Reviews

I just saw the movie last night, and it was a great piece of filmaking, in my opinion. This is no mere action-thriller...this is a true psychological thriller with some horror/action elements scattered throughout to keep the multiplex crowds awake. Will Smith plays against type here as the protagonist Robert Neville, who struggles against insanity as he searches for the cure to the virus that has apparently made him the last uninfected man on earth. Smith does an excellent job here of showing the effects of isolation, loneliness and desperation. Gone is the supercool, in-control, wisecracking badass of Bad Boys, Men in Black and Independence Day. Here, he plays closer to the vulnerability he explored in I, Robot and perfected in The Pursuit of Happiness. I was reminded quite a bit of Tom Hanks' performance in Cast Away, which Smith cites as an influence for making this movie. All in all, this movie is taut, gripping and intense, both emotionally and psychologically. The visuals of (the real) Manhattan, emptied out by the virus are both breathtaking and spooky. The intensity of the performances by the CG creatures is so convincing it makes the infected of 28 Days/Weeks Later seem like they're moving in slow motion. The story plays very close to the vest of the original novel, while simultaneously tipping its hat to the Vincent Price and Charlton Heston adaptations, and weaves its own new tapestry as well. The movie was extremely well done and is sure to be an instant classic. Bravo to all involved.

I went into this movie with high hopes, having been an avid reader of the book, and especially the more recent Garth Ennis-penned books from which this movie draws some of its elements (Joan, Spacker Dave and Mr. Bumpo, Harry Heck, the Russian, etc.). What a letdown it was. This movie was made without a trace of visual style or creative art direction. Granted, the action set pieces were adequate, which puts it at least on a par with the Dolph Lundgren original (which isn't saying much), but the director seems not to know much about staging or where to place the camera. The location alone was a joke--Tampa, Florida? The original story is so steeped in the culture of New York that it seemed more than a bit out of place here. Further deviations from the source material also served to ruin the film: Joan in the book is much more introverted and meek (she is agoraphobic and nicknamed "The Mouse" by Frank), the Russian was a lovably powerful and dangerously dim-witted henchman, and his demise in the book was much more creative and hilarious. The film attempted to include elements of the dark humor of the Ennis books, without staying true to the stories, situations and style. The only real evidence of this is the way in which Frank dispatches the main villain. The one element of this film that almost worked for me was the elaborate set-up of Howard Saint--this was nearly Shakesperean in its complexity, but seemed like it belonged in a totally different movie. The score was insipidly bland and devoid of any major themes, and the song placement seemed arbitrary and uninspired--merely an excuse to pimp a few noteworthy (and not-so-noteworthy) rock bands. What a waste of celluloid.

For a better acted, better written, better filmed and directed action-revenge flick, check out "Man On Fire." That movie has visual style to spare and a soundtrack to die for--things that "The Punisher" were sorely lacking, considering that the rest of the film is pretty standard.