Is anyone else underwhelmed by Diary? [Archive]

Dillinger

26-Mar-2008, 06:18 PM

I've got to disagree with you here.

There were plenty of zombies for a "beginning of the end" film.

The acting wasn't the best, but no better or worse than Dawn.

The black militia were just characters. What do you mean if they served a purpose? Did the deaf amish guy server a purpose? The militia was just there to show how people would band together in a city that has been pretty much evacuated.

Well... Since you're only 19 and weren't even born when Day (my personal favorite) was released, and this (and maybe Land) is the only Romero movie you've got to see at the theater, I think I will wait for a more seasoned Romero fan to respond.

I'm not saying your opinion doesn't matter or anything, it just doesn't matter to me.

I see that you're new and all....but there's several other posts where this could have gone.

To answer your question, yes - some people were let down. Just like any film it has people that like it and people that don't. I enjoyed it, myself.

And no I don't think age effects whether or not a filmmaker can make a good film. Plenty of older directors have made classic films.

Eventhough, i'm "new and all", I will put my posts anywhere I damned well want to. Thanks for the concern though, dad.

bassman

26-Mar-2008, 06:30 PM

You sure do know how to make friends. Insult a guy because he's younger than you(even though that has NOTHING to do with him being a fan of the films) and then do the same to me.

Someone want to start a countdown until this dude is banned?:p

Dillinger

26-Mar-2008, 06:33 PM

Yojimbo

26-Mar-2008, 06:36 PM

Well... Since you're only 19, and weren't even born when Day (my personal favorite) was released, and this (and maybe Land) were the only Romero movies you've got to see at the theater, I think I will wait for a more seasoned Romero fan to respond.

I'm not saying you're opinion doesn't matter or anything, it just doesn't matter to me.

I am a fan of Romero's work. Not that age would make a difference in this regard -- it really does not -- but I will be 40 this year and I went to see Dawn 1978 during it's theatrical release when I was a kid. I saw DAY and LAND and DIARY on the day of release. I own most of Romero's works on DVD, including Jack's Wife and There's Always Vanilla. George Romero has been a big influence in my life, to the point where I have all but convinced my wife to allow me to name our yet to be conceived child "GAR"

As a member of this board, and a long-time "seasoned" fan George A. Romero let me say that I don't really care for your dismissive response to Epdemic's post (which was a response to your statements). Perhaps you did not mean it this way, but you come off as rather rude.

Dillinger

26-Mar-2008, 06:40 PM

I am a fan of Romero's work. Not that age would make a difference in this regard -- it really does not -- but I will be 40 this year and I went to see Dawn 1978 during it's theatrical release when I was a kid. I saw DAY and LAND and DIARY on the day of release. I own most of Romero's works on DVD, including Jack's Wife and There's Always Vanilla. George Romero has been a big influence in my life, to the point where I have all but convinced my wife to allow me to name our yet to be conceived child "GAR"

As a member of this board, and a long-time "seasoned" fan George A. Romero let me say that I don't really care for your dismissive response to Epdemic's post (which was a response to your statements). Perhaps you did not mean it this way, but you come off as rather rude.

The reason I stated it as such, usually younger fans tend to judge Romero's work by the Dawn '04 remake. I want a response from an older fan who popped their cherry with a Romero movie. IF that's such a bad thing, sue me.

Yojimbo

26-Mar-2008, 06:41 PM

Eventhough, i'm "new and all", I will put my posts anywhere I damned well want to. Thanks for the concern though, dad.

Since I started writing the above post, you posted the above response to Bassman. Reading that, I can see that it likely is your intention to be an ignorant jerk. You probably won't be surprised when you get banned.

The reason I stated it as such, usually younger fans tend to judge Romero's work by the Dawn '04 remake. I want a response from an older fan who popped their cherry with a Romero movie. IF that's such a bad thing, sue me.

Fair enough. I can see your point about some younger fans and the DAWN 04 remake, and I have run into the same problem from time to time. It's not a bad thing to want a response from someone who is closer to your age and experience, just not very nice to lash out at folks who were simply responding to your post. Bassman and epidemic, for example, are devoted fans who post here quite regularly and do not deserve to be treated rudely, especially given that they did not draw first blood.

Dillinger

26-Mar-2008, 06:45 PM

Since I started writing the above post, you posted the above response to Bassman. Reading that, I can see that it likely is your intention to be an ignorant jerk. You probably won't be surprised when you get banned.

I don't appreciate flippant remarks, however direct or indirect they may be. He insulted me and treated me as if I was a child. Too many times, i've been new to a forum and people like that want to establish their message board dominance. Well, I say to hell with that.

I stand my ground when I have to. If that's against the rules, then i'm sure a mod will punish me accordingly.

The ironic thing is, the 19 year old was the only person who responded to my topic. Only six posts in and you guys want to derail it.

I might be "new and all", but I wasn't born last night.

Griff

26-Mar-2008, 06:46 PM

I don't know about those of you who have watched Diary, but I walked away severely disappointed.

For one, the lack of zombies. Secondly, the acting was atrocious. Thirdly, did the black militia serve any purpose at all? Fourth, the mummy zombie at the mansion was laughable.

I shed a tear for Romero. I guess when you're at the top, the only other place to go is down. Is age a factor or has Romero just lost his touch?

I liked it. Thought it was great. A refreshing change from all the high-budget, low-concept zombie action films that have been crowding the marketplace.

I thought there was a good number of zombies. They're kinda out in the sticks so I wasn't expecting any CGI zombie crowds - especially on this movie's budget. Infact, I was happy to do without them. I don't find insurmountable odds suspenseful in any way.

Its been over 6 months since I saw the movie but the black militia didn't seem outta place... I guess it was demonstrating how certain people can band together and take control when the authorities abandon their posts.

The mummy was hilarious and shows that Romero has lost none of his wit or cheek. I dunno, you just get his style or you don't, I reckon. Sorry you didn't have any fun but I'm glad I did.

Bye!

Dillinger

26-Mar-2008, 06:53 PM

I liked it. Thought it was great. A refreshing change from all the high-budget, low-concept zombie action films that have been crowding the marketplace.

I thought there was a good number of zombies. They're kinda out in the sticks so I wasn't expecting any CGI zombie crowds - especially on this movie's budget. Infact, I was happy to do without them. I don't find insurmountable odds suspenseful in any way.

Its been over 6 months since I saw the movie but the black militia didn't seem outta place... I guess it was demonstrating how certain people can band together and take control when the authorities abandon their posts.

The mummy was hilarious and shows that Romero has lost none of his wit or cheek. I dunno, you just get his style or you don't, I reckon. Sorry you didn't have any fun but I'm glad I did.

Bye!

I can assure you that I "get" Romero. He's not Sir Isaac Newton.

The black militia out in the sticks didn't seem out of place to you? Neither did the fact that a mummy actor turned zombie single-handedly killed four people all by his lonesome? What happened to ravaging hordes of zombies that took down Stephen or Rhodes? Maybe I "get" Romero too much, and you don't.

Anyways, i'm glad you liked it. You seem to be in the minority. That's for sure.

This is the only Romero movie where I personally witnessed people walking out on it. That's a bad sign.

Yojimbo

26-Mar-2008, 07:03 PM

I don't appreciate flippant remarks, however direct or indirect they may be. He insulted me and treated me as if I was a child. Too many times, i've been new to a forum and people like that want to establish their message board dominance. Well, I say to hell with that.

I stand my ground when I have to. If that's against the rules, then i'm sure a mod will punish me accordingly.

The ironic thing is, the 19 year old was the only person who responded to my topic. Only six posts in and you guys want to derail it.

I might be "new and all", but I wasn't born last night.

Certainly not trying to derail your topic, Dillinger.

Just a difference of opinion, apparently, since I didn't perceive anything they said as being flippant, and you did. Speaking for myself, I do understand the difficulty of being new to a board -- like joining any new group there is a learning curve to figuring out what people mean by what they say and write.

So back to topic, and SPOILERS TO FOLLOW!!!!!!! BEWARE!!!!:

I am sorry that you did not like Diary. I actually enjoyed the film quite a bit, although the acting wasn't exactly airtight as you pointed out. But the concept of viewing the outbreak from the road was pretty cool, and there were some solid zombie scenes. Regarding the black millitia, I think that it played a useful role in the story since, as it showed how society had broken down, litterally overnight, and the only real organized effort to survive was being put forth by people who, at the core, were glorified millitant looters. Later, they revisit this idea when they are confronted by bonafied millitary units on the road who are also looters.

I think that Romero, being an old coot like he is, is pretty well versed with the entire you-tube generation thought processes, and much more so than your standard senior citizen. In this way, I think that Diary was an excellent zombie film that managed to be socially relevant in spite of GAR's age.

DubiousComforts

26-Mar-2008, 07:12 PM

For one, the lack of zombies. Secondly, the acting was atrocious. Thirdly, did the black militia serve any purpose at all? Fourth, the mummy zombie at the mansion was laughable.
Not really sure what type of seasoned response you're looking for, but it's been quite some time since I was 19 so here goes:

First, although I had no problems with it, I knew the "lack" of living dead wasn't going to sit well with some viewers. There are no "epic" scenes in DIARY as most fans have come to expect from these films, but depicting the crisis through isolated incidents better fits with the limited P.O.V. of the documentary video style.

Secondly, I must once again ask by which standard does everyone measure "bad" acting today? It should be obvious that on a daily basis and in every facet of entertainment, we are bombarded with bad acting by people that are more akin to fashion models than actors. The characters in DIARY were predominantly college students and I saw few problems with how they were portrayed.

Third, the black militia depicted a different group's take on survival during the crisis.

Fourth, I'm certain the point of the "mummy zombie" is to be laughable. The underlying commentary, however, that the worst s-h-i-t-e happens behind the closed doors of the wealthy was not meant to be funny.

I think that Romero, being an old coot like he is, is pretty well versed with the entire you-tube generation thought processes, and much more so than your standard senior citizen. In this way, I think that Diary was an excellent zombie film that managed to be socially relevant in spite of GAR's age.

Agree with you 100%. Romero has a better grasp than most people on the inherent problems of combining global technology with human nature. DIARY actually makes a point about this rather than simply using it as a gimmick. Nobody has to agree with that point, but it's there just the same.

Yojimbo

26-Mar-2008, 07:23 PM

What happened to ravaging hordes of zombies that took down Stephen or Rhodes? Maybe I "get" Romero too much, and you don't.

Bear in mind that in DAWN 78 we were looking at the crisis after three weeks had passed, and eventually towards the end of the film, after a number of months had elapsed. In DAY we are looking at the crisis at an implied timeline of close to a year after the crisis had started. In DIARY we are seeing events that take place within the first few days of the crisis. So, it is understandable that in DIARY we do not see the same number of zombies as we saw in DAWN or DAY (or LAND for that matter)

SPOILER AHEAD!!!! SPOLIER AHEAD!!!!

What we did see in the final scenes are ghouls in roughly the same numbers that were shown in NIGHT 68, which, given the timeline, is completely understandable.

DubiousComforts

26-Mar-2008, 07:33 PM

What we did see in the final scenes are ghouls in roughly the same numbers that were shown in NIGHT 68, which, given the timeline, is completely understandable.
Keep in mind that in the original NIGHT, the living dead don't really kill anyone en masse. In most cases, that human characters cause their own deaths, and the ghouls are simply around to feast on the leftovers. Irony always makes for interesting cinema. :D

Griff

26-Mar-2008, 07:41 PM

I can assure you that I "get" Romero. He's not Sir Isaac Newton.

I meant 'get' as in understand his sense of humour, his point of view, what it is he's trying to convey... just like someone might 'get' Stanley Kubrick or 'get' Eli Roth. Its not so much an intellectual thing as it is a sensibility thing. Kinda like reading sarcasm - you don't have to be smart, you just have to be on that particular wavelength.

Folk are always complaining that about various Romero stuff being unrealistic. "Wah! Why would they need money in Fiddler's Green? Wah!" etc... I don't believe its ever been Romero's intent to depict what he thinks would 100% realistically happen in the event of a zombie apocalypse. Rather, he's commentating on the here and now through parable.

I've lost count of the amount of times that some interviewer has asked Romero the same ol' question: "What would you do if the dead returned to life"? Everytime the poor guy almost goes red, shrugs at what he obviously considers to be a very pointless and silly question. Sometimes he gives a humorous answer but usually he declines to comment (once, after a pause, he even said "What, are you serious?").

Its important to understand that he always starts with the concept rather than the catalyst. Its based on observation, not meaningless supposition. He doesn't daydream about zombies taking over the world. Rather he looks what's happening outside his window and then uses zombies to illustrate his thoughts and feelings on that.

And if you think the guy has made some sorta logical blunder then its likely that you really don't 'get' where he's coming from because, as far as I can tell, he's sensibilities, his philosophies, his world view, his sense of humour and his priorities as a storyteller all seem pretty consistant to me. Most filmmakers are content just to have a voice but for Romero is about having HIS voice and putting HIS point of view across.

At the end of the day, he couldn't give a **** whether zombies could really walk under water or not.

Yojimbo

26-Mar-2008, 07:46 PM

I meant 'get' as in understand his sense of humour, his point of view, what it is he's trying to convey... just like someone might 'get' Stanley Kubrick or 'get' Eli Roth. Its not so much an intellectual thing as it is a sensibility thing.

Folk are always complaining that about various Romero stuff being unrealistic. "Wah, why would they need money in Fiddler's Green? Wah!" etc... I don't believe its ever been Romero's intent to depict what he thinks would 100% realistically happen in the event of a zombie apocalypse. Rather, he's commentating on the here and now through parable.

I've lost count of the amount of times that I've seen an interviewer ask Romero the same ol' question: "What would you do if the dead returned to life"? Everytime the poor guy almost goes red, shrugs at what he obviously considers to be a very pointless and silly question. Sometimes he gives a humorous answer but usually he declines to comment. Its obvious he doesn't take the threat of zombies nearly as serious as some of his fans do.

Its important to understand that he always starts with the concept rather than the catalyst. Its based on observation, not meaningless supposition. And if you think the guy has made some sorta logical blunder then its likely that you really don't 'get' where he's coming from because, as far as I can tell, he's sensibilities, his philosophies, his world view, his sense of humour and his priorities as a storyteller seem pretty consistant to me.

Well said, Griff!

Mike70

26-Mar-2008, 07:47 PM

Well... Since you're only 19 and weren't even born when Day (my personal favorite) was released, and this (and maybe Land) is the only Romero movie you've got to see at the theater, I think I will wait for a more seasoned Romero fan to respond.
I'm not saying your opinion doesn't matter or anything, it just doesn't matter to me.
Eventhough, i'm "new and all", I will put my posts anywhere I damned well want to. Thanks for the concern though, dad.

ok first off. i'm 38 is that old enough for you? i really enjoyed diary and wasn't in the least bit underwhelmed by it. were there things i didn't care for? hell yes- those damned annoying voice overs pop to mind immediately. but that didn't ruin the movie for me at all. . for more than that you can see the reviews section.

2d off - why are you such a f**king keyboard warrior (phrase courtesy of slickwilly)? i think we have found our latest troll of the month.

3rd - there's no board dominance here. dude that is all in your mind. there is no need to come in here and get sh*tty with people just because you are afraid of being pushed around. because that isn't going to happen. that sort of behavior is simply not tolerated here. i have been coming here for almost 10 years and believe me i know bassman, griff, and yojimbo (and all the other people in this thread) a lot better than you do and not a single one of them is trying to be a dickhead.

Skippy911sc

26-Mar-2008, 07:57 PM

I have read through this post and although I have not seen diary I am a little scared...I found the acting in Land to be ...er...not so good. I see all to often a movie that has a great idea/concept but just drops the ball weather there are a few stupid side stories or bad acting. One scene that sticks out for me is the Zed walking up to the electric fence in Land and the guy tells the women "takes his head off", she raises her m16/m4 and lets off a string of rounds destroying the Z...the woman couldn't hold the gun??? Let alone aim it...these little things ruin a movie for me. Don't get me started on terror planet...blah! Lets all sit back though and realize these are just movies...

bassman

26-Mar-2008, 07:58 PM

Yeah, your Harvey Dent signature doesn't look homemade or anything.

I first saw this an hour ago and....yeah....I still don't get it.:rockbrow:

Well said, Griff. Well said, mah friend.

Yojimbo

26-Mar-2008, 08:44 PM

I first saw this an hour ago and....yeah....I still don't get it.:rockbrow:

Sure it was meant as a diss, but, yeah I don't really get it either.

DubiousComforts

26-Mar-2008, 08:52 PM

I first saw this an hour ago and....yeah....I still don't get it.:rockbrow:
My signature is cooler than your homemade signature! :p

Yojimbo

26-Mar-2008, 09:11 PM

Keep in mind that in the original NIGHT, the living dead don't really kill anyone en masse. In most cases, that human characters cause their own deaths, and the ghouls are simply around to feast on the leftovers. Irony always makes for interesting cinema. :D

Agree with Dubious as usual. The ghouls could be replaced by an earthquake, or a flu epidemic, or a tornado as they only represent the threat outside which has caused society to unravel. The real danger -- and the real story -- is always about the people who you are trying to survive with, or in spite of.

Mike70

26-Mar-2008, 09:34 PM

The real danger -- and the real story -- is always about the people who you are trying to survive with, or in spite of.

yeah when you think about it in the first 4 movies dawn is the only one where the main characters don't end up destroying (or facilitating the destruction) what they are trying build, protect, utilize.

night68 has the ben and harry show.

day is just a complete and total strifefest between two widely opposing viewpoints, not only of the situation they find themselves in but of life in general.

land has the "well off" people ensconsed in the green. with masses of the underclass swirling around them. it is cholo's frustration with that and his inability to ever be "good enough" that lead him to steal dead reckoning - which facilitates the break in of big daddy and his merry band of traveling companions.

in dawn the destruction comes from the outside. the main characters have worked together to secure the mall and make a home. granted their is tension between fran and steven but i wonder if that is due to fran being freaked out the prospect of giving birth in a place where there aren't any doctors and if the slightest thing goes wrong both she and the baby could die.

granted you could argue that steven's firing on the bikers, due to his, shall we say, masculine defense respone (the this is mine muthafooker and you can't have it response) that leads to the ultimate destruction of their home in dawn. but then the bikers had gained entry and had forced a large number of the store gates up. the zombies were everywhere. would peter, steven, and a very pregnant fran been able to recapture the mall and resecure it? i don't think so. that would've been a tall, tall order given their situation.

diary -i am going to hold my opinion. i have only seen it once and that was when i was in movie enjoyment mode.

kidgloves

26-Mar-2008, 11:41 PM

I noticed since people started discussing the movie the op hasn't responded. Mmmmmm
Anyway, at least we are discussing it. I loved it and thought it was an incredibly informed piece of work from a guy who is now 68 years old but still has something to say.
The whole atmosphere was very sombre and dark and the narration did drag it down a bit but as for the comments about the acting, believability etc, i don't get it. Its a movie. A zombie movie and a pretty good one at that.

Danny

26-Mar-2008, 11:44 PM

Agree with Dubious as usual. The ghouls could be replaced by an earthquake, or a flu epidemic, or a tornado as they only represent the threat outside which has caused society to unravel. The real danger -- and the real story -- is always about the people who you are trying to survive with, or in spite of.

i agree, for some reason ,and i think this is why, games like disaster zone, were your in a city in japan that undergoes fires and earthquakes ect. are piled in with survival horror games.

Yojimbo

27-Mar-2008, 12:02 AM

I noticed since people started discussing the movie the op hasn't responded. Mmmmmm

Hoping that homeboy is reevaluating his manner of communication. Certainly, he seems like a GAR fan, and therefore is welcome to stay around provided that he not lash out at folks when it isn't warranted.

i agree, for some reason ,and i think this is why, games like disaster zone, were your in a city in japan that undergoes fires and earthquakes ect. are piled in with survival horror games.

Choice! First I heard of that game, and now must seek it out. Zombies, earthquakes, or fires, the post-apocalyptic genre rocks!

clanglee

27-Mar-2008, 12:41 AM

Yojimbo

27-Mar-2008, 01:12 AM

As we all know. . .I'm in the "Meh" category about the movie. I didn't hate it, just didn't fall in love with it on first viewing. There was too much silliness for me in the movie. Of course I will have to hold final judgement until I am able to see it by myself in the comfort of my own home. Aside from my general disagreement with everyone else on the topic of this movie I have to say this in agreement with them.

Dude, no reason to be a dick. Not the way to win friends and influence people man.

Clang, you stand as a model of how dissenting views can be presented in a civil manner and how we can all agree to disagree and still be cool about it all without the posturing.

Danny

27-Mar-2008, 01:42 AM

Clang, you stand as a model of how dissenting views can be presented in a civil manner and how we can all agree to disagree and still be cool about it all without the posturing.

shame it doesnt happen more often.:bored:

capncnut

27-Mar-2008, 01:42 AM

Eventhough, i'm "new and all", I will put my posts anywhere I damned well want to. Thanks for the concern though, dad.

Yeah, your Harvey Dent signature doesn't look homemade or anything.

I stand my ground when I have to. If that's against the rules, then i'm sure a mod will punish me accordingly.
I thought this forum had an age restriction of 13+?

Danny

27-Mar-2008, 01:44 AM

I thought this forum had an age restriction of 13+?

huh, those whent straight past me, but damn, agrro much?, there should be a letter from the resepctive country leaders when you get a net connection stating "an online rep doesnt mean ****, you have nothing to prove and nothing to gain".

Mike70

27-Mar-2008, 01:51 AM

As we all know. . .I'm in the "Meh" category about the movie. I didn't hate it, just didn't fall in love with it on first viewing. There was too much silliness for me in the movie. Of course I will have to hold final judgement until I am able to see it by myself in the comfort of my own home. Aside from my general disagreement with everyone else on the topic of this movie I have to say this in agreement with them.

well chris unlike you i did like the movie when i saw it but like you i am going to hold off from any sort of final judgement until i've got the dvd in my grimy paws and have watched it a few times.

i have found that my first time view opinion of a movie that i have seen (esp in a theater) sometimes doesn't hold up under further scrutiny.

capncnut

27-Mar-2008, 01:59 AM

well chris unlike you i did like the movie when i saw it but like you i am going to hold off from any sort of final judgement until i've got the dvd in my grimy paws and have watched it a few times.

i have found that my first time view opinion of a movie that i have seen (esp in a theater) sometimes doesn't hold up under further scrutiny.
Hence why I have posted no review because I find my opinion changes after a few viewings.

Except Day 08 though, that was just too comical to keep to myself! :D

Kaos

27-Mar-2008, 04:37 AM

I love when threads become self-moderated. You guys make it so easy!

Dillinger... welcome to HPOTD. You did throw the first swing in this thread. Bassman was merely pointing out the very true fact that it is generally more accepted to tag on to recent relevant threads instead of starting a new one.

Most of the say has already occurred and posting a new thread is only a unnecessary request for more of the same.

In any event, Yojimbo whens the Consumate HPOTD Member Award for his "Clang, you stand as a model of how dissenting views can be presented in a civil manner and how we can all agree to disagree and still be cool about it all without the posturing." statement.

These are true words to live by on this forum.

Dommm

27-Mar-2008, 03:10 PM

Have to say after having only just caught onto this thread, I find most of the people an agreeable lot and fun to argue with on this site. Though I dont think I have made any fans or long term freindships on here, I have to say I was dissapointed about previous comments especially about age, a view is a view and everyones entitled to theres no matter what the age or the first revelation into the world of Romero that we all love (even if it Dawn '04 that introduced you).

Now onto the actule subjuect matter I was pleasently surprised or macabrely so when I saw Diary at the Cinema. Have to say I was dissapointed with land and I was hoping that this fresh take on things would realign my faith in the entertainment and sociollogical twist of Romero movies, and guess what it did. I loved the fact that he involved the you tube generation of video sharing, the instant if oft time useless knowlege (and often inaccurate) that the web is king of. The reawaking of different types of survivors and there interactions. From freindly and helpful deaf amish to meeting the War like and hard to please local militia to the untrustyworthy national guard unit (I think that could have been done cringeworthly worse and am glad Romero didnt go down that route). I also felt he touched on his earlier dawn with the mansion where everything you need is in one place but all is not quite what it seems.

kidgloves

27-Mar-2008, 06:12 PM

well chris unlike you i did like the movie when i saw it but like you i am going to hold off from any sort of final judgement until i've got the dvd in my grimy paws and have watched it a few times.

i have found that my first time view opinion of a movie that i have seen (esp in a theater) sometimes doesn't hold up under further scrutiny.

Thats a very good point. I loved Land when i saw it at the cinema but i just can't make it all the way through now. if ever there was a Romero movie with cheesy dialogue, Land is it. Some of the lines are truly atrocious.

3pidemiC

27-Mar-2008, 07:37 PM

I find it hillarious that my age has anything to do with how "seasoned" of a Romero fan that I am. Claiming that my only knowledge and basis for zombie films comes from the Dawn '04 movie? Give me a break. I'd love to go into my extensive history with horror and zombie films in my life, but I really don't think it's worth it to waste my time to prove anything to a forum troll.

Grow up.

clanglee

27-Mar-2008, 08:50 PM

Clang, you stand as a model of how dissenting views can be presented in a civil manner and how we can all agree to disagree and still be cool about it all without the posturing.

You are too kind Jimbo. I can be a right opinionated bastard sometimes, and arguments can become heated and all. But really, there is no need to get personal with any of these topics. Age, race, sex, etc. . shouldn't enter into this type of argument. If one stoops to pointing out imagined flaws in someone, they only come off as defensive, combative, and stupid. No need really.:D

Yojimbo

28-Mar-2008, 02:34 AM

I can be a right opinionated bastard sometimes...

You are not alone in this, Clang. I have been guilty from time to time of being an opinionated bastard myself. :D

Mike70

28-Mar-2008, 02:38 AM

You are not alone in this, Clang. I have been guilty from time to time of being an opinionated bastard myself. :D

well, everyone knows i am the sweetest, nicest and most even tempered person around here.:shifty::D

clanglee

28-Mar-2008, 02:54 AM

:stunned: Why. . . . yes. . . yes you are. :shifty:

jim102016

28-Mar-2008, 04:46 AM

Dommm

28-Mar-2008, 10:41 AM

Before you drop your pants, I'm the same age as you.

:evil: Surly that brings about conciquences that makes one want to shudder

Trin

28-Mar-2008, 07:00 PM

Ignoring the tone of the postings and staying strictly to the subject matter...

I was underwhelmed with Diary. I didn't quite hate it, but I cannot say I liked it. It really didn't evoke strong emotions in me either way, unlike all the other 4 Dead movies.

Interestingly, where I did have issues with the movie, I seem to have different issues than what is common around here. For example, I thought the acting was fine. I thought the number of zombies was fine, if a little inconsistent from location to location. I thought the first person camera stuff was gimmicky but it didn't irritate me. None of those points really contributes to my underwhelming.

I'm glad to see someone mention the racial overtones of the black survival group. I am not an expert on race relations in any way, but to me the inclusion of such an overt racial message was odd. It seemed to me that the survival group's struggle and exclusion from the group that fled didn't need to be about race. It seemed more about privilege and poverty. Also, the black leader's total capitulation to a white female's demands in front of his group seemed unrealistic. But, again, the racial aspect didn't bother me - I just found it odd.

Regarding GAR, age, and decline in quality. Roast me if you want, but I think there's merit to this point. I don't think it is related to age though - I think it is related to the desire to improve at your art as you gain experience. Experience comes with age so they are often seen as hand-in-hand.

When you first learn a skill you stick to the basics. As you improve and succeed the desire is to add more complexity, hone your skill, expand your range, etc. That can sometimes obscure what made your early work great. I think GAR has suffered that. With each movie he tries to get to the next level, or explore a new aspect, or something. My opinion is that he has sacrificed some of the charm that made his earlier movies great.

GAR is often applauded for his commentary, so what does he do? Puts in more and makes it more integral to the movie. Where we used to have GAR zombie movies with commentary, now we have GAR commentary movies with zombies.

clanglee

28-Mar-2008, 09:53 PM

GAR is often applauded for his commentary, so what does he do? Puts in more and makes it more integral to the movie. Where we used to have GAR zombie movies with commentary, now we have GAR commentary movies with zombies.

You are the King Trin.

Until further notice, assume every post you make, I jump out Flavor Flav style with a resounding "Yeeeaaah Boooyeee!!!!"

Khardis

29-Mar-2008, 04:58 PM

I don't know about those of you who have watched Diary, but I walked away severely disappointed.

For one, the lack of zombies. Secondly, the acting was atrocious. Thirdly, did the black militia serve any purpose at all? Fourth, the mummy zombie at the mansion was laughable.

I shed a tear for Romero. I guess when you're at the top, the only other place to go is down. Is age a factor or has Romero just lost his touch?

For what its worth I agree with you, I was a little let down by Diary... not as much as I was with land, but still let down. Day is also my favorite.

Oh and about the forum, welcome. Get used to being assaulted by fanboys any time you say 1 thing not in "on your knees praise" of Master Romero.

GAR is often applauded for his commentary, so what does he do? Puts in more and makes it more integral to the movie. Where we used to have GAR zombie movies with commentary, now we have GAR commentary movies with zombies.

/Thread over, winner.

mista_mo

29-Mar-2008, 06:13 PM

I guess it's a mixed blessing that this movie isn't whoeing near me. I either won't miss much, and be wildy dissapointed with Romeros work, or I won't. Either way, i can wait til dvd i guess, and it seems the majority of critics and film reviewers are split near down the middle for the film.

Some shower lavish praises on it, others hate it with all their hearts.

Oh, and i always hear the "well, it is a GAR forum so don't be shocked to see people defend against bad reiviews" or some such, but if anything, shouldn't you be more dismissive of the people who praise him non stop and assume his work is golden?

There are two kinds of people in the media world:
Fans and fanboys.

Fans are the kind who can see a movie for not just it's reedeming values; but also its flaws, and add constructive criticism to a topic.

Fanboys will automatically love a media outlet because of an attached name. They go in with high expectations, and utterly love the sh-it out of the aformentioned outlet, no matter if it is actually good or not. Arguements basically turn into "NO U!" and who has the bigger e-penis.

I have yet to see rampant fanboyism here (everyone is a fanboy to an extent tbh) and i hope to jesus I never see any.

kidgloves

29-Mar-2008, 06:19 PM

Oh and about the forum, welcome. Get used to being assaulted by fanboys any time you say 1 thing not in "on your knees praise" of Master Romero

Ermmmm. I don't see any fanboys attacking the OP. If anything, its the OP being condescending that's the problem.

Mike70

29-Mar-2008, 06:28 PM

Ermmmm. I don't see any fanboys attacking the OP. If anything, its the OP being condescending that's the problem.

agree 100% dillinger threw the first stone in this thread for sure by being rude as hell to bassman and then going on to be condescending to other posters based on age.

Khardis

29-Mar-2008, 06:55 PM

He made a valid point which he explained. Someone 19 years old couldn't possibly know what it was like to see GAR films other than Land and Diary in the theater and all that.

3pidemiC

29-Mar-2008, 07:07 PM

How did he make a valid point? This is what he said...

Well... Since you're only 19 and weren't even born when Day (my personal favorite) was released, and this (and maybe Land) is the only Romero movie you've got to see at the theater, I think I will wait for a more seasoned Romero fan to respond.

I'm not saying your opinion doesn't matter or anything, it just doesn't matter to me.

This statement was not related to being of age to see Romero's past films in the theater. He was stating that because of my age, I could not possible fully appreciate Romero's work enough to give an opinion about one of his films.

The reason I stated it as such, usually younger fans tend to judge Romero's work by the Dawn '04 remake. I want a response from an older fan who popped their cherry with a Romero movie. IF that's such a bad thing, sue me.

Again, no valid points except some blanket statement about younger Romero fans.

Mike70

29-Mar-2008, 07:20 PM

How did he make a valid point? This is what he said...

This statement was not related to being of age to see Romero's past films in the theater. He was stating that because of my age, I could not possible fully appreciate Romero's work enough to give an opinion about one of his films.

Again, no valid points except some blanket statement about younger Romero fans.

zero valid points and much hot air that verged on flaming.

the age thing is ridiculous in the extreme and i fail to see how it can possibly have any bearing on someone's opinion about a movie. most of us were young when we fell in love with these movies - i know i was. i was 15 when day came out and i got to see it in a theater because an older friend worked at the theater and let us in on the sly. again, because i saw day when it first came out in no way, shape, form or fashion means my opinion about it is more valid than someone who is a teenager now.

such a line of arguement is a classic non-sequitur fallacy.

the other glaring failure in logic was his statement that younger fans have all become familiar with romero because of dawn 04. this is idiotic in the extreme and is an assumption that reveals more about the person saying it, than the people it is said about.

3pidemiC

29-Mar-2008, 07:27 PM

/agreed

Nice post.

Yojimbo

29-Mar-2008, 08:46 PM

I really like most of Romero's films, so if that makes me a "fanboy" then I guess that is a label I should wear with pride, though the term itself seems a little creepy.

Regarding this particular thread, however, and the statments associated with Dillinger being "attacked" by fanboys simply because he did not prostrate himself while extolling the virtues of Diary is totally is incorrect. Firstly, Dillinger was not attacked, but called out for his bad manners and aggressive behavior. Secondly, his scolding had nothing to do with whether or not he liked Diary, but again because of his bad manners and aggressive behavior.

So come to the Homepage and like or dislike a film and you will be fine. But come here and attack the members, and show disrespect and you should expect to be called out for it. We can all have our own opinions and do not have to agree on everything, but lets not attack each other over it.

Mike70

29-Mar-2008, 08:56 PM

kidgloves

29-Mar-2008, 09:06 PM

Wise words as usual from Yojimbo. ;)
Its a shame the OP hasn't returned to the thread, with a different attitude, because i don't think Diary has been discussed enough

Test

Spoiler
I loved the scene back in the mansion when they replay the mummy chasing the blonde girl for real and the zombie mummy rips her top off after she had refused to do it in the opening of the movie. Quality

Mike70

29-Mar-2008, 09:38 PM

Wise words as usual from Yojimbo. ;)
Its a shame the OP hasn't returned to the thread, with a different attitude, because i don't think Diary has been discussed enough.

Can someone explain to me slowly how you do that click to show spoilers thingy

***Spoilers***

I loved the scene back in the mansion when they replay the mummy chasing the blonde girl for real and the zombie mummy rips her top off after she had refused to do it in the opening of the movie. Quality

the spoilers thingy - put to the right of it.

preview your post, if you've done it correctly you'll see:
[SPOILER]scipio70 is the greatest of all times

kidgloves

29-Mar-2008, 09:50 PM

Yaaaay. It works (see above)
Many thanks :cool:

Choas

29-Mar-2008, 10:09 PM

I love this

it works,this is so cool.

SRP76

29-Mar-2008, 10:30 PM

I think everyone's going to be "underwhelmed" to some degree, by any zombie flick that ever comes out.

Everybody - whether they admit it or not - has an abstract idea in the back of their minds about "the perfect zombie film". And each person's "vision" is a little different.

Going into any of these movies, especially if Romero's name is on it, people are expecting to see that "perfect zombie film". It's not possible that you're actually going to see that, though (unless you're the one who actually wrote the thing). So no matter what ends up on the screen, you're bound to be somewhat disappointed.

Some more than others.

kidgloves

29-Mar-2008, 10:57 PM

Well said:thumbsup:
This movie certainly has an adjustment period with it though. You have to accept the scenario, actors and stylistic choices, jump on the train and enjoy the ride or you can sit back and pick it to pieces.
I know Romero invites analysis through his commentary, but sometimes you have to let that wash over you and enjoy, what is at the end of the day, escapism and entertainment.

clanglee

30-Mar-2008, 08:10 AM

He made a valid point which he explained. Someone 19 years old couldn't possibly know what it was like to see GAR films other than Land and Diary in the theater and all that.

Khardis, it's just that you are not exactly know for . . . em. . . diplomacy yourself. It's harder for you to see the ummm. . .delicasy of the situation.

Khardis

30-Mar-2008, 01:06 PM

Khardis, it's just that you are not exactly know for . . . em. . . diplomacy yourself. It's harder for you to see the ummm. . .delicasy of the situation.

making a valid point has nothing to do with how you say it and how you treat other peoples feelings. Its either a valid point based on facts or it isn't. Just because people didn't like his delivery it doesn't make him wrong.

jim102016

30-Mar-2008, 04:16 PM

making a valid point has nothing to do with how you say it and how you treat other peoples feelings. Its either a valid point based on facts or it isn't. Just because people didn't like his delivery it doesn't make him wrong.

Sure it does, it's very important. If you can't competently deliver or relate what you're trying to say, than you and your point won't get taken seriously. Don't you realize what a sensitive world we live in these days, Khardis? You can't just throw something out and expect people to buy into it, its all about how you phrase it. Watch the news, you can't just state the facts!

Khardis

30-Mar-2008, 04:18 PM

Sure it does, it's very important. If you can't competently deliver or relate what you're trying to say, than you and your point won't get taken seriously. Don't you realize what a sensitive world we live in these days, Khardis? You can't just throw something out and expect people to buy into it, its all about how you phrase it. Watch the news, you can't just state the facts!

incorrect, facts have nothing to do with delivery.

Mike70

30-Mar-2008, 05:50 PM

He made a valid point which he explained. Someone 19 years old couldn't possibly know what it was like to see GAR films other than Land and Diary in the theater and all that.

well gee, neither could dillinger. i seriously doubt that this guy saw day in a theater when it came out. he just turned 32, which means that he would've been 9 years old when the movie was released.

anyway, seeing a movie in a theater during its initial release has no bearing on how valid your opinion about it is. that is a non-sequitur fallacy. there are plenty of teenagers out there (and some on this board) that have seen these movies many, many times on dvd.

on another note khardis:

i am really sorry that somewhere in your life you were taught that just because you think you are right it is ok to act like a dick. it is unfortunate that whoever it was that taught you to act the way you do on here, choose that sort of behavior for you to model.

further, i think talking about "facts" in relation to something as subjective as film media is ridiculous anyway. film (like books and music) are entirely matters of taste and each individual gets to choose/pick what they llike or dislike based on their own subjective criteria.

jim102016

30-Mar-2008, 11:37 PM

incorrect, facts have nothing to do with delivery.

Clearly you've never had a job where you had to deal with angry people.

Dommm

31-Mar-2008, 01:39 PM

I'm glad to see someone mention the racial overtones of the black survival group. I am not an expert on race relations in any way, but to me the inclusion of such an overt racial message was odd. It seemed to me that the survival group's struggle and exclusion from the group that fled didn't need to be about race. It seemed more about privilege and poverty. Also, the black leader's total capitulation to a white female's demands in front of his group seemed unrealistic. But, again, the racial aspect didn't bother me - I just found it odd.

I agree that there did seem to be some racial overtones to this meeting/ clash but I also think there was an important message here that these two people where very similiar in nature and in wanting to care for there groups and that both broke the social stigma associated to both groups, where the black man was supposed to be a stereotype over bearing, lower class group leader and the white girl could have been a spoilt middle class sniveling brat. But given the situation both came to the common ground of the need for survival and the ability to garner the others respect and based on this an agreement was reached.

but hey thats just my take on the scene.

SymphonicX

31-Mar-2008, 06:17 PM

Wow....just skimming through the first few pages of this thread.......how uncalled for was Dillinger's comments there?

I'm so aghast I'd daren't give my opinion....besides I'm probably way too young for him to even bother acknowledging it.

Good times, people....good times.

DubiousComforts

31-Mar-2008, 06:44 PM

incorrect, facts have nothing to do with delivery.
Delivery is important unless you aspire to be Harry Cooper. Is that what's most important, to be right and everyone else to be wrong?

SymphonicX

31-Mar-2008, 07:44 PM

What's most important is to treat everyone with equal respect.

DubiousComforts

01-Apr-2008, 04:20 AM

Where we used to have GAR zombie movies with commentary, now we have GAR commentary movies with zombies.
The problem is that Romero hasn't aged so much as his audience. Everyone hails Martin as classic Romero horror, for example, yet it's clearly a "commentary movie" about a kid that may or may not be a vampire. In 1977, how could this have possibly been viewed as anything but a letdown from the director of Night of the Living Dead?

kidgloves

01-Apr-2008, 06:43 PM

There's a cam version of this doing the rounds. Please if you haven't seen it. Do NOT download it. Its cropped to shi t and gives a false impression of how the movie looks. You will regret it.

Mike70

01-Apr-2008, 06:49 PM

There's a cam version of this doing the rounds. Please if you haven't seen it. Do NOT download it. Its cropped to shi t and gives a false impression of how the movie looks. You will regret it.

yeah i've seen that. it is a piece of dog crap for sure. i wanted to see the movie again (it's moved on from near me) so i checked this out and it blows donkey dongs. the whole right side of the movie is cutoff. it's trash.

if you can't get to see them movie in your area wait for the DVD. may isn't that far off. this is not the way to see diary.

even i have some morals about downloading. i plan on buying the DVD when it comes out.

capncnut

01-Apr-2008, 08:24 PM

There's a cam version of this doing the rounds. Please if you haven't seen it. Do NOT download it.
The one I downloaded a couple of months ago was nigh on DVD quality.

Khardis

01-Apr-2008, 11:51 PM

Clearly you've never had a job where you had to deal with angry people.

LOL what does that have to do with "facts"? Being angry doesn't change facts.

well gee, neither could dillinger. i seriously doubt that this guy saw day in a theater when it came out. he just turned 32, which means that he would've been 9 years old when the movie was released.

anyway, seeing a movie in a theater during its initial release has no bearing on how valid your opinion about it is. that is a non-sequitur fallacy. there are plenty of teenagers out there (and some on this board) that have seen these movies many, many times on dvd.

on another note khardis:

i am really sorry that somewhere in your life you were taught that just because you think you are right it is ok to act like a dick. it is unfortunate that whoever it was that taught you to act the way you do on here, choose that sort of behavior for you to model.

further, i think talking about "facts" in relation to something as subjective as film media is ridiculous anyway. film (like books and music) are entirely matters of taste and each individual gets to choose/pick what they llike or dislike based on their own subjective criteria.

He couldn't possibly see horror movies at age 9 in the movie theater? You serious? I was watching horror movies in Theaters with my pop long before I was 9. And being old enough to have gone through Romeros work 1st hand from a younger age into adulthood does make you more qualified to judge his work IMO than someone who was born say in 1986 and who's only experience in the zombie genre was Dawn 04 or Resident Evil.

And the "facts" he was referring to wasn't wether or not the film was good, but rather, a 19 year old couldn't grasp what it was like to enjoy Romero films on the big screen in their hayday. Its a fact that a 19 year old couldn't... sorry.

I don't know where you get off acting like you're some sort of intelligent bloke with something valid to say, generally I at least TRY to remain focused on sticking to the topic at hand as opposed to going personal right away (something you love) But in this instance I will break my own rule. I think that you think you're clever and open your trap to spew loads of venomous bile because your parents didn't beat you enough as a child. Thus giving you a false sense of "I'M SO SMART LOL!!!" Ah well, takes all kinds to make the world the suckhole it is right?

DubiousComforts

02-Apr-2008, 12:07 AM

He couldn't possibly see horror movies at age 9 in the movie theater? You serious? I was watching horror movies in Theaters with my pop long before I was 9.
Except that Day of the Dead wasn't rated 'R', it was no one under 17 admitted. Theaters actually used to enforce restrictions back in the 70s and 80s. I was kicked out of Dawn twice, though not for want of trying. :D

Mike70

02-Apr-2008, 12:29 AM

I don't know where you get off acting like you're some sort of intelligent bloke with something valid to say, generally I at least TRY to remain focused on sticking to the topic at hand as opposed to going personal right away (something you love) But in this instance I will break my own rule. I think that you think you're clever and open your trap to spew loads of venomous bile because your parents didn't beat you enough as a child. Thus giving you a false sense of "I'M SO SMART LOL!!!" Ah well, takes all kinds to make the world the suckhole it is right?

at least i am smart enough not act like a rude cretin at every opportunity. something you seem to love to do. if you think that i get personal - what do you call the insulting, childish remarks that you love to pollute this place with?

as for venemous bile, i have no idea what you are talking about. the only one spewing venemous bile around here is usually you. i didn't get personal right away with khardis. i only commented on the way you act and the behavior you that must have modeled as a young person because you seem so intent on being a dickhead simply because you think you are right. you were the one that stated other people's feelings don't matter - several times in this thread in fact. not me. i wondered what could've warped you so much to feel like you have the right to treat people in such a manner.