombie milieu. It just rang so false--never mind that the cure he finds ultimately seems too difficult to administer in order to make much difference and the utopian colony of survivors seems to have pretty well saved themselves on their own before this.
Dissatisfied, I looked up the plot of the original novel, and as it's given on wikipedia, it sounds a lot more interesting than what we were given instead. The original tells a morally complex, interesting story of scientifically-justified vampires and the mentally-unhinged vampire hunter Neville, with an ending that apparently sees the main character become a legend in the manner of nightmares rather than the manner of saviors. I want to read the original now.
The more I think about it, the more plot holes there seem to be in the story we do get; the action, the tension, the fine performance from Smith all combined to insulate me from some of these issues. If you can appreciate one good acting performance (two if you count the dog) and fairly good pacing, while ignoring both minor and major plot issues, then it's definitely worth seeing--enjoyable, but nothing legendary.
I had already read a couple bad reviews on for Legend. But you have me
intrigued as to wanting to read the book. Thanks John. :-)
The trailers for this movie had already done a wonderful job of convincing
me not to see this movie. Thanks for the confirmation.
This is the third film version of this story. The first, from 1958 or so,
starred Vincent Price; the second, from the 70s, starred Charlton Heston.
I'm not sure that 'third time lucky' is the operative rule here!
I totally agree with your interpretation of the film. I too thought it was
a good ride, (loved the use of the word insulate, because that is exactly
what all the films positive points did.) did you happen to see the site
www.godstilllovesus.org that markets the film. It too seems to create
discussion platform that would elevate some of the "deeper" plot points in
the film that get rather washed over in the film, another form or
insulation??
Interesting. I was intrigued by it, but I, too, hated the ending of Signs,
so maybe I'll wait for video.