Survival of the Dead - Finally watched it...

[clanglee]

Bassy & I had that exact conversation in regards to the "Star Trek" reboot. He was utterly baffled by my distain for that movie. And regardless of how "well" (ie professionally) it was made, it was utterly devoid of enjoyment for me what so ever. @Moonsylver - I HATED the Star Trek reboot... I'd love to rant for an hour with you about how shee-ite-e it is. An hour might not be enough. . But. . but . . .but. . . I usually agree with you guys on almost everything!!! How could we disagree on something this big!? ?? On Survival. . . .I liked it, but yeah. . it was graded on a curve, and my absolute and completely fierce hate for Diary really helped it. And yeah. . . both movies have indeed made Land MUCH better for me as well. It was like Romero was thinking "Well Chris was picking Land apart, so I'll give him some movies with so many faults that his head will spin. THEN. . .oh THEN he will like my movie!!" Well George. . it worked. . .

[rongravy]

I NEVER said he should retire. You also edited your post. I should've quoted you, because you've changed your words. Add sentence, my Aunt Fanny. You know what you did. You most certainly said he should retire originally. Someone else besides you needs to tell me I'm wrong on that one. WTF?!?!? I may have been drunk Friday and Saturday, but I was pretty durned sober yesterday. I'd still take the job, though. I loved Land, Diary was pretty decent, and Survival, well... Ok, I was also funk as druck, but it wasn't anywhere NEAR some of the crap I've seen out there. From what I can remember.

[MoonSylver]

But. . but . . .but. . . I usually agree with you guys on almost everything!!! How could we disagree on something this big!? ?? I understand your confusion. Being wrong can do that. (Or so I'm told. Thank goodness it's never happened to me. )

[DEAD BEAT]

Well, I finalllllly sat down and watched it. To set the scene, from the recent history (eg: Diary put a big dent in Romero's history for me) and various reviews/comments of it, I wasn't expecting much from Survival. However, it exceeded my expectations. Was it a good film? Don't know. I'd say passable. What's frustrating is it could have easily have been a lot better:- 1) Too many characters doing too many stupid, things:- 1a) Risking their lives for no obvious reasons. eg: Walking up to the dead and hugging them and putting their hands near faces, just waiting to be bitten. 1b) Shooting at each other for no clear reason. ie: Coming across the guys in the woods, and basically shooting them for no real reason. 1c) Forgetting you were enemies just 2 seconds ago. One minute people are shooting at each other, and the next best buddies? 2) Gimmicky kills. There were just a few too many contrived CGI silly kills. 3) Poorly written character behavour and scenes. 3a) eg: Seamus shooting the gun out of Patrick's hands? Really? Why not just have Patrick go to take a step forwards towards the kids, a shot rings out, and bullet hole appears in the floor boards straight infront of Patrick? Far more plausible... And just as effective? 3b) The introduction to Tomboy? Was that really necessary? Tacky! Why not do it with a bit more style? Maybe she pulls out a mag, and then it's revealed and it's Playboy? 3c) The entire last scene with loads of back shooting and contrived gun fights. 3d) Zombie riding a horse? Hmmm... Not sure... Zombie eating a horse? Why? There's lots of people standing nearby, so why no interest in that direction? Anyway, I'd probably give it a 5.5/10 for some of the good moments in it. I finally bought & saw it for the first time, and lemme tell ya if i could reach id shove my own foot up my ass!

[Neil]

^^ Ummm... Is this good or bad then?

[ChokeOnEm]

You also edited your post. I should've quoted you, because you've changed your words. Add sentence, my Aunt Fanny. You know what you did. You most certainly said he should retire originally. Someone else besides you needs to tell me I'm wrong on that one. WTF?!?!? Don't have time for your whiny fanboy tantrum... The added sentence was about the lack of gore. Nice try tho. The truth is, if I wanted George to retire I would openly say so. I have already called "Diary" and "Survival" the outright pieces of shit that they are. Why would I mince words regarding anything else Romero-related? As bad as their recent output is, I love the fact that all the former horror greats (Argento, Romero, Carpenter) are still playing with karo syrup on a soundstage somewhere.

[rongravy]

Don't have time for your whiny fanboy tantrum... Yawn. Then why'd you bother to quote me yet again? I think you're full of shit. Arrogant noob, I have as much right to like any and/or every movie of his that I want to. Wah wahhhhhh, the attack of the fanboys...(That insult/argument is getting a bit stale, dont you think?) Deal with it, if you can find the time. That is, when you're not changing posts after the fact.

[ChokeOnEm]

Yawn. Then why'd you bother to quote me yet again? I think you're full of shit. Arrogant noob, I have as much right to like any and/or every movie of his that I want to. Wah wahhhhhh, the attack of the fanboys...(That insult/argument is getting a bit stale, dont you think?)Deal with it, if you can find the time. That is, when you're not changing posts after the fact. What truly sets you apart from the usual ADHD-afflicted lumpy fanboy, is that most engage in cyber-battles over franchises worth defending. If you want to spend your time defending Romero's latest umpteenth "Generic Cashgrab of the Dead" be my guest. I'm just setting the record straight - I never called for his retirement. I don't want him to retire. I just want him to make good movies again.

[MinionZombie]

Choke, Ron, leave each other be, it's getting heated up in here.

[SRP76]

I'm going to be an arrogant noob and throw a whiny fanboy tantrum now. I watched Survival a few weeks ago, and wasn't impressed. Wasn't aghast, either, though. I thought this movie was just plain mediocre. Does it deserve to be in the same sentence? As Night, Dawn and Day? No, so it isn't. But, it also isn't nearly as beaten with the retard-stick as a lot of other modern horror films (which, strangely, probably made more money).

[darth los]

I understand your confusion. Being wrong can do that. (Or so I'm told. Thank goodness it's never happened to me. ) I lean toward the saying: "I'd agree with you but then we'd both be wrong." You're welcome.

[Trin]

But. . but . . .but. . . I usually agree with you guys on almost everything!!! How could we disagree on something this big!? ?? On Survival. . . .I liked it, but yeah. . it was graded on a curve, and my absolute and completely fierce hate for Diary really helped it. And yeah. . . both movies have indeed made Land MUCH better for me as well. It was like Romero was thinking "Well Chris was picking Land apart, so I'll give him some movies with so many faults that his head will spin. THEN. . .oh THEN he will like my movie!!" Well George. . it worked. . . So you're saying that Romero wrote the Star Trek reboot? Yes... now that you mention it... that does make sense. It was so full of faults I like Survival more because of it. @darth - yes, thank you... I will use that one

[paranoid101]

I did enjoy survival more then diary but less then land. I find Land while not as good as night, dawn and day of cause, very watchable

[MoonSylver]

I lean toward the saying: "I'd agree with you but then we'd both be wrong." I once thought I was mistaken, but I was wrong.

[darth los]

I once thought I was mistaken, but I was wrong. That sounds like one of those Dos Equis commercials starring "The most interesting man in the world.": "He once purposely tanked a question on an exam, just to see how it felt to be wrong." Stay thirsty my friends !