Romero's Dead Trilogy different than all other zombie films

[wkhan69]

Guys, This has been racking my brain for a while. Romero's trilogy are all very different from each other, but they are all phenomenal! I mean I was mesmerized by all three. Now here's my question. Why are all the other zombie films, dare I say, not as good as the trilogy? I've thought about it and thought about it, and I can't figure out. Even Land of the Dead isn't as good as the three original. Even serious zombie films like 28 days or The Walking Dead, etc. have good moments, but as a whole, are not at the same level as Romero's Trilogy. Any thoughts?

[Andy]

28 days is not a zombie film.

[krisvds]

While 28 days most certainly isn't a zombie film, 28 days later just might be. Though I would call it an 'infected' film if that makes any sense. And while nothing compares to the sheer awesomeness of Romero's original trilogy, in my book, the recent 'The Dead' comes awfully close. If you're a fan of Itallian splatter there's also Fulci's Zombie2 to consider. BTW Land wasn't that bad. More of an apocalyptic, Mad Max style action film with Zombies thrown in for good measure but still,...

[bassman]

Even serious zombie films like 28 days or The Walking Dead, etc. have good moments, but as a whole, are not at the same level as Romero's Trilogy. Any thoughts? Of course it all boils down to one's opinion, but I think TWD is on par with Romero's trilogy. The best zombie offering since '85.

[Danny]

While 28 days most certainly isn't a zombie film, 28 days later just might be. technically speaking 28 days is more of a 'zombie' film than George's ghoul flicks. at least until he ever reveals the man behind the curtain on why the dead walk in his films. IS it some form of external influence like a virus or radiation or some other sci-fi take on the voodoo "zombie"? or something else entirely. Who knows? maybe in some other universe it was called night of the ghouls and it turned out there was some russel edgeington style vampire king raising these cannibal ghouls as an army?

[blind2d]

"While 28 days certainly isn't a zombie film, 28 days later just might be." That makes no kind of sense whatsoever. Anyway, it's because they're good. *shrugs* Watch Shaun of the Dead.

[krakenslayer]

That makes no kind of sense whatsoever. 28 Days: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0191754/ 28 Days Later: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0289043/

[EvilNed]

28 days is not a zombie film. Yes, it is.

[Mike70]

And while nothing compares to the sheer awesomeness of Romero's original trilogy, in my book, the recent 'The Dead' comes awfully close. in my book, "The Dead" is better than any romero zombie flick, day excepted. night is a cool flick even though it is creaky and primitive. it is still creepy and atmospheric, so that saves it from the trash heap. dawn is a cinematic embarrassment that i can't be bothered to waste time on anymore. then we come to day, the best of lot and one of the best horror flicks ever. "The Dead" is a movie that any and all self-respecting zombie freaks have to make every attempt at seeing. i've not been that impressed with a zombie flick in a long, long time. "The Horde" is another recent flick that is a must see as far as i'm concerned.

[wkhan69]

in my book, "The Dead" is better than any romero zombie flick, day excepted. night is a cool flick even though it is creaky and primitive. it is still creepy and atmospheric, so that saves it from the trash heap. dawn is a cinematic embarrassment that i can't be bothered to waste time on anymore. then we come to day, the best of lot and one of the best horror flicks ever. "The Dead" is a movie that any and all self-respecting zombie freaks have to make every attempt at seeing. i've not been that impressed with a zombie flick in a long, long time. "The Horde" is another recent flick that is a must see as far as i'm concerned. I agree that Romero's Day of the Dead is phenomenal and has some of the best dialog I've ever heard in a zombie film. The walking dead is quite good, no doubt, but it's a little heavy on the soap opera side I think. The beginning of Dawn (and Day for that matter) is unbeatable. There are quirky elements to Romero's trilogy, but for some reason, they all work and you get on board for the ride. Maybe it's how Romero works in social commentary, some creepy theories, and an honesty that keeps it up there.

[Ragnarr]

I think that GAR's original trilogy created a certain morbid feel to zombie horror flicks that later films tried to copy but never seemed to achieve. Even GAR's later films (Land, Diary, and whatever that third thing was) didn't come close to achieving the same feel of his original work. I think another factor as to why the originally trilogy rocked was that all non-GAR zombie flicks deal exclusively with infection as the cause of their zombie outbreaks as opposed to GAR's concept that any death (natural or otherwise) will create a zombie. 28 days, 28 weeks, 28 months, etc. are not zombie flicks. The nasties in 28 whatevers are very much alive AND are infected with a virus. They starved at the end of 28 days as you might recall. Zombies do not starve because they are dead you see. They can only decay.

[EvilNed]

28 days, 28 weeks, 28 months, etc. are not zombie flicks. The nasties in 28 whatevers are very much alive AND are infected with a virus. They starved at the end of 28 days as you might recall. Zombies do not starve because they are dead you see. They can only decay. This has nothing to do with this thread, I apologize... But; Zombies do not need to be dead or undead.

[Andy]

This has nothing to do with this thread, I apologize... But; Zombies do not need to be dead or undead. Im sorry but i seriously beg to differ, the one and only thing every zombie movie has as a consistent is that zombies are dead or undead. Runners or shamblers, silent or screeching, weak or strong.. The one thing every zombie movie has in common is that they are dead. 28 days is a good movie, im not taking away from it, but its a a movie about a epidemic virus that effects living people and makes them homicidal. Thats very different. If your gonna call 28 days later a zombie movie then you might aswell call i am legend, the crazies, invasion of the body snatchers and outbreak! zombie movies too but none of them are. IN FACT, danny boyle is on record stating that 28 days is not a zombie movie. The Romero films are obviously the most important zombie films, but 28 Days Later isn't really a zombie film. Other films like Cronenberg's Rabid and John Wyndham's The Day Of The Triffids are big influences for both Alex [Garland, the writer] and I. Source

[EvilNed]

Are we talking the genre of Zombiefilms? Because definitions of genres have nothing to do with what a director wants or believes. He may, of course, have an opinion, as anyone else. But if you walk into a DVD store, you'd find 28 Days Later by the other zombiefilms. Why? Because that's how genres work. We use genres to define films. If I were to recommend a few good zombie films to somebody, I would not exclude 28 Days Later. Why? Because it shares all the same conventions and clichés with the zombiefilm genre. You say that they aren't dead. True. But that doesn't mean they aren't zombies. I could go deeper into the discussion than that, but I think that the argument in itself (I.e: 28 days later isn't a zombiefilm because they aren't undead) is such a simple and near childish argument that I'm just not gonna. I don't need too. Zombiefilms are not about the medical status of their monsters. They are about the decay of civilization. The relationship between survivors. The lack of trust one puts in ones peers when an infectious disease or virus spreads. Facing loved ones and neighbors turned into savage beasts. Hordes of anonymous, murderous monsters.

[Mike70]

The walking dead is quite good, no doubt, but it's a little heavy on the soap opera side I think. The beginning of Dawn (and Day for that matter) is unbeatable. There are quirky elements to Romero's trilogy, but for some reason, they all work and you get on board for the ride. Maybe it's how Romero works in social commentary, some creepy theories, and an honesty that keeps it up there. I cannot stand "the walking dead" at all. it is a crappy family drama masquerading as a horror show. after the pilot, i was literally bored to tears by that show. soap opera is the perfect way to describe it. what qualifies as "character development" to some is, to me, the destruction of any and all ability of the viewer to make decisions about the characters and their motives. i'm one of those folks who prefer to know as little about the characters in a film as possible. makes it more fun, more mysterious and allows you to draw your own conclusions about their motives. "the dead" i was referring to is a recently released zombie flick that centers on an american military flight engineer who finds himself alone and surrounded by the undead in west africa after a plane crash. it is the best zombie film of the last few years.