Oh, and he’s a white blonde-haired German dude. The biggest difference between them is that in the book, Neville seems a bit angrier about his situation and is kind of an alcoholic.
He’s desperate for communication, he clings to life without much of a real reason (it should be noted that novel Neville does not spend the entire book searching for a cure as does his film counterpart), he laments the friends and family he’s lost, he relives the horrors of the virus being released and the events that follow… Even though the book uses narration to give the audience insight to his psyche, the movie does just a good a job at conveying his loneliness and possible madness by including scenes where he talks to mannequins and acts as if they are other people. Neville is essentially the same character up and down. Okay, not many changes here between the book and the movie.
As time passes he searches desperately for a cure in hopes of saving the human race. A disease has spread through the air and caused every other human to transform into blood-thirsty creatures (which are different in each, but more on that later), while Neville is left to suffer due to a strange immunity he has to the disease. This man, our protagonist in both the book and film, is Robert Neville. Hopefully all of you know the basic story behind I Am Legend: Post-apocalyptic account of last man on earth. But when it comes down to it, is the book really better than the movie?
What is it about this phrase that sets some people off so easily? Sometimes the book is better-one’s imagination can surely be more entertaining than what Hollywood tosses out, right? There are also occasions where the big wigs in Hollywood outdo the imagination and give us a masterpiece. I’ve heard it a million times, you’ve heard it a million times, and for some reason I still can’t understand why people complain about hearing it.
0 kommentar(er)
