does Land kinda blow?

[Danny]

roll on diary of the dead in my opinion.

[ProfessorChaos]

My girlfriend had never seen any of the GAR undead films. We sat down this weekend and watched Night 90, Dawn 78, Day and Land on Saturday and Sunday night. She told me that from her initial viewings, Land was hands-down the worst of the the four. Her reasons are: Big Daddy (no surprise), not enough zombies, and too much crappy computer effects. I never did like Land too much anyhow, and don't even really consider it a part of the saga. I hope Diary isn't as much of a turd as Land was...

[bassman]

You're not stating anything new. Even most of the people that enjoy "Land" admit that it's the least of the series. The only difference is that we can accept it for it's flaws and see what is good about it. The people that hate it tend to dismiss it without seeing the good. They just want to see the bad because they have high expectations and expect it to be exactly like A) Night B) Dawn or C) Day. Good prevails over the bad. Some people don't want to see that. Even most of those that like Land and don't like the Dawn remake can admit that there is good in Dawn04 even though there is bad.

[MinionZombie]

Exactly, and most people prefer one of the "original trilogy" better than the others - does that make the other films a pile of wank? No. Like you say, some people are all about the negatives and none of the forgiveness - there's no such thing as the perfect film. And I like Land, I think it's a good film, it could have been better, but I had a blast with it. What's wrong with that? There's plenty of good in the film, more-so than any potential "bad".

[DjfunkmasterG]

It has Big Daddy(Jar Jar)... that was enough to make it horrible. Which is a real shame cause the script had so much potential to be a KICK ASS zombie film.

[cwsmith17]

i was just as stoked about Land coming out as anyother fan,i followed the progress for about a year from when i heard romero was just starting the script and although i will say that it was an interesting movie and with the exception of dennis hopper and john lenguzamo they didnt cast the lead with over exposed actors but a couple things did bug me: 1) i didnt like gas station zombie his screams were terrible and show the dead how to shot humans instead of eating them? (i dont like my zombies smart) 2) this is the capper i truely thought the beginning was going to do a quick timeline starting frm the begining maybe even showing clips from the first three movies i thought the beginning was 2 short and not dark enough! anyone with me on these? To get back on topic....yes.....the movie was on the lame side. George could have done so much more. Why did he start allowing zombies to "learn things" in Day Of The Dead; then continue that into Land Of The Dead?

[bassman]

To get back on topic....yes.....the movie was on the lame side. George could have done so much more. Why did he start allowing zombies to "learn things" in Day Of The Dead; then continue that into Land Of The Dead? Because that's the progression of Romero's storyline?

[Mutineer]

To get back on topic....yes.....the movie was on the lame side. George could have done so much more. Why did he start allowing zombies to "learn things" in Day Of The Dead; then continue that into Land Of The Dead? The best thing to do is forget this film even exists and hope some other filmmaker re-invents the world or at least brings us back to the world we love in DAWN and DAY The problem is that GAR never was a good filmmaker and has based his entire career off B Movie Cult Classics that are a step or two above the Corman films. I never quite understood the Idolation of Romero by the fans. Land should have been the Mother of all Zombie films even with it's paltry $15,000,000 budget. 28 DAYS LATER had an $ 8 Million budget and just PWNTS Land on all levels. (Were we suppossed to care about the DEAD RECKONING car ? How much of the budget went to that is a mystery.) Zombies are great, don't get me wrong, but the first 3 GAR films are the only films he's done worth a damn, and even then they're good for being 'B Movie Zombie Films' . Films like The Return of the Living Dead, Shaun of The Dead, Dawn of the Dead 04, 28 Days Later (Yes, not technically a zombie film), Resident Evil (The 1st one and not that good, but watchable), Cemetary Man, Re-Animator, Dead Alive (Brain Dead), The Night Remake (Savini) are all on equal par (and a few even better IMO). Next up is Diaries; " The plot involves a group of film school students who are filming a horror movie in the wilderness, and who are attacked by zombies." I'm not even going to bother with this one. Wasn't this done already with The Dead Hate the Living ? and Blair Witch, and Open Water, and Romero tells us he is 'Putting a NEW spin on it' I know this opinion isn't going to make me any friends (I'm not looking for any), I love the first 3 Dead films, but Romero has never matured as a filmmaker and at 67 years of age is still making crap B Movies.

[coma]

I know this opinion isn't going to make me any friends (I'm not looking for any), Good, because its probably not going to get you any Mission Accomplished. You know you can have any opinion you want but do you have yo be so obnoxious?

[Mutineer]

How's that ? Am I upsetting the GAR faithful ? Don't confuse an opinion on a zombie film with me calling you an idiot. Land was horrible; doni't start flaming me about it. Flame GAR for making crap. -

[capncnut]

I know this opinion isn't going to make me any friends (I'm not looking for any), I love the first 3 Dead films, but Romero has never matured as a filmmaker and at 67 years of age is still making crap B Movies. Good, because its probably not going to get you any Mission Accomplished. Am I upsetting the GAR faithful? Don't confuse an opinion on a zombie film with me calling you an idiot. Land was horrible; don't start flaming me about it. Flame GAR for making crap. You state 'I know this opinion isn't going to win me any friends' but you go ahead and spout it anyway. So when someone disagrees with your words you accuse them of flaming. Oh and the only person I see doing the flaming is you, so get a grip.

[bassman]

Zombies are great, don't get me wrong, but the first 3 GAR films are the only films he's done worth a damn, and even then they're good for being 'B Movie Zombie Films' .. "The Crazies", "Martin", "Knightriders", "Creepshow", "Monkey Shines", "The Dark Half", "Bruiser". All pretty good movies. Some better than others, but a decent slate overall. The "Dead" movies just overshadow his other films and those are what he's best known for. The problem is that GAR never was a good filmmaker and has based his entire career off B Movie Cult Classics that are a step or two above the Corman films. I never quite understood the Idolation of Romero by the fans. And that's why he's admired by film fans, as well as film makers as one of the greats? It had nothing to do with his direction, editing, charactizations, and allegorical meaning in his films, I guess?

[capncnut]

"The Crazies", "Martin", "Knightriders", "Creepshow", "Monkey Shines", "The Dark Half", "Bruiser". I enjoyed EVERY one of those flicks. Martin is GAR's best effort in my opinion.

[MinionZombie]

GAR has indeed made some great movies, and even when he's not been on top of his game he was still putting out decent flicks, the flavour of his flicks in the 70's was especially vibrant, mainly due to his editing style (personally speaking anyway), it really felt like a GAR movie - just look at the scene where the black army dude in The Crazies is packing his bags, pure Romero editing.

[coma]

"The Crazies", "Martin", "Knightriders", "Creepshow", "Monkey Shines", "The Dark Half", "Bruiser". All pretty good movies. Some better than others, but a decent slate overall. The "Dead" movies just overshadow his other films and those are what he's best known for. And that's why he's admired by film fans, as well as film makers as one of the greats? It had nothing to do with his direction, editing, charactizations, and allegorical meaning in his films, I guess? Agreed. I love his editing style. And the wierdo dog shots. I agree that he's a B fol maker, but Film Noir were B movies and they are classics, in the end so what. But saying he is only a little above Corman is just off base. How's that ? Am I upsetting the GAR faithful ? Don't confuse an opinion on a zombie film with me calling you an idiot. Land was horrible; doni't start flaming me about it. Flame GAR for making crap. - This place is for devotes of GARs dead films and by extension his whole body of work. Why would you be surprised that there is "idodoltry". Though I dont think all of his films are gems. Thats just not reasonable. And I think that most of that list, while that is your opinion, I couldnt disagree more. I didnt flame you. I tried to make a joke about what you seemed to be looking for. I simply asked why do you have to be obnoxious. I didnt say "you are an ***" (fill in the blank). You know that you split your posts between interesting observation and comments and sharp obnoxia that doesnt even attemp to be humorous. You can goof on whatever you want. If everybody agreed it would be very boring, but you dont have to go out of the way to be rude unless you "know you are not going to make any friends". Why communicate at allthen? I enjoyed EVERY one of those flicks. Martin is GAR's best effort in my opinion. Maybe the most fully realized. It doent have any cheap looking moment either. The part on the train and when he is in the apt and is messing with the phone is nuts. I love Martin. (the film martin. heheh) GAR is thr reason I started making films. The soundtrack to DOTD is one of the reasons I became a musician. Do I idolize GAr. Probably. Not in a 10 year old way, in a "he's an artist with integrity who always offer something new" kind of way. His own way in his own time. Something to admire to me.