Now That Makes a Little More Sense

Israeli film critic Yair Raveh links to this clip off the I Am Legend DVD, of the film's original ending.



To be honest, though it's obviously better than the tacked on upbeat ending the theatrical version shipped with, I don't think this ending works perfectly either. There would have had to be changes to the body of the film too, which stressed that the transformed humans were still feeling creatures. There are hints of this in the theatrical version, when the zombie male goes to extreme lengths to rescue the woman Smith's character captures for experimentation, but considering that we're talking about flesh-eating zombies who have all but depopulated the Earth, I think a little more effort, and a corresponding emphasis on the Smith character's monstrousness towards the zombies, were necessary to bring this point home. For all I know, though, that's on the DVD too.

Comments

Anonymous said…
Agreed on all counts.
March 06, 2008 12:21 PM
the.exile said…
I think that the hints through the theatrical version were enough. In fact, when I was thinking about the movie the day after seeing it, I was totalling up all the little echoes of the 'family' theme throughout (the lions etc), and I was wondering why they didn't make the conclusion of that theme a little more clear.

But then again, anything is better than the survivalist wet-dream of a walled compound guarded by uniformed soldiers.
March 06, 2008 7:51 PM
Abigail Nussbaum said…
I agree that the film equates the zombies with animals and specifically pack animals, who share an affinity with one another that we, being pack animals ourselves, can easily sympathize with. But as cool and as noble as we find, say, wolves, most of us would agree that a man-eating wolf needs to be killed. The ending as it's presented here argues that the zombies have the right to exist and continue to kill humans, which I don't feel is supported by the movie as it was released.
March 06, 2008 8:47 PM

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The 2023 Hugo Awards: Somehow, It Got Worse

The last month has been a busy one in Hugo and Worldcon fandom. After the shock of the much-belated 2023 nominating stats, and their revelation of serious irregularities in the compilation of the award's ballot, there was a great ferment of conversation and action. Mainstream publications have caught wind of the scandal and publicized it far and wide . Turnover in the few permanent committees that oversee the Hugo trademark and intellectual property has been high . The poor folks at the upcoming Glasgow Worldcon have been scrambling to respond to the evolving situation and to distance themselves from the previous committee—including, most recently, making a laconic announcement that they would refuse any of Chengdu's passalong funds, the budgetary surplus that is traditionally bequeathed from one Worldcon to the next. And stats nerds—of which this community is, unsurprisingly, blessed with a surfeit—have been furiously crunching the nominations numbers and EPH calculations...
Read more

The 2023 Hugo Awards: Now With an Asterisk

It's been a while since we've had one of these dramas. On Saturday, the nominating stats for the 2023 Hugo awards, which were announced in Chengdu, China in October 2023, were released to the public . There was a great deal of anticipation for these numbers, in no small part because of their much-delayed release. Though the WSFS constitution permits Hugo administrators to wait as long as 90 days before releasing the voting and nominating stats, most Hugo teams have them ready to go within minutes of the ceremony's conclusion. Chengdu, in contrast, waited the full allotted period, and even went a little bit over (the voting stats were released separately in December). Once the stats were released, it quickly became clear why the Chengdu Hugo team were hesitant to make them public. There are any number of irregularities and questionable choices in this document that suggest everything from erratic voter behavior, to incompetent collation and calculation of the nomination rank...
Read more

Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga

The first thing that must be said about this movie is that it should not work. It's a prequel to one of the most mind-blowing, groundbreaking, and just plain revolutionary action movies of the 21st century—and prequels are a bad idea in most cases, but all the more so when the character they revolve around has already given you their entire backstory in their original introduction, which is also the final, culminating act of their character arc. (To put it another way, if you had asked me, nine years ago, which character I thought offered more fertile ground for prequel storytelling, Imperator Furiosa or Han Solo, I would have picked Han without a moment's hesitation, and I don't even like Han that much.) And it's a follow-up to a movie whose chief virtue lies in its conciseness—in being a single, drawn-out, pulse-pounding, increasingly deranged car chase. Which means you can either try to repeat that accomplishment, which will inevitably feel a bit old hat; or you can ...
Read more