For those of you who **have seen** Survival of the Dead - - - opinion poll!

[darth los]

Well, I also just want to see this movie the way it was meant to be seen. On the Sci-fi channel. Military chick + jillinoff = Sci-fi channel. You all know its true. If you go back to my old posts I've been saying that for years. Land of the dead, survival and diarhea( ) are of the quality of something the sy-fy channel regularly shows. Put it like this. If you had no idea who made them and someone showed you those films and told you they were sy fy originals you'd be like: "yeah, that sounds about right."

[bassman]

Ehhh...Diary and Survival maybe, but Land doesn't seem very syfy-ish to me. Clark's acting is on par with syfy actors, but the movie as a whole doesn't fit the bill, imo.

[darth los]

Are you Mad!?! Beauty truly is in the eye of the beholder. LOTD screams sy fy.

[bassman]

Maybe your opinion of the film has something to do with it? Like it or hate it, I just can't see it as a syfy flick. Something along the lines of the Resident Evil films are syfy material. Land has it's bad moments, there's no denying that, but it's not near as bad as Mega Shark vs Octopus or whatever other crap comes on that channel...

[darth los]

Land has it's bad moments, there's no denying that, but it's not near as bad as Mega Shark vs Octopus or whatever other crap comes on that channel... Now that we can agree on.

[Trin]

I have to agree with Bassman. Land is well above a Sci-cry movie. For all my griping about Land it did feel big-budget and big-theater movie-ish to me.

[clanglee]

Well, I also just want to see this movie the way it was meant to be seen. On the Sci-fi channel. Military chick + jillinoff = Sci-fi channel. You all know its true. I agree with you for the most part. . . it had that feel. I think the High def adds to that sensation as well. But I found Survival to be a lot more cinematic than Diary.

[krakenslayer]

I agree with you for the most part. . . it had that feel. I think the High def adds to that sensation as well. But I found Survival to be a lot more cinematic than Diary. Yeah, Survival had some really nice outdoor cinematography and decent sets that helped it look bigger budget than it really was. I think the dialogue and acting - while not bad, per se - were very "genre" and nudged it towards B-movie territory. But I've kind of accepted that about the more recent films in the series and can enjoy them both in spite of and because of it.

[ChokeOnEm]

. I think the dialogue and acting - while not bad, per se - were very "genre" and nudged it towards B-movie territory. I must say, after seeing the film twice, the dialogue is especially crap. Every line is either a pun or someone repeating a different character's line for dramatic effect. For example, when the lesbo catches O'Flynn as he jumps to the Ferry she goes, "You're lucky I'm me." Later, when O'Flynn tries to save the same lesbo from the hands of the Muldoons, he turns and says to her, "You're lucky I'm me." This happens no less than 6 or 7 times in the film. The script is just plain lazy. On the acting front, only Van Sprang makes a fool of himself. His freak out scenes are laughable, especially when Kenny gets shot. Old hands, Kenneth Walsh and Richard Fitzpatrick, really elevate the material and both have great juicy roles similar to Kaufman or Captain Rhodes.

[SymphonicX]

On the acting front, only Van Sprang makes a fool of himself. His freak out scenes are laughable, especially when Kenny gets shot. Totally, that was really sub par....he did alright until he had to show emotion...

[MinionZombie]

Totally, that was really sub par....he did alright until he had to show emotion... I think he did a good job ... except for the Kenny scene.

[ChokeOnEm]

Having finally watched 'Zombieland' over the weekend, Romero's latest may be due for a reappraisal. I heard ALOT of good things, but what I saw was a generic coming-of-age tale awkwardly shoehorned into a zombie film, not to mention some of the most painfully forced hip dialogue this side of Diablo Cody ("spitfuck", "nut up or shut up"). What little plot there is, mostly consists of post-production gimmicks like the on-screen rules, Family Guy type cutaway gags, and Tarantino-esque slo-mo montages featuring retro music. And for the last time, I get it - Woody Harrelson's character sure does love twinkies. Ha..ha..ha? Glad other horror fans found this to be a breath of fresh air.

[Mr.G]

Having finally watched 'Zombieland' over the weekend, Romero's latest may be due for a reappraisal. I heard ALOT of good things, but what I saw was a generic coming-of-age tale awkwardly shoehorned into a zombie film, not to mention some of the most painfully forced hip dialogue this side of Diablo Cody ("spitfuck", "nut up or shut up"). What little plot there is, mostly consists of post-production gimmicks like the on-screen rules, Family Guy type cutaway gags, and Tarantino-esque slo-mo montages featuring retro music. And for the last time, I get it - Woody Harrelson's character sure does love twinkies. Ha..ha..ha? Glad other horror fans found this to be a breath of fresh air. IMO the main difference is Zombieland was intentionally written to be funny where as Survival....well, not so much.

[ChokeOnEm]

IMO the main difference is Zombieland was intentionally written to be funny where as Survival....well, not so much. I dunno...there's some broad Looney Tunes moments in 'Survival', as well as some typical Romero black humor. 'Survival' at least offers some solid B-movie thrills. 'Zombieland' strains waaay to hard to be offbeat and irreverent. Can't say that I really liked either movie. Haven't seen a truly GREAT zombie flick since "28 Weeks Later".

[Mr.G]

Can't say that I really liked either movie. Haven't seen a truly GREAT zombie flick since "28 Weeks Later". You might want to take shelter on these forums if you classify 28 Weeks Later as a zombie movie.