1st real Bad Review - Bloody-disgusting.com

[capncnut]

well said. id take indie over big budget anyway, you can telll a lot of sweat and tears was put in a film were you can here someone curse when the guns start firing at the bottles I play in the same park, independent movies destroy the mainstream!

[Fulcifan91]

Wow, Gary, next time I need to write an angry e-mail, Ill get you to do the draft! I'm not a big fan of B-D's site anyways, some of the reviews on there jsut seem really un-professional, and i think it is most evident in this case. Also, I totally understand that you are not mad about the negativity of teh review, rather the illegitimacy of it. I mean, TGB gave it a bad review, but it was exremly well written, and obvious that he analyzed tideiously.

[DjfunkmasterG]

TGB's review wasn't completely bad as he it did have some good points. He gave it a 4 out of 10. However, this knucklehead just gave off a vibe like he didn't watch the film. Eh to each his own. Happy turkey day everyone. Gobble gobble.

[Fulcifan91]

Isn't that tomorrow?

[coma]

You're 1st email was total class. the comment in your 2nd about Ewe Boll was so funny I dribbled some pee in my shorts People who say "It just sucked that's it" to the actual artist are almost always no talent, no work wanna be tards. Anyone can be a critic. If you watch a movie and type, you can be too. I like Lo budget films. They have tons of charm.

[DeadCentral]

Sorry I just caught this ..been working my butt off on another new site... any who...ignore this F***ker guys... I mean hell if I wanted advertising I'll go to B-D, if I want horror reviews I go to sites that bring you news rather than run a million & one pop up adds on their site...... DreadCentral.com, and such..this guy who reviewed this film is a knob, and B-D has sunk below the levels of credability ...they're a web billboard...not a horror site. Keep doing what your doin Gary, success is the best revenge.

[N2NOther]

What a numpty! The problem is that a lot of this project belies it's budget and amateur background, so it gets compared to "professional" productions, which obviously just isn't fair!! No, but it shouldn't get a pass just because it's low budget either. Sorry and DJ knows this, but I found the movie to be terrible. Terrible writing, directing, editing, pacing, score, cinematography, everything. I didn't care about a single character, it felt like a bunch of ideas thrown together, the "climax" was anti-climatic to a stupifying extreme. It seems to me that people are giving this movie a pass because it's an extremely low-bidget indy...Sorry but that should NEVER be good enough. There are good low budget films and there are bad ones. Deadlands falls squarely in the latter. My suggestion for DJ and the others...Make short films, get REALLY good at that, and THEN kick out another feature. I only took one review to heart and that was someone who bought the film, posted on the forum at Dread-Central and said it sucked. Nothing else, just that it sucked. When I asked him to elaborate on what he did or didnot like about the film his response was... It sucks what more do you need to know. So I continued to debate him for 10 pages in the DEADLANDS thread until he pointed out exactly what was wrong and he then proceeded to talk about stuff not even in the film. So, like the guy from B-D, another one who probably didn't watch it and just made a comment. I don't mind criticism, it helps me as a filmmaker. However, if you give me criticism make sure you know what you're critcizing... because nothing pisses me off more than ill knowledged critics. Uhm that was me and here's my initial review... First off I would like the thank Gary for getting the DVD out so quickly...As soon as I got it, I popped it in... And so much for the positive...I appreciate the effort put into this but man, it was REALLY bad...The script, the acting, the editing, the sound, the score all of it just bad... Not one character worth rooting for, not a single chilling moment, nothing. I was honestly bored to tears and the actual movie is barely 60 minutes long...The side-story has the most awkward ending, hell the movie itself has an awkward ending... I'm not super lenient with low-budget films because there are SO many examples of great ones over the history of the horror film...Sure these guys put a lot of effort into it, but when the finished product is this bland and dull, well, it hardly seems worth it... I wanted to like it, **** I paid $15 for it, but ultimately I didn't...At all... The ONLY possible plus is the FX were decent...I know how tough that is and for something like this it's probably touger, none of them are standouts, but they did well with what they had... I actually feel bad saying this but I would only give this movie a 1/10...Take that as you will. Anyone with the desire to actually check for truth can see that I did post a lot more than "it sucks" and that this thread was 2 pages, not 10... It seems as though you have a REALLY hard time with anyone that doesn't pat you on the back for making a low budget film...Sure you made it, but that means nothing really other than you made it. Some people will like it, some people won't. Some people will commend you for it, others won't. You need to grasp the fact. Do these small inaccuracies change the overall opinion of the film? In your email you point out WHY your film is slow in the beginning when it shouldn't matter. A good film doesn't need that explanation. Look at Psycho. "Nothing" happens for the first 3rd of the film yet it's compelling. Not because of it's budget, but because it's filmmaker and it's script. The zombie FX look bad to this guy so you explain that you spent $650? Maybe to him it looks like you spent $650. It should look like you spent more than you did. I don't have a problem with you personally, so please don't take it that way. But I really think you have an issue with anyone that doesn't like your film. Which is going to get you nowhere if you persue this as a career.

[N2NOther]

I only took one review to heart and that was someone who bought the film, posted on the forum at Dread-Central and said it sucked. Nothing else, just that it sucked. When I asked him to elaborate on what he did or didnot like about the film his response was... It sucks what more do you need to know. So I continued to debate him for 10 pages in the DEADLANDS thread until he pointed out exactly what was wrong and he then proceeded to talk about stuff not even in the film. So, like the guy from B-D, another one who probably didn't watch it and just made a comment. And here's my next post after your response: Sorry you hated it... You are actually the first whom didn't like it. Can't please everyone I guess. Actually the movie is 64 minutes long from start to finish. However, please elaborate about your gripes You say the script, story, acting effects. Please point out your issues I am very curious to hear what ya have to say. Bear with me, I don't remember any of the characters' names... The script was THIN...Padded out with pointless moments like them talking about his divorce (I realize that it's an attempt at character development, but it didn't develop his character at all, SHOW don't TELL is a good rule of thumb)...Moments where they stop and discuss what route to take...Not needed...It didn't add anything to the film but more time, and could have easily been omitted without any lapses in logic. Not a single moment stands out other than the traffic jam, but not because it was a good scene, but because I was impressed that you got a road to be shut down for your film. No characters worth rooting for... The dog disappearing from one shot to the next...The dog went back inside and shut himself into a room? I know that's not what happened but it was sloppy. The end of the side-story with the guy from the traffic jam at the shelter...He walks out of the room, grabs a fire extinguisher and leaves? Why did we follow him? There was no resolution at all. The end of the film was anti-climactic as well... The score was intrusive intead of enhancing the on screen mood and action...You shouldn't be as aware of it as I was not as something that takes away from what's on screen...It's pretty lifeless. The acting felt like it was a bunch of friends hanging out, making a movie, so they didn't sell the characters...The wife did the best with what she had, but it wasn't much. A scene that really sticks out in my mind, for the wrong reasons, is when you see the main guy (your producer) say he's going to set up the targets and we see him walk the entire distance, place the targets and walk all the way back...There is no reason for this...It adds nothing and takes away from the movie...We should have just seen them load the guns and start shooting...The audience will fill in little things like how the targets got there... This are just my thoughts on it, take them as you will... Don't get bent at the other guy for exaggerating and adding 9 minutes before the zombies show up if you're going to just make things up that DIDN'T happen. Especially when people can always provide proof.

[DjfunkmasterG]

No, but it shouldn't get a pass just because it's low budget either. Sorry and DJ knows this, but I found the movie to be terrible. Terrible writing, directing, editing, pacing, score, cinematography, everything. I didn't care about a single character, it felt like a bunch of ideas thrown together, the "climax" was anti-climatic to a stupifying extreme. It seems to me that people are giving this movie a pass because it's an extremely low-bidget indy...Sorry but that should NEVER be good enough. There are good low budget films and there are bad ones. Deadlands falls squarely in the latter. My suggestion for DJ and the others...Make short films, get REALLY good at that, and THEN kick out another feature. Uhm that was me and here's my initial review... Anyone with the desire to actually check for truth can see that I did post a lot more than "it sucks" and that this thread was 2 pages, not 10... It seems as though you have a REALLY hard time with anyone that doesn't pat you on the back for making a low budget film...Sure you made it, but that means nothing really other than you made it. Some people will like it, some people won't. Some people will commend you for it, others won't. You need to grasp the fact. Do these small inaccuracies change the overall opinion of the film? In your email you point out WHY your film is slow in the beginning when it shouldn't matter. A good film doesn't need that explanation. Look at Psycho. "Nothing" happens for the first 3rd of the film yet it's compelling. Not because of it's budget, but because it's filmmaker and it's script. The zombie FX look bad to this guy so you explain that you spent $650? Maybe to him it looks like you spent $650. It should look like you spent more than you did. I don't have a problem with you personally, so please don't take it that way. But I really think you have an issue with anyone that doesn't like your film. Which is going to get you nowhere if you persue this as a career. I am glad you came all the way over to HPotD just to justify a half assed review written by someone on B-D. I don't care if people like the film or not, but when you write a completely incorrect review, with wrong character names, and producers etc etc... How am I supposed to take that seriously? In your eyes and B-D's you are the ones whom have a huge distaste for the film. 13 other online websites have wrote very positive reviews. so 2 out of 13 means nothing to me. However, to say the Cinematography sucked in DEADLANDS is way off base. I watched your film and your DP work was horrid. I actually purchased and used cranes, effectively and proactively. How many lowbudget Zed films do that, less than 1%. As far as Make-Up FX. I have far more believeable FX than most other lowbudget films. However, it is your opine and I will accept the fact that you and B-D don't like it... However, when you post a review stating something you need to be specific in your dislike. You never clarified in your original post what you disliked about the film and I had to ask you for continued clarification. However, I am still curious as to why you are following me over to HPotD to further bad mouth my film. Do you have some complex about it? I can speak freely about Opinions from reviewers about my film here as this is a dedicated forum for DEADLANDS, however make no mistake... I don't have an issue with a bad review... Bad poorly written incomptent reviews I have a problem with. People who aren't specific beyond this sucked that sucked etc etc have no weight with me. And, especially reviews where they list incorrect characters and producers when the jackass whom reviewed had the F-in DVD right in front of him. So if you're finished stick around and enjoy the community. If you came to be an ass... wrong forum and community to do it in slick. No, but it shouldn't get a pass just because it's low budget either. Sorry and DJ knows this, but I found the movie to be terrible. Terrible writing, directing, editing, pacing, score, cinematography, everything. I didn't care about a single character, it felt like a bunch of ideas thrown together, the "climax" was anti-climatic to a stupifying extreme. It seems to me that people are giving this movie a pass because it's an extremely low-bidget indy...Sorry but that should NEVER be good enough. There are good low budget films and there are bad ones. Deadlands falls squarely in the latter. My suggestion for DJ and the others...Make short films, get REALLY good at that, and THEN kick out another feature. Indie films have to be given a level of passage because filmmakers don't have the ability or the resources to accomplish certain goals. Anytime you have a budget less than $50K you have to be given leeway. Lets not forget though I accomplished what most filmmakers haven't done on the amount I spent either. I closed a road, alid out a 100+ car traffic jam, and pulled off a pretty decent sequence of a zombie attack and that sequence only cost me $2000 to shoot. Most of it to provide food, drinks and neccesary equipment to accomplish the sequence. The problem with your look on films is you need 2 hours to tell a story in 60 minutes. I gave the audience what they needed in a short amount of time. I didn't pad running time to do something that could be done in 2 minutes. The climax was supposed to be anti-climatic because a sequel was in the works. Did you need me to put TO BE CONTINUED just to help you figure that much out, or didn't you watch the end credits where it says DEADLANDS 2: The New World coming 2009 One question are you the same guy whom reviewed for B-D? Because your initial replies hints that you seem to be the reviewer.

[N2NOther]

I am glad you came all the way over to HPotD just to justify a half assed review written by someone on B-D. I don't care if people like the film or not, but when you write a completely incorrect review, with wrong character names, and producers etc etc... How am I supposed to take that seriously? I didn't come here to justify the review...Get over yourself. I came here to check out the forums and saw this thread. I would have stayed out of it completely had I not seen your comment about my post at Dread-Central and the lies about prodding a response out of me for 10 pages. In your eyes and B-D's you are the ones whom have a huge distaste for the film. 13 other online websites have wrote very positive reviews. so 2 out of 13 means nothing to me. When you start a thread about one and mention another I'd say "2 means nothing to you" is what most people would call a lie. However, to say the Cinematography sucked in DEADLANDS is way off base. I watched your film and your DP work was horrid. I actually purchased and used cranes, effectively and proactively. How many lowbudget Zed films do that, less than 1%. Ok, so you had equipment...This means you had good cinematogrpahy? Are you serious? It doesn't mean **** if you can't use it. I'm glad you watched my short film....I agree that some of the DP work is pretty rough and I hope to improve upon that with each film I make. As far as Make-Up FX. I have far more believeable FX than most other lowbudget films. However, it is your opine and I will accept the fact that you and B-D don't like it... However, when you post a review stating something you need to be specific in your dislike. You never clarified in your original post what you disliked about the film and I had to ask you for continued clarification. I tend to not go too deep into what I liked or disliked for the sake of avoiding spoilers but you did ask me to clarify and I did so imediately, not even close to what you are stating here. However, I am still curious as to why you are following me over to HPotD to further bad mouth my film. Do you have some complex about it? I can speak freely about Opinions from reviewers about my film here as this is a dedicated forum for DEADLANDS, however make no mistake... I don't have an issue with a bad review... Bad poorly written incomptent reviews I have a problem with. People who aren't specific beyond this sucked that sucked etc etc have no weight with me. And, especially reviews where they list incorrect characters and producers when the jackass whom reviewed had the F-in DVD right in front of him. Again, get over yourself...I didn't follow you over here to bad mouth your film. I had no intentions of signing up just yet and was planning on lurking a bit longer but seeing as how you mentioned me in a lie, I figured I'd sign up and fix it. No one knows who I am, so that's not the issue. The issue is you defending your film in such a childish way. People aren't going to like your film. And I guarantee when it gets a wider release a lot more people are going to not like it. Will the positive outweigh the negative? That remains to be seen. So if you're finished stick around and enjoy the community. If you came to be an ass... wrong forum and community to do it in slick. How is it being an ass to disagree exactly? Indie films have to be given a level of passage because filmmakers don't have the ability or the resources to accomplish certain goals. Anytime you have a budget less than $50K you have to be given leeway. Lets not forget though I accomplished what most filmmakers haven't done on the amount I spent either. I closed a road, alid out a 100+ car traffic jam, and pulled off a pretty decent sequence of a zombie attack and that sequence only cost me $2000 to shoot. Most of it to provide food, drinks and neccesary equipment to accomplish the sequence. Yeah and? Your movie is still bad though. Sorry, but once El Mariachi existed, the bar for what can be accomplished on an amazingly low budget was raised. And with DV cams becoming more affordable the bar is raised even more. The problem with your look on films is you need 2 hours to tell a story in 60 minutes. What? Did you read my review? I complain about the length because it's too long and not enough story to sustain it. I gave the audience what they needed in a short amount of time. I didn't pad running time to do something that could be done in 2 minutes. You didn't? So seeing a guy stand up, walk over to place targets and walk all the way back wasn't padding the running time? Anyone with even a modicum of understanding would have just had them load the guns and shoot the targets...****, I wouldn't have even had them load the guns. A child could figure out that they loaded the guns and placed the targets there. The climax was supposed to be anti-climatic because a sequel was in the works. Did you need me to put TO BE CONTINUED just to help you figure that much out, or didn't you watch the end credits where it says DEADLANDS 2: The New World coming 2009 No I didn't watch the end credits...I'm lucky I made it through the whole film. But your film shouldn't be dependednt on a "sequel". It should contain it's story to have a satisfying conclusion. The film still needs to exist with an arc in itself. What if you never made or make the sequel? Then the first and only films hangs limp. Again, sorry you're so offended by the bad reviews/negative opinions but you better get used to it. And no, I'm not the same reviewer...His name is Ryan, mine is Sean...Which you would know if you watched the film and read the BD review thuroughly.

[HLS]

I can not really judge the movie for I have not seen it yet but if you hate the movie there are better ways to state your negative opinion without being out of line or rude. Good or bad, I do not think I could say an unkind word about this movie once I do see it. The reason for that I have a huge respect for those people that step out and make these low budget movies. DJ put a lot of love and hard work into his project and deserves a little more respect. I do not intend to sound mean, thats not my intention. it is just my opinion. Peace

[Danny]

so when he says "defending" he just came to this site ,reigstered and proceded to btich and flame, damn man, poffesional if you didnt like the movie then let it go your supposed to be a movie critic people wont agree with you all the time becuase everyones views are different, you did get names and facts wrong and thats the sot of thing you just dont do when you write reviews proffesionaly you got an email from gary sayng that and yet youve come here just to argue like a 12 year old, have you no self respect?, come on man do your job right review movies, if people dont agree thats that you dont follow em round the net and bitch back at them for gods sake. No I didn't watch the end credits...I'm lucky I made it through the whole film. But your film shouldn't be dependednt on a "sequel". It should contain it's story to have a satisfying conclusion. The film still needs to exist with an arc in itself. What if you never made or make the sequel? Then the first and only films hangs limp. not flaming here but that aint true, there are hundreds of films off the top of my head that leave open endings for a sequel, unless peter jackson wanted the lord of the rings to have an "unsatisfying conclusion" that is.

[N2NOther]

I can not really judge the movie for I have not seen it yet but if you hate the movie there are better ways to state your negative opinion without being out of line or rude. Good or bad, I do not think I could say an unkind word about this movie once I do see it. The reason for that I have a huge respect for those people that step out and make these low budget movies. DJ put a lot of love and hard work into his project and deserves a little more respect. I do not intend to sound mean, thats not my intention. it is just my opinion. Peace I have respect for the filmmaker as well...If the movie turns out to be good. And nothing I've said was rude. so when he says "defending" he just came to this site ,reigstered and proceded to btich and flame, damn man, poffesional Who's bitching? I stated my case, which contradicts what he said I did. if you didnt like the movie then let it go your supposed to be a movie critic people wont agree with you all the time becuase everyones views are different, you did get names and facts wrong and thats the sot of thing you just dont do when you write reviews proffesionaly you got an email from gary sayng that and yet youve come here just to argue like a 12 year old, have you no self respect?, come on man do your job right review movies, if people dont agree thats that you dont follow em round the net and bitch back at them for gods sake. It REALLY helps when you read the posts you're commenting on...I'm not the reviewer this thread is about. I'm just a guy that forked over $15 for the movie because I was excited to see it, didn't like it and said so. not flaming here but that aint true, there are hundreds of films off the top of my head that leave open endings for a sequel, unless peter jackson wanted the lord of the rings to have an "unsatisfying conclusion" that is. Huh? There is still a climax to the film...The battle where Borimir dies. But Lord of the Rings is an exception because they funded all 3 movies at the same time....Look at Star Wars...It has a CLEAR ending but still allows for more films to follow. Deadlands felt unfinished and dull. Sorry if this seems harsh but it's the way I felt about the film. I couldn't care less if 100 people like it, as I said, my intent wasn't to come here and trash the film. I stumbled onto this site looking for something else and saw this thread.

[Danny]

fair enough then, and the bitching thing was the emails, which ,c'mon you gotta admit that one. as for the ending i did feel a little cheated like i said when i posted a review here but i allready knew there was a sequel in the works so that kinda made up for it, though that was my biggest gripe with the film, still the zombies were a lot better than some i have seen no matter what the budget and speaking as an amatuer film maker myself i think gary should be proud of what he accomplished, he got a movie out there, which is mre than many can say ,it may not do well ,it may become a favourite of many in years to come, the movie going public is a very fickle group so as allways you just gotta wait and see.

[N2NOther]

fair enough then, and the bitching thing was the emails, which ,c'mon you gotta admit that one. I had nothing to do with emails though. You're confusing 2 different people. as for the ending i did feel a little cheated like i said when i posted a review here but i allready knew there was a sequel in the works so that kinda made up for it, though that was my biggest gripe with the film, still the zombies were a lot better than some i have seen no matter what the budget and speaking as an amatuer film maker myself i think gary should be proud of what he accomplished, he got a movie out there, which is mre than many can say ,it may not do well ,it may become a favourite of many in years to come, the movie going public is a very fickle group so as allways you just gotta wait and see. I agree that he should be proud that he had a goal and accomplished it. I offered my advice as to what can help him the next time around...Make some shorts first, THEN take on the feature. It will realy help him work out the kinks and help him learn to tighten up the story. It's only my advice, but anyone that puts something out for judgment then they should expect that not everyone is going to like it for a variety of reasons.