Zombie land or Shaun, discuss.

[Danny]

So i saw zombieland earlier and loved it, it was the most fun ive had watching a film in a while, being a zombie comedy i instantly thought of comparing it to shaun of the dead and i honestly found myself liking zombieland more. Thing is im sure it wont be the same for most, but i think i know why. At least in part its a generational thing. both films are great, they both have good effects, performances, soundtracks, there both incredibly funny but still have tense moments. The only difference i can think of in terms of leaning is on the viewers part.
bear with me hear, i might ramble.

Now i think people forget sometimes im actually one of the youngest people on her, along with mo' and craig and a few others we make up a much smaller younger generation of people on here, and honestly i think the shaun zombieland split is above 25 in favor of shaun, below might favor zombie land.

The key reason, for me at least, is the music. Though this is more a shaun thing, but a valid point to make. A prime example is the song "zombie nation" a techno/trance style beat in shaun, thats an example of the divide im talking about, im old enough to recognize these references to turn of the century culture, i'll still find them funny, but its that specific era were its not the music of your parents, which everyone hates when there younger but learn to dig in later years, its not "your music" its the music of kids a few years older who you think "what the fuck are you doing?" a lot of the stuff in shaun is like that, i get the joke and the reference, but just because i was there to experience it doesnt mean its "mine" like stuff about 5 years later y'know? its a sort of divide that zombieland, the more recent one doesnt have, i'll chuckle in a knowing way with the online games and mountain dew gags than up after 3 after a lock in scratching on lp's, because honestly i know tons of people who play videogames online, none except for dj's who even own lp's anymore. Its not just the subtle culture touches however.

Theres the zombies, the guns and the cars. now i first saw romeors flicks, the obvious shaun inspiration what?, 10-15 years ago for the first time? for older viewers thats a much shorter associative time compared to themselves. When people here first saw dawn when it came out in there early teens i saw 28 days later, so its a much more comfortable transition to have faster, more vicious zombies as its been the mainstream equivalent for the most part for my youth. for older viewers this is a pisstake compared to what they know and love, and it takes them right out of enjoying the movie, sometimes making it absurd, which is why im also not throwing undead into the zom-com ring tonight:lol:
But shaun isn't that, its familiar, its your zombies, your notions, for all intents and purposes if wright and romero shook on it and agreed shaun was part of the original trilogy's canon most people wouldn't bat an eye because it has what you love and grew up with.
Which brings me to the technology. most older zombie flick fans will see shaun, a guy in a suburban area, with one gun by the end, some friends and enemies and feel familiar with it, then look at the people of zombieland, with big suv's and hummers, ridiculous weapons they find by happenstance and all these expensive things as, again, a pisstake. Where an older viewer might just think "why is Tallahassee wasting those bullets?" younger viewers will just see the normal excess of our generation and more readily accept it, because people in the 30s grew up in a "shaun" world, drinking at the pub, going to work and hanging out with mates, its approachable. Seeing the likes of hummers as rich folks toys, playing videogames over the internet and recording some disaster on a camerphone or handycam is less familiar. They see it all around nowadays, like everyone, but its not the world they grew up in. Its the major difference between shaun and ZL. the england of shaun is anywhere in the world for older viewers, its what they grew up in, its ingrained on there being. For younger viewers the same is true for zombie land, we have grown up in a world where its second nature to send messages electronically instead of by mail. to have the luxury of outrageous clothes and cars, everyone does, but its the younger generations natural environment, they grew up in it, as opposed to older viewers, where it grew up around them.
I hope im getting some semblance of coherency across but too compare the two, shaun is the zombie comedy of the current adult generations, zombieland is the example for us younger people. at least in my opinion. i love them both, there both excellent movies, but whichever you prefer i think honestly relies on which side of the age line you are, specifically around the turn of the century and the following change in the zombie as a movie monster. i love them both, but zombieland felt like the make up of the film was something i could easily accept, to be blunt i think its not as easy to sit down and get into for older viewers.

Of course its everyones opinion too, theres going to be older folks who love it, younger people who wont compared to shaun, this post isnt really to argue which is the better film, why i voted ZL, just why i think it may appeal to you, whichever member you happen to be reading this right now.

[ProfessorChaos]

i had to vote for shaun, probably for many of the age/generational reasonings you listed, hellz. nice observations, btw.

never really dug running zombies..in fact, i really only dig the romero-verse of zombies, for the most part. so that's an automatic fail on zombieland's part. and there's barely any zombies in zombieland and a much less believable story overall...plus i thought the humor in shawn was much more natural and less forced.

i'd go into more detail, but i'm currently studying for a major exam tomorrow (supposed to be, at least) and am dealing with an intense re-entry of an ex gf in my life, so things are kinda jacked up here in professor chaos-ville at the moment.

i predict a resounding victory for shaun, however....perhaps if there were many younger members here it'd be a close match.

[Danny]

see i think shauns writing is much smarter, but where it fails is its always simon pegg and nick frost reading the clever lines theyve written, it was impossible to immerse myself completely, i like shaun much more for the writing than the characters. thats why i prefer hot fuzz, its simon and nick in shaun, in fuzz its nicholas and danny.
ZL's writing wasnt as smart but the characters felt like characters, not actors reading there lines, no matter how smarter they were, does that make sense?

[Andy]

Shaun by far..... i dont even beleive this has got all the way to a poll, i dont consider zombieland that much of a movie.

[clanglee]

I loved both movies, but Shaun has the edge for me. It was just a better movie. Nuff said.

[MinionZombie]

As much as I love Zombieland, Shaun of the Dead wins naturally.

This'll be a walk-over. :D

[Philly_SWAT]

Now i think people forget sometimes im actually one of the youngest people on her,Who is she?
along with mo' and craig and a few othersDam, all of you guys are on her? What a tramp.... ;)

But seriously, I understand the points that you make in your post. The ....age difference thing...that you mention would apply to many movie situations across many different generations. However, in the grand scheme of things, that doesnt have much if anything to do with relative "quality" of two different movies, only the ability of different age groups to properly perceive quality. And even having said that, there are some people of older age groups that let things like you mention affect their judgements of things. Some people, regardless of their age, automatically dismiss a movie in black and white, under the assumption that it is "too old", they "dont like" black and white, the movie MUST suck if its in B&W, etc. I think most people here on HPOTD realize that there is nothing inherently bad or shitty about B&W. Good writing, acting, directing, etc. make a movie good, not the color of the film stock.

As far as the two movies in question, I like both movies. They are totally different movies made in different times with different styles. As others have mentioned already, even though I really like ZOmbieland, I think the writing and humor was more clever and smart with Shawn. That isnt a dig on ZL, just props for Shawn. I could go on longer, but gotta leave for work now.

[DjfunkmasterG]

I had to go with Zombieland just because of Woody Harrelsons character. Technically I don't really consider Shaun a horror comedy like Zombieland, because Shaun turns into a full fledged horror film in the last 30 minutes of the flick, where as Zombieland remains tongue firmly planted in rotted cheek from start to finish, making it a straight up comedy with a dash of horror sprinkled within to keep the mix interesting for horror fans all the while appealing to the comedy fans.

So for me its Zombieland for the comedy horror win, but Shaun will always be in my top 5 zombie films, but comedy to comedy, ZL wins over it just because of the quest for the last twinkie. :D

[Andy]

I had to go with Zombieland just because of Woody Harrelsons character. Technically I don't really consider Shaun a horror comedy like Zombieland, because Shaun turns into a full fledged horror film in the last 30 minutes of the flick, where as Zombieland remains tongue firmly planted in rotted cheek from start to finish, making it a straight up comedy with a dash of horror sprinkled within to keep the mix interesting for horror fans all the while appealing to the comedy fans.

So for me its Zombieland for the comedy horror win, but Shaun will always be in my top 5 zombie films, but comedy to comedy, ZL wins over it just because of the quest for the last twinkie. :D

Well i see i disagree, i think shaun is a fantastic horror comedy all the way but having said that i loved spaced, big train.. peggs other stuff.

No disrespect but i really didnt expect you americans to get shaun at all, i think its very british humour and im honestly suprised it fared over there at all.

Just shows what a brilliant film it is.

Zombieland on the other hand, gave me neither a fright or really a laugh, i mean there was a few giggles here and there but for the most part the cinema was silent.. the humour, like the scares, was very stale and predictable.

[AcesandEights]

Both are great films and I don't think they warrant much of a comparison. Yes, they both had comedy as a key element, but they seemed to approach things very differently, yet delivered well for me as a viewer.

I refuse to vote (at this time)!

[capncnut]

Now i think people forget sometimes im actually one of the youngest people on her
Who is she?Dam, all of you guys are on her? What a tramp.... ;)
:lol:


Zombieland on the other hand, gave me neither a fright or really a laugh, i mean there was a few giggles here and there but for the most part the cinema was silent.. the humour, like the scares, was very stale and predictable.
I can't top that. You said everything I wanted to say about the film.

[JDFP]

"SHAUN" = brilliant zombie-comedy with entertaining characters.

"ZOMBIELAND" = stupid comedy with stupid characters.

No comparison.

If you want a comparison for "ZOMBIELAND" -- I'd throw up "RETURN OF THE LIVING DEAD 2" as a comparison...

j.p.

[Trin]

I like Zombieland better. It probably wasn't as funny as Shaun. And it was not as much an homage to the Romero work as Shaun. But I liked it better. I thought it was a better blend of horror and comedy.

I felt like Zombieland was a wonderful horror movie setting that became a comedy by inserting quirky characters and having some great interplay between them. With different characters (and remove the comedic filming elements) this is a horror movie. The zombies were always zombies. They never broke character for gags. I got into the zombie survival rules and watching how each of the characters managed in the zombie world.

Shaun was a great movie, but I think it sacrificed too much plausibility for the laughs. It lost me in places. The zombies held to some rules sometimes, but not others. It was very British in that it would step outside of itself for a gag. But, that meant I never could get into it as a survival movie. A great comedy - but nothing more.

[octo7]

LOL how was zombieland in any way a horror setting?

[DjfunkmasterG]

Well i see i disagree, i think shaun is a fantastic horror comedy all the way but having said that i loved spaced, big train.. peggs other stuff.

No disrespect but i really didnt expect you americans to get shaun at all, i think its very british humour and im honestly suprised it fared over there at all.

Just shows what a brilliant film it is.

Zombieland on the other hand, gave me neither a fright or really a laugh, i mean there was a few giggles here and there but for the most part the cinema was silent.. the humour, like the scares, was very stale and predictable.

I got Shaun, and I love Shaun, but Zombieland was funnier to me. Shaun is still a great comedy, but is also a love letter to Romero whereas Zombieland made its own rules and aside from zombies and flesh eating was original in its approach to the survival aspect.

Shaun is just Romero done with British flare and brit comedy, nothing more nothing less, but still a kick ass flick. I just prefer ZL more.

[bassman]

Two totally different films, imo. I enjoy them both for different reasons. I would have to say Shaun is my favorite, though.

[octo7]

wow i am suprised there is even debate. zombieland was cheap fun, shaun was something much more than that. if bill murray and woody werent in it, it would have been Superbad but a lot less funny, the main character SUCKED and was completely derivative of the guy in superbad... the plot was terrible (oh wait there was none) and the characters retarded "HEY LETS TURN ON A FUN FAIR! THE ZOMBIES WON'T NOTICE" and these same people survived longer than everyonr else?

the constant call-backs to the 'rules' and the CG font that kept popping up was also extremely cheap. the slow-mo sequence near the end was also an incredibly cheap way to try to heighten the drama of a situation with no feeling of threat whatsoever.

[capncnut]

This as a poll is useless because we all know Shaun's gonna totally landslide it.

[clanglee]

I felt like Zombieland was a wonderful horror movie setting that became a comedy by inserting quirky characters and having some great interplay between them. With different characters (and remove the comedic filming elements) this is a horror movie. The zombies were always zombies. They never broke character for gags. I got into the zombie survival rules and watching how each of the characters managed in the zombie world.

Shaun was a great movie, but I think it sacrificed too much plausibility for the laughs. It lost me in places. The zombies held to some rules sometimes, but not others. It was very British in that it would step outside of itself for a gag. But, that meant I never could get into it as a survival movie. A great comedy - but nothing more.

You know, that is wierd, because I felt kind of the same way but opposite. To me, Shaun was a much better "serious" zombie movie. I bought the zombies and the situation in Shaun a bit more than in ZL. I guess it was the lack of flash bang boom. It just felt more real to me.

In any case. . I loved both movies. Just liked Shaun a bit better.

[Trin]

LOL how was zombieland in any way a horror setting?

Compare it to 28 Days Later. It's like the exact same setting.

I never bought the situation in Shaun. He stumbles around in the zombie apocalypse without even realizing there are zombies. They throw records at a zombie in the backyard. They pretend to be zombies to evade capture. And when they started bickering the zombies all formed a circle around them and did NOT attack. It was great slapstick, and funny as hell, but it sacrificed any attempt at being a serious zombie movie to get laughs.

I just thought that the ZL characters and zombies broke character less for slapstick or gags. I also really like the kid with his rules and woody with his brute force method of survival. And the combo of them was wonderful.

I will say that ZL broke the rules to have BM using makeup to walk amongst the zombies. I don't think that should've worked. It was obvious they only did that for gag laughs, based on the fact that the characters never made any attempt to integrate that into their survival strategy. I thought that was funny, but took me out of the story too much to be worth it.

[octo7]

what about his mum? and his relationship with his stepdad?

[clanglee]

No disrespect but i really didnt expect you americans to get shaun at all, i think its very british humour and im honestly suprised it fared over there at all.
.

Hey!!! I'll have you know that there is a very large portion of the American populous that enjoys British humor. I grew up watching Monty Python and Faulty Towers and Black Adder etc etc.

---------- Post added at 04:39 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:31 PM ----------


Compare it to 28 Days Later. It's like the exact same setting.

I never bought the situation in Shaun. He stumbles around in the zombie apocalypse without even realizing there are zombies. They throw records at a zombie in the backyard. They pretend to be zombies to evade capture. And when they started bickering the zombies all formed a circle around them and did NOT attack. It was great slapstick, and funny as hell, but it sacrificed any attempt at being a serious zombie movie to get laughs.

I just thought that the ZL characters and zombies broke character less for slapstick or gags. I also really like the kid with his rules and woody with his brute force method of survival. And the combo of them was wonderful.

I will say that ZL broke the rules to have BM using makeup to walk amongst the zombies. I don't think that should've worked. It was obvious they only did that for gag laughs, based on the fact that the characters never made any attempt to integrate that into their survival strategy. I thought that was funny, but took me out of the story too much to be worth it.

I think it was more of a tone or feel thing for me. Shaun just felt more serious, like the approach to the subject was handled in a more serious manner. I dunno. . I can't quite place my finger on it. But I find it interesting that we picked different movies for essentially the same reason.

[Philly_SWAT]

One thing that no one has mentioned is that Shawn was.....a good...."general concept way of humor". What I mean is, Hot Fuzz was done almost the EXACT same was as Shawn. Sure the stories and most of the cast were different, but the way the comedy was set up was the same. The way they....showed several quick shots in a row to show what someone just did, was the same in both movies. I suspect they could come up with another movie with a totally different plot line than either, but use the SAME WAY it was put together, and it would be a good movie. To make another example, its how Curb Your Enthusiasm is put together just like a Seinfeld episode was. It shows you that the genius of Seinfeld was due to Larry David's writing above all other things.

Zombieland on the other hand, it a totally unique concept. Not to say another movie with a different storyline couldnt be done with the same process (rules onscreen, cool cameo, etc), but to my knowledge nothing like that has been done before.

[blind2d]

Not sure how I feel about the young people thing. I just turned 20, and I absolutely loathe runners. Damn, if our (America's) younger generation is all that way, I'm staying celibate! No kid needs that kind of mindless torture. Shaun has much better music, acting (Murray excluded), pace (picante sauce!), atmosphere, believability, etc. Hands down.

[JDFP]

Bill Nighy was also in "Shaun",

And I think Nighy is not only one of the finest British actors out there, but one of the finest actors out there PERIOD. I freaking love Bill Nighy.

Favorite flick with him has to be "Still Crazy". Absolutely amazing movie. He's like a mix between Robert Plant and well, Bill Nighy. If you haven't seen it add it to your Netflix or Blockbuster queue now. It's great stuff.

Now that I think about it, the "Harry Potter" flicks use mostly British actors, they should have picked Nighy to play Lord Voldemort, I think he would have done an amazing job in the role.

j.p.

[MoonSylver]

I voted Shaun. Everyone else has pretty much hit all the reasons. Just better almost all the way around (except Woody/Tallahassee...he's up there w/ everything in Shaun on the awesome-meter).

Shaun hits ALL the right notes for a zed flick, period. It's a zombie movie with comedy, rather than a comedy with zombies. Zombieland is just a LITTLE too silly & implausible for me to take as seriously as Shaun (if that makes sense)

Not that I didn't love Zombieland (the more I think about it the more I like it & want to see it again...can't wait for the DVD!), but to me it's just not in the same league as Shaun...:|