167
The ending to the book is one of the best reveals I've read/watched. The movie discarding it was such a huge disservice.
On this topic: The Hobbit movies.
What the fuck?
I’m rereading the book for the first time since childhood. They retconned all of Thorin’s character traits and Bilbo did not play for time to save them from the trolls.
It’s frustrating.
The animated Hobbit movie is infinitely better than the live action abominations the studio created.
The animated are undeniably better than than the entire series, just based on music alone.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Please spoil me, I have neither read the book or watched this movie.
spoiler
Basically the main character is the sole survivor in a word of vampiresque monsters. He tries a bit to find a cure while strugging with intense loneliness. During the night he hides in his fortified house. By day, he goes out and hunts them as they sleep. At the end of the book he is captures and put on trial for his heinous acts. They arent monsters really, its a new society, and he is their boogeyman, killing inocent people while they slept. He is the monster. In this new world he will become a legend of old, the monster in the day.
I'd suggest reading it instead. It's pretty short (130 pages depending on printing) and a good read.
It's such a weird heel-turn when Will Smith slaps the zombie and tells it not to talk about his wife.
Huah huah huah, they referenced that thang wit real life, clever movie huah huah huah.
Let's see: thin skin, contributes nothing, and actively makes a throwaway joke worse... Mr Smith!?
Aka, money is more important than challenging people to think, so, pander to morons and make more money.
The Matrix "batteries"
Actually just made some comments elsewhere on lemmy about that lol.
What about them? I don't see the analogue
Apparently, the original idea was for humans to be used for computing power, not as batteries. But they were worried people wouldn't understand that so changed it to batteries (which makes no sense). Something like that. The similarity is in dumbing down the concept
load more comments
(1 replies)
Now you're understanding hollywood!
(Smith) claimed “it was the only movie I’ve ever had that the audience booed.”
Somehow Wild Wild West escaped booing.
Well you need an audience to boo…
Fuck you I loved Wild Wild West. I mean it probably helped that I was a kid watching it on VHS, but it's still a very fun movie.
It was one of the biggest flops and he turned down the Matrix to do it lol
Which is why we have to thank it every day. Can you imagine?
Yeah I actually do think the matrix would've been a worse movie with will Smith. He is not a good actor.
Did you know that spiders are the fiercest killers in the insect kingdom? Also polar bears.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wo2KB1dEDdk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=53hMYw8LX60d
Well that's easy to explain, wild wild west was a masterpiece
What are you talking about? That's a great movie.
To be fair it was a fun movie if you were a kid and the soundtrack was great.
The second to last paragraph of article is the most important. The mythos of the alternate ending has grown so much in the 19 years since the movie has been released that people ignore its flaws.
The Alternate ending doesn’t fit the movie at all and the folks that claim the theatrical ending is so different from the book make me laugh.
Everything in the movie is different from the book. The only thing that the I Am Legend movie has in common with the book is the title and the name of Smith’s Character.
Every other aspect is different right down to where it all takes place.
The mythos of the alternate ending has allowed people ignore the idiocy of the alternate ending. Why would Smith be allowed to live? If me and a bunch of my buds had a monster who had been terrorizing us for years captured in his torture chamber basement, the torture chamber basement that had dozens and dozens of pictures of my friends that the monster had tortured to death, I would tear him to shreds. I sure as hell would not allow him to live happily ever after.
Yes, the movie has a version of infected fast zombies. The book had vampires.
Also, I didn't think the main character of the book was monstrous. The other book characters should not of thought that either. The vamp faction that caught him was actively hunting other vampires that were not part of their faction, so no one should have been shocked.
The book had two types of vampires, mindless ones that wiped out humans who were then wiped out by thinking vampires that had built a society.
To me the main failing of the movie was that it used CGI “zombies/darklings”. Good lord they looked so terrible on screen. Why the hell the movie didn’t use actors and actresses in costumes and makeup is beyond me.
There is a lot greatness in the movie that gets overshadowed by the endless posts about the alternate ending. Sam is one of the best on screen depictions of Man’s best friend ever and the sequences with Smith scavenging around NYC are great.
So the same as I, Robot.
Absolutely!
Yeah but counter point.
I can use this to circlejerk about how smart I am compared to Hollywood.
load more comments
(1 replies)
My favorite part about this is the 1964 film The Last Man on Earth starring Vincent Price avoided using the same name as I Am Legend because they felt they were taking too many liberties with the story, when it is hundreds of times closer than anything since.
Test audiences kills authenticity and memorability
I disagree.
Authenticity?
The only part of the I Am Legend movie that is authentic to the Novella is the title. Every other part is different. So the movie never had authenticity.
Memorability?
The only reason anyone talks about the I Am Legend movie is because the movie did not use the alternate ending.
The test audiences are what has kept the movie on the front page of movie message boards for 19 years. The discourse over the theatrical ending v the alternate ending is why a sequel is development.
The best thing that ever happened to the I Am Legend movie is the test audiences.
load more comments
(2 replies)
I just remember watching the movie, then finding the alternative ending (only the last couple minutes) and realizing the polar opposite naritives.
One is where he becomes martyred fighting the enemy, the other is realizing even when others are different, we are still able to relate and find peace.
So yeah, whoever made that decision ruined the entire movie.
They pandered to the test audience in the hope of making more money, versus ignoring them and making a better movie.
And what the heck was wrong with that test audience, anyway? Personally I love when a movie manages to throw a clever curveball and challenge my expectations.
Says a lot about the world in general that people want to 'pick a side' and then dislike anything that challenges their support for that side.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Probably something to do with the majority of the country having an IQ below 50
When i don't understand a movie, my first thought is: i'm too dumb. A focus group's first reaction always seems to be: the movie is dumb.
load more comments
(1 replies)
IMO you cannot make a focus group for art. I Am Legend had a choice; try to be art or try to be mindless entertainment. By making the focus group dictate the movie they decided to back down from their artistic vision in order to please mindless drones who didn't want to be challenged.
Sure, I would probably also be upset watching that twist for the first time, but it would have got me thinking. I'm more of an exception that I don't rate movies on the first go, but for most people that's what they'd do. The focus group only gets one chance to share their feelings and it's one of challenging their core beliefs resulting in being upset, a negative feeling. Hence a negative rating.
But all movies aren't supposed to be feel-good movies. The absolute best movies in history makes us think. Have you ever seen Wes Anderson or Robert De Niro or the like change their vision bases on focus group feedback? No, because they know the first impression and thus first feeling might not be a positive one and thus inadvertently translate to a negative rating.
There's a balance though, sometimes an auteur needs a reality check, take Coppola's Megalopolis for example. I haven't seen it yet, but from what I heard he kinda went off the rails on that one. We have yet to see if it makes us think down the road, but maybe he needed someone to say, "you know, this doesn't work." But not from hundreds of random movie enjoyers. From experienced film creators who know to look deeper. Writers, cinematographers, gaffers, sound mixers. People who know their craft and can say "this has been tried before and didn't work." Or if you're feeling adventurous: "we've never tried this before. Let's see if it'll stick."
The difference is perhaps that people like Wes Anderson have both faith in their vision, and a track record of success in their distinctive style that together provide the clout to resist meddling.
If Wes Anderson says "This is done, we aren't changing a thing" then it's done.
I can only imagine in Legend there was big pressure from execs to make changes after the test screening, not because they thought the test audience was right artistically, but because they were worried about the impact on the profit margin.
I don't disagree, but IMO that's where the movie crosses the threshold from art to mindless entertainment. The execs are more often than not people who don't have years or decades of experience crafting movies, just funding them. They don't know what works or not. Same with the target focus group as ironic as it may sound.
The execs may know that old-movie was a flop, but not why it was a flop, and are afraid that new-movie becomes a flop too. That's understandable, but the only way to prevent this is to hire the right people with loads of experience who can say exactly what went wrong in flops and successes and apply that knowledge to new-movie. Focus groups are just too narrow to allow that to happen, so even if they identify a fault (not unlikely) they apply the wrong solution. Maybe they needed better dialogue to emphasise the twist? Lighting changes to help guide the viewer's feelings? Instead they scrapped it at the detriment of the artistic vision which more often than not will come back to bite them in the profits anyway (like now when they are thinking of making a sequel to a movie where the main protagonist dies in the theatrical version and have to say "forget that, it isn't canon").
But that of course puts a huge burden on getting a good team with good experience. Mix of new people with new ideas and old people with wisdom. And most importantly, people who are open to be challenged by the other people's expertise. That usually doesn't happen if "profits!" is the first and last thought on your mind as an exec.
All I can say is, I agree. Legend ultimately wasn't for art, it was for money, and the way the test screening was handled shows that.
My point was really just sad acknowledgement that creators often don't get to follow through on the vision they want to create because the money says otherwise, and that's disappointing.
One can hope that they learn after the umpteenth flopped Marvel movie. I'm just worried since people whose entire vocabulary is "profit!" are buying up great artistic film studios nowadays.
Hopefully we'll see a renaissance sometime soon. And artistic minds getting together to define the next chapter that's not "Disney or no way" but full or art. I don't mind mindless entertainment, I watch some myself, but I do mind quality options becoming needles in a haystack.
This is pretty much why John Cassavettes essentially created the US independent film industry
I am currently reading the book to my 12 year old daughter.
I can't wait for her mind to be blown. Its not "Sci-Fi"...
But its totally Sci-Fi in that it challenges your morality and the way you see the world
You mean it wasn't smart to change the ending from the book that was the gut punch the entire book was leading up to, making the book memorable?
Test audiences are we have slops that try to appease everyone but end up disappointing everyone but still have broad enough viewership to make millions.
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 10 Mar 2026
167 points (100.0% liked)
movies
3585 readers
270 users here now
A community about movies and cinema.
Related communities:
- !television@piefed.social
- !homevideo@feddit.uk
- !mediareviews@lemmy.world
- !casualconversation@piefed.social
Rules
- Be civil
- No discrimination or prejudice of any kind
- Do not spam
- Stay on topic
- These rules will evolve as this community grows
No posts or comments will be removed without an explanation from mods.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS