Is the film any good? I loved it because I'm a furry fan and cannot resist this kind of movie. You will have to look elsewhere to find a sane review.

I read the film reviews in the Scotsman Newspaper on Saturday. The review of I Am Legend gave a plot summary for the film, giving me a nostalgia attack as I recognised it as a remake of the Omega Man.

However the reviewer seemed unaware of the earlier film. She failed to mention it. How odd.

Using the Internet I quickly discovered full  story. Two ignorance points for me, I had forgotten about the book and never heard of the first film. Three ignorance points for the reviewer. That is a bit of a problem. If the reviewer knows even less than I do, I should give up reading her.

Reading the Scotsman's other film reviewer, he comments on a different film, saying that it is dangerous for a fifty-something director to try to be "down with the kids", but that the film succeeds. That strikes me as a little odd too. It is surely even more dangerous for a sixty-something film reviewer to comment on whether a fifty-something film director succeeds in being "down with the kids" which raises a question in my mind about the ages of the Scotsman's film reviewers.

The little pictures at the top of their columns show a man and a women in their twenties. So that is why the woman had not heard of the Omega Man, it was exhibited before she was born.

My guess is that the Scotsman is making a trade-off. They are targeting the age group (which I guess to be 20-somethings) that spends money on going to movies. So they get some-one that age, and some-one normal, not a film-obsessive who has seen lots of movies from before they were born.

That puzzles me. It seems obvious that a film reviewer should be a movie obsessive, just as it seems obvious to me that a CGI character should be a cute, furry animal, but what do I know of real life?