The Banned I AM LEGEND Ending!, page 2

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 0 times

reply posted on 8-3-2008 @ 11:14 AM by TXMACHINEGUNDLR

Kind of a stretch? IT WAS A ZOMBIE MOVIE. I dont care what deep meaning people think the movie is trying to say....It was a Dawn Of The Dead ripoff...A boring one at that.

reply posted on 8-3-2008 @ 11:57 AM by smans

I think the ending is way better than the released one.

However, having said that I feel that altough this is better, it could also come across as an anticlimax, given the shoot from the hip american style explosion and heroics smovies that the US audiences love.

reply posted on 8-3-2008 @ 12:01 PM by Tinhatman

reply to post by smans

Yeah, failure of the American people to think beyond the The things go Kaboomie movie plot is why this ending was scrapped. Oh, well.
At least we can still buy books.

reply posted on 8-3-2008 @ 12:01 PM by 44soulslayer

Originally posted by Psychomike
I was deeply offended by the ending to I AM LEGEND that glorified suicide bombers. Knowing this film would play the Middle East, I consider it reckless in the extreme to portray suicide bombers as heroes. Guess what? There was an alternative ending. Not only was the unused ending better than the John Wayne style heroics at the end of the film, but it's closer to the feeling of the book. What's next Hollywood? Making heroes of plane hijackers? Watch the alternative ending here- BEFORE IT GETS TAKEN DOWN!
Sadly, that no one involved in the process of making this film had a problem with portraying a suicide bomber as a hero shows how out of touch we all are with terrorism.
www.gametrailers.com...

Absolutely pathetic statement to make. Frankly if you can watch that movie and automatically think that it glorifies suicide bombers, the terrorists have already won.

If you want to fight terror on your own terms... dont get scared by it. The hint is in the name "TERRORism". Dont allow them to change anything about your way of life and you have won. Give in to fear, give up your rights and enslave yourself in fear and guess what... they have won.

reply posted on 8-3-2008 @ 12:19 PM by swinggal

Originally posted by Tinhatman
reply to post by Unit541

the "Zombies in love" theme justifies a good portion of the movie IMO. Right after Smith captures "Barbie" Zombie, "Ken" zombie freaks and chases her out into the sun. Smith then records how the "Nightstalkers" have lost all semblance of societal structure, clearly misinterpreting Ken's reaction to Barbie's capture as base hostility and nothing more. The capture of Barbie results in Ken's quest for retribution against smith's character which would not have happened if in fact the "Zombies" had not been in love.

Two things to remember.

These are not Zombies. They are humans with a disease.

The book recounts how Smith's character became "Legend" because he was able to move around in the sunlight and went about murdering and capturing the Infected. He became a legend in the same sense as Dracula or a Werewolf type character is legend or Myth even. In the book only the infected survived and with no uninfected people left to be compared to they became normal people.

In my opinion the "they all lived happily ever after and cured the disease" ending was much more Hollywood. The whole movie was ruined by the 10 minute Ford Mustang commercial in the beginning.

Alternative ending would have saved the movie. The moment after the Zombies left and he looks at all the pictures on the wall and realizes that he was in fact the monster. Nice

I do not see the tie to Suicide Bombers at all. Sounds like something the OP may have heard on Sean Hannity or Glenn Beck.

[edit on 8-3-2008 by Tinhatman]

[edit on 8-3-2008 by Tinhatman]

[edit on 8-3-2008 by Tinhatman]

I really don't know why they didn't stick to the original 1950s book plot. I was so dissapointed that Hollywood stuffed up yet another classic. In the book the infected had 'vampiric' tendencies - not Zombie like behaviour. The woman he finds IS infected but she warns him to get out of the city because 'they' are coming to get him and kill him. She herself is infected, but can control the disease and so can the people where she has come from. But - they see him as a killer - HE is no longer the normal one, thus he becomes a legend.

He doesn't heed her advice and is captured, but before they kill him, she gives him a pill so he will feel no pain.

I mean, 'I am Legend' is a classic. Stephen King was inspired to be a writer because he read it when he was younger. Why do they mess with this stuff??? The book story is soooooo much better!!!

reply posted on 8-3-2008 @ 12:37 PM by bigbert81

reply to post by Beefcake

The cgi on the zombies was about the worst I've seen in a big budget movie.

I couldn't agree more. And especially with all the extra money they made from Ford to advertise their cars.

Makes you wonder, doesn't it?

P.S. I also hated that these zombies jaws somehow opened up so wide. Stupid. I guess this disease made it so that people could somehow unhinge their jaws at will to look more scary. What a joke.

[edit on 3/8/2008 by bigbert81]

reply posted on 8-3-2008 @ 12:42 PM by swinggal

I agree. Read the book.

Been two previous films based on the book too. 'The Last man on Earth,' and 'The Omega Man.' Neither which got it right either, but I liked the Omega Man at the time. The new I am Legend is just lame.

reply posted on 8-3-2008 @ 12:52 PM by Tinhatman

reply to post by swinggal

I agree wholeheartedly. Again, the Things go Kaboomie expectation of American audiences. I actually think that if you take out the mustang commercial and stick on the Alternative ending it would not be a bad movie overall. Also, these movies from books are only "influenced" by the book. Kind of like how "300" was "influenced" by history. There were actually Spartans and they did fight at Thermopalae but other than that?

A friend of mine hyped me up to see " 300" while it was still in theatres. It was such swill, I walked out after an hour. Actually got my money back too.

reply posted on 8-3-2008 @ 02:39 PM by The_unraveller

Cool, so sacrificing one to save many is glorified as suicide bombing... To be honest I can't see the logic in that.

Suicide bombers, bomb themselves for their religion, killing a bunch of infidels in the name of allah to meet some virgins at the end of the well-lit tunnel (sorry if this offended someone, this is meant for the extremists). And other suicide bombers bomb themselves in the name of their country (mostly as a last resort kind of attack). Where Will Smith bombed himself to save a woman that would afterwards save many.

So Armageddon glorifies suicide bombing as well (on a whole new level). Am I right or am I wrong?

I'm shooting the message not the messenger.

[edit on 8-3-2008 by The_unraveller]

reply posted on 8-3-2008 @ 02:44 PM by nyarlathotep

I am honestly disgusted with how the movie TOTALLY butchered the book. I know movies are generally different from books, but this was completely different.

In the movie he was a legend because he sacrificed himself to get the cure to the survivors camp. But in the book, he was legend because of all the vampires and half vampires he killed.

IMHO, this is the worst book to movie job I have ever witnessed[/rant]

reply posted on 8-3-2008 @ 04:23 PM by mrwupy

I just wish he would have grabbed the grenade and blew himself up at the beginning of the movie and saved me the trouble of watching it.

reply posted on 8-3-2008 @ 05:45 PM by dracodie

reply to post by TXMACHINEGUNDLR

its more of a rip-off "28 days later" , anyway OP there are many movies were the hero our the villain blow themselves up , why dont those movies bother you too , or does this movie has something in special?
Do you think that kids in the middle east wil start to blow themselves up because they saw Will Smith doing it?

reply posted on 8-3-2008 @ 06:00 PM by nyarlathotep

Originally posted by dracodie
reply to post by TXMACHINEGUNDLR

its more of a rip-off "28 days later" , anyway OP there are many movies were the hero our the villain blow themselves up , why dont those movies bother you too , or does this movie has something in special?
Do you think that kids in the middle east wil start to blow themselves up because they saw Will Smith doing it?

First of all, this was the original survival horror. Does anyone read books anymore? 28 days later, Night of the Living Dead, et al are ALL ripoffs of I Am Legend. The book was first written in 1954.

reply posted on 8-3-2008 @ 06:04 PM by dracodie

reply to post by nyarlathotep

i was refering to the motion pictures , not the books

reply posted on 8-3-2008 @ 06:10 PM by nyarlathotep

Originally posted by dracodie
reply to post by nyarlathotep

i was refering to the motion pictures , not the books

Even though 28 Days Later came first, it still ripped off I Am Legend, the book. How can I Am Legend rip off 28 Days Later when the book was written 50 years earlier?

reply posted on 8-3-2008 @ 06:20 PM by dracodie

reply to post by nyarlathotep

lol , i am saying that the movie i am legend tried to copy very badly the ambience of the movie 28 days later , i am not talking about the book

[edit on 8-3-2008 by dracodie]

reply posted on 8-3-2008 @ 06:25 PM by nyarlathotep

Originally posted by dracodie
reply to post by nyarlathotep

lol , i am sayng that the movie i am legend tryed to copy very badly the ambience of the movie 28 days later , i am not talking about the book

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. How can you not talk about the book? It came FIRST. 28 Days Later copied the ambience[sic] of I Am Legend. If you actually read the book, you would know what I am talking about.

reply posted on 9-3-2008 @ 05:33 AM by ivzm

By the O.Ps logic Tassadar crashing into the Overmind at the end of Starcraft glorified suicide attacks. Starcraft was probably played in the middle east at some point there fore, oh noes computer games make people terrorists terrorists.

reply posted on 9-3-2008 @ 06:26 PM by skyblueff0

Does Will Smith blowing himself up have anything to do with promoting suicide bombing...not really...but I can see your point. I mean the only reason why people choose to be suicide bomber is because they believe its noble to sacrifice themselves in order to preserve something important to them, unforunately their death were all in vein and served no noble purpose, they are just pawns for political games. Will Smith self-sacrifice in my opinion was noble and justify, he had to protect people he loved, he was put in a tough situation.

Was the alternate ending better than the original? I personally thought so, it goes so much better with what I first envision the theme to be from all of the interviews and reports I read about this movie. Basically when I first about the movie, I thought throughout the movie Will Smith hunts down these "monsters" just killing them. Then on one of his hunting trip, he ended up being the hunted. As he was about to be kill by these "monsters," he was saved by the "metapeople" basically people were partially affected by the virus, they went through all of the physical changes but still retain their sanity or humanity. This was when Will Smith questions his methods and actions, and try to find a way to cure them. (And yes he was the only Human alive!!)

P.S. I enjoy more happy or positive endings. I hate it when a hero dies, thus why I can never be a scriptwriter...the ending will always be the same.

reply posted on 11-3-2008 @ 04:06 PM by bodrul

can someone post a link to the alernitive ending?
since the one i have is the one where he blows him self up and *cough* glorifies sucide bombings*

what is the alternitive ending?

just found it

YouTube Link

it makes no sense
randomly C4 has magicaly appeard and put in place?

seriously if people have a problem with something dont watch it

[edit on 11-3-2008 by bodrul]