Day of the Dead

[Sir James Forbes]

Finally got around to watching this on Friday. After reading so much, wasn't expecting anything but crap; which unsuprisingly, it was...

What really disappointed me though was it COULD HAVE BEEN GOOD. It had the budget, the gore was decent enough, but they made an utter mess of it!

The lead, Corporal Cross (?), was awful and looked like your Sister had just put on a uniform and decide to play soldier for the weekend. None of the other characters were worth giving a damn about either. The only I thing I really liked were a couple of moments of dark humour.

As someone who suprisingly enjoyed the Dawn remake (yes, I'm one of them), I can't believe that this is supposed to be the chronological sequel. There's some fundamental differences:

Dawn conveyed a tense and frightening atmosphere of society, family, friends etc... collapsing and people trying to find a safe haven before thinking what to do next. You actually cared and rooted for the characters. The whole movie was a non-stop rollercoaster of trying to survive and be one step ahead. The first ten minutes I found to be the most atmospheric of any horror movie I can remember. Day had very little, if anything memorable of that.

A complete waste of Ving Rhames. Zombies that die like vampires from Blade and that "don't get eaten" warning from Brother to Sister at the end!!!!Oh please!!!

Should have made Dawn of the Dead 2: What happened after they got back on the boat.

[Neil]

Should have made Dawn of the Dead 2: What happened after they got back on the boat.

I would be totally up for that. If they built on what worked well in the Dawn remake, and built a better/stronger script (with more realistic people doing more realistic things), it could be great!

[Mike70]

my feelings on the day remake are pretty well known. the thing i still can't get over is that the people who made the day remake had more money to work with than romero did on land (3 million more roughly) and way more than diary (about 16 million more roughly). you don't see the $18 million that the day remake folks had to work with at all. it looks like a cheap, trite film - like something that would've been on the scifi channel back in 98 or so.

both land and diary(whatever you feel about them as films) are both high quality looking productions. you can see the money that was spent on the screen and both look far superior to the day remake.

budget info day remake:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0489018/business

info for land:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0418819/business

info for diary:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0848557/business

[Moon Knight]

I would be totally up for that. If they built on what worked well in the Dawn remake, and built a better/stronger script (with more realistic people doing more realistic things), it could be great!

I agree 100%!

[Geophyrd]

Well, I received a screener for Day of the Dead yesterday and watched it last night. I'll write the following and try to avoid spoilers but if it takes spoilers to make you decide not to watch the movie, then I'll give you spoilers.

First off, the cover art (zombie vomiting, eyeball in middle of mess) is deceptive. It never happened in the movie and would only have made it worse if it had.

This is NOT a remake of the Romero classic Day of the Dead. The zombies aren't zombies. They're infected, much like 28 Days/Weeks Later. Whatever they've got, they don't go into it much during the movie, just a trite ridiculous explanation and some graphics showing cells being infected.

Now, before I get into it, the good. The movie looks good. The DP did quite the competent job on it. Its well lit, the scenes are well composed and there are some very nice shots, particularly of sunset/sunrises over Colorado. Ok, that's the good. I mean that ALL of the good. What they did with the movie was terrible.

The script is terrible but let's face it, scripts in zombie movies are less important than having a sense of story. I know they're supposed to go hand-in-hand but they don't alway. In this case, there seemed to be a lot of improvisation, a fair amount of after-the-shoot-is-wrapped ADR/storylines implanted. One example is the whole 'he was a vegetarian while alive so he won't eat me when he's dead thing.' There was 1 line (ONE!) in the middle of a conversation and it was a complete nonsequitar. Except that it set up that plotline later. His mouth was obscured when he said it...I think it was added in later.

There's all kinds of bad storytelling here. Its not that there's no story, just hamfisted storytelling.

A good example is the 'hot girl' (I think that's how they identify her in the end credits) who decides to walk home through the woods. After about 20 shots of the tattoo around her belly button, she's attacked and pulled off screen. Wow. Rather than show the obligatory splash of blood to show something bad happens to her, a big wad of flesh is thrown into a puddle. Hey! Its the tattoo! And the bellybutton!

The actors are fine, just not given much to work with. Mena Suvari (who is actually an excellent actress) is given a thankless task. I'm guessing she saw what Sarah Polley did in the Dawn remake and thought that was a plan. Having said that, its a little ridiculous that anyone expects her to kick arse and take names but that's the role. Hope she didn't thank anyone for it. What made Polley's part so much better was that she didn't kick ass. She was just trying to survive. Polley was good. Not Suvari's best work. Probably her worst.

AnnaLynne McCord, fresh off a stint of the now unwatchable Nip/Tuck. In the show, she is Portia Rossi's daughter who is Anally-Obsessed-Because-She-Wants-To-Be-A-Virgin (henceforth referred to a AOBSWTBAV which really doesn't seem shorter) and who poisons Julia by putting mercury in her fruit cake and serving her slices over the whole season. Heck, I've wanted to poison Julia more than a few times, but doesn't anyone in Hollywood know...NO ONE eats fruitcake. AnnaLynne looks good just standing around. She really is a beautiful girl but its a good thing that she can't act her way out of a bag; No one expects her to in this film. If the film had a more competent director, they'd have convinced her to at least skin off her clothes at some point and give the viewer something to see, something that Nip/Tuck's been trying to hint at all season.

Ving Rhames, also a fine actor, is mostly wasted. Just when I thought he was going to get kind of interesting, he vanished in the movie. Won't spoil what happens to him; Its already rotten.

The 'zombies' become infected and their eyes turn white. Their skin instantly becomes porous and shredded and they get hungry. They'll apparently eat anything. One of them grabs his own eye out and downs it. Its the Zombie Ourobourus. They also get superpowers. They jump, leap, crawl on ceilings. They jump out of buildings from four stories up and keep going. The film editors use a BS technique to make them scary where they accelerate their movements by 50% and then jumpcut their motion so, fast as they seem, they look like they're on top of you instantaneously. Its editing room nonsense, but that's the movie.

Summary: Walk, don't run, away from this movie. Do not pass it and decide to grab it in the pile of rentals. Do not buy it. Avoid it. There are some things that you can't unsee and there are some moments in life you'll never get back. Here's a gift. 1 1/2 hours to do anything you want...don't waste it on this dreck

[Redman6565]

I would be totally up for that. If they built on what worked well in the Dawn remake, and built a better/stronger script (with more realistic people doing more realistic things), it could be great!

You should start a thread and explain what you mean. 'Realistic people doing more realistic things', you've mentioned this on a few occasions. What exactly are you talking about? It's odd to bring this up a few times yet never point anything out. In Dawn and Dawn '04 you have people trying to do one thing, find some place safe. Period. Did you like the original Dawn? Your point is what?

[Legion2213]

Should have made Dawn of the Dead 2: What happened after they got back on the boat.

Erm, didn't they all get butchered after getting off the boat at the island?

[capncnut]

Erm, didn't they all get butchered after getting off the boat at the island?
Yup, the camera topple led us to believe that. Cue Disturbed:

"Ooh-wah-ah-aha-ah!" :lol:

[sandrock74]

With no food or water and an empty tank of gas, they were screwed as far as the boat goes. I suppose they could have jumped into the water and made a swim for it?

[DjfunkmasterG]

With no food or water and an empty tank of gas, they were screwed as far as the boat goes. I suppose they could have jumped into the water and made a swim for it?

Not if Big Daddy was nearby. He would have summoned his troops into the water for a fresh meal. :elol:

[zombiekiller]

I would be totally up for that. If they built on what worked well in the Dawn remake, and built a better/stronger script (with more realistic people doing more realistic things), it could be great!

if their going to something like that, why not have it set with the suvivors that found andys tape. the would be better.

[clanglee]

That's some odd thread necromancy there Deej

[Epidemic79]

I have Not had the displeasure yet.

From my first glance of the trailer when it was still in production,I said to myself; "Uuuuh,NO!"

Just looked too cheap,even for my standards! And from the get-go,I also disliked that it clearly had absolutely no tie in to the Dawn '04 remake whatsoever. Making it to me,a waste of time,effort,actors,writers,budget,...Everything!

And has anybody seen the disgraceful DAY of THE DEAD "PART 2" that some one sqeezed out about 5 or 6 years back. You guessed it,Straight-to-DVD. It would make Big George spit out his cigarette,thats how bad it is.:dead:

Except for the first 5 minutes or so,when it actually had potential. Started in a Retro scenario,taking place the same night in 1968 as the Original NOTLD! They show Army guys in 'Nam era fatigues getting attacked by Zombies,in the midst of the chaos a mysterious canister is dropped,rolls all the way down a hill and is lost in the undergrowth. It gets buried for about 40 years or so,till it gets uncovered by some young Mental Patients on recess from a hospital which lays in the vicinity.

But that is the extent of the coolness. It drops sharply off the cool graph after that! This flick not only resides at the top,(or bottom)of the Give-Away dvd pile,it is the kind of flick that is only suitable to watch on MUTE,during a party with alotta people,loud music,and plenty of booze & drugs going on.

Aside from that;

=FAIL!