Watched: 02/03/2025
Format: Amazon
Viewing: Third, I believe
Director: Ridley Scott
An absolute trainwreck of a movie, Legend (1985) is worth seeing mostly to say "wow, they had all these resources at their disposal, and this is what they did?"
Unsurprisingly, this was also my impression of the movie when I saw it aged 10. And knowing I saw it at age ten also reminds me my dear mother sat through this movie. Sorry, KareBear!
Of course, in 1985, I was a Dungeons and Dragons kid, and was expecting more of a Conan style adventure, so was disappointed on that level. But I did understand we were looking at cutting edge sets, make-up and effects. And especially now in the CGI fantasy world we see daily, this movie looks amazing - because it is practical and has real light, etc... and all that is really the thing to recommend it.
But... The story was and is both overly complicated and mind-numbingly simple. You can dress up anything in faux-Shakespeare or fantasy-novel-speak, but you're still just saying "Jack has to get the MacGuffin back - and the girl. But that bad-guy stole them, and he's really tough and mean".
I watched Legend again, I believe, in college (maybe high school) and liked it no better. And then Jamie and I put it on probably 20 years ago, made it ten minutes in, and then tapped out.
But tonight we watched it from beginning-to-end, knowing this movie is bad. But, wow... is it a mess.
Visually? Yes, it's a masterclass of 1980's optical and practical FX. The make-up and creature effects are stellar. If you want to put it on and listen to some music, you might have a good time.
I didn't, and don't, think this movie had characters. It has impressions of characters. It has vague archetypes. Most surprising, no one really has an arc, they simply go through a little adventure where we're told that maybe the universe is at stake - but how, why or if we should care about this fact is all a little bit up in the air.
What is the movie is trying to say? I couldn't tell you. Something about light and dark, not approaching wildlife, and that Mia Sara being the source of all of our problems.
A quick glance at Wikipedia tells me that there is a "director's cut" available that people are not as mad at, that actually lets the characters develop and reveal themselves and have motivations outside of the immediate crisis. I am both intrigued by a version of this that isn't just people in costumes shouting over Tangerine Dream, and horrified at the idea of watching this movie ever again. But it sounds like they trimmed out 30 or more minutes, and that tells me we accidentally left the story on the cutting room floor.
It's just a stunning disaster of a movie that may have been murdered in editing and sound design. It fails basic tests like "hey, explain how and why these characters are now in this scene".
As something that tried to go full Tolkien and create a new world based on familiar fantasy characters, it at least achieves a unique look, but then, if it had anything to say about it, forgot along the way. The world is too empty - there's no sense of anything beyond the sets, which gives the film no stakes. So what if this mile or two of woods is compromised? "You can't have light without darkness" is a fine sentiment, if you want to spend any energy whatsoever giving that phrase meaning in the context of the movie, but here it just sounds like a 17 year old who just discovered the Doors.
Anyway - if you think you need to watch this movie because it's been a while, I'd just watch any of the 1980's many, many fantasy movies other than this one. Maybe even Krull.
No comments:
Post a Comment