Skip to main content

The beginning of any new society is never charming or gentle.

The Last Man on Earth
(1964)

(SPOILERS) I get the impression that some – purists – regard The Last Man on Earth as the best of the three I Am Legend adaptations simply by default: because it’s the most faithful version, regardless of other diminishing factors. Which was pretty much Richard Matheson’s take (“I was disappointed in the film, even though they more or less followed my story”). The truth is, the movie is quite watchable, largely down to Price (whom Matheson felt was miscast), but it’s only ever a bare-bones, basic piece of work.

That basic quality makes it easy to see why George Romero was taken with it, and would credit the movie for inspiring the zombies of Night of the Living Dead. Which means The Last Man on Earth is quite the forebear. Or alternatively, has a whole lot to answer for. Because the shambling, erratic, laughably-inept zombie vampires attempting to break into Robert Morgan’s home every sundown really do suggest Romero’s zombies (I’ll wager, if you come to the movie cold, it’s the first thing you’ll think of). There isn’t a whole lot of tension to go along with that, but that’s of a piece with the iffy direction from Sidney Salkow and Ubaldo B Ragona and the mostly iffy acting from an Italian cast (zombie vampire Ben, played by Giacoo Rossi Stuart, is especially amusing).

The picture lacks the range or thematic depth to truly grapple with the theme of loneliness, extolled by the novel’s advocates as its greatest achievement. Part of that is spending too little time with Price alone; we’re always either insulated by a voiceover, his daytime activities – does garlic stay fresh for three years? And why isn’t he busy planting some rather going to the supermarket for past-their-sell-by-date supplies? – flashbacks, or his not-actually fellow survivor Ruth (Franca Bettoia).

The flashbacks offer probably the most affecting and engaging material, however. The progress of the plague is sketched out suggestively (“Is Europe’s disease carried on the wind?” asks a newspaper headline). Price’s Morgan is a scientist, in contrast to the novel, and forwards the view that “I just can’t accept the idea of universal disease” (if only there were more like him just now!) His colleague Ben, who will succumb to paranoia and then vampirism, wonders if this may bear all the hallmarks of your classic, go-to, hysteria-generating contagion: “Is it possible this germ or virus could be airborne?

The novel appears to suggest the pandemic derives from bacteria (in contrast to popular and proliferate viruses). Albeit, rather unevenly spread by mosquitoes (which could make sense) and dust storms (less so). Matheson piles on a whole load of pseudo-scientific vampire lore, which in this version, with its mirrors and strings of garlic, comes across as plain silly (although, it’s a neat reversal that a bat furnishes Morgan’s immunity from the plague – it bit him a long time ago in Panama – as a twist from their usual unwarranted vilification).

It’s unusual to see Price in a “straight” role, particularly tackling the loss of his daughter and wife with something approximating a restrained manner. The former goes blind with the disease and, when his wife (Emma Danieli) ignores his instruction not to call the doctor, is disposed of in a perma-burning pit of the diseased. Virginia also succumbs, but she returns from the grave after he buries her.

Unfortunately, it’s the element that wins The Last Man on Earth all the brownie points – the retention of Matheson’s twist – that disappoints. It lacks the all-important impact of Price being regarded as a legend, feared by Ruth and her fellow infected non-zombies (who have come up with a vaccine that holds off the worst effects: “We’re alive. Infected yes, but alive”). Morgan has been travelling around town, staking the “alive”, and they, not unreasonably, want shot of him. I’m not sure the development of Morgan developing a permanent cure via a transfusion bears up to close scrutiny – why would he only realise the reason for his immunity now? Unless it’s only the presence of Ruth that gives him cause and opportunity – but it adds an ironic poignancy to his being hunted down and killed. As for the black-clad army, the “freaks” who do for him, they’re possibly even less imposing than the undead.

Above and beyond The Last Man on Earth’s protagonist-antagonist reversal, it’s interesting to consider that Morgan, “a man. The last man”, unadulterated in his biology, can have no place in this “new society” anyway; the prospects for any resisting the incoming technocratic age’s vaunted gene-altering vaccine, those who do not wish to become the “new humans” in the new society of tomorrow, might be similarly construed.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

How would Horatio Alger have handled this situation?

Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (1998) (SPOILERS) Gilliam’s last great movie – The Zero Theorem (2013) is definitely underrated, but I don’t think it’s that underrated – Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas could easily have been too much. At times it is, but in such instances, intentionally so. The combination of a visual stylist and Hunter S Thompson’s embellished, propulsive turn of phrase turns out, for the most part, to be a cosmically aligned affair, embracing the anarchic abandon of Raoul Duke and Doctor Gonzo’s Las Vegas debauch while contriving to pull back at crucial junctures in order to engender a perspective on all this hedonism. Would Alex Cox, who exited stage left, making way for the Python, have produced something interesting? I suspect, ironically, he would have diluted Thompson in favour of whatever commentary preoccupied him at the time (indeed, Johnny Depp said as much: “ Cox had this great material to work with and he took it and he added his own stuff to it ”). Plus

He’s so persistent! He always gets his man.

Speed (1994) (SPOILERS) It must have been a couple of decades since I last viewed Speed all the way through, so it’s pleasing to confirm that it holds up. Sure, Jan de Bont’s debut as a director can’t compete with the work of John McTiernan, for whom he acted as cinematographer and who recommended de Bont when he passed on the picture, but he nevertheless does a more than competent work. Which makes his later turkeys all the more tragic. And Keanu and Sandra Bullock display the kind of effortless chemistry you can’t put a price tag on. And then there’s Dennis Hopper, having a great old sober-but-still-looning time.

No matter how innocent you are, or how hard you try, they’ll find you guilty.

The Wrong Man (1956) (SPOILERS) I hate to say it, but old Truffaut called it right on this one. More often than not showing obeisance to the might of Hitchcock during his career-spanning interview, the French critic turned director was surprisingly blunt when it came to The Wrong Man . He told Hitch “ your style, which has found its perfection in the fiction area, happens to be in total conflict with the aesthetics of the documentary and that contradiction is apparent throughout the picture ”. There’s also another, connected issue with this, one Hitch acknowledged: too much fidelity to the true story upon which the film is based.

You were a few blocks away? What’d you see it with, a telescope?

The Eyes of Laura Mars (1978) (SPOILERS) John Carpenter’s first serial-killer screenplay to get made, The Eyes of Laura Mars came out nearly three months before Halloween. You know, the movie that made the director’s name. And then some. He wasn’t best pleased with the results of The Eyes of Laura Mars, which ended up co-credited to David Zelag Goodman ( Straw Dogs , Logan’s Run ) as part of an attempt by producer Jon Peters to manufacture a star vehicle for then-belle Barbra Streisand: “ The original script was very good, I thought. But it got shat upon ”. Which isn’t sour grapes on Carpenter’s part. The finished movie bears ready evidence of such tampering, not least in the reveal of the killer (different in Carpenter’s conception). Its best features are the so-uncleanly-you-can-taste-it 70s New York milieu and the guest cast, but even as an early example of the sub-genre, it’s burdened by all the failings inherit with this kind of fare.

But everything is wonderful. We are in Paris.

Cold War (2018) (SPOILERS) Pawel Pawlikowski’s elliptical tale – you can’t discuss Cold War without saying “elliptical” at least once – of frustrated love charts a course that almost seems to be a caricature of a certain brand of self-congratulatorily tragic European cinema. It was, it seems “ loosely inspired ” by his parents (I suspect I see where the looseness comes in), but there’s a sense of calculation to the progression of this love story against an inescapable political backdrop that rather diminishes it.

To survive a war, you gotta become war.

Rambo: First Blood Part II (1985) (SPOILERS?) I’d like to say it’s mystifying that a film so bereft of merit as Rambo: First Blood Part II could have finished up the second biggest hit of 1985. It wouldn’t be as bad if it was, at minimum, a solid action movie, rather than an interminable bore. But the movie struck a chord somewhere, somehow. As much as the most successful picture of that year, Back to the Future , could be seen to suggest moviegoers do actually have really good taste, Rambo rather sends a message about how extensively regressive themes were embedding themselves in Reaganite, conservative ‘80s cinema (to be fair, this is something one can also read into Back to the Future ), be those ones of ill-conceived nostalgia or simple-minded jingoism, notional superiority and might. The difference between Stallone and Arnie movies starts right here; self-awareness. Audiences may have watched R ambo in the same way they would a Schwarzenegger picture, but I’m

What do they do, sing madrigals?

The Singing Detective (2003) Icon’s remake of the 1986 BBC serial, from a screenplay by Dennis Potter himself. The Singing Detective fares less well than Icon’s later adaptation of Edge of Darkness , even though it’s probably more faithful to Potter’s original. Perhaps the fault lies in the compression of six episodes into a feature running a quarter of that time, but the noir fantasy and childhood flashbacks fail to engage, and if the hospital reality scans better, it too suffers eventually.

One final thing I have to do, and then I’ll be free of the past.

Vertigo (1958) (SPOILERS) I’ll readily admit my Hitchcock tastes broadly tend to reflect the “consensus”, but Vertigo is one where I break ranks. To a degree. Not that I think it’s in any way a bad film, but I respect it rather than truly rate it. Certainly, I can’t get on board with Sight & Sound enthroning it as the best film ever made (in its 2012’s critics poll). That said, from a technical point of view, it is probably Hitch’s peak moment. And in that regard, certainly counts as one of his few colour pictures that can be placed alongside his black and white ones. It’s also clearly a personal undertaking, a medley of his voyeuristic obsessions (based on D’entre les morts by Pierre Boileau and Thomas Narcejac).

The game is rigged, and it does not reward people who play by the rules.

Hustlers (2019) (SPOILERS) Sold as a female Goodfellas – to the extent that the producers had Scorsese in mind – this strippers-and-crime tale is actually a big, glossy puff piece, closer to Todd Phillips as fashioned by Lorene Scarfia. There are some attractive performances in Hustlers, notably from Constance Wu, but for all its “progressive” women work male objectification to their advantage posturing, it’s incredibly traditional and conservative deep down.

You don’t know anything about this man, and he knows everything about you.

The Man Who Knew Too Much (1956) (SPOILERS) Hitchcock’s two-decades-later remake of his British original. It’s undoubtedly the better-known version, but as I noted in my review of the 1934 film, it is very far from the “ far superior ” production Truffaut tried to sell the director on during their interviews. Hitchcock would only be drawn – in typically quotable style – that “ the first version is the work of a talented amateur and the second was made by a professional ”. For which, read a young, creatively fired director versus one clinically going through the motions, occasionally inspired by a shot or sequence but mostly lacking the will or drive that made the first The Man Who Knew Too Much such a pleasure from beginning to end.