I watched the Last Man expecting a present day adaptation on a Mary Shelley novel but on a small budget and thats what i got. I also expected decent independent actors, passable special effects, decent direction and freaks that actually look like freaks.....this however I did not get. The Last Man has its good points, which are that I could get all the way through it without turning off and for the small budget spent you can see the potential that the director has with the right mentor. The problem with the Last Man is that the bad outweighs the good. The camera is shaky in the action scenes, the CGI is appalling (would have been better without it), the echoed overlayed voices are amateur, the action scenes (fights and gun battles) are about as exciting as watching paint dry, and the acting is mediocre at best. I'm not a hater at all, I'm just being brutally honest. No actually I'm being fair giving it a 4 out of 10. It was watchable but never exciting, and that is a shame because a film like this had so much potential. I love apocalyptic films and this one did have good writing (yes a positive comment). The script was interesting, especially the use of Sun Tzu's Art of War, and the message that we are all monsters, especially when we judge those that are different is one of truth that needs to be told. It is this alone that made me keep watching. Another good thing is that watching this has made me want to read the novel so I can picture in my imagination what this film could have been with a bigger budget, better actors, and better editing and camera-work. I would still like it to be independent but a film of this scale needs some cash to work with. Please someone out there give it another shot and this time make it with heart, you know like your Mum does with the cooking. That way I know it will be good.
9 Reviews
Really bad film.
hexrei13 January 2009
Warning: Spoilers
So, the cinematography was not so bad. The makeup, acceptable for the budget, although not impressive. By far the worst element of the film a viewer will notice is the terrible voiceovers through the whole movie. The star actor speaks like he is legally retarded. A big first step toward cleaning up this film would be ditching the voiceovers, or at least re-recording them with someone who is not so annoying to listen to.
Speaking of which, this character is boring and uninspiring to watch. He looks like he just stumbled out of a local bar to strap on some vests and camouflage and try to shoot the neighbor's dog with a pellet gun. Meet him: prior to the contagion, a nerdy office worker with a large paunch, begging to finally play in the big game. By the end of the few months passage in the film, he is a silent ninja, capable of Navy Seal tactics. The infected can use guns, but apparently not against him. His slothlike movements and pudgy body are even less stealthy and graceful than one might expect, I guess it's lucky for him that he is facing a partially blind and disabled enemy.
Of course, this all comes to a head when it is revealed that he is not only infected, but he is the one man who is capable of being infected while still maintaining his human nature. He is asked to breed with several women who may be able to produce viable offspring, healthy like him- what does our hero do? cut their throats one by one in one of the most pathetically uninspiring and unnecessarily long scenes in movie history. You can tell the director budgeted a few hundred for "chicks with their throats cut" effects. There were poor attempts at homages to Omega Man, but they fell flat and seemed more like distractions from the utter unoriginality of this film's plot. I am honestly willing to forgive the CGI scenes, they were not terrible except for the actual flight crash scene- but it doesn't matter, because the scene that comes after the CGI is so bad that you will wish you hadn't watched the film.
Just let this one rest- a script with a hint of promise but a failure in every other way.
Speaking of which, this character is boring and uninspiring to watch. He looks like he just stumbled out of a local bar to strap on some vests and camouflage and try to shoot the neighbor's dog with a pellet gun. Meet him: prior to the contagion, a nerdy office worker with a large paunch, begging to finally play in the big game. By the end of the few months passage in the film, he is a silent ninja, capable of Navy Seal tactics. The infected can use guns, but apparently not against him. His slothlike movements and pudgy body are even less stealthy and graceful than one might expect, I guess it's lucky for him that he is facing a partially blind and disabled enemy.
Of course, this all comes to a head when it is revealed that he is not only infected, but he is the one man who is capable of being infected while still maintaining his human nature. He is asked to breed with several women who may be able to produce viable offspring, healthy like him- what does our hero do? cut their throats one by one in one of the most pathetically uninspiring and unnecessarily long scenes in movie history. You can tell the director budgeted a few hundred for "chicks with their throats cut" effects. There were poor attempts at homages to Omega Man, but they fell flat and seemed more like distractions from the utter unoriginality of this film's plot. I am honestly willing to forgive the CGI scenes, they were not terrible except for the actual flight crash scene- but it doesn't matter, because the scene that comes after the CGI is so bad that you will wish you hadn't watched the film.
Just let this one rest- a script with a hint of promise but a failure in every other way.
a low-budget, but not altogether awful film
davidm-1417 January 2009
a doomsday virus decimates the world, and a lowly Tucson hospital worker, seemingly immune, tries to make it after the world falls apart. the remaining survivors seem to be either blind or insane. he wallows in self-pity, eventually becoming a sort of vigilante. interesting from one point of view, as there aren't many horror movies shot in Arizona that i can remember, except maybe "night of the Lepus". a mixture of "the stand", "i am legend" with a little "night of the living dead" thrown in. lots of superfluous gunplay and meaningless narration. the CGI is just awful, as is the vocal dubbing, but there's some nice cinematography. not completely forgettable as a small, independent film.
You have got to be kidding me.
ronaldprince5 January 2009
Why would someone make such a horrid movie with $7,500? It was so bad. I laughed so hard. Truly, it has to be up there with the worst movie I have ever watched. None of the actors - Gee, if you could even call them that - had taken lessons. Imagine watching the worst possible high school play...unrehearsed. Then throw in some special-effects that South Park would laugh at. Just a riot. I will not spoil the movie, but please, why must we hear traffic going by in a city that is supposed to be free of all traffic? If this guy plans on making more films like this the public needs to be warned. Seven months of weekends isn't much time for preparing, granted. Do any of these actors plan on making careers - no - they didn't have to quit their day jobs (thank Goodness). I saw several of the same people get killed many many times over. I must say that the obscenities were at a very minimum. There was one brief nude/slashing scene. Lots of gratuitous overkill - and I mean OVERKILL....gun scenes that seemed to go on forever..kinda like a broken record. I think the actors/actresses did their own make-up and stunts.
wast of time
hopla6820 August 2009
Warning: Spoilers
I never read the novel by Mary Shelley, but I sincerely hope it is better then this film.
Where to start... no production values.. well one can live with that. The fact that there is no money for large scale scenes( which an apocalypse movie does need), no money for decent cgi ( I can live with that, I chewed my way through countless Scfi channel originals).. I can all still live with that.. but who on earth found the lead actor, well basically all the speaking parts. I rarely saw such inept acting in a movie, its incredibly bad and the term "unconvincing" is the understatement of the century with this flick. Which poses a direct problem since the title is of course the last man, which basically means not that many actors. And I do give some credits to the director and the producers, I did some reading about this film and it seems it is all a very enthusiastic effort from all involved, The problem is however that if your lead is a crap actor and the rest of the actors involved are also crap, the rest starts to irritate very quickly.
I rarely turn a film off halfway but this one managed to do just that. Don't waste your time.
Where to start... no production values.. well one can live with that. The fact that there is no money for large scale scenes( which an apocalypse movie does need), no money for decent cgi ( I can live with that, I chewed my way through countless Scfi channel originals).. I can all still live with that.. but who on earth found the lead actor, well basically all the speaking parts. I rarely saw such inept acting in a movie, its incredibly bad and the term "unconvincing" is the understatement of the century with this flick. Which poses a direct problem since the title is of course the last man, which basically means not that many actors. And I do give some credits to the director and the producers, I did some reading about this film and it seems it is all a very enthusiastic effort from all involved, The problem is however that if your lead is a crap actor and the rest of the actors involved are also crap, the rest starts to irritate very quickly.
I rarely turn a film off halfway but this one managed to do just that. Don't waste your time.
Mary Shelley? Really?
Julie_K25 January 2009
I am surprised! Someone read a Mary Shelley novel and decided to make this adaptation? Jesus Christ!!!
The director must be a HUGE "Blair Witch Project" fan. Anyone who saw the whole movie is a hero to me, because I only saw the first 25 minutes! I laughed my head off though,this I have to say.If they were trying to make a comedy or make fun of "I am legend" it would be a great hit.But they didn't! It's not a splatter, not a cult, not sci-fi, not anything! The actors where bad (I mean not even high-school kids act like that), the sound, make-up, and the list goes on and on.
In all, it was a big waste of money for the poor producer. My condolences...
The director must be a HUGE "Blair Witch Project" fan. Anyone who saw the whole movie is a hero to me, because I only saw the first 25 minutes! I laughed my head off though,this I have to say.If they were trying to make a comedy or make fun of "I am legend" it would be a great hit.But they didn't! It's not a splatter, not a cult, not sci-fi, not anything! The actors where bad (I mean not even high-school kids act like that), the sound, make-up, and the list goes on and on.
In all, it was a big waste of money for the poor producer. My condolences...
Among low-budget production values, not a bad flick
oldkingsol30 June 2011
Warning: Spoilers
This is definitely not one for those to whom production values are a major component of their enjoyment (or lack thereof) of a movie, yet it's not a bad story for those who know how to tolerate such shortcomings in the interest of a not-bad story and a decent effort in spite of the handicaps. Much as I liked it, it was in spite of its shortcomings and not because of any 'charm' such things can sometimes impart. Virtually every component that goes into movie-making is what you might consider "sub-par", so don't go into it expecting anything terrific, but yet I still liked it. I'll be honest in that I probably wouldn't have paid much to rent it - but it might be worth a $1 rental or something similar. It's one of those kinds of stories where while the movie may not be the best depiction of it, the concept itself involves some sufficiently troubling philosophical/ideological questions so that if you're willing to look past the movie's surface "production values" and deeper into the core concept, it might actually be satisfying for you on that level alone. It doesn't get you into that mode automatically - that would be "high production values" for that - but if you're that type of person already and you -want- to peer into the philosophical realm, it shouldn't be too difficult to do.
The more crucial elements of the story were depicted "good enough" to let you get into it as deeply as you want to, with the exception of the distractingly cheap CGI. Fortunately, there aren't too many places where you absolutely have to ignore it, just enough of them to be a bit unpleasantly jolting for just a second or two here and there. The nuclear detonations were actually pretty bad - they appear to have forgotten to texturize them, so they were just shiny, "Stargate shimmer effect" textures on mushroom-cloud shaped CGI renderings. The motion & shape weren't too shabby, but the absence of actual texture was rather distracting. Fortunately, there are only two of them and they're relatively far apart. The plumes of smoke and "raging fires" are the only other cheap effects, and they're only mildly overused in a few parts, not so much as to ruin the whole experience if you're not too picky. Shortcomings aside, I -was- somewhat impressed with the complexity of the "carnival"-like scene about 30 minutes or so from the end. That was actually surprisingly complex and well-choreographed as far as the outside scene with dozens of actors. That was probably the most impressive scene of the whole film, production-wise. Also, while not giving a spoiler for the ending, I will say that in spite of the rather cheesy lead-up to the final scene, it -did- end on an interestingly profound note. That, I suspect, was the writing of Mary Shelly -finally- being made obvious (admittedly, it's a bit hard to credit this to Shelly through most of it - some elements are clearly her, but only if you know what you're looking for - the final line, though, is classic her, imho).
I don't apologize for movies, but I may sound like I'm doing that here to a degree as I just happened to like this one in spite of the things others justifiably loathed. It's cheaply made and that's obvious, but enough of the actors, script writers and set designers actually seemed to -care- about the job they were doing that some of you will find the cheap overall experience to be worth putting up with by the time all is said and done. The flaws are obvious quickly, the strengths a little less so, but I think you should be able to know within 10-15 minutes whether or not you'll like this particular semi-stinker. A few good clips on YouTube or elsewhere on the 'net should be sufficient. :-)
Enjoy - or not! I did in either case. :-)
The more crucial elements of the story were depicted "good enough" to let you get into it as deeply as you want to, with the exception of the distractingly cheap CGI. Fortunately, there aren't too many places where you absolutely have to ignore it, just enough of them to be a bit unpleasantly jolting for just a second or two here and there. The nuclear detonations were actually pretty bad - they appear to have forgotten to texturize them, so they were just shiny, "Stargate shimmer effect" textures on mushroom-cloud shaped CGI renderings. The motion & shape weren't too shabby, but the absence of actual texture was rather distracting. Fortunately, there are only two of them and they're relatively far apart. The plumes of smoke and "raging fires" are the only other cheap effects, and they're only mildly overused in a few parts, not so much as to ruin the whole experience if you're not too picky. Shortcomings aside, I -was- somewhat impressed with the complexity of the "carnival"-like scene about 30 minutes or so from the end. That was actually surprisingly complex and well-choreographed as far as the outside scene with dozens of actors. That was probably the most impressive scene of the whole film, production-wise. Also, while not giving a spoiler for the ending, I will say that in spite of the rather cheesy lead-up to the final scene, it -did- end on an interestingly profound note. That, I suspect, was the writing of Mary Shelly -finally- being made obvious (admittedly, it's a bit hard to credit this to Shelly through most of it - some elements are clearly her, but only if you know what you're looking for - the final line, though, is classic her, imho).
I don't apologize for movies, but I may sound like I'm doing that here to a degree as I just happened to like this one in spite of the things others justifiably loathed. It's cheaply made and that's obvious, but enough of the actors, script writers and set designers actually seemed to -care- about the job they were doing that some of you will find the cheap overall experience to be worth putting up with by the time all is said and done. The flaws are obvious quickly, the strengths a little less so, but I think you should be able to know within 10-15 minutes whether or not you'll like this particular semi-stinker. A few good clips on YouTube or elsewhere on the 'net should be sufficient. :-)
Enjoy - or not! I did in either case. :-)
Impressive indie minibudget flick
p-stepien10 February 2009
Kudos to the director for this attempt. The movie has many flaws, but I am accustomed to below par production in my line of work.
In the end I was very impressed with what the director managed to do with the money he had at his disposal. Yes, the acting was weak at times, but I've seen much worse. Yes, the lighting was sometimes off and there were sound issues. But overall the production quality is good enough to know whats happening and the story is engrossing with a no holds barred approach. The acting may have not been up to par to the script, but still I enjoyed every minute of this movie.
This film has many flaws but the 3,3 IMDb rating is ridiculous. At least this movie has a great story. Liked it much more than The Omega Man (with Charlton Heston) or I Am Omega (with Mark Dacascos).
People act like acting and top-notch production qualities is all that matters. I would tell these people that they are hooked on eye candy and that sometimes they should really put stuff into perspective.
Overall a decent 7 in my book. Two thumbs up.
In the end I was very impressed with what the director managed to do with the money he had at his disposal. Yes, the acting was weak at times, but I've seen much worse. Yes, the lighting was sometimes off and there were sound issues. But overall the production quality is good enough to know whats happening and the story is engrossing with a no holds barred approach. The acting may have not been up to par to the script, but still I enjoyed every minute of this movie.
This film has many flaws but the 3,3 IMDb rating is ridiculous. At least this movie has a great story. Liked it much more than The Omega Man (with Charlton Heston) or I Am Omega (with Mark Dacascos).
People act like acting and top-notch production qualities is all that matters. I would tell these people that they are hooked on eye candy and that sometimes they should really put stuff into perspective.
Overall a decent 7 in my book. Two thumbs up.
Not bad at all
byxl10 February 2009
Warning: Spoilers
Considering such a low budget it was an ambitious project. It's an amateur picture and the good effort by that standard. I gave it a 6/10 rating. I had more fun with this one than I did while watching Griff Furst's I Am Omega (starring Mark Dacascos). The escape, realization that he's not human either, Eva story- those were the things that could have been delivered better, regardless of the budget. Acting was horrible, which really doesn't make any difference- it's just that kind of picture. Overall, movie gives you a perfect opportunity to invite your friends (those dedicated freaks- if you've seen this picture or are reading comments like these, you fit the category yourself :D), buy some beer and snacks, and the fun is guaranteed. On the other hand, do not watch this with you significant other!
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
