Airborne33
Marksman
I thought the movie was a terrible remake. Not true to the original story line. Fails at an attempt to add some sort of wierd butterfly connection b.s. that doesn't make sense and outright doesn't belong in the movie. If they would have gone by the book they would have had an amazing movie, but they instead wanted to just make an entertaining movie so they added a "happy" ending completely change the main characters motives, personality, background, and body type.
In the book, there is very little use of guns at all. So to make it more interesting and a lot less suspenseful Neville (I believe that's the main characters name, it's been a while) has to kill almost each and every one of them by stabbing them with a stake. He finds no real female companionship except by a mutant vampire female that can actually control herself. Basically they should have called this movie something else and just given credit that it was loosely based off of a book with some similar circumstances. Hollywood can't get anything right. If they really wanted to go with a character that was a military doctor, why not get someone WHO HAS MILITARY EXPERIENCE... would that be too hard or difficult to imagine? So gives a **** if he's a bad actor, the character in the movie isn't exactly supposed to be up to date on his people skills and most of the story has little to no dialogue.... Grr.
Let me know when they remake this movie again.. the right way.
By the way, why is it so hard to get Soldiers and Marines (present or former) to play Soldiers and Marines in movies? Is there some reason we have to pick people who have zero experience to play them? I like how our society would rather see someone flashy that gets paid too much to play a hero on T.V. when the real heros have to struggle to make ends meet and have to watch crappy movies about themselves that dishonor them by making us military look like idiots.
In the book, there is very little use of guns at all. So to make it more interesting and a lot less suspenseful Neville (I believe that's the main characters name, it's been a while) has to kill almost each and every one of them by stabbing them with a stake. He finds no real female companionship except by a mutant vampire female that can actually control herself. Basically they should have called this movie something else and just given credit that it was loosely based off of a book with some similar circumstances. Hollywood can't get anything right. If they really wanted to go with a character that was a military doctor, why not get someone WHO HAS MILITARY EXPERIENCE... would that be too hard or difficult to imagine? So gives a **** if he's a bad actor, the character in the movie isn't exactly supposed to be up to date on his people skills and most of the story has little to no dialogue.... Grr.
Let me know when they remake this movie again.. the right way.
By the way, why is it so hard to get Soldiers and Marines (present or former) to play Soldiers and Marines in movies? Is there some reason we have to pick people who have zero experience to play them? I like how our society would rather see someone flashy that gets paid too much to play a hero on T.V. when the real heros have to struggle to make ends meet and have to watch crappy movies about themselves that dishonor them by making us military look like idiots.
