MovieWorld: Will Smith

Nina Tryggvason  so I got the Blu Ray of I am Legend and watched the theatrical release and thought it sucked.  and then I watched the alt version

and it’s waaayyyyyyyyyy better and makes far more sense

so, why is it sooooo wrong for movies to make any suggestion that religion is the tiniest bit bad  but okay to lay all blame at the feet of science

when, without science, we’d be living in trees still?

and not being able to communicate on this website at the very least?

the two versions of I Am Legend are completely different movies, with a very minor change with who is referenced by the butterfly

and then the action that the Will Smith character takes as a result – makes a very different ending movie.

brenda jane pressnall :yes it is grim.

i don’t see how it could be made noot grim.

i didn’t like the horror movie level zombie people. they were over th etop.

i am intersted in teh two versions nina.
i only saw the flick in the movies.
i would like to hear spoilers about the version you saw on disc.

the sci-fi i have up live here on zoe currently is a bit anti-religious. well, it is an anti-zealot piece.  i wonder if it could get made.

Martin Stalvey: For me, the alternate version (which started out as the theatrical version) made little sense. I won’t go into detail as to why for those that haven’t seen it, but the reasons for certain things didn’t cut it.

Miriam Adams-Washington: Since we have a choice of what theory we’d prefer to subscribe to, I happen to fancy the theory that my ancestors didn’t swing in trees but walked in a beautiful Garden…imo makes for far better cinematic and visual quality…dialogue is always good too.
But back to I Am Legend, I liked the theatrical ending, haven’t seen the altenate ending either. I thought it rather pioneering because many doomsday type movies don’t even consider the God factor at all.

Nina Tryggvason
there’s many options that you are 100% absolutely free to chose to believe religiously speaking

However, you cannot use scientific language to describe religion, as religion fails scientific tests

to be a theory, it must be testable

and creationism/intelligent design, is not testable

scientifically speaking there’s one theory – and there is no debate in the science community about that theory, only about some of the mechanisms – and none of the mechanisms include supernatural causes

SPOILERS

the word butterfly is a trigger word, spoken by Will’s daughter

in the theatre version, a woman, Ana shows up and claims God sent her and says God told her there’s a survivor colony and she has a butterfly tatoo and Will accepts this on faith as proof that her claim is true and it turns out to be.

this is what makes the theatre version stupid

in the alt version

it is the infected woman who has the tattoo – which is also kinda dumb.

but, Will figures out when the infected arrive that they want the woman back and instead of arming a grenade, he gives the infected back the woman, he unhooks the IV and returns her to the infected (not zombies)

and the infected leave with her – when the IV is unhooked, she reverts back to an infected state and

the Infected leader looks at the wall of photos of the Infected that were experimented on and there’s comprehension, there’s understanding – this is what humanity is now, this infected race – Will represents the monster

Will gets it, he’s the monster

the infected leave – leaving Will, Anna and Ethan unharmed.

the three load up and leave NY to the infected

credits roll

Martin Stalvey  But don’t they leave without the cure in the alt version. It’s been a few since I saw it.

Nina Tryggvason  they leave without the cure

because Will understands from the interaction that he is the monster to the infected, not the saviour

he is a legend because he is the monster stalker, dragging the infected away from their hives to their deaths, he is their daystalker, their doom, their daymare, if you will

they are what humans have become

if the “butterfly” is the symbol of the hope for humanity, and the infected woman with the butterfly tattoo is the hope, then it is her as an infected woman, not her as a infected to cured woman, but her as an infected, giving birth to the next generation

the immunes are the dying gasp

the infected are the next evolutionary step

his perception of them as dumb animals is clearly wrong

he misundertands why the male goes into the sun exposing his skin to the pain

the male is protesting the loss of his mate

the male sets an elaborate trap with the Fred mannequin – more elaborate than the trap Will set for the random female infected

the male had had to know something about Will to use the mannequin

The trap included the caltrops in the puddle, the vehicles, pulleys, wires, the mannequin, Will’s route, the infected dogs,

all hope against hope that the female would even be recoverable

Martin Stalvey You sure got a lot more out of the alternate version than I did.

Nina I almost ripped the disc out on the “God didn’t do this, we did it” line

I only kept watching cause Will has such pretty eyes.

I know, shallow, but at least I’ll admit that

I’d like to see a movie about science gone wrong that either science pulls it out

or at least people suck it and and accept the responsibility

because science for it’s own sake isn’t any better than art for it’s own sake

like have you been following about that collider experiment where one possible outcome when they turn it on is that it might create a black hole and destroy our entire solar system?

puts global warming so on the back burner, eh?

but at least, no will be around to say, I told you so.

but to revert to a science bad, religion good

is worse than maintaining a women=sainted victims and men=rapists mentality.

you need to watch the whole movie to know it’s not imagined that it’s about religion vs science

it’s not subtext

in the original novel, Rob is hunting and killing the infected

in the movie, he is capturing rats and testing various serums from his blood and when he gets a promising one, he’s capturing an infected and testing the vaccine on an infected – and, based on the photos in his lab, he had failed to cure about 30 – this movie focuses on his current attempt to cure the captured female

but this is back burnered to all the other action

he captured her mid movie and she’s tucked away on a gurney – apparently the infected don’t need food or bathroom facilities

there are still issues of balancing the story

because the focus was too much on the science bashing and pro religion that the actual story – Rob’s trying to find a cure

that the scenes that show that are almost absent from the movie

so instead what we see is a lot of the result of science’s mistakes – ie: weed and animal overrun new york

William LaRochelle I agree that the alt ending is much, much better.

I’ve heard the hero dying ending described as Christian, but many heros have died. Bob Marley gets more play than Jesus. Many are considered martyred or immortal with a discovery or music or an idea outliving them. If someone has issues with religion then I can see the theatrical grating on them, but that’s their own issue. I think either one works.

I don’t think The Mist would have felt authentic if the army had just given them a clean rescue from without. But this hero recognizing himself as monster is much stronger and I wonder if that’s what it was when Smith signed on.

Very interesting that in both that the more upbeat ending (hero surviving) was forsaken for being too pure and the hero as martyr was ultimately a studio cop out. I guess they figure Americans (even sci-fi/fantasy fans) aren’t willing to accept that they (humans in general) are often the monsters.

Teddy J. Jensen Seemed like a simple story made “something” by special effects. Average, in my opinion.  Yours?

Ahmed Shaukat Malik Just goes to show how wonderful special effects are.

::Bows down::

I love you special effects. You’re so easy on the eyes and my brain.

::Sighs affectionately::

Nina Tryggvason I’d pay to see Will Smith in the shower;  does it really need more than that?

A.K. Smith SPOILERS: The film was kinda fun. But there were enough plot contrivances to drive me crazy and lessn my enjoyment. The fact that the service entrance to the robotics factory had no security surveillance is one such implausible contrivance. Why the hell not? And will someone tell me where Shia Lebeouf’s (sp?)character came from? Actually, why did they leave any of his ridiculous scenes in the movie? With all the CGI, couldn’t they have airbrushed him out of the picture? And in the DVD director’s cut, will we find that there was actually something he did in the original version of the film?

this is another discussion thread from the I am Legend movie chat:

Carma  I look forward to seeing this.

I like Will Smith. Anything he’s in, I’ll watch it. Something about him, pleasant, always solid acting without taking it all so seriously.

I like his Happyness movie. it was sweet
Nina Tryggvason did he go shirtless in that?

I have a theory that it’s in his contract to be shirtless in all his films.

Miriam Adams-Washington I think the shirtless thing is his trademark now…watchout he may pull a DiCaprio on us.

Nina Tryggvason I am not complaining

it’s pretty much why I bought I am legend on blu ray I found the acting very compelling and it felt like there was a lot more going on with even the CGI facial and body language. I just wish they didn’t kill samantha and I haven’t even watched the extras yet

Martin Stalvey I completely agree about the acting. One of his best. The killing of Samantha was the best/worst part of the film for me.

Philip Davetas I liked it for the most part. Didn’t care so much for the ending. Either one of the endings for that matter, but at least it kept my attention mostly. Don’t think I could watch it again though.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The overly compelling, “No-o-o-o-o….!”

Steven Terry  I just watched the Exorcist again–best of the genre–and the climactic moment where Father Karras shouts his defiant, “NOOOOOO…!” It’s power still resonates within context of that moment.

Seems to me it created a lengthy series of cinematic “NOOOOOO’s” in movies I can’t name anymore, nor care to. It’s shown up in a number of specs I’ve read, too.

Was Father Karras’ “No,” of that magnitude the first in film?”

What other words or lines got overused over the years sucking on the success of someone’s meaningful expression?

Exorcist holds up even now, 40+ years later. Love Lee J. Cobb’s role–residing somewhere between wholly disarming and a burr in the saddle. The brooding Father Karras, directed to a T. Okay, the whole production worked marvelously.

Wendy Jane Henson Y-E-E-S-S-S!

The shouted/screamed/howled “no” has become so predictable and such a cornball cliche that it makes me laugh. On the screen, some poor schmuck is weeping and I’m laughing. Can’t help it.

Another tried and tired phrase, “Its our last (best, only) hope.”

I love writers who go boldly where few have gone before and use something original.

Nina Tryggvason  when it came back out int he theatres with extra footage

it’s so dated a story. it’s become a comedy;  the cinematics are still wonderful

but supernatural horror is lame

Steven Terry It stands on its own as an original. That it was half-baked over and over again across the decades via a slew of trash films doesn’t diminish it. We’re talking horror, which of course is ridiculous, but this one brought it as close to reality as the genre has gotten in my book. The cast was marvelous, the direction, spot on. Graphically beautiful.

Now, I recall being riveted to my theater seat at my first viewing of Bruce Lee in Enter The Dragon back in 1972. Me and my bud sat through a second showing–we had to! Currently I find Enter The Dragon to be one of the greatest comedies ever written. I love it now as I did then for opposite reasons.
Susan DeSandoli I haven’t seen the exorcist since I was 15 and plan never to see it again (or poltergeist, for that matter.)

The lengthy Nooooo is a cri de coeur that works when it works because it taps into that primal sensation of loss or refusal.

When it doesn’t work, it really doesn’t work, as every toddler has found out upon noticing their parent’s reaction to a heartfelt Noooooo for something particularly awful (their security blanket going into the washing machine for instance) and then tries to use it every time they don’t want to go to bed.

I think Nooooo can still be used – as long as the audience’s intelligence is respected, and when it comes down to it – is the only thing the writer can think of that does work.

Nina Tryggvason  when I saw exorcist re-released in the theatre in vancouver

it was a comdey and totally diminished by not only parody of it

but the reduction in religious in the general public

don’t forget Dude – we watch movies more intently and involved than the general audience

who want a scare to get in a squeeze

but for lasting horror nothing has touched Jaws

what is realistically possible is more scary than fake ghosts and demons

which, have a limited terror they can hold, for a popcorn flick length

Steven Terry  Jaws worked. Beyond that, to each his/her own.

Nina Tryggvason – yes.

I was very disappointed in Blair Witch project, the audience I saw it with mostly fell asleep – the website was better than the movie

and I tend to get attacked every time I share that experience

jaws was mostly bad for sharks and was bad science
action and horror are the the blockbuster genres

that push has rather ruined the rest of the categories;  to the determent of characters

I agree with your noting the overuse of “NOOOoooo”

and I also think “I don’t know what to believe anymore”

is equally overused and not in world view shattering ways

from my own life, the only time I have ever screamed a prolong no, was finding the body of my uncle.

so people being surprised by obvious betrayals and circumstances really don’t get those big emotional turn you inside out and your world upside down moments

Susan DeSandoli I think it’s not so much a good story as a primal tap.
I don’t remember much of The Exorcist, so I don’t remember that Noooo, but one cri de coeur that worked was in Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid when they go over the cliff right after one of them has told the other he can’t swim.

Everyone can feel that sensation of ACCCCCCCKKKKKKKKK there’s no way out of this!!!!

Similar screams have been in other movies where they didn’t really work quite so well.

Another primal tap is the concept, back to toddlerhood again, of MINE, when there is the absolute fury that something precious has been taken away (a lipstick smeared cigarette butt rescued from a mud puddle for instance) and there is nothing that can be done about it because there are larger and more powerful beings who control things, very unfairly.

I felt this sensation when someone close to me died, and remembered it – that primal outrage that this precious thing was taken from me, and it just wasn’t fair.

I haven’t actually seen that in a movie, though, and I don’t write dramatic stuff so am unlikely to use it.

George Charles I love Linda Blair, we’re the same age. So, like the rest of the world we waited on line for an hour to see The Exorcist (back when the BIG SCREEN was truly huge screens) and while everyone in the audience was shocked and horrified, me and my family laughed the entire film.

I rented it back in the 80s to see if I missed something being so young when it was released, and I’m sorry it still sucks.

many people noticed that Harrison Ford’s love interest in this robot vs Amish world movies were both named Rachel.

I think Star Wars Empire Strikes back had the best extended no

when the ice hoth base doors closed

everyone wanted to scream along with Chewie