linksys

Robert Neville (Will Smith) is a brilliant scientist, but even he could not contain the terrible virus that was unstoppable, incurable...and manmade. Somehow immune, Neville is now the last human survivor in what is left of New York City...and maybe the world. But he is not alone. He is surrounded by “the Infected” - victims of the plague who have mutated into carnivorous beings who can only exist in the dark and who will devour or infect anyone or anything in their path. For three years, Neville has spent his days scavenging for food and supplies and faithfully sending out radio messages, desperate to find any other survivors who might be out there. All the while, the Infected lurk in the shadows, watching Neville’s every move, waiting for him to make a fatal mistake. Perhaps mankind’s last, best hope, Neville is driven by only one remaining mission: to find a way to reverse the effects of the virus using his own immune blood. But his blood is also what The Infected hunt, and Neville knows he is outnumbered and quickly running out of time.

from what ive read the evil night things in the book are vampires, but in the movie they are like some mutant s***. However going by the trailer the movie still looks like its going to kick some serious f***ing ass, espically if you love s*** like the omega man and what ever that kiwi movie was with the same kind of storyline minus scary monsters.

the omega man was also based on the i am legend book.

movie looks awsome but apparently they changed a lot when compared with the book.

The Last Man On Earth

You can watch the original movie on google which stars Vincent Price. The quality is ass but it's very watchable.

Looking forward to the new version and hopefully Hollywood don't f*** it and change the ending.

I still have trouble taking Will Smith seriously as an action hero.

Oh hell no.

Well yo are yall ready for me yet
pump it up prince!

prepare to be disappointed rev

I dunno, I think it looks pretty rad. I had no idea that it was a book, so everything I know about it is what I've seen from the trailer. I'm definitely looking forward to it.

saw the preview in cinemas, and looks wicked.

just saw this, pretty decent, he's not really in an action hero role, so much as just trying to survive.

THIS MOOFIE ROCKED MASSIVELY

totally awesome, loved it (even the ending which some people have issues with)

will smith was awesome in it;

coolest evar bad dudes, great effects

i wanna be i wanna be i wanna be like miiiiike POW

thought the movie was good. will smith rocks my world. id go gay for him!

the ending was pretty balls. kind of a non event. what was the ending like in the book?

i found a free ebook of Richard Matheson's 'I am Legend'.
i wont direct link but if u google it its pretty easy to find.

http://img101.imageshack.us/img101/4704/140309uf6.jpg


Overall not bad.
It should take you a couple of hrs to read it as it's only 96 pages long.

Pros:
- Not boring very short but intense story
- Matheson introduces alot of interesting horror concepts regarding the myths of Vampires and Zombies that have no doubt been copied by every Zombie/Vampire movie made after it was written in 1954!!

Cons:
- Very depressing feel to the whole story about a man caught in a hopeless situation.
- Therefore, it has a very 'flat' ending as well.


I havent seen the film yet but from what I've read about it, it seems they have tried to keep with the overall theme of the original story but changed a few background elements. Some examples are that the main character was obviously caucasian and he' wasn't a scientist instead he just an ordinary man. The original book is set in LA and not in NY where the film is based.

Personally I felt as though the movie was pretty good but far too short. Having not read the book, it's as though they have taken a couple of key bits out of it and hacked it together. Kind of like previous attempts at LOTR before the Jackson trilogy. 7/10.

The book itself is very short/small. It's not a huge hardback novel.

The ending as far as I'm aware is reasonably true to the book as well.

Reasonably No-spoiler review follows; safeish to read if you don't know the story beyond the trailers etc.

I was pretty happy with it overall. Will Smith played his role pretty well for once without needing to be allll dat.

They portrayed the deep loneliness / alienation of being a lone survivor well. The setting was pretty believable as a city that had died overnight - think 28 days later when the guy walks out of hospital.

The CGI was crisp and quite tidily executed, but the baddies lacked a certain something to me to make them fully believable. I don't know if it was a slight miss from the art direction or a technical limitation, but it wasn't overly jarring in any case.

Without going into plot spoilers, the ending was OK. If I have a complaint it is that it just 'happened' without really drawing on plot arcs. There was a lot of screen time left available to seed the story with feeders to make the finale more satisfying. The final 10 minutes or so really needed to be expanded on and properly threaded into the story. We could have easily gone with 10 minutes less of post-apocalypse scenery panning to add a more integrated finish.

3.5 / 5, probably deserves a bit more.

+5

Personally I felt as though the movie was pretty good but far too short

a moofie can never be too short

but a movie can be too short

just watched it, i liked it

that was cool how they set that trap for him, not as stupid as they first appear

I was one of those that was somewhat disappointed with ending. Will Smith definately played the role well though.

However going by the trailer the movie still looks like its going to kick some serious f***ing ass

Bit of a let down. Over all it was OK. Not the best movie, not the worst but above average. I don't really get why people are hating on the ending. For me the whole movie lacked a bit of something, just felt a bit hollow. I saw an advanced screening free tickets...I would have not been too satisfied if I had paid $14 to see it.

If you think the ending was a bit lame, watch it until about 5 minutes to go, and then switch to 'Black Sheep' and pretend it's the same movie, just jumped locations to new zealand.

got the ebook. we read it sometime

Cityscape was awesome, Will Smith good, special FX not worth the money, plot ordinary, ending bland. Wait for the DVD at least. Not worth shelling out money for at a cinema.

yeh woulda felt a bit chumped forkin out for gold class on this one

my mate who's been working in NYC the past 8 months said it was so freaky to see all these locations he recognised in such overgrown dead states with no one around, like seeing cafe's he eats at etc and esp the Grand Central Station part (where he was caught in the trap)

The CGI of the city is incredible imo, it looked extremely real to me for what must have been a ton of blue screen shooting.

But yeah, overall the movie is a bit hollow as its a pretty simple storyline, though fairly entertaining throughout.

last edited by partyhat at 23:15:44 01/Jan/08

They shot on location, no blue screens.. CGI edited everyone out.

i read they closed down 5 blocks and all the new yorkers were pissed off with willie.

movie was f***ing s*** imo

I agree, I robot was better.

I robot was nothing special ..
I am legend > I Robot

Yeah, I wasn't a fan of I Robot. I am Legend > I Robot.

Worst Movie EVA ( huge call ) "omega man" owns it Big time.

wow, tough crowd;

i pretty much hate all new moofies, and i really enjoyed it;

perhaps it was me doing it wrong :(

I liked it, but I loved it up until Spoiler:
he meets up with the chick and the kid, everything after that turned into a generic action movie, before that it looked like he was losing his head and going crazy, it would be been more interesting had they continued down the road of him going insane, not believing they were real or something

thought this was fkn awesome, beginning to end.
5/5 for me

5 isn't very high, why not 10/10

actually you're right.
now you mention it, I give this 7.4/7.4

I still have trouble taking Will Smith seriously as an action hero.

I still have trouble taking your mum seriously when she does that thing with her tongue...

i'd heard bad reviews, people saying it was s*** or just not very good. I thought it was pretty good (but went into it expecting s***). Would've been better if it could've gone in to the intelligence the mutants seemed to be exhibiting rather than just ending it like they did.

I still have trouble taking your mum seriously when she does that thing with her tongue...

Took you a month to come up with that zinger hey? You're getting slow in your old age.

To me it was just an american version of 28 days later.

The best part was when they set a trap for him.

Man this 28 days later story has been done to death, and it was never good to begin with... how awful was triffids...

I'm looking forward to Cloverfield... no zombies, cinema's lamest monster...

It wasn't too bad. Better than 28 days later :p

Saddest part of the movie for me was when the 'girl' died.

I see what you did there

samantha!

I was over the cgi though. Way too much and way too green screened for my liking. Men in suits ftw!

I thought she was a he all through the movie! :(

I'm fairly sure you were meant to.
That's why he always called her Sam til that bit. His daughter gave it to him to look after, so it was doubly painful for him to lose that last link as well as his only companion.

I am legendary (sequal) should see him walk through the gates at the start of the movie, then finds his wife and kid fine but married to another man zomg

His wife and kid were killed when the other helicopter hit theirs. Whilst they didn't show that, I thought it was pretty obvious

they are all dead teq...

MAYBE THEY SURVIVED OK

Not to mention HE is dead

yea saw this yesterday... the preview for cloverland was better then this whole movie

I thought the movie was really good. I agree that the ending could have gone differently... but I was still pretty happy with it. Still think Will could have survived and I don't understand why he didn't put Sam straight into one of the glass cages like the other animals and treat her slowly like he did with that "vampire" thing

lol, now you mention the trap layed by the KV victims it is possible, but i thought it was supposed to be left by him, you know he left all the manikins around for the kv's to go after them but didnt, plus he was going crazy so he might have forgotten about the trap (it was pretty much the same trap as the first one without the bag)

from what Ive seen of the trailers 'Cloverfield' looks like an American version of Godzilla which they have already done and it was turd.

how the f*** do you figure that spock?

a trap he just forgot about?

somehow i don't think the dolls were setup for them to go after..

spoiler tags Kat!

I agree with Reverend "Omega Man" way better, IAL was crap.

stinky, well everyone else started talking about it so I figured no spoilers were needed. I didn't give any spoilers away in my first post.

And Spock, the trap was set by one of the KV victims, at least that is how I read it. Hence why he had such a strong reaction to Fred being there.

i thought that was pretty f***ing obvious haha

they seemed to have that leader type one

ive read half of the i am legend novel. its pretty good so far. gonna go see the movie tomorrow, but atm the movie looks completely different to the book.

also warner brothers bought the rights to a sequel off of matheson.

last edited by ravn0s at 22:42:04 04/Jan/08

Kat, you definitely include a massive spoiler in one of your posts that wasn't mentioned anywhere else.

This post may contain spoilers. Just got back from it. I thought it was very f***ing entertaining but there were a couple of things about it that really s*** me off...

The city looked fkn insane with all the overgrowth and stuff. Even the animals looked fairly convincing. The bad guys looked f***ing RIDICULOUS! Seriously, stop f***ing using CG for humans... it can't be done convincingly yet. They looked absolutely stupid. That first time the "boss" bad guy sticks his head out of the door I nearly laughed because he looked so fake. That totally ruined the scare factor of the bad guys from that point on.

On that note, why the f*** does there have to be a BOSS bad guy!?!? This isn't a computer game.

SPOILER: When he gets caught in his trap and then falls on his knife... he has to crawl for f***ing ages because his leg is apparently wounded. Then, as soon as they fight off the attack, he magically gets up and starts walking around. LAME.

And in regard to the trap, I thought it was Will Smith who f***ed up and left the trap out... I'm not saying that's the only way it could be read, but it's pretty fkn lame if the boss bad guy set that up.

Overall, I thought it was a pretty good movie, but because of the disappointing visual effects used for the bad guys, it was never going to be as good as something like 28 Days Later.

The KV infect people were supposed to sort of retain their feelings etc, so the boss guy hated smith for capturing the girl..

It's not really apparent in the movie adaptation though, I think it would've been better if they stuck to the book's story.

how is it lame?

not 2 minutes before he had said they had degenerated completely, then they go setting traps

it was no his own trap, what he had amnesia and forgot he set it there? in the middle of the day

haha the fact that he was talking to fred asking wtf he was doing there, getting angry at him, shooting the place up.. you don't think someone who does those things would be capable of forgetting he set the trap?

another possible reading is he set it and then convinced himself someone else did, just to feel less alone. given this was right after he made the recording saying they had completely lost all human behaviours.

the implied reading may have been that he didn't set it, but it's definitely plausable that he did.

probably the reason you chumps didn't enjoy it is you refuse to explore other possibilities.

Seriously, stop f***ing using CG for humans... it can't be done convincingly yet. They looked absolutely stupid. That first time the "boss" bad guy sticks his head out of the door I nearly laughed because he looked so fake.

qft

how is it lame?

not 2 minutes before he had said they had degenerated completely, then they go setting traps

it was no his own trap, what he had amnesia and forgot he set it there? in the middle of the day

Not sure which bit you're referring to, but either way I think you're contradicting yourself. You know what "degenerated" means right?

that was the point, he thought they had completely degenerated into just beasts, lost all humaness, THEN next thing they are setting traps prooving they are smarter than you think

you must be serously high if you think he got caught in his own trap

last edited by paveway at 10:21:00 05/Jan/08

yea I agree with pave

from what you guys are saying, I think I'll wait till it comes out on DVD which will probly be next month.

I f***ing detest bad CGI. I read another review somewhere else of IAL and the guy said the same thing about the CGI. He also made a good point that Jurassic Park was made in 1992 and whilst the CGI in that is not totally convincing today, it's amzing that it was made 16yrs ago and had even passable CGI.
Also when I first heard about this movie being directed by the guy who made Constintine I didnt really expect it to be that good anyway because the CGI in that movie slopped on with a trowel and wasnt much better than some console games.

I know I'm derailing the thread into a rant about sub standard CGI.

i dont get the whinging about the cgi :S

for starters there f***ing zombie f***ing vampire non human like human creatures, so wether they actually move or look like a human means jack s***, better then having a heap of humans wearing brown robes with baby powder all over there face whilst wearing sunglasses (though thats still cool)...


i personally cried my eyes out during the movie, i have a german sheppard and everytime things got suspenseful i expected the worst for the dog and the tears kept flowing, Spoiler:
then after the dog dies and he goes to the music store and talks to the female doll, and then again when hes driving around and he looks at the passenger seat where his dog usually sits


seariously f***ed me up emotionally, however thats only because my dog and i are like super best friends.

other then the emotional rollercoaster i thought it was the best movie this year buts thats a biased opinion cause im a super huge fan of post apocolyptic films.

Saw it last night and the CGI was s***e. They shouldn't have even used CGI for the infected - why not use people and makeup? Much creepier.

the cgi was awesome

best zombies in a moofie evar

anyone who says otherwise is wrong

cept they are vampires not zombies

other then the emotional rollercoaster i thought it was the best movie this year buts thats a biased opinion cause im a super huge fan of post apocolyptic films.

LOL... is it the only movie you've seen this year by any chance?

that was the point, he thought they had completely degenerated into just beasts, lost all humaness, THEN next thing they are setting traps prooving they are smarter than you think

you must be serously high if you think he got caught in his own trap

I don't see why it's hard to believe that he could get caught in his own trap? Like someone else said, he started getting a little loopy. How did the zombies exactly replicate the trap? They weren't that smart, surely. Were they watching him talk to Frank? Did they understand that it would make him really confused if they used that mannequin? I'm not actually wanting answers to these questions because hopefully you see the point is that it's easier to believe he got caught in his own trap.

I can see the other option... it does make sense considering that they seemed to sorta be waiting right near where he got caught, but if the bad guys were smart enough to set up that elaborate trap, why weren't they smart enough to just cover themselves up so they can go out in daylight?

they learnt from the trap he set for the chick

it never occured to me once ever they he 'forgot' his own trap, that you never saw him setup or move the maniquine

heh... it never occurred to me that the zombie dudes did it:/ I guess it could have been one of those intentional bizzos by the writer/director to make people wonder about what the f*** happened.

i hate to sound like spook, but i reckon i'm right

^ I reckon you are too. It's the only conclusion I came to when I watched the movie.

LOL... is it the only movie you've seen this year by any chance?

ive seen just about every "blockbuster" movie this year and yeah i still consider i am legend to be the best of the crop, like i said im a huge post apocolyptic fan.


soon as i finished watching i am legend i got a craving to watch the postman, a film which most people consider to be complete ass, however i find to be a brillant master piece of post apocolyptic cinema and one of my all time favourite movies, that and water world, kevin costner rocks.

heh... it never occurred to me that the zombie dudes did it:/ I guess it could have been one of those intentional bizzos by the writer/director to make people wonder about what the f*** happened.

for someone who has more or less the same routine every single day for 1000 days forgetting he moved a manequin doll and setting up a trap is a huge f***ing thing to forget.

sure the "darkseekers/vampires/zombies" setting up the trap doesnt make much sense, like how did they get the tools and rope and all that s*** to set it up, also for creatures that live in such filth and darkness its kind of unbelieveable for them to construct such an elobrate and well placed trap.. regardless of how human they seem to behave but then again its a movie and that kind of s*** doesnt have to make sense

they learnt from the trap he set for the chick

I don't think so. They made a strong point in the movie that the infected have very little brain activity. His quote in the movie:

Behavioural note: an infected male exposed himself to sunlight today. Now it's possible decreased brain function, growing scarcity of food is causing them to .. ignore their basic survival instincts. Social de-evolution seems complete. Typical human behaviour is now entirely absent

You could argue they set the trap to get more food but I don't think so. That sort of behaviour would be at odds with the fact that they f***ing charge and try to devour anything they see.

It was his own trap which he got caught in when he started losing his mind. End of story.

Well it was his observation, doesn't mean it is real.

I would see one of them exposing themselves to sunlight as an evolutionary thing and that they are adapting. I wouldn't put it down to ignoring their basic survival instincts at all.

the only conclusion I came to when watching it was that they copied his trap. I never once thought about him "forgetting" that he'd set his own trap up. As was said before, he'd been doing the same thing for like...3.5 years was it?

I would see one of them exposing themselves to sunlight as an evolutionary thing and that they are adapting.

That's what I was originally thinking when I was watching the movie, except the movie never actually explored adaptation or anything complex. It might have been true if we (the viewers) saw something that he didn't, but we saw everything from pretty much his view. The movie focused more on the fact that they de-evolved and now act like a pack of animals, able to follow a scent of blood miles for miles, etc.

Well it was his observation, doesn't mean it is real.

His observation is all you go on in the movie, as again .. nothing else is really explored in the movie. Anything else is pure speculation, as the movie focuses more on emotion and less on intellectual stimulation.

I never once thought about him "forgetting" that he'd set his own trap up. As was said before, he'd been doing the same thing for like...3.5 years was it?

And as we said before, the counter-argument is that he was losing his mind, which he was. He went ape-s*** over the mannequin and stepped into his own trap.

You guys are making this movie sound way more complex than it really is.

last edited by parabol at 15:13:34 05/Jan/08

not his trap

I don't think so. They made a strong point in the movie that the infected have very little brain activity. His quote in the movie:

exactly, then they prooved him wrong by setting that trap

it's pretty clear that one big one the male he talks about had a bone to pick with him

concur.
Wasn't his own trap.

He thought they had no intelligence or social constructs and were completely primal instinctive in their behaviour.
Which I thought was the whole point of the 'leader' KV exposing himself to sunlight, to show that they retained emotions - and emotions denotes some form of intelligence.)

It's shown again when the 'leader' towards the end of the movie is ordering the others around (when Will Smith is in the car).

They have the intelligence to know how to flip it.

http://photo.gangus.com/d/26788-2/ackbar.jpg

WARNING: Whole post is written like you've seen the movie.. could be spoilers galore.

1) CGI was f***ing balls, use humans for humans - grab a few emos and they'd look like skinny weedy vampire type people.

2) Dogs dying in movies sucks :(.. about the only time I got that real nervous/scared feeling was when the dog went into the apartment block after the deer. Then of course was much upset when doggie got injured.

3) Ending sucks, someone mentioned it earlier - just as it was getting good, they turned it into an action flick with explosions and s***. Yay Hollywood.

4) Has to be his trap IMO - if the infected turned back into animals surviving on basic instincts then I doubt they could setup such an elaborate trap IMO. Moving the right dummy to somewhere he would see it, hiding the trigger in a pool of water, making the trigger some type of "clicky" device implying it was using electronics or something similiar.

5) Leave the crazy everything is dead in the world and I'm the last one left to the brits, 28 days later > I am legend.

However, with those things aside - I did find it enjoyable probably because it was better than what I expected.

wasn't his trap, you are wrong

for f***s sake

it wasnt his trap, obviously the zombie dudes set it

they were humans, just infected, with big old human brains

Can't be zombie trap, it's too complex for them.

THEY ARE HUMANS

i can see who's trap it certainly wouldn't be

it doesn't HAVE to be either way for f***s sake. jesus christ, way to limit your enjoyment of a movie. did you people ever take english at school? I swear they teach this s***...

it's the same dummy he said g'day to earlier on in the movie - red/orange hooded top and he called it fred. he even said something like 'nice sweater, dont leave it laying around'


surely if it was supposed to be one of his own traps they wouldn't make such a point of him talking to that dummy and highlighting it's sweater earlier on, and then fail to show him moving the dummy's around from time to time to suggest he'd simply forgotten one of his own traps. add to that the fact that he was driving along and happened to see the dummy out his left window from a distance and wtf'd at it being there - this doesn't suit a person simply forgetting that they'd set a trap somewhere. surely if it was his own trap, he'd go 'oh yeh I forgot I had put that dummy up there' instead of going into a whole syco rant that revolved around him not knowing why the dummy was there. and he'd also realise that he'd set a trap right by the dummy as well

It's pretty damn obvious that the dog set the trap..

no mang, the only guy left in the city who is a scientist forgot he set a trap and and forgot he moved the doll there

don't you know anything

srsly... i don't really care... but i think you're foolish to argue so strongly that it wasn't his. He even hallucinates at the end and sees his wife and daughter again.

dude a head that huge doesn't get things wrong ok

haha i'm just having fun now

Replying to:

surely if it was supposed to be one of his own traps they wouldn't make such a point of him talking to that dummy and highlighting it's sweater earlier on

and:

exactly, then they prooved him wrong by setting that trap

Haha so:

1. The zombies observed him talking to a mannequin with an orange hoodie, got either that one or another one exactly like it and put it in the street to attract him.

2. Then they hopped into a car and used it to tow the trap-car into position, or somehow lifted the trap-car with their bare hands into position.

3. They then tied complex knots and set up the wiring to complete the trap

Whatever, I think we've entered trolling territory because no one could possibly believe any of that ...

Firstly, they aren't Zombies.
Secondly, who is to say he didn't have a trap set up somewhere else that they moved and they put the dummy there as they witnessed him interacting with it.

The point is that he made an observation and it was clear that he was wrong. They had a pack mentality and they had a top dog that they followed.

Why reply to me, when there are so many other posts you can pick apart ;)

Was zombies trap...what jim said.

they die.. and then they're undead. how is that not a zombie? :)

ffs they arent zombies. they never died and came back to life. it was all made pretty clear when he was talking to the chick about survivors.

direct quote from the movie

All right, let me tell you about your "God's plan". Six billion people on Earth when the infection hit. KV had a ninety-percent kill rate, that's five point four billion people dead. Crashed and bled out. Dead. Less than one-percent immunity. That left twelve million healthy people, like you, me, and Ethan. The other five hundred and eighty-eight million turned into your dark seekers, and then they got hungry and they killed and fed on everybody. Everybody! Every *single* person that you or I has ever known is dead! Dead! There is no god!

they sound more like vampires to me :)

last edited by ravn0s at 19:52:19 05/Jan/08

I had no idea what they were til the start of this post. Movie didn't really give me the impression that they were vampires, other than the whole not being able to come into the sunlight bit.

thats why i wish they stuck more closely to the novel. in the novel the vamps talked and called for him to come outside. the females would all strip naked to try and get him to come out of the house.

zombies, reanimated dead that eat brains with very little concious thought
vampires, technically they are dead but have plenty of concious thought, drink blood, screw hot chicks, set elobrate traps.

We can call them BCP - Bad CGI People.

(And they didn't set the trap)

^^ yes they did ^^

For once I'm with paveway.

Haha so:

1. The zombies observed him talking to a mannequin with an orange hoodie, got either that one or another one exactly like it and put it in the street to attract him.

2. Then they hopped into a car and used it to tow the trap-car into position, or somehow lifted the trap-car with their bare hands into position.

3. They then tied complex knots and set up the wiring to complete the trap

Whatever, I think we've entered trolling territory because no one could possibly believe any of that ...

So he didn't leave his first trap behind? That iirc didn't involve many complex knots. I also thought they seemed to be a lot stronger than a normal human.

I like how everybody is going on about how the stalkers set the trap and backing it up with his mad and lonely rantings/already odd behaviour ;)

dude a head that huge doesn't get things wrong ok

wtf is that supposed to mean? Everyone makes mistakes.

it's the same dummy he said g'day to earlier on in the movie - red/orange hooded top and he called it fred. he even said something like 'nice sweater, dont leave it laying around'

Yeah because sane people/people who are all there do that kind of thing all the time... Why mention the sweater being distinctive, it's like he knew at the time it was going to be lying around somewhere.

so the boss guy hated smith for capturing the girl.

Among many other reasons I'd assume, such as he's food that has been avoiding them, and the fact he keeps kidnapping them for experiments. Even the most simple minded animals knows when something wanders into the herd and takes the young or weak and acts appropriately.

I doubt he forgot as such, just assume he's gone mad from the loneliness and may be trying to spice things up etc. If he was with it at the time he encountered the mannequin, wtf was with the random shooting and shouting at it? Wouldn't you just go up to it and investigate?

It wasn't a calm, what is this doing here, I should go and investigate.

last edited by predat0r at 20:50:16 05/Jan/08

last edited by predat0r at 20:50:30 05/Jan/08

Zombies made the trap.

Yes, but if you were *sure* you were the only person left and you *knew* you didn't leave the mannequin there then of course you're going to be freaked out as to how it got there. I would be.

it boggles the mind that people could think otherwise

Yes, but if you were *sure* you were the only person left and you *knew* you didn't leave the mannequin there

It was pretty obvious that he was losing his grip on reality. He wasn't entirely *sure* about anything he saw. He had conversations with mannequins, flipped out when he saw one by itself, flipped out during his first couple of conversations with humans, was completely holding onto the belief that there was no survival camp.

I'm just imagining a bunch of zombies quietly sitting there in intense concentration and planning, moving mannequins, tying knots and/or relocating traps.

Seriously, LOL guys.

Once again, they weren't zombies :)

zombies.

Why would will smith set a trap with the mannequin? Bad cgi dudes care not for mannequins - they just want his sweet, sweet blood. The boss bad guy was also in the vicinity of the trap and set bad cgi dogs on him. Convenient. And they had the whole night to set the trap (after boss guy saw how he set a trap earlier) and that's why Fred had moved from where he was at the video store during the day. Seems pretty straight-forward to me.

he didn't flip out 'when he saw one by itself' though - he flipped out when he saw the same mannequin that he was used to seeing regularly outside the video store, now sitting somewhere completely unexpected. his behaviour was a mixture between knowing it was suspect, and desperately hoping it was a living person as indicated by his actions - challenging it, shooting it, shooting up into buildings around him as though he realised they might be waiting for him to take the bait


and asif they were zombies, you troll

Why would will smith set a trap with the mannequin? Bad cgi dudes care not for mannequins - they just want his sweet, sweet blood.

not that I think will smith's character set the trap, but your point doesn't really make a lot of sense given that later on he seemed to use a dummy on that dock at night to get the infected to go toward it - he then appeared behind them in a car and started charging into them with it

and asif they were zombies, you troll

As if anyone (apart from the few purists in this thread) use the traditional definition of zombie anymore (ie. "reanimated corpse"). If there's a class of humanoids that are dirty and/or bleeding, and intent on ripping you apart at all costs = ZOMBIE.

Though in this movie, giving the zombie the cure didn't make the CGI look any more convincing. It was still dongs :/

So who's sending a letter to the writer/director to get a definitive answer?

no ur dongs. Idiot.

Read the f***ing book.

They are vampires of a sort. They are intelligent, and they have their own f***ing society. Deal with it.


And they originally had Actors playing the darkseekers, but they just didn't work and looked crap so they replaced them with CGI, so stfu about the CGI already.

Edit: Also Zombies typically eat brains. Darkseekers eat EVERYTHING. Remember, 90% of the world's population died outright, but did you see any corpses or bones?

last edited by Cl1nt at 22:18:32 05/Jan/08

guys listen to dint :V

I don't reckon it has anything to do with whether or not anyone is being purist about it - the thing here is that you're using the term 'zombie' to play down their ability to perform any sort of action other than mindlessly hunt for brains to feed on

Read the f***ing book.

They are vampires of a sort. They are intelligent, and they have their own f***ing society. Deal with it.

Who f***ing cares what the book says. Movie adaptations usually give a modified story and/or perspective. Sometimes they're very similar, sometimes they're not. It's like me going "BUT THEY CAME FROM HELL" during the movie adaptation of the Doom game. Interesting and true in some respect, but completely irrelevant to the movie.

There's nothing about vampirism (other than prowling at night), intelligence, own-society in the I am legend movie. If it's not explained in the movie, it's not meant to be part of the story of the movie.

And they originally had Actors playing the darkseekers, but they just didn't work and looked crap so they replaced them with CGI, so stfu about the CGI already.

Oh boohoo, a bit defensive there?

i thought it was pretty clear in the movie that they were vampires.

the whole fanged teeth and blood drinking didnt clue you in? not even daylight killing them?

fyi you could see their reflections and I also saw one eating a deep dish pizza loaded with garlic.

not vampires

i haven't read the last 2 pages of dribble,

if you think he forgot a trap he set, you're f***ing high put down your ice pipe

if everyone agreed on everything every single thread would be about a page long.
the last 2 pages have been pretty funny really.

i haven't read the last 2 pages of dribble

That's ok. It should cancel out the fact that you didn't pay attention to most of the movie either :)

well i've watched it twice so maybe you should watch it again and take it in properly

No I'm just sick of you bitching and crying about it parabol.

No I'm just sick of you bitching and crying about it parabol.

Crying about what.

I was perfectly content with the movie until people came in making s*** up and making it sound more complex than it really was. I love intricate and intellectually stimulating movies, but unfortunately this wasn't one of them.

lolol he forgot teh trap man

I love intricate and intellectually stimulating movies, but unfortunately this wasn't one of them.

it never intended to be one

it never intended to be one

I never said it did.

Parobol is a f***** lolz

you wouldn't take him hunting, HE MIGHT FORGET THE TRAP YOU SET LOL

I generally watch movies for entertainment and to provoke thought and discussion. seriously does it kill you guys so much to consider other explainations and possibilities?

of course the implied reading is that the infected humans made the trap for willy.. but if you refuse to discuss anything about a movie/book/whatever other than its flaws (or how the ending was s*** or how the cgi wasnt the best or how it wasnt like the book) you end up with nothing else gained, no further discussion and no further enjoyment.. if you actually got any in the first place.

way to take the fun out of a movie guys. sheesh!

yeah way to go guys jiminy cricket

Personally I loved the movie and I actually think it's more interesting that people seem to have so many different opinions about it all. Thread would be so empty if everyone just agreed on everything

I mentioned further back in the thread that u can download the free ebook of the original 1954 "I am Legend" by Richard Matheson if you simply google it and hunt around a bit or pm me.

After reading the craziness of this thread I strongly suggest you guys get the book and have a quick read as its only 96 pages long.

The reason why I say this, is not because the book explains the movie. From what I've read about it the film keeps only the very basic theme/plot and main character's name 'Robert Neville'. A heck of alot of other aspects of the book have been changed.

No, why I suggest you read the book is because Matheson discusses and challenges many myths about 'Vampires' and the 'Undead' through the character of Robert Neville. I found it very interesting seeing that book was written 53 years ago!! Some books and films based on or containing themes regarding the 'undead' and 'Vampires' have no doubt been inspired or have drawn from concepts introduced in this book. I do stress 'some' not all. I wouldn't be surprised that films like 'Night of the Living Dead', '28days' and 'Day of the Triffids' were influenced by this story.

One point you guys seem to be making is the whole 'are they Vampires or Zombies?'.
I'd say technically they arent Zombies beacuse in the story they try and tempt him out of his house by actually calling his name, rocking his roof and some females actually get naked and entice him sexually so they do have some basic cognitive function that puts them on a higher status than shuffling corpses.
I think they are more aligned with Vampires, going by the book but without any supernatural powers. Matheson undoes all the Vampire mythology by explaining plausible reasons why the Vampire creatures do what they do and what they are afraid of e.g sunlight, garlic, crucifixes and mirrors and how they can surivive being shot. About half way through the book it's almost as if there are 2 types of Vampire. One that is referred to as the 'True Vampires' or the 'Living/Alive Vampires' the ones that spread the virus and the other type of 'Dead Vampire Zombie' or decomposing Vampire that it is dead (heart has stopped beating) due to many reasons but mainly lack of blood that has caused the germ to hemmorrage all the cells in the still animated body. The body would slowly decompose to dust particles that get blown about to infect others. So it's not a human 'Zombie' conjured by supernatural forces as such.

Human -> Infected -> Vampire -> Vampire Zombie -> Dead

Near the end of the book the character of Neville hypothesises that like all viruses etc mutation occurs and gives rise to a hybrid. Hence, why some of the Vampire type creatures are smarter or havent been affected by the virus as much.

It's all very confusing I know. I'll have to read it again myself. I'd be interested to hear what you peeps who've read the book, think.

All I can say is that it's a shame that they didnt stay closer to the original story. Although, I know making a big-budget film is extremely difficult and they would have had their reasons.

The book actually sounds pretty cool, i'll have to check it out.

They have a pack mentality/social structure which denotes a form of intelligence, you cannot deny this as it's clearly depicted in the movie with the 'leader' and knocking the car over, street poles onto it and so on.

The whole trap thing, you're kiddin' if you think after 3+ years you'd act calmly if something 'bizarre' like that occurred. Fight of flight for a start is why he has such an animated reaction to it, you'd be scared of who the hell moved it and is messing with you (Which is why he shoots into nearby buildings) and probably wondering if you are losing your head about you compounding the whole perplexing situation.

As for the mannequin on the dock,
For all intents and purposes you can assume there is blood there to attract them and the whole mannequin being there this time is just the whole 'Hollywood misleading the viewer' for suspense [seeing silhouette which you think is Will Smith with 394829034 KV's running at him]. (there wasn't a need for a mannequin when he captures the female which shows its unnecessary).


oh as for intelligence... The leader KV in the house sure knew what the f*** a gun was when it was pointed at him and he jumped out of the way and over the railing pretty damn quickly before will smith could fire it..... I reckon it requires a bit of intelligence to recognize what a gun is and what it does... Whether through experience of being on the receiving end of the gun, or through observation - Recognition and memory = intelligence.

In other words, the KV set the f***in trap, it's pretty obvious they are meant to be alot more intelligent that he thinks they are, it's spelled out throughout the movie.

[edit] and as someone else puts it:

The vampires set up the trap. If you recall, they tracked the woman, the boy and Will Smith back to his home and marked it with a leaky blood bag for them to ambush the following day. In addition, the vampires strategically took out the UV lamps first when they rampaged his condo. Another vampire was making a hole in the roof as an entrance point. All of these events demonstrated they were intelligent beings so it shouldn't suprise you that they set up that trap as well.

last edited by J at 03:13:48 06/Jan/08

last edited by J at 03:14:08 06/Jan/08

the zombies were HUMANS, just infected;

they still had human brains and no doubt were as smart as HUMANS, just their sole purpose in life was to try and eat will

im using the term zombie in the sense that the infected HUMANS want to eat his brain

perhaps it would be easier for all the retards to understand if we were saying

"the infected humans set the trap"

they were smart enough to follow will and the chick home, and then not attack until the next day when they had more darkness and could be better organised

they obviously were still able to think for themselves

last edited by Spook at 07:47:27 06/Jan/08

Well I just saw it again and I can definitely see why so many people thought the "zombies" set the trap... it certainly could seem that way.

Just because I enjoy the idea more that he was going insane (I think that it's deeper to assume that the zombies were mostly stupid and that Will Smith was a psycho) here are some things I noticed the second time around, or confirmed from the first time:

1) Will Smith's hair is grey by the end of the movie??? I can't remember it being grey at the start... but I do kind of remember some talk of a timeline. Depending on what is said about how much time goes past, the grey hair could indicate that quite a few years go by between the start and the end of the movie where he gets caught, giving him plenty of time to change the dolls around and forget about it or get confused.

2) The MANNEQUIN MOVES!!!! Well, at least Neville thinks it does: in the first shot of the mannequin as Neville looks out the window and sees Fred in the orange jacket, Fred's head turns to look at him. This definitely happens. Clearly, it's just a mannequin though, indicating that, yes, he is going crazy and could have easily forgotten about the trap. This freak out is backed up again when he sees his wife and child in his own home a little bit later.

3) I don't know about you, but after seeing it twice, I still didn't know how the trap worked. I think that even if the zombies were just infected humans, it gives them too much credit that they worked out how to do it. Like I said before, if they could work out how to do something that complex, why couldn't they just cover themselves up during the day, or work out how to open a door?

4) If you still don't like my third argument about the trap, you might remember that when Neville is setting up his trap, HE USES A BOLT GUN TO BOLT THE CHAIN INTO THE ROAD. 'nuff said IMO.

Either way, I don't care what other people choose to think about what happened... as long as you get enjoyment out of whatever it doesn't really matter. I'd say it was in fact intentionally done like this so people debate about it.

If the trap was set by him it would of had a cloak to cover the zombie so it wouldn't get burnt by sunlight...which the trap did not have.

last edited by r_mazing at 13:34:25 11/Jan/08

you should use a .avi instead of relying on going to the cinema to work that stuff out - you'd be amazed at what you missed our even outright got wrong - even after two visits to the cinema

I don't think it's very deep at all, the movie goes out of it's way in several places to suggest that he's going at least a bit barmy - I don't think that was ever in dispute. it has little to do with whether or not he set the trap though

Thanks for coming round Billy

your self-deception is worthy of shock therapy ticcles

I don't think much time progressed in the movie at all, because the version number of the antidote remained the same. Surely if years had passed then the version number would have increased at least once as he tried new ones etc? I don't think it's very deep at all either.

I think you're just reading too much into something which isn't there. From the sequence of events, its pretty obvious the idea the movie is trying to put accross is that the head infected guy setup the trap to get back at him for setting his other trap. I don't think the movie has enough depth to bother reading anything more complex into it than that. I don't think its the sort of movie that expects the viewer to have to think deeply about anything, it makes sure it serves up everything you need to know and puts it right there in your face.

Also, only 3 years passed between the infection starting, and when we see him in the movie, they mention that at least a couple of times. Yeah I did notice he'd gone grey at the end, but I dunno, I guess living like that would be pretty stressful and enough to turn anyone grey over the course of a few years.

it was his own trap

(why are people arguing over a s*** movie anyway?)

He was grey to begin with in 2012. The run in the mustang(i think it was) at the start...grey hair I'm pretty sure it was the first thing I noticed.

I think that even if the zombies were just infected humans, it gives them too much credit that they worked out how to do it.

Yeah it was a bit inconsistent or not well explained how smart they actually were. Spoiler:
They were able to follow the car to where he lived, managed to remember the precise location.

cept they are vampires not zombies

they are neither - they are infected with a mutated virus, exactly as per the 28 days/weeks storyline (which IMHO is the single most exhilarating and thrilling storyline in popular movies atm, make 3 of those per year and i will be happy for ever).

the beautiful rendering of the post-apocalyptic New York was breathtaking, and the flashbacks as per the Lost-style of story-telling kept the intrigue developing neatly for a 90min movie.

the ending was a bit ho-hum, but it can't all be they live happily ever after stuff. in fact usually it's better when it isn't.

re the trap - it definitely wasn't the zombies, they never once showed any indication of intelligent behaviour in the movie so why or how could they make a trap? That's just ridiculous.

It's far more plausible that the Fresh Prince in his near-delirious state simply forgot about his own trap (and it was designed exactly as per the other one he set which did catch an infected).

You Infected-Trap crew need a cluepon.

edit: also how f***ing awesome and badass were the vamypres in 30 days of night?!?!

last edited by infi at 14:32:58 11/Jan/08

re the trap - it definitely wasn't the zombies, they never once showed any indication of intelligent behaviour in the movie so why or how could they make a trap? That's just ridiculous.

you dont reckon its smarts to follow will home, and then not attack?

but instead come back the next nite when they have more time?!?!?!?!?

that says smarts to me

if they were dumb, they would have just followed him home and started attacking straight away

yeah they got their engineer infected to design the trap, check all the material tolerances etc, they got their make-up infected in to dolly up the mannequin and the BSA licensed infected to construct the trap according to original design specifications...

do you think the boss infected is a mean boss, like would they get union breaks and overtime etc?

im just a believer that even though the bad guys were infected, they still had human brains and were able to use them

you do know the easter bunny isn't real, right?

infi
you suck at getting it

OK SO :

I thought this was an awesome movie. Really enjoyed it. I think the CGI was good, and although the victims didnt look 'real', they werent meant to look human anymore so who cares.

Even though some people found this slow and boring - I think thats the point. It highlights the absolute isolation and desperation of the situation.

The ending was disappointing. If you know the ending for Omega Man, I think it would have made alot more sense and been a lot more satisfying end. In the end of this movie they get the guy in the end, in a fountain - so that the infected drink his blood from the fountain and were cured.

IT WAS NOT HIS TRAP. There are so many things that make this clear :
The manequinns are highlighted as his friends in the beggining, his only source of near normalcy. You dont see him moving them around, you see him treating them as friends on the street, with names etc.

When he captured the girl victim, the 'boss' threatens his safety coming out into the light after her. Willie puts this down to testing the tollerence or building a resistance to the light - but I know that my and my bf assumed an emotional connection. So when hes recording his findings, it hints that there may be more going on than he assumes.

Especially when he comes across THEIR trap. They have used one of his manequinns as bait, and have used one of his traps to capture him, displaying high intelligence. After all - they are humans mutated by a virus - doesnt automatically assume they have lost all intelligence. And this scenario just makes the whole thing all the more scarier.

Loved it!

First half = great.

Second half = s*** house.

Oscar nomination for the dog.

it's his own trap

If the trap was set by him it would of had a cloak to cover the zombie so it wouldn't get burnt by sunlight...which the trap did not have.

That is by far the strongest argument I've read in this entire thread.

Oscar nomination for the dog.

QFT.

Like I said, I enjoy it more to think that Neville was going crazy and set it himself than to credit the bad dudes with that much intelligence.

If the trap was set by him it would of had a cloak to cover the zombie so it wouldn't get burnt by sunlight...which the trap did not have.

if we assume that this trap was laid a long time ago by the fresh prince who has since forgotten about it - it's not hard to believe that the cloak may have become loose or displaced with wind or other weather/zombie activity/animal activity/etc

is it possible that the trap was one he laid a long time ago and didn't use, and the zombies used it against him by luring him there with the mannequin?

they are zompires or Vambies (that should stop all the arguing) now my 10c worth ...how was it an old trap,what was the bait for the zompires there was "NO BLOOD" to attract them FFS ????????

how do you know that?

nah it's not his own trap

I watched the movie ? the only blood was from the back of his negro head and there were 3 zompire dogs and a zompire waiting for him because everyone else is Dead .

it's not his own trap, you see one of the zombies holding back and then releasing the zombie dogs after the fresh prince cuts himself free of the trap.

so? the zombies could have found him trapped and been waiting until the sun went down. the dogs have no connection to the trap.

okay and how the f*** would the zombies know to use a mannequin as bait if they are stuck hiding in the dark all day?

no, no, no, none of this is making sense at all

It was the zombies.

the fact that they can hold and then release the zombie dogs as their will implies intelligence

why?

okay and how the f*** would the zombies know to use a mannequin as bait if they are stuck hiding in the dark all day?

wtf does being allergic to light have to do with intelligence?

are real vampires stupid?

no, ur

if the infected are stuck inside all day, how do they know Fresh Prince places any significance on mannequins inasmuch as he would be drawn to one. all of his mannequin activity would be during the day time.

noob.

being inside doesn't mean you cannot see things outside

nor is any significane on mannequins required to have the idea of using one as a lure

okay and how the f*** would the zombies know to use a mannequin as bait if they are stuck hiding in the dark all day?

no, no, no, none of this is making sense at all

Cause it was one of his own traps he's just losing his mind at that point.. remember he traps in front of the dark areas.... ..... .... ..................................

http://img179.imageshack.us/img179/6784/d106e6a7f06ebd72412770ewg7.gif

last edited by reload! at 23:49:55 11/Jan/08

remember he traps in front of the dark areas.... .....

Wasn't the trap he caught the girl in actually in the dark and the trap pulled her out into the sun?

yep

but it is just as plausible to design traps for when they are roaming at night in the open...

Yes, but seeing he barracades himself inside and hides in the bath tub with his dog. I doubt he's going night hunting......

trap them at night collect them at dawn.

I've got a bridge for sale

the reverse happened to fresh prince right? they were crawling to him as the sun set.

either scenario is equally possible so get ur head out of ur ass. (except for the whole infected having logic thing lol. should we have an infected for president? how awesome would that be?)

I think that people who so strongly argue one way or the other are infected...

r_mazing's comment is still the only one that legitimately challenges the "he set it himself" argument.

i just saw the movie again. the mannequin never moves like billy said.

also how could he have set the trap a long time ago when we see the exact same mannequin near the beginning of the movie at the dvd store? he even calls it the same name. also it would be a pretty big f***en coincidence that the main vampire comes out of the building with dogs right where roberts trapped himself in his own trap.

quote from the movie:

Behavioral note - an infected male exposed himself to sunlight today. Now it's possible decreased brain function or growing scarcity of food is causing them to... ignore their basic survival instincts. Social de-evolution appears complete. Typical human behavior is now entirely absent.

he theorised why the main vamp would come out into the sun. he was obviously wrong about brain function and social de-evolution. the vamps did too many things to suggest that they were intelligent to a certain extent:

1. the vamps had a god damn leader, suggesting there was some kind of social hierarchy
2. they new he goes to the dock during the day since they tried to ambush "robert" on the dock
3. they remembered where he lived and came back the following night in full force
4. they took down the uv lights when attacking his house
5. a vamp created a new entry into his house
6. the vamp noticed a gun and jumped out of the way

i cant believe how long this stupid debate has gone on for. but i guess it will continue unless we get an answer from the director to silence the idiots.



last edited by ravn0s at 00:28:55 12/Jan/08

The problem is, there is so much to be assumed for both sides of the argument.

rav... I was debating whether or not I should bother writing a reply to your post... and then I read your final comment. I'm going to argue like Jim does - blunt, and with as little explanation as possible.

i just saw the movie again. the mannequin never moves like billy said.

Wrong. If you can't see the head move you're an idiot!~!#!#!@#@!$#@!45rrr (take that) Can someone upload that bit so we can all look at it??? It's probably less than 2 seconds long.

1. the vamps had a god damn leader, suggesting there was some kind of social hierarchy

I agree that there was a leader. I can't speak for other vompie colonies... but this guy didn't really do much. If that's "damn good" then so be it.

2. they new he goes to the dock during the day since they tried to ambush "robert" on the dock

They went where the only food/human/non-infected human was. f***... I just re-read your comment and it's totally retarded. Feel free to ask me to explain why it's retarded, other than what I already wrote.

3. they remembered where he lived and came back the following night in full force

Yes they did. I don't see your point here? Intelligence/memory... I guess you could argue they're the same.

4. they took down the uv lights when attacking his house

Correct again. And pointless again. Or does it take a PhD to work out that the big bright things cause burning?

5. a vamp created a new entry into his house

A vompie used its bare hands to tear a whole in the roof because it was too stupid to use the front door, despite being smart enough to rig an elaborate trap (allegedly).

6. the vamp noticed a gun and jumped out of the way

See note about bright lights.

There is really no point there that you have made about the things that zampires can do that animals like dogs and the great apes can't do. The difference is, great apes and other animals wouldn't be able to see a trap being set up once and then re-create it.

Srsly though, when I saw it the second time after reading comments here, I totally saw that the zampires set up the trap - it does make sense. There was the hole in the building next to the trap, the boss dude seemed to be waiting there, it was like a day by day account of Neville's life and we didn't see him set it up. All that I totally agree with. But to be completely blind to the other side of the argument is like me arguing this exact point on the internet.

i just saw the movie again. the mannequin never moves like billy said.

Yes it does.

It moves its head, you can tell just by looking. That's one of the reasons I assumed he was going loony.

The bottom line is I accept if the writer says it's meant to be an infected trap. The way it was portrayed in the movie, they threw in many things that almost deliberately throw you off the trail.

When the infected guy poked his head out in the sun, I assumed they were adapting to the sunlight or at least they were able to tolerate the pain to an extent if they wanted. Then Will Smith comes in and says they are now completely dumb. I mean, we don't see anything they HE doesn't see, so why would he be wrong (apart from being possibly insane, which complicates matters further).

So in summary, I think the movie could have been done better.

Here's the video:




last edited by parabol at 01:39:37 12/Jan/08

Clearly the head moves.

haha yer i just realised that if they knew he was at the dock during the day, then they should have known where he lived as well.

bugger i thought billy was talking about when we first meet fred at the dvd store, not at the trap. after re-reading his comment i dont know why i thought that. the head does move though at the trap.

billy we obviously both have different definitions for intelligence. imo everyone animal is intelligent to some degree. however, this does not mean i think they are all "smart" or "clever" like us. billy would you consider an infant intelligent?

but seriously, the whole trap sequence was set up from the moment we met fred to show that the vamps arent as dumb as robert thinks.


last edited by ravn0s at 02:27:44 12/Jan/08

hmmm, this thread appears to be going all planeonatreadmill on us, whats the rest of the internets saying?

http://blog.wired.com/underwire/2007/12/reviewi-am-lege.html

The film also elects not to examine an increasingly intriguing interaction between Neville and an alpha male vampirelike zombie, which Neville dismisses as brain damage in a video log. Wait, a supposedly human-vestige-free vampire laid a trap for you? Holy crap! Dig in! This is exactly what I want to see in a science-fiction thriller -- a vicious battle for survival between a pseudo-intelligent (at least enough to form a hierarchy) undead society and the last surviving humans. That's exactly the line-blurring, perspective-flopping, trippy, philosophically engaging dialogue that the best of science fiction can, and should, provide. Who would win? Who deserves to win? This is the kind of stuff I want to keep me tethered to my seat, not a weird-string of God-like intervention that keeps me furrowing my brows in impatience and rooting around for the last Junior Mint.

http://www.themovieblog.com/2007/12/i-am-legend-review

This one killed me. Will Smith is keeping careful detailed notes and memos as any good scientist would do. He even makes this video entry into this computer about how he noticed one of the infected guys stuck his head into the light for a second, which was unnatural behavior for them. However, in another scene, one of the infected (minor spoiler) sets an elaborate booby-trap for Smith to fall into. These are supposed to be mindless rage machines… and they this one shows complex reasoning and planning… and Smith never mentions it again in the movie… ever. I know that’s a minor point… but it really stuck out.

http://my.spill.com/forum/topic/show?id=947994%3ATopic%3A58326
undecided discussion

http://malaysia.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080108064649AAHfn19
more discussion

http://www.sfsignal.com/archives/006011.html

The scene where Neville, in his descent to madness from loneliness, falls into his own trap was incredibly intense and, to me, one of the best scenes in the film.

so, it seems we will never have an answer

other than this one, the zombies did it

either scenario is equally possible

many things are possible, but clearly your suggestion is not reasonable infi


billy, if you go back to the third or fourth page in this thread you'll see some reasonable comments from me across a couple of posts - some or all of which haven't even been reasonably responded to, least of all by you!

ironically, right after one of my earlier comments you said

srsly... i don't really care... but i think you're foolish to argue so strongly that it wasn't his.

also:

r_mazing's comment is still the only one that legitimately challenges the "he set it himself" argument.

you're referring of course to his comment on page 3 where he said:

Was zombies trap...what jim said.

couldn't agree with you more :D

haha. the reason I didn't respond to so many people's comments was because I didn't care enough, and I agree with a lot of the "zampire set the trap" arguments anyway. I responded to rav's to show why he shouldn't call me an idiot:(

PS As ifn't 100 posts per page...

that would mean I'd have to click into the options somewhere and change something :(

These are supposed to be mindless rage machines… and they this one shows complex reasoning and planning… and Smith never mentions it again in the movie… ever. I know that’s a minor point… but it really stuck out.

He has inadvertantly made my point for me. Something so significant should have been highlighted by the director as it is a change in the character dynamic. Instead it was dismissed to the continuation of the story.

* Note on the mannequins. They did not just vibrate into the positions in the stores where you see Fresh Prince interacting with them. He would have placed them there over a space of time to satisfy his own needs for "social interaction" e.g. Castaway. It makes far more sense that he would relocate a mannequins into another contrived situation for his own stimulation, than that an infected would make the logical leap that Fresh Prince values mannequins for social interaction even though they aren't alive.

the vamps were waiting there for him (until sunset) with dogs. they knew he was there since before sunset, so it was their trap.

case closed.

Wrong.

i think we need the harly boys.

theres an obvious reason why it wasn't his own trap.

think about it, the trap was out in the open. the trap didn't have the tarp or whatever he used to protect the vamps from sunlight. so if it was his the vamp would have been dead by the time he came back to collect it in the morning.

i can't imagine he'd have much need for dead vamps. THEREFORE, it was a vamp trap set for him.

he interpreted the male the day before exposing himself to sunlight as a lack of intelligence, rather than what it was: a threat, an intimidation, from a creature with intelligence.

ah no. see how according to you the vamps set the trap in the night waiting for him to get caught in the day, and they were waiting for him when he got caught as the sun set the crawled closer?

well, this equally could have been a trap FP set for the infected during the day waiting for one to get caught at night and then he would come an collect the caught specimen at sunrise.

it cuts both ways, i guess. i have given up caring, but my point is it's ambiguous. the thing that tips me to the "It's his own trap" argument is that the plot focusses all about him and his interaction with the mannequins.

Not once do you see an infected near a mannequin. It's not on the radar... A good storyteller would have made that connection to the audience.

He wouldn't go out at night to collect it, he would have to go back the next day.

Day.

Sun.

No Tarp.

Dead Vamp.

Useless.

nF's point.

I don't see where the head moves but even if it did it is merely to point out that isolation plays on a man's mind. NOT that he forgot his on trap

think about it, the trap was out in the open. the trap didn't have the tarp or whatever he used to protect the vamps from sunlight. so if it was his the vamp would have been dead by the time he came back to collect it in the morning.

Yes, make sense .. BUT that's the level of detail I'd expect to be overlooked easily and become a plot hole. Can't really use that as definitive evidence that it was set up for him.

I don't see where the head moves but even if it did it is merely to point out that isolation plays on a man's mind. NOT that he forgot his on trap

You can't have it both ways (he's crazy + infected trap) in the same scene. Though it seems that's what they did in the movie, and that's just bloody retarded.

Also for those who still can't see it:

http://homepage.powerup.com.au/~boldajis/images/lhead.gif

last edited by parabol at 12:25:16 12/Jan/08

You can't have it both ways (he's crazy + infected trap) in the same scene. Though it seems that's what they did in the movie, and that's just bloody retarded.

Why not? Why can't he be so shocked by the statue being there that he sees it move in his own mind? The majority of the shots are from his point of view so it is highly possible.

Plus, with such a close proximity to the infected I think it is pretty obvious it was them. I mean what? 3 metres from where they are? Seems a tad suss to me

Why not? Why can't he be so shocked by the statue being there that he sees it move in his own mind?

Obviously because it strengthens the view that he's just crazy and he ran into his own trap. Basically if you're trying to make a point in a movie without being too obvious, you give the audience hints but NO throwing of red herrings like the head-turning and his quote where he says they're all dumb (after your initial guess that they are adapting in some way).

It's a failure of the movie. Like watching prison break where they show you completely unrelated stuff to build suspense and then you feel like bashing them afterwards for deceiving you.

have any of you peeps read the pdf of the book yet?

A good storyteller would have made that connection to the audience.

uh no its not. a good story doesn't fill all the gaps, its the gaps that let the audience connect with the characters. the gaps build intrigue, they help build a sense of tension. if the movie had told you everything without ambiguity, then it makes for a boring watch. story telling 101, is tell the audience as little as possible. its only retards who can't follow this logic.

hell, even scooby doo they don't tell you who the villain is until the very end. did that upset you too infi?

Yes, make sense .. BUT that's the level of detail I'd expect to be overlooked easily and become a plot hole. Can't really use that as definitive evidence that it was set up for him.

ok theres more to it than that, uh lets see, theres a MANNEQUIN there. why would he have done that? why would he move one of his mannequins right into the middle of a trap? a trap that he apparently built. nope that'd be stupid. and it wouldn't have been his trap, because the vamp would have likely escaped even if it was a covered trap.

the whole idea that it was his own trap only makes sense if you believe that the vamps are completely unintelligent, which is what neville thought. its why he walked right into the trap. he says it as a special note on the video, as a way of explaining the lack of logic in what the alpha male did. this extra note is a red herring. aka, it throws you off the trail a bit. its also a hint to his weakness, which is his arrogance.

You can't have it both ways (he's crazy + infected trap) in the same scene.

he wasn't going crazy, he just believed that he was losing his mind because the mannequin had moved. he walks straight into the trap because he can't believe that the vamps are intelligent. you're only saying its s*** because you missed the point.

Plus, with such a close proximity to the infected I think it is pretty obvious it was them. I mean what? 3 metres from where they are? Seems a tad suss to me

Kat's comment is the same as nef's:

the vamps were waiting there for him (until sunset) with dogs. they knew he was there since before sunset, so it was their trap.

case closed.

As I said, you're assuming too much. How do you know they were waiting for him?

How do you know they werent waiting for him ??/ game over man game over.

he wasn't going crazy, he just believed that he was losing his mind because the mannequin had moved.

Are you trying to say that he saw it move but he wasn't crazy? Right ...

you're only saying its s*** because you missed the point.

Haha, whatever mate. Just due to the fact that there are so many threads on the internets about this topic is evidence enough the movie could have been executed better. I mean both possible sides of the story are insanely simple but there's enough inconsistency in the movie to argue either way.

last edited by parabol at 13:11:24 12/Jan/08

Because they have nests/homes. And they were in a different building then normal.

You normally go home, you dont stake out a place, unless you have a reason to. Like waiting at a trap.

You normally go home, you dont stake out a place, unless you have a reason to. Like waiting at a trap.

Who the f*** was staking out a place???

How do you know they were waiting for him?

i think you've misunderstood my point. they were waiting at the entrance of the building (or window whatever it was) until the sun went down. hence i said they were there before sunset. thats on screen, not an assumption.

Haha, whatever mate. Just due to the fact that there are so many threads on the internets about this topic is evidence enough the movie could have been executed better. I mean both possible sides of the story are insanely simple but there's enough inconsistency in the movie to argue either way.

yeah but how many threads are there about planes on treadmills? there are plenty of retards on the internet, this thread is no different.

also, the point of a movie isn't to have a 100% defined, completely saturated tale of events from beginning to end. considering that movie with very little dialog, you don't even see a vampire until what 45 minutes in, the whole backstory is shown in pieces throughout the movie - you can tell its not the directors intent to hand everything to you on a plate. you don't see any conclusive evidence that the vamps are intelligent, its hinted at, and the main character dismisses it. its a RED HERRING. its not inconsistent, it was a character describing what he had (and the audience had) seen. he interpreted it wrong though.

if you expect everything to be clear cut and unambigious, than maybe movies aren't for you.

i think you've misunderstood my point. they were waiting at the entrance of the building (or window whatever it was) until the sun went down. hence i said they were there before sunset. thats on screen, not an assumption.

That's not an assumption, I agree.

the vamps were waiting there for him (until sunset) with dogs. they knew he was there since before sunset, so it was their trap.

So they couldn't have just found/smelt him after he got caught?

I think the manequin was the bait for the trap because he had to break a vial of his own blood to draw that woman Zompire into the original trap or was it the tiny puddle of water on the ground for the Zompires to drink ?

Yeh who knows. Also, what was he spraying on his doorstep at the start of the film?

maybe disinfectant to remove his scent.

google says ammonia

if you expect everything to be clear cut and unambigious, than maybe movies aren't for you.

I enjoy ambiguous movies, where it's ambiguous due to a deliberate lack of detail or explanation that requires you to piece together everything. A red herring here in there is great, as long as it's well-timed.

The red herrings in this movie were poorly timed and just became amplified to a ridiculous magnitude. I mean seriously, WHY DID THE MANNEQUIN MOVE ITS HEAD if the point was to make you work out it was an infected's trap. For much of the movie it was building up the fact that he's losing his mind but there wasn't anything definite until the head-move. I placed heavy significance on that, whereas many of the people who argue it was a zombie trap didn't even see the head move.

Though you're pretty determined to try to make it sound like I'm stupid and can't see the other point of view. I certainly can but even having both views out in the open and discussed in great detail, I still believe there are strengths and major plot-holes in each theory. So whatever the outcome (though I'm quite sure it was meant to be a zombie trap), it could have been done with more consistency.

yeah but how many threads are there about planes on treadmills?

Yeah that's fair enough.

last edited by parabol at 14:24:44 12/Jan/08

The plane takes off.

Who the f*** was staking out a place???

Vamps.

He had a big map. Buildings he cleared (For food and Vamps).
They're nest(Read Home) that Sam ran into, wasn't the Building near the trap.

So why would they be there, instead of their home? To wait for their trap to be sprung. Thats why.

Exactly. Billy, I would love to agree that everyone should be open to both sides, but I really see much more reason to think that the zamps set the trap. Makes much more sense and is far more interesting than the simple idea that he just forgot about his own trap.

Wait for the DVD commentary imo.

So why would they be there, instead of their home? To wait for their trap to be sprung. Thats why.

I'm going be as ignorant as you guys: they were there because Neville got caught in the trap. They weren't waiting for him. They only arrived as the sun was going down which is when they start to come out of their holes.

Exactly. Billy, I would love to agree that everyone should be open to both sides, but I really see much more reason to think that the zamps set the trap.

Yes there is a lot to suggest that.

Makes much more sense and is far more interesting than the simple idea that he just forgot about his own trap.

I think that makes the movie totally retarded.

Apparently one of the producers has confirmed the vamps set the trap for him.

Hot. My rating of 3.5 stars just dropped to 2.

What holes did they come out of? Up through the Toilets?

I've read the book and saw the movie yesterday and I'd have to say I enjoyed both but preferred the book. The dog was adorable, I was heart broken when it died. I thought the zombpires/vambies looked too fake and generic. I'm normally quite tolerant of CGI, but they all looked the same and they contrasted too starkly with the strikingly convincing scenery. And were they supposed to open their mouths so widely when they screamed that they must be dislocating their jaws? I think the book ending was MUCH better.

As for the trap debate, I'd be inclined to believe that the zompires set the trap. The fact that they were using dogs to help them gave me the impression that they were smart enough to try to copy TFPOBA. So using dogs to help hunt and setting traps are all behaviours that they may have picked up from watching the main character. Even an ape can learn to sign! I think the purpose of the water around the trap was to hide the rope of the snare. The protagonist was ex-army after all, so he's usually pretty sharp.

I think the whole scene was supposed to be a combination of madness and a trap set by teh baddies. In a very unforgiving world the protagonist loses it for a few seconds, and in that slip up his enemies manage to get the better of him and it ends up costing him his only companion. It helps add to the feel of bitter hopelessness of the film. It adds to the the feeling of 'surely something could have been done, if only things had happened slightly differently' that the viewer gets.

One other weird thing I thought when I saw it a second time, the CGI didn't look anywhere near as s***. If you read my first post I was extremely critical of the CGI on the bad guys, but this time I thought that it was bearable... this more recent time I saw it on a much smaller screen - maybe that has somethign to do with it??

Well thats one good thing to come out of this thread, Billy. That crap CGI doesn't scale up to well.

the vamps were waiting there for him (until sunset) with dogs. they knew he was there since before sunset, so it was their trap.

Like Billy said this is a huge assumption. The writers cover this with will smith dropping blood as he hits his head. Their senses are sharp for blood. Remember he breaks that test tube of his blood and their on that s*** in seconds. Still very debatable.

its not whn a producer says it was te vamps.

case closed..
deal with it

apparently one of the producers says it was fresh prince's own trap.

Why didn't about 1million guys run out with the dogs or atleast after the dogs were dead?

Why didn't the infected humans and dogs wear coats for protection since they were so smart?

coats.... wtf would coats do

coats.... wtf would coats do

Protect against UV light obviously, so they can roam and kill during the day.

Surely such smart creatures with a society of their own should have come up with that.

Crizane that was a fantastic review. You explained the movie really well.

After i saw the movie, i felt the same feelings. The best thing about it is, i felt as though alot of the plot was left up to the viewer to decide. That always adds an important factor of mystery to a movie.

Why didn't the infected humans and dogs wear coats for protection since they were so smart?

Same reason they didn't use tools or weapons duh

They were busy mastering basic mechanics, pulley systems, creating catches to hold heavy weights, hiding snares, studying human psychology to work out how to attract the protagonist and animatronics to make the mannequins head move.

Get a clue.

nice one parabol, how about they wear sunscreen instead.

you d*******.

Bite harder, you guys crack me up.

They were busy mastering basic mechanics, pulley systems, creating catches to hold heavy weights, hiding snares, studying human psychology to work out how to attract the protagonist and animatronics to make the mannequins head move.

These are not unreasonable assumptions to make. lol

do you guys ever get tired of being wrong?

do you ever get tired of being an a******?

Does being an arsehole matter when you're right?

I'd rather be right and an a****** than wrong and not an a******.

Can't believe there is actually 13 pages on QGL to do with this movie....it was extremely cheap. Someone with too much money decided to butcher something that was good.

It's actually 6 pages for real men, who have their view set to 50 posts per page.

It's actually 6 pages for real men, who have their view set to 50 posts per page.

Or 3 pages for manly men who have their view set to 100 posts per page.

I still say the Zombies take off.

I finally went and saw this (at the CINEMA no less) and it f***ing sucked balls. I just had to resurrect this thread to say this and prepare everyone that posted remotely positive comments in this thread to have them torn apart tomorrow like the useless chaff that they no doubt will be.

no ur useless chaf

I enjoyed the movie. So whooped-de-do the director or whoever decided to slightly alter the ending.

You should have gone in there excepting an adaption of the book and not the book itself.

Cry some more.

hey trog you can't even tear apart a chicken wing, let alone someone's opinion of a movie

ZING!

id like to see you make a better moofie trog

it was his own trap

whether he set the trap or not the movie was crap, unoriginal, boring, crap.

you are

From the sequence of events, its pretty obvious the idea the movie is trying to put accross is that the head infected guy setup the trap to get back at him for setting his other trap. I don't think the movie has enough depth to bother reading anything more complex into it than that.

I'll be honest, I didn't have any idea who set the trap. My first thought was that it was another human.

Then I started thinking that it was probably a trap he laid and forgot. Then I forgot all about it. After the movie though my g/f suggested that it was a trap laid by the zombies, and all the pieces just flicked into place - the reason I didn't think of it during the movie was because NOT 5 MINUTES BEFORE THAT SCENE we got to listen to Will Smith talk about how the zombies had no intelligence.

The argument about this topic is interesting (sorry I came in late); for me the evidence points to the fact that the zombies laid the trap but I can easily see how people would think otherwise (because I certainly did until I'd thought about it a little more).

a good story doesn't fill all the gaps, its the gaps that let the audience connect with the characters. the gaps build intrigue, they help build a sense of tension. if the movie had told you everything without ambiguity, then it makes for a boring watch. story telling 101, is tell the audience as little as possible. its only retards who can't follow this logic.

I disagree with this about 1000%. You can't learn anything from gaps and you certainly can't connect to characters from them. I think I see what you're trying to say though but I think you've just picked the wrong words.

I placed heavy significance on that, whereas many of the people who argue it was a zombie trap didn't even see the head move.

I did not see the head move at all, and thus have to assume it was a minor part of the movie - c'mon, this is Hollywood - they don't do anything that audiences might not understand; they have to bludgeon you over the head half the time to get a point in. I have to conclude that this was a subtle clever sign of his impending madness (like the couple of frames when he thought he saw his own kid and wife - that happened so fast I almost didn't even notice it too).

whether he set the trap or not the movie was crap, unoriginal, boring, crap.

QFT. 28 Days Later shat all over it.

it wasn't his trap, i think the point of him saying they had no intelligence was they 5 mins later they proved him wrong

must suck to be so wrong

28 days later, started awesome, finished a massive steaming bowl of poo

I always thought it was his trap because The way Smith's character setup traps was to intricate for the zombies. He used a nail gun if I remember correctly, if zombies knew how to use a nail gun then s*** why aren't they using real guns, or wearing clothes or a whole lotta things.

I'm not saying the zombies are completely stupid, because they did move Fred so that Smith falls for his own trap. It's like they wanted him to understand how it felt. I bet you can argue otherwise but thats how I saw it.

Interestingly, Smith at the start of the movie refers to the zombies as 'it' but then by the end of the movie he refers to them as 'they' (ie people).

I disagree with this about 1000%. You can't learn anything from gaps and you certainly can't connect to characters from them. I think I see what you're trying to say though but I think you've just picked the wrong words.

Yep - there's a big difference between directors (and writers) imlplying something from gaps, and making the audience WTF and argue over what the hell happened.

it wasn't his trap, i think the point of him saying they had no intelligence was they 5 mins later they proved him wrong

I agree with what you say about the intelligence bit (he was clearly wrong when he said they weren't intelligent), but it still doesn't mean they set the trap;)

I always thought it was his trap because The way Smith's character setup traps was to intricate for the zombies. He used a nail gun if I remember correctly, if zombies knew how to use a nail gun then s*** why aren't they using real guns, or wearing clothes or a whole lotta things.

I'm not saying the zombies are completely stupid, because they did move Fred so that Smith falls for his own trap. It's like they wanted him to understand how it felt. I bet you can argue otherwise but thats how I saw it.

That's my prefered opinion (except for the zombies moving Fred, but I still like that).

Interestingly, Smith at the start of the movie refers to the zombies as 'it' but then by the end of the movie he refers to them as 'they' (ie people) because it makes the movie more enjoyable for me.

LOL what's the plural of "it"?

c'mon, this is Hollywood - they don't do anything that audiences might not understand

that was my point but "nooo" intrigue is so much more sophisticated.

PS. You're a noob if you didn't see the head move.

I always thought it was his trap because The way Smith's character setup traps was to intricate for the zombies. He used a nail gun if I remember correctly, if zombies knew how to use a nail gun then s*** why aren't they using real guns, or wearing clothes or a whole lotta things.

heh what

so because you saw him use a nailgun when you saw him setting a trap earlier, that means every other trap you then come across in the movie must've been set up the same way - despite not having seen the trap he was caught in being set up, or any evidence that it was set up in the same way? and then from that, you conclude he was thus the only one who could've done it?

in fact, there's evidence to suggest it could've been set up differently - such as being able to reach up and easily slice through what could only be rope to set himself free, when you can clearly see he uses a steel cable when shown setting the earlier trap. that alone doesn't mean he didn't set it, but it helps highlight the flaw in your reasoning

jim, your argument works both ways... you're implying as much as anyone else.

so every trap must use steel cable. no u fail.

jim, your argument works both ways... you're implying as much as anyone else.

I don't think you understood what I'm saying if that's your response. did you see the part where I wrote:

that alone doesn't mean he didn't set it, but it helps highlight the flaw in your reasoning

I wasn't implying one way or the other, I was simply pointing out a flaw in greazy's conclusion

so every trap must use steel cable. no u fail.

is that supposed to be a troll?

I checked, and there's a closeup of the cable he used, when he smashes the vial of his blood - it actually looks more like nylon than steel

nevertheless, there's no reason to assume that the trap he was later caught in had to have been set up with a nailgun

You're all wrong - the dog set the trap. The evidence is that the dog wasn't the one who got caught in it.

so why didn't the dog just go around with a nailgun and clothing?

The dog clearly takes off.

Like a helicopter.

It's a trap.

The dog is not interested. He is OT7.

Awesome, this arguement is still going.

I reckon the movie prop guys set the trap.

You all fell into the trap. You're arguing about it, which is exactly what they wanted you to do.

You're all suckers.

http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b151/Dino-kun/1183064455517.gif

haha that bloke from star wars with the text "it's a trap" over the top!

You're right, my conclusion is flawed. But lets agree on one thing, he fell for a vampire trap (whether it was originally setup by him or not).

no, they're not vampires (lol)

You all fell into the trap. You're arguing about it, which is exactly what they wanted you to do.

Actually I think this is an unintended side product of them making a really s***ty movie.

Oh yeh, if you haven't read The Editing Room's abridged script of it, you should. As always its a hilarious and insightful summary of the movie (and its flaws).

Oh yeh, if you haven't read The Editing Room's abridged script of it, you should. As always its a hilarious and insightful summary of the movie (and its flaws).

ok, that was pretty funny

The Editing Room's script was about as original and gay as Andy Warhol's exhibition.

Can we refrain from calling them 'Zombies'.

Please use the terms 'Infected', 'Vambies' or 'Zompires' in future.