Land for an Oscar?

[Minerva_Zombi]

I was watching Land on TNT the other night and as I watched it. I kinda felt like this was the kind of film that if it had made a few adjstments could've been a big time "Oscar' type of movie. The film should have been about 2 hours long. It should've focused more on the revolution of the survivors on the street ganging together to take over the green as Cholo steals Dead Reckoning. There were so many possibilities for side stories and real human emotion between the characters. And Romero does such a great job of creating new things to bring to the table (The zombie cage fighters, Fiddlers Green, etc). I still love the actual film today I think its beautifully philosophical and I really don't get tired of watching it. But, there are a few things that I think if Romero had the extra money he could've enhanced and made this his greatest work yet surpassing Dawn.

[Mike70]

i just don't see it happening. the day a zombie movie gets nominated or wins an oscar (for anything other than make-up/special effects) will be a date to right down indeed.

land could've had clark gable, alec guiness, vivien leigh, myrna loy and laurence olivier in it and it wouldn't have made a difference. it would still be a zombie flick and lots of folks would still be looking down their noses at it.

[bassman]

I would have to agree with Scip on this. In the end, it will always be "just a zombie flick".

Although that sort of thing could be changing. I mean.....Johnny Depp was nominated for Jack Sparrow. That was a first of it's kind....

[SymphonicX]

I was watching Land on TNT the other night and as I watched it. I kinda felt like this was the kind of film that if it had made a few adjstments could've been a big time "Oscar' type of movie. The film should have been about 2 hours long. It should've focused more on the revolution of the survivors on the street ganging together to take over the green as Cholo steals Dead Reckoning. There were so many possibilities for side stories and real human emotion between the characters. And Romero does such a great job of creating new things to bring to the table (The zombie cage fighters, Fiddlers Green, etc). I still love the actual film today I think its beautifully philosophical and I really don't get tired of watching it. But, there are a few things that I think if Romero had the extra money he could've enhanced and made this his greatest work yet surpassing Dawn.


I agree, dunno about oscars but I've always maintained that Land needs at least an extra 20 mins of story...

[Redman6565]

i just don't see it happening. the day a zombie movie gets nominated or wins an oscar (for anything other than make-up/special effects) will be a date to right down indeed.

land could've had clark gable, alec guiness, vivien leigh, myrna loy and laurence olivier in it and it wouldn't have made a difference. it would still be a zombie flick and lots of folks would still be looking down their noses at it.


haha can't we dream alittle here. :skull:

[Dead Hoosier]

Land is closer to Plan 9 From Outerpace than an Oscar.

[bassman]

Land is closer to Plan 9 From Outerpace than an Oscar.

Now that's a stretch.:rolleyes:

You may not like Land, but it's nowhere near Plan 9...

[DjfunkmasterG]

Ok well then it is the sequel, Plan 10.

[Doc]

Now that's a stretch.:rolleyes:

You may not like Land, but it's nowhere near Plan 9...

Hehe...Even though its bad. I still think Plan 9 is still kinda....well.....funny...

[bassman]

Hehe...Even though its bad. I still think Plan 9 is still kinda....well.....funny...

Oh yeah, definitely. That's what's made it a cult film. Same with all of Ed Wood's flicks.

But to say that Land is THAT bad, is obviously just stretching for an argument.

[Trin]

Yeah, Land isn't *that* bad. I only consider it bad in comparison with other GAR zombie movies.

[Minerva_Zombi]

Yeah, Land isn't *that* bad. I only consider it bad in comparison with other GAR zombie movies.

Which is exactly the point. STOP COMPARING! because no matter what, it'll never be up to ur pre-set standards.

[bassman]

Which is exactly the point. STOP COMPARING! because no matter what, it'll never be up to ur pre-set standards.

If i had a nickel for every time I've set foot on that battlefield.:eek:

[Trin]

Which is exactly the point. STOP COMPARING! because no matter what, it'll never be up to ur pre-set standards.Lol - My pre-set standards... such as don't suck. It really wouldn't have been that hard to make me happy with Land.

Poor GAR - having to be compared against his own work. I'm sure glad my boss doesn't compare my job this year versus my job last year and expect me to do as well or better. :rolleyes:

[SRP76]

I don't think the idea's that farfetched. There have been some very piece-of-crap movies that have been given Oscars. Why most of these movies win is beyond me; it sure as hell isn't because they're enjoyable to watch.

Anyone that doesn't think so should be forced to sit through The Last Emperor without a pissbreak.

[Trin]

Yeah, I don't think it's that far-fetched either. My not liking it has nothing to do with it being Oscar-worthy or not. Heck, my not liking it might HELP its chances. From the perspective of someone looking for deeper meaning and sustance Land brings a lot to the table. If the someone looking to hand out Oscars were keen on the message in Land who knows?

[Dead Hoosier]

Pardon me while I vomit:annoyed: