Originally posted by: Baked
Where did the OP go? Too much pwnage?
Originally posted by: ChAoTiCpInOy
I Am Legend > 28 Days Later. At least I Am Legend had a good plot.
refers to EVERY apocalyptic monster/zombie movie ever made. There were dozens of them, decades before 28 Days Later. So OP is pwnt, even if I Am Legend wasn't based on a 1950's novel. Which it is.Virus creates zombies.
Its contagious to everyone except a minor few.
Entire island/city has to be evacuated (Manhattan vs England).
Survivors must travel to the last known survivor camp.
Survivors broadcast messages via radio to alert other survivors.
Maybe 28 Days Later is a ripoff of another movie, in which case, I am late on my rant.
Originally posted by: Agentbolt
No, the woman still had the virus, she just didn't exhibit any symptoms. She's a carrier. She still had the virus, therefore she's not immune to it.
Join edro in the failing corner, failure.
Originally posted by: dreadpiratedoug
Originally posted by: edro
I watched I Am Legend this weekend via Netflix.
WTF... this is a huge, blatant ripoff of 28 Days Later (2002).
Maybe 28 Days Later is a ripoff of another movie, in which case, I am late on my rant.
Anyway, it's not just a zombie movie... it has many of the exact same scenes and plots.
Virus creates zombies.
Its contagious to everyone except a minor few.
Entire island/city has to be evacuated (Manhattan vs England).
Survivors must travel to the last known survivor camp.
Survivors broadcast messages via radio to alert other survivors.
At least on I Am Legend the zombies were harmed by UV light... otherwise, this would have been the exact same movie.
28 Days Later was much much better IMO.
Much lower budget, I am sure... but it used real actors, not horrible looking CG.
All your marketing crap can't make a movie great.
They weren't zombies, they were vampires dumbass.
