General thoughts on “I Am Legend”

[aadler]

 
Per a request from trinfaneb, in response to this meme:

Some time back, I had occasion to watch I Am Legend with my son. (We agreed that it would not be the kind of thing my wife would be likely to enjoy.) Not only was this the third movie version of Richard Matheson’s book — and the first to use his title — I had actually seen both of the others, so I had ample basis for comparison.

As far as pluses go, there are several. It was the most outstanding performance I’ve ever seen from Will Smith. (I didn’t catch his portrayal of Muhammed Ali, if anyone wants to claim that was better.) He was both physically impressive — does the man have any body fat at all? — and clearly something less than an idealized movie hero; his fear in the lair of the ‘Darkseekers’ was palpable and unforgettable. The rigid structure of his life, the stubborn preservation of order and purpose, the desperate grip on his sanity and the visibly fraying edges of that sanity, were beautifully rendered and flawlessly delivered. Aside from that, there was a powerful message in seeing mankind almost obliterated by its own hubris: “Of course we can use a tailored virus safely, it’s not like we’ve ever had a global pandemic before!”

Negatives … there were only three, really, and only one of those unique to this movie. That was the near-superhuman capabilities of the infected humans. Watching them leap around and skitter up walls like hairless, toothless Spider-Men was a jarring note. Surely numbers, blood-thirst, and mindless ferocity should have been threatening enough? Just like that, the movie slid from nightmare into fantasy. Unnecessary, and instantly counterproductive.

The second negative was common to all three movies: this one, the Omega Man (Charlton Heston, 1971), and the Last Man on Earth (Vincent Price, 1964) had the protagonist finding a cure at the end. Not purely objectionable in itself, but contrary to — and changing the point of — Matheson’s novel. (Also, all three movies depicted the protagonist as a doctor or medical researcher, totally skipping the grueling self-education process of the original Robert Neville, an ordinary middle-class guy who initially knew nothing of medicine.)

The last problem: of the three movies, only the first and cheapest — the Last Man on Earth — presented the most telling detail of Matheson’s original story. The disease victims were vampires, the vampire of myth, inaccurately portrayed by the myth but now finally and slowly explained by science. No changing to bats, no having-no-reflection, but almost everything else in place and justified in one way or another. An ancient plague, hitting the modern world and wiping it out. How can you take a book about vampires, and make it not about vampires? Just isn’t right.

So, that’s that. Movie commentary, only the third (I think) that I’ve done on LJ. Meme response met.

Comments

[aadler]

Catering to audience expectations is acceptable as long as it doesn’t reduce the quality of the result, and in this case I feel that over-amping the Darkseekers did exactly that. Joss Whedon has said several times that a storyteller shouldn’t give the audience what it wants, but what it needs. This needed something less cartoonish. I understand that there was a desire to distinguish these creatures from other ‘zombies’ (particularly those of 28 Days Later, another post-plague movie), but there should have been a way of doing so that didn’t break the willing suspension of disbelief.

That said, I’ll agree that the use of the Marley motif was masterful. One of the best thematic strokes in the entire movie.