If you had Romero's ear?

[MoonSylver]

garbage crapfest Hyperbole is fun! At least the 90 minute MTV video satisfies my want for a good movie with lots of blood, scares, action and fun. I understand completely now. To each their own then.

[J0hnnyReb]

Hyperbole is fun! I understand completely now. To each their own then. I know you ant fathom that a GAR fan would have the audacity to stray from the collective group think, but that wasn't hyperbole.

[MoonSylver]

I know you ant fathom that a GAR fan would have the audacity to stray from the collective group think That's cute. But yes, I can fathom it. I don't need the "group" to think for me. I simply like what I like, for reasons which I've already given. You didn't. Believe it our not, I believe folk are entitled to have differences of opinion, even if I don't agree with them.

[strayrider]

I'd like to see GAR get back to basics. Good, action packed story, character driven, with some melodrama, and the usual background social commentary. Visually he might go back to using the same type of cameras, sound equipment, and lighting he used in Dawn to give it a retro, 70s drive-in feel. Use library music. Ditch the CGI SPFX and go back to the latex rubber, squibs, and stage make-up and blood. Editing wise he ought to return to the montages and quick cuts that gave films like Crazies, Dawn, and Knightriders that unique Romero feel. And ... stop giving the supporting characters crazy, comic book nicknames. Just my thoughts ... -stray-

[ProfessorChaos]

^ all that, plus NO REANIMATED ANIMALS. someone needs to give the dude a good smack based on what i've seen/heard so far of this new "? of the Dead"....and while we're on the subject, how about a proper title, instead of "another GAR....of the Dead" film. come to think of it, i'd probably tell ol' george to just quit while he's ahead.

[strayrider]

^ all that, plus NO REANIMATED ANIMALS. someone needs to give the dude a good smack based on what i've seen/heard so far of this new "? of the Dead"....and while we're on the subject, how about a proper title, instead of "another GAR....of the Dead" film. come to think of it, i'd probably tell ol' george to just quit while he's ahead. Yeah, really. Don't tell anyone I "said" this but, I think Dawn of the Dead was the high water mark of his career. He just ain't gonna top it. -stray-

[Wyldwraith]

I wanted to put that in a quote because I could not have said any way shape or form better!! I love to see the suspense and how they will get out of the situation, you know the 'edge of your seat' drama that scares the crap out of you that you are totally forgetting to breathe. Then when the scare is over you take a big cleansing breath and a sigh of relief. Ii like those scares! It's not necessarily the gore that I like which I do but its how they attack and when and not knowing. Also, I want to really get to know the characters and not be sure of who will get killed. Maybe get snippets of their lives before the zombies and I do mean snippets. I like a lot of zombie action in zombie movies and a lot of zombies. They all don't have to have a bunch of gore dripping off of them either to scare me. Thanks Debbieangel It's really nice to know that there are others who are looking for/hoping for the same sort of return to the solid classic principles that made GAR's first three movies great that I am. I mean, maybe I jumped on the whole social commentary issue too harshly. I read something that one of the posters who posted after the two of us said, about the fact that at least GAR is trying to give his films meaning, and that resonated with me. However, it's still the most valid point to emphasize that if a director doesn't give us a movie we enjoy, then NOTHING else matters. I DO hate the Uwe Bolls of the horror movie world. Just churning out gorefests with stories as weak as a bad porn flick. I hate those. Don't even get me started on the evils of the House of the Dead trilogy. (Although to be fair when extremely bored in the early morning hours I do have to admit I find the original one semi-watchable) I'm not a fan of mindless gorefests. Sorry if I gave anyone that impression. I thought emphasizing a desire for good story, characterization, pacing and action choreography would've demonstrated that, but perhaps not enough to some folks. My apologies Neither am I an enemy of a director making a message they want to convey part of the film. No, what I object to is the film being turned into nothing more than a thin veneer of a vehicle for the message. That's not precisely true though. I'm not a big fan of the concept that zombies are the victims and humans are somehow the bad guys. While a zombie certainly can VICTIMIZE a person, if that person becomes a zombie they aren't a victim anymore, they're a remorseless eating machine that's a deadly threat to humans. I think that's part of what causes a certain camp of people to take issue with Land. Land is arguably the most zombie-sympathetic of GAR's films. To the point of having the main character equate them with the disenfranchised lower class of Fiddler's Green "They're just looking for a home" my ass. Those zombies came to Fiddler's Green to exact a bloody brutal revenge and indiscriminately prey on any person with a pulse. I consider Riley a traitor to humanity for not blowing Big Daddy and his educated lieutenants straight to hell when he had them in their sights. If GAR wants to get into social themes I'd love to see someone who lost their entire family to Big Daddy and his crew catch up with Riley, driven by a desire for revenge against the man who could've saved them, but chose to side with the dead against his own species. THAT'S interesting social dynamics. It can be accurately said however that GAR does seem to be trending towards not seeing the zombies as monsters. He seems to be turning them from representatives of into the complete personification/incarnation of the social ills he rails against. To me that's a bridge too far from what makes a good survival horror film. Zombies = Bad Guys, Survivors= Maybe Bad Guys, Maybe Good Guys. I wonder sometimes if GAR even CARES what any of us think about his movies. Or if he's fallen into the trap that's snared many a successful author and director in the Stephen King Pit of Ego. Does he believe that the enormous success of his original trilogy means anything he directs automatically equals cinematic gold, and anyone who disagrees is an unenlightened philistine who doesn't perceive the majesty of his Great Message? I really wonder about that sometimes. I mean, reading interviews he's done he seems like a very intelligent man. SURELY he can't believe that Diary is of equal or greater quality than say, Dawn? Or is it much more basic? Has the rainmaker finally seeded his last cloud, and is the ground staying dry regardless of how hard he tries to recapture the past magic? If that's the case I feel truly bad for the guy. Sometimes when I watch Land I get the feeling that GAR is hunting for that elusive One More Hit to cap off his career. Anyone else feel that way? Just my .02

[strayrider]

If GAR wants to get into social themes I'd love to see someone who lost their entire family to Big Daddy and his crew catch up with Riley, driven by a desire for revenge against the man who could've saved them, but chose to side with the dead against his own species. THAT'S interesting social dynamics. Notice how Riley has no problem blowing zombies away when it's own tail on the line. Sometimes when I watch Land I get the feeling that GAR is hunting for that elusive One More Hit to cap off his career. Anyone else feel that way? Yeah, I agree. With the way his last two Dead films have panned out, I don't think he's on the right track. I dunno, maybe this new film will be the one to "knock our sock off" ... maybe ... I'm still of the opinion that Dawn was his pinnacle. It's kind of sad (for me at any rate) because I've gone from ROMERO! to ... romero ... -stray-

[Debbieangel]

Not because I am from PA but, it seems to me since he left Pittsburgh filming his movies they arent grass roots like they used to be...I know I know I am beating a dead horse! I really think living here was his how can I put it? Pa is his muse, his link to his creativity in his movies. Since he left his movies are so totally different. Not that I dont like his movies, I do. I am just saying maybe a change of venue is what he needs to get back to movies like his triology.

[Thorn]

I agree Debbie, and to add to that I think he bought into his own hype in a sense. Now before I am crucified you all know me, I am a fan of the work. I love the films. I love any good zombie film, but Mr. Romero is king. The issue is this, I do not believe and find this to be supported by his own words in interviews and commentaries that his original idea was horror films as a vessel for a larger message. His initial idea was to create horror films. He said himself that the casting of Ben was a fluke, that the part was written for a white man. But that Duane Jones was the best actor out of all of his friends and associates so he got the role. So many of us applauded him for casting a black man in the role, and for writing him as such a strong character. Writing in scenes where he strikes a white woman or dominates a "deceitful and treacherous" white man. Thing is, all of that was accidental. He did not start off down the road to write movies with a message, he set off down the road to make movies. That is what he needs to do again, if he focuses too much on the message he is going to sacrifice so many other elements KEY to a successful production and that is where his failings are. I do not hate Land. I know it was not perfect but I do not hate it. I did dislike diary a great deal, largely because the production values were so low and the volume of the message drowned out everything the movie had to offer by the way of character development and plot points. Just my own thoughts and opinions.

[Wyldwraith]

I agree Debbie, and to add to that I think he bought into his own hype in a sense. Now before I am crucified you all know me, I am a fan of the work. I love the films. I love any good zombie film, but Mr. Romero is king. The issue is this, I do not believe and find this to be supported by his own words in interviews and commentaries that his original idea was horror films as a vessel for a larger message. His initial idea was to create horror films. He said himself that the casting of Ben was a fluke, that the part was written for a white man. But that Duane Jones was the best actor out of all of his friends and associates so he got the role. So many of us applauded him for casting a black man in the role, and for writing him as such a strong character. Writing in scenes where he strikes a white woman or dominates a "deceitful and treacherous" white man. Thing is, all of that was accidental. He did not start off down the road to write movies with a message, he set off down the road to make movies. That is what he needs to do again, if he focuses too much on the message he is going to sacrifice so many other elements KEY to a successful production and that is where his failings are. I do not hate Land. I know it was not perfect but I do not hate it. I did dislike diary a great deal, largely because the production values were so low and the volume of the message drowned out everything the movie had to offer by the way of character development and plot points. Just my own thoughts and opinions. Again I find that great minds think alike One of the interviews that someone posted recently, with GAR talking about himself not being a good choice to judge horror films because he doesn't feel like his movies are horror films was very telling. He then went on to contradict himself, and say that he knows when all is said and done that what people see from him is a zombie movie, so he can add in whatever message he likes. (The context of the interview made it sound like he felt he could squeeze that message in however he liked, and that he wasn't terribly concerned about the affect on the story.) It's that sort of thinking that led to the disastrous hyper-clusterfuck that is Diary. Someone close to the man who cares about him really, REALLY needs to try to get through to GAR, because it would be a shame if he was remembered as a director who began his career with a brilliant trilogy that pioneered a genre, and then ended his career with a string of crapfests extraordinaire. I'm very up in the air as to whether this new movie that's set in between the Night and Dawn periods is a good idea. Things that have come to light in the interim have revealed just how much of Night's success depended on elements of random chance combining favorably. Lightning may not strike twice for our beloved GAR. Hope it does, but it's a major risk to go with this particular era of the epidemic.... Just my .02

[strayrider]

Lightning may not strike twice for our beloved GAR. Already did. Night 68 and Dawn. Both defining films for their respective time frames (in the horror genre, at least). The question is, will lightning strike thrice? GAR is running out of time (literally, due to his age) and chances. I've got my fingers crossed. -stray-

[ProfessorChaos]

i'd have to say that lightning did strike thrice for ol' George with Day. but his lightning-strikes are over, i'm beginning to suspect. neither of his last two dead films are even in the same league as any film of the original trilogy. and this new one doesn't look very promising.

[strayrider]

i'd have to say that lightning did strike thrice for ol' George with Day. but his lightning-strikes are over, i'm beginning to suspect. neither of his last two dead films are even in the same league as any film of the original trilogy. and this new one doesn't look very promising. Don't get me wrong, I love all three films of the original trilogy, it is just that Day did not have the box office appeal, or success of the other two. Day was the beginning of his downturn, IMHO. I also think he should have stuck with Laurel for a few more years. He would've at least had a good shot at directing The Stand mini-series. -stray-

[Debbieangel]

If I had GAR's ear well first I would give it back so he could hear me...hahaha! I am hoping that he has been on this site or other zombie sites and has listened to what his fans have to say about his latest films. I keep thinking the teaser trailer we got to see was just a rough cut and it is going to be even better,really the teaser trailer doesnt look that bad to me. imo I am hoping he has gone back and is going to give us a good scare with some surprises and gore, that will "knock our socks off" this time.