Why people hate LOTD

[DjfunkmasterG]

Subtle? DAWN was anything but subtle. The commentary in DAWN was way more subtle than in Land. I don't believe the social commentary was as in your face in DAWN as it was in LAND.

[vill666]

I've loved every zombie movie made except house of the dead...land had a good story..I liked it...

[DubiousComforts]

The commentary in DAWN was way more subtle than in Land. I don't believe the social commentary was as in your face in DAWN as it was in LAND. If you're refering to DAWN '04, that's because it had no social commentary. It had a mall setting, and that's where all similarities between original and remake end. The commentary is why Romero's films are held up above all the remakes and "re-imaginings." Otherwise, you might as well be watching Resident Evil or Chopper Chicks in Zombie Town. Romero's films always break new ground, an area which other genre films lack. That being said, the commentary in LAND wasn't handled very well.

[Danny]

*fireowkrs go off and for more totally scripted dramatism hellsing shows up to join in with bassman and mz to throw his dawn 04 bithcin's in the ring* dude, dawns story was NOT better than lands, there wasnt one other than run, at least there was some focus in land, this aint a flame at dj, its just dawn strated so ****ing great, the opening carnage was fan-****ing-tastic, but it just got so downhill, ving rhames, the less said the better since theres nothing positive but it added so many unnessecary characters which had little screen time or plot involvement in any way and it just didnt flow well narrative wise, sure the camera work was nice but when you dont care about the cahracters or get drawn in does it matter? im not too big a fan of either but land is by far adn wide my favourite of the two, though i gotta say resi 3 was much better than dawn 04. oh yes. i whent there, bought a t-shirt, took some pictures, whent on the rides, had a time, brought it back, but not before saving some in a foil wrapped doggy back to bring it back again later. oh yes, i whent there.

[Trin]

Dawn '78 wasn't subtle in its commentary. However, the commentary flowed from the plot very well so it didn't draw attention to itself like what happens in Land. Yes, the survivors embraced consumerism with gusto. But you don't scratch your head and wonder why. With Land we find ourselves excusing the plot and characters, explaining that any deficiencies exist to support the director's message. I agree that characters have intentional flaws and those are not plot holes. Where I see plot holes are where the society's flaws on a whole literally defy its existence. The sheer ineptitude of the Green to defend itself makes you wonder how it ever came to be, or how it has managed to stay in power at all. I understand the message that Big Daddy and the zombies were evolving past their need to feed. I agree that is likely the vision Romero intended. But I think it's lame and contributes to Land being a bad movie. Bub was a horror masterpiece. He gave us hope that the zombies could overcome their instincts. But that hope was snatched away when we discover he'd merely been trained to accept a deferred reward. Changing the nature of zombies from flesh eating monsters to introspective misunderstood beings who just want to discuss their feelings over tea does not make the zombies more interesting, nor does it make Romero a visionary. For a Land Sequel I think we should have Litigation of the Dead, where Big Daddy represents Cholo and the other zombies in a class action lawsuit to get his money. With that much potential for social commentary you wouldn't need to burden yourself with plot at all.

[MinionZombie]

oh yes. i whent there, bought a t-shirt, took some pictures, whent on the rides, had a time, brought it back, but not before saving some in a foil wrapped doggy back to bring it back again later. oh yes, i whent there. I f*ckin' love that, has to be said.

[SRP76]

Big Daddy represents Cholo and the other zombies in a class action lawsuit to get his money. As outrageous as that sounds, there's probably someone out there, thinking, "hey, that would be a great idea!".

[DjfunkmasterG]

If you're refering to DAWN '04, that's because it had no social commentary. It had a mall setting, and that's where all similarities between original and remake end. The commentary is why Romero's films are held up above all the remakes and "re-imaginings." Otherwise, you might as well be watching Resident Evil or Chopper Chicks in Zombie Town. Romero's films always break new ground, an area which other genre films lack. That being said, the commentary in LAND wasn't handled very well. Nope I was referring to the original DAWN.

[Trin]

Comparing Land and Dawn '04 is like asking which works better to relieve the pain of a headache - a nail driven through your foot or watching an Oprah marathon for 24 hours solid? They're both horrible in completely different ways, and neither satisfies the intended desire.

[DjfunkmasterG]

What else can you compare Land too? In the glut of Zombie films that came out between 2003 and 2005, the only ones worth comparing are Land and Dawn. I won't compare RE flicks with them, frankly because the RE films have sucked (I haven't seen 3, but from what I hear I ain't missing much.)

[Trin]

Beyond a very high level "which do I like more" comparison, I don't know how you compare Land and Dawn '04. They're not trying to be the same thing. To answer that high level question I liked Land better than Dawn '04 (my apologies to DJ). Perhaps for no better reason than Land was a Romero movie in the 'Dead' universe and I'm hungry for anything that adds to the series. I will say that I think Dawn '04 did a better of job of meeting its goals. It tried to be a thrill ride and it was. And I can't hold this in any longer. Zombie baby plus deranged baby-daddy puts Dawn '04 on the same level as Chopping Mall. Yeah, I went there too...

[Mutineer]

I walked out of DAWN 04 totally jazzed. One of the best Zombie films I have ever watched; pure entertainment, action and adrenalin. Nothing like the orginal sans the Mall and as I have oft stated, the opening scene and credits were worth the price of admission alone. The action, suspense, the mood created and the getting down to business made it a fun ride. I still don't see how there can be haters on DAWN 04 ? I think it mainly due to the ROMERO GOGGLES; just admit, Zach did a better job than George did. Romero had an opportunity to finally do something special, with Undead films at it's highest peak ever, and he made a boring, poorly constructed film. The charcters sucked, the plot sucked, the Dead Reckoning was a joke, the gags were amatuerish, it wasn't scary, it had ZERO mood and the action scenes were a joke. The zombies overunning the citizens of Fiddlers Green was comical; patrons sitting at the cafe tables as zombies run, no .... walk slowly in and overrun them ? Come on. Big Daddy's intelligence and 6th sense powers were an insult to zombiedom. The mob, er 20 or so zombies that walk underwater across a river was bad, bad, bad. Completely inplausible even in the Land if the Undead. The scene where homeboy is aiming his gun at the little man through the (I think they were bleachers?) was bad, bad, bad. All of the vacant buildings with only FG being occopied was lame, lame, lame. It was a horrible film from the moment the zombies were playing the horns and we saw a zombie couple holding hands. - DAWN 04, 28 Days and Weeks and Shaun all blow this film out of the water. - George ? Thank you for giving us the Undead Genre, but you are a skilless hack of a director whose chops just have never developed. -

[Danny]

teh only thing saving dawn 04 for me is it opened with jhonny -mother ****ing- cash! though ive said it many times before the opening 15 mins rocked, but the its just seemed to lose steam, plus ,yknow, dont make me bring up the a-team construction montage again folks. but its all personal tastes so there is no definitive answer, i prefer ladn too awn, yet preffered resi 3 to both of them, adn thats just me, everone likes the same films for different reasons, so different strokes for different folks, i mean we can bitch again adn again, and do, over which is scarier, orhas the better script but in the end its all just personal tastes and preferance so there is no answer, hence my ouroboruos reference a few pages back.

[bassman]

I love how some try to change other's opinions.... Like what you like and move on. Or at least just take stabs at each other every once in a while like MZ, DJ, and myself.

[Mutineer]

I agree, DAWN 04 was not perfect by any means The A-Team scene was silly, the dog girl was grossly a bad idea but somewhat saved with 'We gotta go get the guns anyway' reasoning. I also see where it lost some steam, but with an opening like it had, it could be hard to top. It is as if the climax opened the film. - I loved the cast. Steve was the perfect Dick. Michael was beliavable and likable as the leader. Ving underplayed what could have been an over powering personality. Even the hot chick carried a cool vibe. CJ was rad but I wish we could have seen his development transitioned properly and not suddenly a cool guy. I could have done without the young lovers and the redneck securty guard. I totally embrace the running the zombies. I think the genre needed the twist. Yes, 28 Days Later did it first and YES, Return of the Living Dead can claim the fame on the idea; Return (My FAV of all based purely on the Punk Rock atmosphere and characters) never seemed to have the ferocity and terror that 28 Days and DAWN 04 created with their running dead. To be clear; I wanted LAND to rock. I went in with 100% support and enthusiasm and walked out almost embarrassed for it. Whereas I ran home telling my wife "OMG, you gotta see DAWN 04 !, I came home from LAND with "Eh, wasn't very good." : / Each to his own. - A liner note: I found 28 Weeks Later to be a nice entry and would welcome a sequel into that world.