| Mistershine said: So, I read the book then watched the film. The book I enjoyed, the film on the otherhand-WTF? Did they just take the name of the book and the lead character and then just make some shit up? It has got to be THE worst book to film conversion ever. Now I know you have to make allowances and lose certain parts to fit it into a couple of hours, but apart from some vampires, a man called Robert Neville and the title, they have nothing else in common. There is no vampire hunting, no Ben Cortman and no Ruth. The worst part is, they have missed the whole point of the book. It's supposed to be about 1 man's transition from victim to monster, instead it's about 1 man's trasition from hero to marter. /RANT |
Well said.
I enjoyed the book even though I didn't really like the ending. But just because it wasn't a "happily ever after" story didn't make it bad to me, as I got the point of it.
I enjoyed the movie too, but mostly for the bond between a man and his dog. I also had to think of the movie as an unrelated project rather than bringing the book to life. I won't even give it the vampire link as their only weakness shown was UV light, but they could be killed with guns. I realize the story was modernized to draw a crowd, but the number of drastic changes made was quite disappointing. It would have been better off with a different title and main character in my opinion.
All that said "I think.. it was ten bucks (Don't get me started either) well spent" as well. I'll surely never watch it again though.
