My thoughts on land. As Requested.

[Andy]

A lot of people have asked me in the last few weeks what my big issue with land of the dead is, ive had PM's from a couple of members asking me to explain myself, how can I rank a Romero movie my personal worse movie ever? Well im setting out my points here, before I do so though, I want to point out, this is not open for debate, I dont need persuading and my mind wont be changed. I hate land more than any other zombie movie, that includes night of the living dead 30th anniversary edition, contagium, the day remake, children.. any other piece of shit zombie flick you care to throw out, I rank land worse. Dosnt matter what anybody posts in this topic, you will not change my mind on this matter so don't attempt to. I am simply laying out my reasons, as I have been asked to several times. OK lets begin.

OK lets start with the setting. The whole setting is wrong, we are lead to believe that this movie takes place 3 years after day of the dead, one of my favourite movies of all time, yet the atmosphere looks like its come from the dawn of the dead time period. Let me elaborate, in Day, you have your survivors in the bunker, they fly 100 miles up and down the coast looking for other survivors and they find zilch. Watching this movie, you really do get a sense that this is the end, this is it, the human race is fucked. Land on the other hand, an entire city has somehow been missed off the zombie map? Your kidding me right? An entire city full of bums and tramps, seriously the lowest of the low, societies bottom rung.. these guys would be the first to die if a zombie apocalypse actually happened, who are more concerned with getting drunk and gambling than they are about the undead horde outside? Yeah right, as if these idiots would survive.. how the hell have a group of bums and tramps got to this city? “what if they weren't tramps before Z-Day?” Were they normal people beforehand and then they reached the city and succumbed to Kaufman rule and happily accepted living as a tramp? Really?...

Also on the topic of the atmosphere/setting, what's up with the scale? Again using day of the dead as a reference, Logan says that they outnumber humans by around 500,000 to 1. Just take a minute to think about that scale, 500,000 to 1... how many zombies come after the helicopter when they disturb the city at the beginning? Fucking loads... how many engulf the bunker at the end? Fucking loads..... Now in land, how many zombies are attacking the city? What about 20 or 30? WHERE THE FUCK ARE THE REST OF THEM? On a giant zombie vacation? Your seriously expecting me to believe this is 3 years AFTER day, zombies outnumbered humans by 500,000 to 1 and threw massive attacks of hundreds of zombs at whatever survivors there where and now all of a sudden there's only about 30 of them attacking a city? A full city with lights and noise that could be heard for miles away? Seriously? Incredibly stupid stupid stupid Romero.

Next up is the story, now I have to admit I avoid watching this film whenever I can, it pains me to watch it, so im not 100% up to speed with the story but from what I remember, there's a good guy who is charge of “dead reckoning” (ohh ill get to that) and there is a bad guy, chodo or something.. I always think of the dog from wizard of oz when i hear his name mentioned so from now on ill be referring to him as toto.. they have some kind of rivalry going on i think even though its never explained as they both fetch things for Mr Kaufmann and his city. The good guy wants to leave the city and be a kind of wondering nomad amongst the zombies, although again, its never explained why he dosnt just do this? he needs Kaufmann's permission for some reason which isnt explained.. this movie does that alot, i guess romero didnt have time for explainations.. Anyway toto however, he wants to live in the tower in the middle of the city with all the rich folks and thinks he can buy his way in, but Kaufmann tells him to fuck off, he gets mad and steals dead reckoning, and drives off, letting a huge unstopable group of about 25-30 zombies into the city which the military, which has up to this point survived for 3 years of zombie apocalypsee so they cant say their not experienced, anyway this military cant handle a school group size gang of zombies. Toto then aims some missiles at the city and demands $1,000,000 (ill get to that too) or else he'll blow it up. Then the good guy goes out of the city in a car of some sort, with his crew and gets dead reckoning back, saving the day.

Am I the only one who thinks that is absolutely ridiculous? I was writing better stories in primary school (elementary school to you Americans) and this has come from George Romero.. the creator of the holy trilogy of movies. Did he envision this during a seizure of some kind? Seriously.. its tragically bad, it is the single worse storyline ive ever heard for a movie. Fact.

First off dead reckoning, not only has this city had time to build and fortify itself while the rest of the world falls to pieces and zombies take over, but the inhabitants of said city have had time to build a huge armour plated “big brother of the buses from dawn'04”.. where exactly have they got the materials for this? Where does it get its ammo for its incredible arsenal? Come to think of it, how the hell do they keep it fuelled up? Something that size must get through a good few gallons every mile, its fair enough saying they scavenge it but where and how far must they travel? Its simply not realistic and the movie makes no attempt to explain this, its just there and your expected to accept it. Now you might say im picking too deep, but am I? Look at how far we pick the trilogy every day and how well they stand up to scrutiny.. there are no (or very few) plotholes in the original trilogy and none as gaping huge as this.

OK dead reckoning. Not realistic.

Next up is Toto's demand for $1,000,000. my only question with this point is why? In a post apocalyptic world, what use is money? (Think start of day, outside the bank) Why dosnt toto ask for fuel, ammo, food, drink, weapons, armour, vehicles, general supplies.. anything USEFUL.. what the hell is he going to do with $1,000,000? buy a beach condo in Florida? Even if he does want $1,000,000 that badly.. why dosnt he just drive to a bank and grab it? Would be easier.. And I can hear some of you saying “but there would be other cities he could spend it there...” how do you know? When do you see these cities or even hear them mentioned?.. Again i remind you, in DAY, the group flies a helicopter 100 miles north and south and finds nothing at all.. and toto can simply drive to a neighbouring city in a vehicle that must get about half a mile to the gallon with no functioning petrol stations en route? And IF there are and we beleive this much, what makes you think they would use money? Money is used now because its hard to come by, you earn it, steal it or win it.. you dont just find it lying around in the street like you would in a post apocalypse zombie world (think start of day again...) if I was running a city in this kind of atmosphere, and god willing I will be one day, I would not use money as currency, id use something valuable like I listed above... food, drink, ammo, supplies.. anything I could use. Useful things.

Another ill thought out plot point Romero..

This post is getting longer than I intended so I have one final point id like to touch on then ill wrap it up, big daddy. LOL

What the hell is this? I wanna know what Romero was smoking when he thought this would be a good idea. Now let me just point out, as I said before, I love day of the dead and I freaking love bub. Genius idea. The difference? Well bub became domesticated by mimicking Logan and using faint memories that remained in the functioning parts of his brain, which isnt much so I put it down to mimicking behaviour.. although smart for a zombie, bub is still pretty dumb and I like to think of his intelligence as that of a dog. As Rhodes says, Logan is teaching him tricks and he is performing them. Thats my take on bub. Big daddy, first of all has a gay porn star name, secondly.. how exactly has cock daddy developed his intelligence “in the wild”? Never explained. Why only him? Why havnt any other zombies developed this level of thought? Never Explained. Why do other zombies follow him? I've discussed in other topics what I call the herd effect, where one zombie mindlessly follows another creating a herd, but it isnt a Romero based theory and there is no evidence to suggest it occurs in any of the trilogy, apart from maybe zombies following Stephen up to the lair in dawn, so again, never explained.

Thats my problem with big daddy, potentially another good creation, he had the makings of a advanced bub, but nothing is explained about him.. we're just expected to believe that one zombie, and only 1 out of billions has developed rudimentary intelligence and the ability to lead and it is never damn well explained. Is he supposed to be the zombie equivalent of Jesus or something? Explain it to me George!? Its just baffling.

Which brings me to my last, and most important point about this movie.. all the points above alone add up to a bad movie, but no-where near as gut wrenchingly awful as land is, so what is the last point that really tips this over the edge?

George Romero. This is the man who brought me night of the living dead, Dawn of the Dead and Day of the Dead.. this man played a huge part in my childhood and gave me what I hope is a lifelong and joyful obsession some would call it. So imagine my feeling when I heard a new George Romero zombie movie was coming out and I would get to see it in the cinema? Now being born in 1985, this would be the first I get to see in a cinema too.

And then I see it, and its everything I have stated above. From any other other name, this would be a bad horror movie.. but from George Romero, this is a spectacular disappointment and really made me question my following of zombie movies in general. Some would say thats my own fault for building up such big hopes, but when you think about the mans previous movies IE the holy trilogy “night, dawn and day”, I think I was quite within my rights to build up hopes and dreams. I mean fucking hell when I heard that Romero was making a new movie I was staying awake all night having wet dreams about what it would be like... and I got land.

That my friends is a mental scar that will never heal.

So, those are my main reasons for ranking land as my absolute worse zombie movie ever. I don't expect any of you to agree with me and I fully expect some of you to attempt to “win me over” or “prove my points wrong” and your fully welcome to, but I wont be responding.. as I said my points are my own and I havnt posted this with the intention of starting a debate to whether land is a good movie or not, I've posted it simply as its been requested.

[ProfessorChaos]

a nice halloween present from our friend andy.:lol:

while i don't loathe land as much as you, i was totally let down, for many of the reasons you listed above. expectations are a motherfucker, for sure. totally agree with you about the epic fail that is big daddy (gay porn star name:lol:) and the stupid plot, i'd never given thought to dead reckoning and the fueling scenario...intersting. and yet another fault of land comes to light.:|

while i've ranked land higher on my list than craptagium and NoLD 3D and many other shit zombie movies, i think diary, dawn04, and night 90 rank higher than land. as for surivival, not really liking what i see so far.

anywho, thanks for sharing, andy. while i wasn't one of those who requested this info, it was a delightful read.

[DjfunkmasterG]

Hate Land Much?


LMAO... All valid points. But my hatred is much more simple and summed up in two words.

BIG DADDY!

[deadpunk]

Land definitely ranks at the bottom of my list. Without going into uber detail, I will state that my feelings stem from its 'mainstream' feel. While I salute any film maker that attempts to bring his work to a wider audience (afterall, what good is it to make a movie if no one is watching it?), in this case, I felt that GAR had simply gone so far beyond his true fan base as to be insulting to them. :rant:

[Andy]

I Said wouldnt reply to this topic but deadpunk, your signiture cracks me up.

Forgive my ignorance, what show is that from?

[DjfunkmasterG]

The Love Boat


WTF MAN? :D

[Andy]

The Love Boat


WTF MAN? :D
Hey dont forget im a good decade younger than you guys!

:p

[DjfunkmasterG]

Hey dont forget im a good decade younger than you guys!

:p

Youngin... :p

Actually almost 1.5 decades younger than I am

[JDFP]

Damn skippy and awesome post, Andy.

I agree with you 100% that "LAND" is by far the worst of Romero's zombie flicks. I won't go as far as saying it's the worst zombie movie ever though -- man, have you seen some of Bruno Mattei's stuff? Of course, I'm not really trying to change your mind on your thoughts on it, as I can see where you are coming from entirely. You have bad zombie flicks and you have real bad ones, but if Romero's name is on it and it's bad, well that's far worse than if someone less than Romero comes along and makes a piece of shit. "DIARY", with all its faults, was just a superior film all around compared to "LAND".

I'm looking forward to seeing "SURVIVAL" -- but I'd honestly be surprised if, even after disliking it after seeing it, it would ever be able to take the cake of dethroning "LAND" as the worse Romero-zombie flick for me.

I never considered "LAND" to be set 3 years after "DAY", that just seems ridiculous to me. I always pictured "LAND" happening right around the same time-period as "DAWN" or shortly after "DAWN" but long, long before "DAY". To consider the events of "LAND" happening 3-years after "DAY" is just beyond ridiculous. It just doesn't work at all. Anyway, as far as I'm concerned, I don't consider "LAND" to be part of the Holy Trinity of zombie flicks (NOTLD, DOTD, and DAY).

If any of the rest of you want to classify "LAND" as Romero scripture, be my guest, but for me it will always be heretical non-canonical work compared to the Romero scripture of the trilogy. I don't accept it.

j.p.

[paranoid101]

Land is ok in my book, not great and not totally rubbish, but its like you said it the whole money part that niggles me and does ruin the movie a bit, I mean money in that world could only be useful for 2 things, lighting a fire or wiping you arse.

Still as a zombie film I still enjoy it more than diary of dead

[deadpunk]

I Said wouldnt reply to this topic but deadpunk, your signiture cracks me up.

Forgive my ignorance, what show is that from?

Hahahaha...yeah, that's a great one huh? I found that by complete accident while surfing photobucket. :lol:

[capncnut]

Still as a zombie film I still enjoy it more than diary of dead
Ditto. The only two things about Land that I dislike are 1. The overuse of celebrities (heck even the midget from Sabrina The Teenage Witch made an appearance) and 2. Big Daddy. Other than that, I don't mind the film at all.

[clanglee]

Not a huge fan of Land either. . . . but Diary was way worse. . . .way way worse. . . to me(and all right thinking individuals)anyways. :D

[Mike70]

Hey dont forget im a good decade younger than you guys!

:p

15 years younger than me. one more year and i'll actually start taking you seriously.:lol::D:moon:

[JDFP]

Not a huge fan of Land either. . . . but Diary was way worse. . . .way way worse. . . to me(and all right thinking individuals)anyways. :D

I never claimed to be "right thinking individual". The fact that I'm here expressing my love of movies about flesh eating zombies proves part of that. :)

However, I'm certainly not the only person here that actually enjoyed "DIARY" and thought it was a much more interesting and entertaining film than "LAND". "LAND" just ticks me off, like Andy, every time I see it. The only thing that made that film ("LAND") worth watching to me was Dennis Hopper, who is always enjoyable to watch, and every inch (although not enough inches, ahem) with Asia Argento.

I'm not saying that "LAND" or "DIARY" are better than any of the original trilogy, I think to do so would be folly like comparing oranges to tangerines, but I thought "DIARY" was just far superior to "LAND", and I'll certainly not make any apologies for that estimation of enjoying films that I have as a person.

j.p.

---------- Post added at 12:51 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:35 AM ----------

Actually, Andy, now that I've thought about it, how would you compare "DIARY' V. "LAND", what are your thoughts on "DIARY"?. You've already expressed our almost mutual contempt (and I say almost mutual contempt because I think "LAND" was Romero's weakest zombie flick but I most certainly don't consider it as the worst zombie flick ever) towards "LAND", but what do you think of "DIARY"?

j.p.

[MoonSylver]

and I'll certainly not make any apologies for that estimation of enjoying films that I have as a person.

*GASP* How DARE you be one of those guys who likes things & stuff, & then come around here posting about it! Oooooh you are so gonna get it now....:lol:

[Wooley]

Nice rant Andy. I think George was trying too hard with his "Who's the real monster?" shtick. I'm sorry George, but anyway you slice it, people are not gonna root for the zombies. There's a dozen different ways he could have made Land and he picked a very badly done political satire.

You missed the fact that those towns would have been picked clean months earlier, so there would have been no point in sending the Dead Reckoning teams on their supply runs. Resident Evil: Extinction got this right.

The scavenger crews would have better used pulling guard detail on plots of crops being cultivated outside the city or something like that.

Now, I'd like to hear you're thoughts on "Diary". Land was halfway entertaining if you had never seen a Romero flick and could suspend your disbelief. Diary just sucked, blew and swished the jizz around a bit before it swallowed. I mean, who the fuck is gonna watch your little movie kid? It's been three days and the only people you've come across are an Amish dude, and some National Guard deserters, one of whom is leading a street gang. No one cares about the "Media as voyer" plot when they're counting shotgun shells and boarding up the windows.

Maybe "Survival" won't suck.

[Danny]

I like land more with each view, its a fun movie, diary was a bit more competent a horror film, but it just isnt as much fun to watch those whiny film students, including a goddamn power ranger, bitch about things between set pieces.

-and if lands your worst go and watch vampires vs zombies. for reals, sit through the whole damn thing. contagium is better than that. Hell, redneck zombies is better than that!

[bassman]

Land is obviously not as good as the trilogy, but I still dig it. Warts and all....

[kortick]

I tried to read your whole post Andy
but it got difficult to focus on after a bit
so i will just say "ok Andy don't like that film"
and move on.

Me, I dont love it or hate it.
It just is.

Oh and btw I got LOTS of Love Boat
animated gifs.
Wanna have fun?
Sing the theme song in a crowded store out loud
and watch the reaction.

Love...exciting and new
come aboard, we're expecting you..
The Love Boat soon will be making another run....

[DjfunkmasterG]

I am a fan of Diary and I sing its praises over Land in any zombie debate, but Land is just beyond bad, to me its not even Sci Fi Worthy.

[Andy]

Those who want my thoughts on diary, prepare to be disappointed.

I didnt mind diary, it had good bits.. it had awful bits. would i say its a return to form for romero? definatly not. its still only a "meh" film at best.. but its also a couple of steps up from land.

Survival, i will reserve judgement on until i see it, but i think romero really needs to sit down and rewatch the original trilogy and think about what made him great before he makes another movie.

[AcesandEights]

Nice, Andy. Thank you for sharing your thoughts. I already see a few of my favorite (mis?)conceptions that some people have about the setting that I like to pick apart.

I think I'll C&P your post into a word doc and digest it more thoroughly over the course of the day.

[Philly_SWAT]

Well Andy, you have a well thought out, intelligent post, filled with appropriate amounts of Land-loathing and humor. Most (if not all) of the points you make have been made before (I'm sure you know that), althought you made them better than a lot others have in the past. Most of the topics in your post are ones that I myself have commented on before. I will certainly not try to change your opinion of Land, but there is one line of thought that I want to point out. If you accept my line of thought, you may still think that Land is the worst movie ever, but if will help explain the reasons for some of the (justifiable) problems you have with the movie.

You use Day of the Dead as a reference point in detailing some of the problems you have. You start by saying...

The whole setting is wrong, we are lead to believe that this movie takes place 3 years after day of the dead,
I totally disagree with your statement here. This disagreement has nothing to do with whether or not Land is a good movie. But I say there is nothing in the movie that leads us to think what we see happens 3 years after the events shown in Day of the Dead. All we have is a couple of people mentioning "three years since....", which while not necesarily meaning anything, could be taken to mean three years since the START OF THE OUTBREAK, not three years after the events we see in Day. I have said before (quite lengthily at that, I will try not to be that lengthy here. Yeah I know, good luck with that :) )that it doesnt make sense that they were 3 years into the outbreak. The only way it makes sense is that the events in Land are much closer to the start of the outbreak.

This explains many of the problems you point out....and many others that I had that you did not point out....why would ANYONE want money? Where are they getting fuel? How are so many people still alive? How are they suppling stuff for all those people? We see SO many people in Land....they would have depleted the surrounding territory VERY quickly to supply all those people. And would have had to travel further and further away to get supplies, possibly past the feul window. The only way to answer these types of problems is to say that the events in Land are taking place a lot closer to the events shown in Dawn than the events shown in Day. The references to "three years" could mean anything.

When the good guy and bad guy (Riley and Toto..er....Cholo) are talking about working for Kaufman for 3 years.....what, they were total strangers to Kaufman pre-outbreak, and magically got to known him and get into a position of power within his ranks after the outbreak? It makes MUCH more sense that they were already working for him PRE-outbreak. Now sure, they werent scavaging a zombie-invested countryside looking for goods pre-outbreak, but they could have been doing just about anything for Kaufman. Arent most of us working for someone right now, doing something? The other comment is the guy in the parking area saying "No cars have driven out of here in 3 years". This can be as simple an explanation as no cars had driven out of there in 3 years, which includes times both pre and post outbreak. Again, right now as you read this, can you think of any closed down businesses anywhere near you? It is not some wild and crazy idea to think that a garage area may have been closed down pre-outbreak for a couple of years. Some would say "but two mentions of 3 years are obviously meant to let the audience know we are 3 years into the outbreak". Well, everyone is free to take that as their opinion, however, all the problems that I have pointed out in the past and Andy points out now make it blatently evident to me that there is no way the events in Land are 3 years into the outbreak.

So in closing, if you accept the premise that the events in Land take place way before the events in Land, it explains a ton of problems that otherwise exist. Now if you think Big Daddy is rediculous, that is independent of how long into the outbreak they were. But you are right Andy, Day goes out of its way to show us, the audience, that the world is a desolate place now. They have flown 100 miles in each direction and found no evidence of other living beings. In Land, you cant thrown a rock without hitting someone on the street, and that someone is either buying a hot dog from a hot dog stand or getting ready to enter a "zombie fight club" for a night of entertainment. And.... where did they get the meat for those hot dogs anyway? If it were only a couple of months into the outbreak, OK, they scavaged the hot dogs already made. If it were YEARS into the outbreak.....well, (insert sarcastic comment here).

[lullubelle]

Well put. This movie makes no sense and there are a lot of unanswered questions as you mention. I never thought of the fueling situation, but that whole thing about cholo asking for money that was stupid. And you are right how the hell did all those dum dums stay alive for so long, I never thought of that.

[Zombie Snack]

Land sucks........too many bad plot holes

[SymphonicX]

Land wasn't that bad...it was just a bit weak on certain details, things needed fleshing out for story and development.

Big Daddy was stupid, and the worst part of the movie...

but you can't use Day as a means to dictate what should happen in Land - the people in Day couldn't find survivors in a 100 mile radius - Fiddler's Green could have been 700 miles in a completely different state/place...who knows? The point of Day wasn't to speculate if they were the only people left on the planet (which is speculated upon anyway in passing) but to give you an idea of how isolated those characters were - whether humanity was thriving somewhere else entirely is irrelevant to the plight of the characters in Day, because in their situation there was no one around, leading to said speculation.

We also don't know just how much infrastructure was available to Fiddler's Green, personally I took the angle that the city was boarded off and taken over by Kaufman just as it looked as though humanity was fucked, therefore a monetary system in place, whilst a bit of a fallacy, was a simple throwback from the past era...Slack mentions not leaving the city for three years, when it was a real city - this kinda says that simply for three years they were using money as a bargaining tool to represent a false economy - more testament to how humanity were locking themselves away and pretending they're normal.

On the subject of "bums" - the people on the outside of the Green were refugees...not bums. Just people "down on their luck"...their three years of isolation from the outside world had bred a systemic abuse of vices such as gambling and prostitution - and with a basic martial law system in place, access to vice was unfettered. I think that's completely natural.

One last small point to make is that Land is set 3 years after NIGHT, not Day...that changes the timeframe dramatically...only three years had the dead been walking...

And no, I'm not trying to change your mind...I just think you made some points that needed addressing:).

[Cruxdustrial]

Land is not only one of my favorite 'zombie movies' of all time, but one of my favorite movies of all time. I don't know who was asking Andy for his thoughts on Land, but please stop it. Andy is written out of my book as far as I'm concerned and he has lost ALL validity and credibility with me. I definately won't be interacting or speaking with that fellow. This is beyond a doubt, one of the worst threads here at these forums. Why does it keep getting bumped? As for all the hate toward Land, my solution is simple, if you hate it, stop talking about it. And don't worry about talking to fans of Land, such as myself or about fans of Land bothering you because I WILL NOT NOW OR EVER BE TALKING TO YOU. Leave the issue alone, your not changing my mind and im not changing yours. I think your a fucktard, you think im a fucktard, so what? Whats the point? It's kindergarten grade arguing. It's like two kindergarteners sitting there saying 'You're stupid!' and the other one says 'NO! You're stupid!' and the other replies 'NO! You're stupid' and it just continues and continues to no end, while proving absolutely nothing. Which is all Andy has done here, nothing.

[SymphonicX]

^^ thinks above poster needs some maturity pills.

[Philly_SWAT]

Land is not only one of my favorite 'zombie movies' of all time, but one of my favorite movies of all time. I don't know who was asking Andy for his thoughts on Land, but please stop it. Andy is written out of my book as far as I'm concerned and he has lost ALL validity and credibility with me. I definately won't be interacting or speaking with that fellow. This is beyond a doubt, one of the worst threads here at these forums. Why does it keep getting bumped? As for all the hate toward Land, my solution is simple, if you hate it, stop talking about it. And don't worry about talking to fans of Land, such as myself or about fans of Land bothering you because I WILL NOT NOW OR EVER BE TALKING TO YOU. Leave the issue alone, your not changing my mind and im not changing yours. I think your a fucktard, you think im a fucktard, so what? Whats the point? It's kindergarten grade arguing. It's like two kindergarteners sitting there saying 'You're stupid!' and the other one says 'NO! You're stupid!' and the other replies 'NO! You're stupid' and it just continues and continues to no end, while proving absolutely nothing. Which is all Andy has done here, nothing.
One big difference between you and Andy...he can ban your ass!

[SymphonicX]

One big difference between you and Andy...he can ban your ass!

LOL....I can see a motivational poster arising from this....

[Philly_SWAT]

Did you read my post in this thread? I realize it is hard to find the way the post-tree works. If so I would be interested to know what you think of it.

[capncnut]

One big difference between you and Andy...he can ban your ass!
I was just in the process of putting a line through his name until Andy jumped on MSN.

Cruxdustrial, consider yourself lucky pal.


Oh my. I really wish you wouldn't leave Crux. There is so much entertainment potential in future posts by you.
:lol:

[Andy]

Land is not only one of my favorite 'zombie movies' of all time, but one of my favorite movies of all time. I don't know who was asking Andy for his thoughts on Land, but please stop it. Andy is written out of my book as far as I'm concerned and he has lost ALL validity and credibility with me. I definately won't be interacting or speaking with that fellow. This is beyond a doubt, one of the worst threads here at these forums. Why does it keep getting bumped? As for all the hate toward Land, my solution is simple, if you hate it, stop talking about it. And don't worry about talking to fans of Land, such as myself or about fans of Land bothering you because I WILL NOT NOW OR EVER BE TALKING TO YOU. Leave the issue alone, your not changing my mind and im not changing yours. I think your a fucktard, you think im a fucktard, so what? Whats the point? It's kindergarten grade arguing. It's like two kindergarteners sitting there saying 'You're stupid!' and the other one says 'NO! You're stupid!' and the other replies 'NO! You're stupid' and it just continues and continues to no end, while proving absolutely nothing. Which is all Andy has done here, nothing.

Good counter-points to all my arguments there :rolleyes:

Im not trying to persuade you, im not trying to engage you in any kind of argument.. i did say that in my original post and in fact, i dont think anyone in this topic is acting like kindergarteners except for you. I Didnt think you were a fucktard before, in fact i have no idea who you are, but i think you have just shown yourself up to be a total fool with that post.

If i dont like land, im to stop talking about it. your telling me what i can and cant talk about on my forums? Here's an idea, if you dont like my topic on land, dont read it or if you feel really compelled to, dont reply with your half minded, foolish gibbering. The whole idea of this forum is for a open exchange of ideas based on romero's movies, whether you like them or not.

Now im not even going to give you a warning or ban you, you've shown yourself up and i want other members to see this.

[Mike70]

Now im not even going to give you a warning or ban you, you've shown yourself up and i want other members to see this.

don't worry we have.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/57/176096755_702c5cda2f.jpg?v=0



i kind of like land but i'd readily agree that it has some glaring flaws. i certainly do not think that it is a "classic."

[MoonSylver]

don't worry we have.

From March:


I just wanted to say that I do acknowledge that not everyone, in fact, most do not agree with my assessment of LotD. I realize that out of Night, Dawn, Day & Land, it is Land that is the most hated and gets the most flack. I just want to say, you are absolutely entitled to your opinion, you are entitled to differ with me, in fact I think diversity is awesome so please keep it up, I would hate a world that was just clones of me everywhere (I SUCK!). And also, I need more than one mind to cull more than just my insight on things. More often than not, people have better insight than I do. On the same token, I'm just asking that you please don't attack me for liking LotD (so much that it's a classic for me) and please let me just be an LotD fan like I am. That's all I'm asking and I will give you the same rights, you can be a fan of whatever you want and I'll totally support you in it. In this world, there are issues of convictions and issues of preference, my love for LotD is not a conviction (since LotD cannot be a belief per say) but it is a preference. Quite frankly, if you were to disagree with me on an issue of conviction, I'd still support you because I do NOT want clones of me.

To now:


Land is not only one of my favorite 'zombie movies' of all time, but one of my favorite movies of all time. I don't know who was asking Andy for his thoughts on Land, but please stop it. Andy is written out of my book as far as I'm concerned and he has lost ALL validity and credibility with me. I definately won't be interacting or speaking with that fellow. This is beyond a doubt, one of the worst threads here at these forums. Why does it keep getting bumped? As for all the hate toward Land, my solution is simple, if you hate it, stop talking about it. And don't worry about talking to fans of Land, such as myself or about fans of Land bothering you because I WILL NOT NOW OR EVER BE TALKING TO YOU. Leave the issue alone, your not changing my mind and im not changing yours. I think your a fucktard, you think im a fucktard, so what? Whats the point? It's kindergarten grade arguing. It's like two kindergarteners sitting there saying 'You're stupid!' and the other one says 'NO! You're stupid!' and the other replies 'NO! You're stupid' and it just continues and continues to no end, while proving absolutely nothing. Which is all Andy has done here, nothing.

My how time changes some people...:rolleyes:

Andy, I officially relinquish my title of Big Bad Wolf to you...

http://forum.homepageofthedead.com/showthread.php?t=13395

[clanglee]

What? Crux is back?!?!?!?


http://media.giantbomb.com/uploads/0/5768/542398-stimpy_large.jpg
Oh Joy!!!

[Danny]

.wat.

[deadpunk]

Meh...as a stand alone film, LAND would not have been so terrible. The problem falls with it being a follow-up to a trilogy that had been so well done that they set the bar about as high as it can get.

While its not my favorite movie, I"m guilty of popping LAND in from time to time and giving it a watch. But then, I liked Night90 and Dawn04 (I liked the cast anyway), so take that for what it is worth :lol:

[Trin]

@Andy - Good post all around. The only really upsetting part is that you adamantly refuse to be swayed. That seems a waste. You never know, maybe someone here could make you hate it even more. :)

Agree list:
- Dead Reckoning = unrealistic - Agreed. Add in the GPS system and remote control.
- 500,000 : 1 and yet no zombies - Agreed. I wanted a wall of zombies outside pressing in like on the poster.
- Money and Toto - Agreed. I could buy money within the Green under Kaufman's rules. But screw Mister K and you have no more use for money, period.
- Military not handling 25-30 zombies - Agreed, though the script makes it sound like Romero envisioned far more.
- Riley's behavior - Agreed, he could've left whenever he wanted, or toppled Kaufman, or armed Mulligan, or, or...
- Bub & Big Daddy - Agreed. I could take Big Daddy if there was more explanation of why he was different. No, wait, he'd still suck.
- Expected more/Got less - Yep.


Disagree:
- Setting - I think the city surviving in that form is plausible.
- Tramps - Clearly the bums on the streets were not always bums. Slack and Mulligan are good examples of that. They'd become that over time under Kaufman's oppressive rule.


Along the hate lines I would add:
- Zombies walking under the river = absurd.
- No defense of the riverfront = absurd.
- Leaving Mouse on the docks with headphones = absurd.
- "Slack", "Foxy", "Pretty Boy", "Mouse", "Motown", "Chihauauaha", bullfighter guy = stupid names.
- Driving off at the end abandoning the residents to the zombie horde = absurd.
- Money and Kaufman - Kaufman taking money was even more absurd than Toto wanting it.


@SymphonicX - Brilliant post, well said, and agree 100%.

@Philly - No, I don't buy that the garage bum was including 2+ years of pre-outbreak time in his "no car has left here for 3 years" comment. It's a reach to think that he would even know that, a further reach to believe he'd consider it relevant to Riley's situation, and a near impossibility that Romero would confuse the subject by pointing the audience toward a time frame he didn't write the story toward. Is it possible? Yes. But only if you ignore far more plausible and likely conclusions.

Also, Cholo's comment directly implied he'd been disposing of Kaufman's enemies for that 3 years. "Taking out his garbage." I don't believe that's something he was likely to have been doing pre-outbreak. Again, possible, but not likely.

Even without either of the 3 year comments I'd put Land 3-5 years into it. The atmosphere of the surroundings, the decay of the world, and the behavior of the people implied a long period.


Regarding fuel:
There is a gasoline storage facility 3 miles from my house that can fuel the entirety of Kansas City for 2 weeks. Land had maybe 5 cars, a couple trucks, some motorcyles, and Dead Reckoning. And use of those is severely limited. Fuel is not a problem for 5 years.

And, finally, I think the fact that Land leaves a question like "how long into the outbreak" unanswered is ridiculous.

[Philly_SWAT]

I would be interested Trin to hear your thoughts on my theory that the events in Land take place before the events in Day. You speak of my "three years" points as if you think I believe them....I simply offer those as plausible possiblilites, not that I believe them as absolute truth. Either way, I still say that the events in Day are LONG after the events in Land. You say about Land...

The atmosphere of the surroundings, the decay of the world, and the behavior of the people implied a long period.
I totally disagree with that. I dont think the world looks that decayed, and the behavior of the people (still clinging to concepts like wanting money) show evidence that they are close to the START of the outbreak, not long into it. But either way, I think that the atmosphere of the surroundings, the decay of the world, and the behavior of the people in Day imply a much longer period than Land. Agree, disagree?

P.S. Trin - You inspired me to learn something new (for me anyway). I have made a clickable map of the chopper landing area from Day. It is pretty cool I think, however, the pics dont show up properly with Internet Explorer. Do you use Firefox? Works perfectly there.

[Trin]

I think Day was in the 8 month timeframe (roughly where Dawn ended) and Land was 3-5 year timeframe.

I recognize that you are not using the "3 years" arguments as proof of a shorter timeframe and that you are only posing possibilities to cast reasonable doubt. My problem is that I consider your arguments implausible possibilties, not plausible ones.

I don't consider the "3 years" comments proof of a 3 year timeframe, but I do believe they strongly point to it. But keep in mind that what doubt there is opens the timeframe both ways. For all we know the garage was operational 2 years after the outbreak and we're at 5 years now. That makes a lot more sense to me than assuming the bum was around 2 years prior to the outbreak and just happened to know this particular garage was not in use. Same argument for Cholo & Kaufman. For all we know Cholo began working for Kaufman 3 years into it, and we are seeing events 6 years in. I personally have a hard time believing Cholo was working for Kaufman prior to the outbreak given the disdain Kaufman shows Cholo throughout the movie.

So, push comes to shove, we're not going to get anywhere arguing the "3 years" comments. I think they point toward my timeframe. You think there's room for doubt. Neither of us is claiming they prove anything so on that at least we seem to agree.

As to the behavior of the people and society:

I think you are looking at the society and mental state in each movie and assuming that as time progresses those things decline. So Night comes out first, then Dawn/Land, then Day. So, by that argument, the fact that they still used money in Land shows them to have declined less than in Day, and thus they were earlier in the outbreak. Same for mental state - Day was obviously the worst mental state so that makes it further into the decline and further into the outbreak. Does that about sum it up?

Where I disagree is the assumption that the society and mental state would only decline. My belief is that Day was the low point of society and Land was a rebound.

I see a natural progressing from movie to movie.
Night - Everyone is reactive just trying to survive the night. Living on adrenaline, no time to think about greater ramifications.

Dawn - At the start they are still reactive trying to survive from day to day. Toward the end they were considering options for longer term survival (packing the chopper knowing they could not stay in the mall). Some thought was given to the greater ramifications ("when there's no more room..."). You could see the mental strain beginning to take its toll (Peter considering suicide).

Day - Day to day survival is not a problem. They were looking to the larger struggle of man vs. zombie in an effort to keep from losing the world. They were still trying to fix the problem, and the mental strain of it had them at the brink. Their own survival was more threatened by their mental state than the situation. They ultimately saw the inevitability of their situation and that there was no world left to save.

Land - Society regrouped. They have accepted that the zombie world is their reality. They have learned to live within the zombie world. No one is trying to fix the problem. They're dealing with it. They have dealt with it long enough it is comfortable.

Look at the general demeanor of the people. The military stands guard like they've done this for years. They pass the time on the front lines by shooting at stuff in the dark. There is no fear or revulsion at seeing a zombie approach the borders ("stench - high noon"). The dead have long since stopped being thought of as our friends and loved ones. They are now sideshow novelties (Simon and Edgar) and bar entertainment (red vs black). They hang them up for target practice. People have jobs in the zombie world and are worried about pleasing the boss. The scavengers are not only comfortable roaming the zombie world, they are cavalier about it.

Let's talk about money. Money was valuable in Land because Kaufman made it valuable. He re-established currency as a means of controlling the people through jobs and vices. The re-establishment of currency and economy, in my mind, is evidence that the society had progressed further back towards recovery. Not evidence it had declined less. The people were past mere survival and looking to better their situations.

My biggest point would be this. With Night, Dawn, and Day you can ask how long were they into the zombie outbreak. With Land that question is not even relevant. They weren't INTO the zombie outbreak. They were PAST it. There was no struggle to survive. There was no question of how to stop the zombies. Zombies were the norm for them and they were set for the long haul. If anything, zombies were on the decline. The zombies "pretty much don't come around anymore."

Ugh... sorry for the long-winded post. I sincerely hope that at this point the only person still reading is philly. :P

And, yes, I would gladly install Firefox for a glimpse at the Day map. :) I'll try to post some pics of my in-game map of how I envisioned it.

[SRP76]

I dont think the world looks that decayed, and the behavior of the people (still clinging to concepts like wanting money) show evidence that they are close to the START of the outbreak, not long into it.


They don't show much of the world anyway, to see any "decay" or lack of decay, really. So that doesn't matter all that much. Especially with outdoor settings, like Uniontown (or whatever it was) - getting the people there to let you, say, break every single window on Main Street and demolish City Hall for your movie can be a bit hard. You could CG it, but that would be a disaster, and everyone here knows it.

And the "clinging to concepts" thing only seems off to an outsider - that being us, who have seen other movies with other survivors, with other ways of "life" (if you can call cringing in a cave "living"). To the people there, however, it's different - this is all they have ever known, for all practical purposes. They never went and lived with Peter and the crew, or any of that; they've lived under "the system" before all hell broke loose, and continued to do so afterward, when they happened to stay inside the quarantine zone when the city was locked off. If you don't know any other way, you aren't going to change your way of life. That's the way people are all over the world - you see it every single day. Women are still getting beaten for not wearing veils in some places, for example.

The only people exposed to any alternate way are those few - FEW -that actually work on the scavenger crews. Everyone else just sits in the city, rotting away, not having either the A) guts, or B) desire to strike out on their own, or to try to change things on the inside.

[DrSiN]

Re: the time frame. I never took the 3 years comment as placing it before or after Day. I just took it as 3 years from the start of the outbreak. But in any event, it's an unrealistic time frame for a number of reasons. At best it kind of works if humanity has regrouped after 3 years and this is an outpost. The bigger question (and a symptom of the real problem) is why even mention it. Dating the time line was just a bad call.

Re: Gasoline. The untreated shelf life of gasoline is about 6 months before it starts to degrade. At about a year, what hasn't evaporated will have suffered from oxidation which changes the chemical composition making it useless. Even treated gas has only about 15 months tops before it goes bad and becomes unusable. But then who says they aren't refining their own crude oil. Pittsburgh has at least one refinery so it's possible.

Re: Dead Reckoning. The truck was an icon piece plain and simple. I suspect it was the first idea that the rest grew from. It in my opinion didn't hurt the movie, but it didn't help it.

Re: Big Daddy. He didn't bother me. I can accept that given millions of zombies, 1 might retain a little more intelligence. But I do agree it needed to be explained or at least touched on. It also didn't bother me that the others followed him. Normal zombies following a hero zombie have a real precedent in the series (those following Flyboy, Bub). The problem came when Romero forgot that his movies were never really about zombies.

The problem with Land was it had a poor script plain and simple. From idea to execution it was just bad. At least they threw out the zombie animals. In this case, the script really sunk the movie. The characters were unbelievable, the setting was disjointed and the message was too heavy handed. All that led to the weakest of the 5 movies.

Diary on the other hand has actor trouble (and to a less extent an ending problem). But with a stronger story, it sits slightly above Land. But hey, it's all opinion.

[Trin]

Re: Gasoline. The untreated shelf life of gasoline is about 6 months before it starts to degrade. At about a year, what hasn't evaporated will have suffered from oxidation which changes the chemical composition making it useless. Even treated gas has only about 15 months tops before it goes bad and becomes unusable. But then who says they aren't refining their own crude oil. Pittsburgh has at least one refinery so it's possible.
I don't know man. I have a ski boat that has been sitting in my garage for 5 years unused because it leaked. Earlier this year I decided to get off my butt and get it fixed. Prior to taking it to the shop I figured I'd better see if it would still start. It did. The gas in that tank was 5 years old and it was fine. And let's not get into my chainsaw that has been running on the same gallon of gas for 10+ years. lol

Maybe Dead Reckoning was converted to run on corn oil and they're using all that deep fat fryer grease to run her.

I disagree with the comment about the timeline dating being a bad idea. I want to know when the events are happening, not only specific to the start of the outbreak, but in relation to the other movies. I like to think of the events as being in the same universe and like to imagine what is happening elsewhere in the world as I'm watching what's happening in the world I see.

I do agree 100% with the bad script comment. The script was bad, bad, bad. And he had a long time to write it. I mostly liked the characters, so I don't blame that. But they had no motives that made sense.

Diary, imho, was worse than Land. Disjointed plot, directionless characters, bad commentary, and a gimmicky feel with the first person thing. I think it should've been called "Vignettes of the Dead" because it was a bunch of little short encounters with zombies that had nothing to do with one another except for the idiots involved.

[Philly_SWAT]

I think Day was in the 8 month timeframe (roughly where Dawn ended) and Land was 3-5 year timeframe.
The three year comments in Land are the only thing that could lead to anyone thinking Land was 3 years into the outbreak (IMO). Day being 8 months in....there is NOTHING that I know of that gives that impression.


I personally have a hard time believing Cholo was working for Kaufman prior to the outbreak given the disdain Kaufman shows Cholo throughout the movie.
You dont think that right now in real life there are people in positions of authority that look down at their underlings with disdain?


So, push comes to shove, we're not going to get anywhere arguing the "3 years" comments. I think they point toward my timeframe. You think there's room for doubt. Neither of us is claiming they prove anything so on that at least we seem to agree.
I agree that we wont get anywhere with the "3 year argument". But it is highly unimportant/irrelevant to me. What is of much importance to me is the Land happens before Day line of thought.



Where I disagree is the assumption that the society and mental state would only decline. My belief is that Day was the low point of society and Land was a rebound.
Here is where we have a huge difference in our opinions. In my opinion, using real life as a basis for assumption, I assume that there is NO WAY IN HELL that a scant 3 years after the worst situation in the history of the world that people would have pulled together, worked in tandam, etc. to bring about a semi-utopia where they live in relative harmony and can forget all about the zombie threat right outside the city walls. I could see how close to the start of the outbreak people could have worked and/or lucked there way into a good situation, but not come back from a destroyed world to having a functioning city in 3 years. My good friend wrote a book about this, and I think he would agree with me.....
http://i95.photobucket.com/albums/l150/Philly_SWAT/Celebrities/MeandMaxBrooks.jpg



Look at the general demeanor of the people. The military stands guard like they've done this for years. They pass the time on the front lines by shooting at stuff in the dark. There is no fear or revulsion at seeing a zombie approach the borders ("stench - high noon"). The dead have long since stopped being thought of as our friends and loved ones. They are now sideshow novelties (Simon and Edgar) and bar entertainment (red vs black). They hang them up for target practice. People have jobs in the zombie world and are worried about pleasing the boss. The scavengers are not only comfortable roaming the zombie world, they are cavalier about it.
Again, I think you give too much credit to human beings, and ESPECIALLY to human beings in a GAR created universe. A central theme to GAR's works has been man's inability to get along with his fellow man. Your idea has men co-operating to a here-to-fore unknown level. My idea still has them hanging on since they are close to the start of the outbreak.


Let's talk about money. Money was valuable in Land because Kaufman made it valuable. He re-established currency as a means of controlling the people through jobs and vices. The re-establishment of currency and economy, in my mind, is evidence that the society had progressed further back towards recovery. Not evidence it had declined less. The people were past mere survival and looking to better their situations.
Again, I think you WAY overestimate how long in would take to re-introduce concepts of money and economy successfully in a post-outbreak world. I would take DECADES, if no longer, for this type of re-introduction to take place, IMO.


My biggest point would be this. With Night, Dawn, and Day you can ask how long were they into the zombie outbreak. With Land that question is not even relevant. They weren't INTO the zombie outbreak. They were PAST it. There was no struggle to survive. There was no question of how to stop the zombies. Zombies were the norm for them and they were set for the long haul. If anything, zombies were on the decline. The zombies "pretty much don't come around anymore."
This makes sense according to your overall view. However, I disagree with your overall view, so I dont agree with it. Zombies "pretty much dont come around here anymore" I thought was only in reference to that area of electrified fence, not that they were so few and far between that they were all but extinct. If that were the case, they wouldnt even had needed the Dead Reckoning, they could have enjoyed a ride in the countryside in horse drawn carriages to scavenge for supplies. You dont think that "zombies were the norm" for the people in Day? They captured them, PUT COLLARS on them, and were keeping them in a pen right next to where they slept. I could go on (for real, I could) but dont want to be long winded....


Ugh... sorry for the long-winded post. I sincerely hope that at this point the only person still reading is philly. :P
Well, I could be wrong, but I think that I tend to be the most long winded person here at times, so there is no need for apologies. In fact, as long as discussions such as these are thoughtful and intelligent, the longer the better. That is how mankind learns and grows, whether discussing matters such as zombie movies or world peace.


And, yes, I would gladly install Firefox for a glimpse at the Day map. :) I'll try to post some pics of my in-game map of how I envisioned it.
Let me know when you have Firefox. I have not uploaded the map yet...I am unhappy how much of the pictures cut out with IE and havent had time to look into possible hack/solutions to get it to work. Send me a PM if you want. This thread may be lost by then I suppose.

[Andy]

The three year comments in Land are the only thing that could lead to anyone thinking Land was 3 years into the outbreak (IMO). Day being 8 months in....there is NOTHING that I know of that gives that impression.

Actually i agree with trin on the timing of day being 8 months in, i have done for a long time even before i found HpotD, on watching the original trilogy i thought at a very young age that they were sequential (night>dawn>day) and came directly one after another, although in different locations.

The lap over theory, for me, Between night and dawn is signified by the posses, the rednecks at the start of dawn could be the same or a similar group from the end of night.

The lap over between dawn and day is shown in the calendars i beleive, id need to watch both films to 100% positive but i think near the end of dawn, fran is making a calendar in september or october, i cant quite remember now but at the start of day, sarah is marking a calendar in the same month.

That struck me as a link between the films, as i said, even before i found HpotD.

[SRP76]

The lap over between dawn and day is shown in the calendars i beleive, id need to watch both films to 100% positive but i think near the end of dawn, fran is making a calendar in september or october, i cant quite remember now but at the start of day, sarah is marking a calendar in the same month.



That's true, but some would argue that it's for different years. Say, Fran's September 1978 calendar to Sarah's October 1985 calendar. Day being 7 years after Fran and Peter's mall escape, in that case.

It did always just make sense to me for the original three to just run straight into one another, though. No real reason for them not to.

[Philly_SWAT]

Actually i agree with trin on the timing of day being 8 months in, i have done for a long time even before i found HpotD, on watching the original trilogy i thought at a very young age that they were sequential (night>dawn>day) and came directly one after another, although in different locations.

The lap over theory, for me, Between night and dawn is signified by the posses, the rednecks at the start of dawn could be the same or a similar group from the end of night.

The lap over between dawn and day is shown in the calendars i beleive, id need to watch both films to 100% positive but i think near the end of dawn, fran is making a calendar in september or october, i cant quite remember now but at the start of day, sarah is marking a calendar in the same month.

That struck me as a link between the films, as i said, even before i found HpotD.
Dr. Foster says at the beginning of Dawn "for three weeks you have not listened". To me, that implies that the events we see in Dawn are three weeks after the events we see in Night.

Actually, at the end of Dawn Fran has marked off 3 months on the calendar, implying March. Here is a pic of Flyboy coming down the ladder after seeing the bikers coming, with the calendar in the background.
http://i95.photobucket.com/albums/l150/Philly_SWAT/wallcalender.jpg
At the end of Day, Sarah is marking off November 2nd (which is the Mexican "Day of the Dead", clever, eh? :) ) Therefore, there is no link like you suggest as far as the calendar's go. And as SRP76 already typed as I was typing this, each year has 12 months in it, therefore there is bound to be all kinds of coincidental month overlaps in all types of movies situations.

[sandrock74]

Again, I think you WAY overestimate how long in would take to re-introduce concepts of money and economy successfully in a post-outbreak world. I would take DECADES, if no longer, for this type of re-introduction to take place, IMO.


Why, exactly do you say that? You say it would be decades to reintroduce the concept of money? Humanity has been using currency for hundreds of years, it's not like everyone would forget how to use it, or what it represents. I think it would only take a fairly short while, myself. Money is "comfortable", people of all classes are used to it. I think it would come back into use fairly quick in a society with some structure...like Kaufman had set up.

By the way Philly, you might say you're long winded, but I always enjoy your posts! I usually don't reply, because I'm too intimidated, but this is one point I have to disagree with you on (please don't take it personally, just a differing opinion).


Actually i agree with trin on the timing of day being 8 months in, i have done for a long time even before i found HpotD, on watching the original trilogy i thought at a very young age that they were sequential (night>dawn>day) and came directly one after another, although in different locations.

The lap over theory, for me, Between night and dawn is signified by the posses, the rednecks at the start of dawn could be the same or a similar group from the end of night.


I agree with you. I always assumed the films go in sequential order. I realize I may be simplistic in my thinking, but it makes sense, since nothing tells us otherwise (such as one being a prequel or some such). I also thought the Night posse had "morphed" into the Dawn rednecks...it just seemed to follow a sense of logic.


It did always just make sense to me for the original three to just run straight into one another, though. No real reason for them not to.

Exactly!

[JDFP]

That's true, but some would argue that it's for different years. Say, Fran's September 1978 calendar to Sarah's October 1985 calendar. Day being 7 years after Fran and Peter's mall escape, in that case.

It did always just make sense to me for the original three to just run straight into one another, though. No real reason for them not to.

I don't think the folks in "DAY" would have survived for SEVEN years down there without having killed each other long before then. I could see it being 8 months that they've been down there without any problems (a mention in the film: "We used to talk to Washington all the time!"). But SEVEN YEARS? I have a very difficult time in imagining that.

As far as the calendar, is it common for companies to make calendars seven years in advance? The calendar that Sarah is using looks like a real company calendar. Before the end of everything did Sarah get a ten year calendar from Hallmark and check off on it every day for that full period of time? Eh, it's possible, I suppose, but I just can't buy it being that long.

Dr. Logan was probably near crazy before the outbreak (and the outbreak pushed him over into nutso-land in remembering daddy's beatings and taking out his aggression on the ghouls). And a bunch of healthy macho-alpha- men-soldiers without any other women except Sarah for YEARS? Oh hell no... she would have been brutalized years before. The only exception would have been if the other three scientists that are mentioned by Rhodes in his "Not A Fieldtrip" speech were all women who "enjoyed" the company of the other men down there. Otherwise, no way they could have made it for years.

I think the argument that the end of "DAWN" was around March / beginning of April sometime (because it was still cold outside) and the beginning of "DAY" as the end of October of the same year or maybe the next year makes sense. I don't think a really good argument could be made for saying that the folks in "DAY" have been down there for years. I don't think that group of people could have survived that long down there without having killed each other first -- even if Major Cooper was John Wayne in keeping everyone away from each others throats.

j.p.

[SRP76]

As far as the calendar, is it common for companies to make calendars seven years in advance? The calendar that Sarah is using looks like a real company calendar. Before the end of everything did Sarah get a ten year calendar from Hallmark and check off on it every day for that full period of time? Eh, it's possible, I suppose, but I just can't buy it being that long.



Whoa, HUGE find, right there. I don't think anyone's ever pointed that out before.

Could chalk up to "movie mistake", but if we go by in-film-is-law rule, it MUST be taken, and clinches the whole deal. Day cannot possibly be that far beyond Dawn.

[clanglee]

As far as the calendar, is it common for companies to make calendars seven years in advance? The calendar that Sarah is using looks like a real company calendar. Before the end of everything did Sarah get a ten year calendar from Hallmark and check off on it every day for that full period of time? Eh, it's possible, I suppose, but I just can't buy it being that long.
.

Yeah, While I have been trying to stay out of this conversation (dead horse you know), this is a very valid point. Unless they had their own Printing Press or a modern Printer, a clander of that sort would have been impossible. This movie took place in the 80's so the modern printer is out of the question, and the printing press is unlikely.

[Philly_SWAT]

I don't think the folks in "DAY" would have survived for SEVEN years down there without having killed each other long before then. I could see it being 8 months that they've been down there without any problems (a mention in the film: "We used to talk to Washington all the time!"). But SEVEN YEARS? I have a very difficult time in imagining that. Whether in Day or anything else, if someone uses the phrase "We use to (fill in the blank) ALL THE TIME", I would think they were referring to a long time ago, not a recent time. If it was a recent time, wouldnt someone be more likely to say something like "We use to (fill in the blank) last month" or whatever. I think that mention points to a long time period, not a short one.


As far as the calendar, is it common for companies to make calendars seven years in advance? The calendar that Sarah is using looks like a real company calendar. Before the end of everything did Sarah get a ten year calendar from Hallmark and check off on it every day for that full period of time? Eh, it's possible, I suppose, but I just can't buy it being that long.
Ummm...not only did the calendar Sarah was using NOT look like a real company calendar, it was not even a "blank month, fill in the year and days" calendar. Sarah had to write the month in by hand. The lines separating the days were lines drawn by hand. Whatever paper it was she was writing on, it was definitely NOT some type of pre-outbreak produced calendar, which lends credence to the fact that it was a while past the outbreak.http://i95.photobucket.com/albums/l150/Philly_SWAT/DayEndCalender.jpg



Dr. Logan was probably near crazy before the outbreak (and the outbreak pushed him over into nutso-land in remembering daddy's beatings and taking out his aggression on the ghouls). And a bunch of healthy macho-alpha- men-soldiers without any other women except Sarah for YEARS? Oh hell no... she would have been brutalized years before. The only exception would have been if the other three scientists that are mentioned by Rhodes in his "Not A Fieldtrip" speech were all women who "enjoyed" the company of the other men down there. Otherwise, no way they could have made it for years.

Hopefully if the government was putting together a project, even a project rushed to get ready in a matter of days, but a project that could determine whether the human race SURVIVES or DIES.......hopefully they wouldnt stick a half crazy scientist and a bunch of quick-to-rape-quick-to-lose-discipline soldiers together to find the solution to the world wide problem. Hopefully, they would choose the best and brightest scientists, and the most disciplined, best able to cope and adapt soldiers, ones that would go crazy and decide to rape other members of the team ONLY AFTER YEARS, not after a few months. Unless you take the position that going crazy and being a rapist is the default position of most people after a few months of distress.



I think the argument that the end of "DAWN" was around March / beginning of April sometime (because it was still cold outside) and the beginning of "DAY" as the end of October of the same year or maybe the next year makes sense. I don't think a really good argument could be made for saying that the folks in "DAY" have been down there for years. I don't think that group of people could have survived that long down there without having killed each other first -- even if Major Cooper was John Wayne in keeping everyone away from each others throats.So if you had food, water, medicine, electricity, protection from the elements (both weather and zombie) and a specific goal to fill your time, the goal or saving mankind, you think that you would be quick to rape and kill after only a few months?

---------- Post added at 10:43 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:22 PM ----------


Whoa, HUGE find, right there. I don't think anyone's ever pointed that out before.

Could chalk up to "movie mistake", but if we go by in-film-is-law rule, it MUST be taken, and clinches the whole deal. Day cannot possibly be that far beyond Dawn.
No one ever pointed that out before because it isnt so! :)

[clanglee]

I can't see your pic at work here Philly, but the calendar at the beginning of the movie. . with the pumpkins . . didn't seem homemade to me. .i'll have to give it another look.

The calendar at the end was definitely homemade. .but the beginning?

[Philly_SWAT]

I can't see your pic at work here Philly, but the calendar at the beginning of the movie. . with the pumpkins . . didn't seem homemade to me. .i'll have to give it another look.

The calendar at the end was definitely homemade. .but the beginning?

If you recall, that calendar was in a dream, unless you think a bunch of zombie hands actually broke thru a concrete wall, grabbing at Sarah!

[JDFP]

Ummm...not only did the calendar Sarah was using NOT look like a real company calendar, it was not even a "blank month, fill in the year and days" calendar. Sarah had to write the month in by hand. The lines separating the days were lines drawn by hand. Whatever paper it was she was writing on, it was definitely NOT some type of pre-outbreak produced calendar, which lends credence to the fact that it was a while past the outbreak.

Hopefully if the government was putting together a project, even a project rushed to get ready in a matter of days, but a project that could determine whether the human race SURVIVES or DIES.......hopefully they wouldnt stick a half crazy scientist and a bunch of quick-to-rape-quick-to-lose-discipline soldiers together to find the solution to the world wide problem. Hopefully, they would choose the best and brightest scientists, and the most disciplined, best able to cope and adapt soldiers, ones that would go crazy and decide to rape other members of the team ONLY AFTER YEARS, not after a few months. Unless you take the position that going crazy and being a rapist is the default position of most people after a few months of distress.

So if you had food, water, medicine, electricity, protection from the elements (both weather and zombie) and a specific goal to fill your time, the goal or saving mankind, you think that you would be quick to rape and kill after only a few months?

I was actually referring to the calendar at the opening of the film with the pumpkins where the ghouls reach their hands through the walls. But, that specific calendar was in a dream sequence, so unless Bobby Ewing really died, my initial point is actually invalid. Good catch, Philly.

As far as the project goes, I don't think in the middle of a Zombie Apocalypse it would have been easy getting the best and brightest together. They settled for the doctors/scientists/staff that they could get together in a very rushed fashion. Everything about the project was rushed. They weren't flying in neuro-surgeon's from 2,000 miles away. Could I be completely wrong? Sure. But it is mentioned that the project was rushed together in a matter of days, which means that they would have had to get everything together ASAP.

You're right, hopefully if it were to happen, they wouldn't put a half-crazy scientist with alpha-soldiers together. However, we can only go based upon what we witnessed. Logan was nuts -- I don't think that's talking out of terms to say that. I'm not a psychiatrist either, but I don't think it's a stretch of the imagination to say that Logan had major repressed emotions from childhood abuse from his father as a child, coupled I'm sure with some other Freudian mommy issues as well. ("Discipline must be rewarded, captain!").

As far as people not becoming rapists and barbarians within an 8 month period, I would agree 100% in NORMAL circumstances. Zombies eating everyone you know and being possibly the last surviving humans in the world, I wouldn't exactly call that normal circumstances. Who are we to say what we would do in this type of situation unless we lived (which hopefully we won't) it? Philly mentioned in his previous post a few pages up that, if anything, Romero doesn't paint a pretty Norman Rockwell image of humanity -- I don't think it's too far fetched to see men and women collapsing into insanity or barbaric uncivilized behavior within an 8 month period under the circumstances.

I don't think it's crazy (haha, pun) to say that the default position of a vast majority of people, especially locked away from the rest of humanity in an under-ground facility without enough Vitamin B, in the world would be to go bat-assed crazy within an 8 month period under the circumstances. I think a great number of people would probably go crazy much faster than this.

They may have been protected from the elements, but they weren't protected from themselves. They weren't protected from the most dangerous of elements: Their memories and their minds. As far as saving mankind, that was a pipe-dream only months into the operation, and anyone there who attempted to delude themselves into thinking otherwise was only fooling themselves.

Anyway, good discussion and good points though, Philly, the great thing is that the movie is just so damn good that we'll be discussing it for the rest of our lives (which will hopefully be long) or until we all finally pull a "Day After" and nuke one another. But as to answer the point as to how long they were down there, I don't think there's really any way for us to know for certain. The same goes for "LAND" as to the length of time. It is interesting and entertaining to speculate it though, since we all can come together in agreement in enjoying Romero's films.

j.p.

[Mike70]

If you recall, that calendar was in a dream, unless you think a bunch of zombie hands actually broke thru a concrete wall, grabbing at Sarah!

the calendar is a minor point. anyone could put that sort of thing together by simply keeping track of how many days had passed since the old calendar ended.

even if you'd been locked up underground for weeks on end, it would only take a few observations of some very simple things. where does the sun rise in the morning? how high does it get in the sky at midday? where does it set at night?. how many hours of sunlight versus night are there? a couple days of that and you can zero right in on where you are at in the year down to within a day or two. if you have an almanac, you can key right in on the exact day with that sort of info. heck, if you know the declination of the sun (degrees north or south of the celestial equator) that it rises at, you know the exact date.


then again, i am a geek of such epic proportions that it would kill a lesser human.

[Philly_SWAT]

As far as the project goes, I don't think in the middle of a Zombie Apocalypse it would have been easy getting the best and brightest together. They settled for the doctors/scientists/staff that they could get together in a very rushed fashion. Everything about the project was rushed. They weren't flying in neuro-surgeon's from 2,000 miles away. Could I be completely wrong? Sure. But it is mentioned that the project was rushed together in a matter of days, which means that they would have had to get everything together ASAP.
You dont think that with SEVERAL DAYS to get a plan together they would in fact fly in qualified people from 2,000 miles away?



I don't think it's crazy (haha, pun) to say that the default position of a vast majority of people, especially locked away from the rest of humanity in an under-ground facility without enough Vitamin B, in the world would be to go bat-assed crazy within an 8 month period under the circumstances. I think a great number of people would probably go crazy much faster than this.
If by lack of Vitamin B you mean lack of sunlight, if you remember they go out looking for survivors, and the soldiers got a nice little weed garden growing up there that they tend to. Again, the growing of marijuana plants right out in the open with no effort to hide them, to me points to the fact that they are WAY IN to the outbreak, not near the start. If they were still near the start, would discipline break down to the point where you would break international drug laws right in front of your superiors? Even if Cooper and Rhodes were cool with it for some reason, if you were close to the start of the outbreak, with the hope of a resolution still on your mind, wouldnt it be naturally to assume that others might visit the facility? They could have at least made some minimal effort to hide the weed, but they didnt, which to me lends weight to the idea that they are years and years into the outbreak.





They may have been protected from the elements, but they weren't protected from themselves. They weren't protected from the most dangerous of elements: Their memories and their minds. As far as saving mankind, that was a pipe-dream only months into the operation, and anyone there who attempted to delude themselves into thinking otherwise was only fooling themselves.
So if you were charged with saving all of mankind, you would give up and quit after only a few months without success? If so, I certainly hope that you ARENT put in charge of saving humanity in a time of great crisis!

[clanglee]

If you recall, that calendar was in a dream, unless you think a bunch of zombie hands actually broke thru a concrete wall, grabbing at Sarah!

Point taken. . .

So Philly. . I gotta ask. . you've interviewed the big guy himself. .you ever ask his opinion of your timeline theory?

[Philly_SWAT]

Point taken. . .

So Philly. . I gotta ask. . you've interviewed the big guy himself. .you ever ask his opinion of your timeline theory?

Well, I didnt actually "interview" him, I just talked with him a bit, but unfortunately didnt get to go into in depth discussions of matters such as these. Actually, Land had not yet come out yet. Somehow I doubt he has given as much thought (any thought whatsoever?) to some of the things we discuss here as we do. But I had planned on taking to him about these things the last TWO YEARS in a row at Screamfest, and he has canceled two years in a row. When I was hanging out with Scott Reiniger I didnt ask his thoughts about this either. I was a little inebriated at the time...I do remember asking him if he had wanted to have sex with Gaylon Ross back during filming!

[JDFP]

So if you were charged with saving all of mankind, you would give up and quit after only a few months without success? If so, I certainly hope that you ARENT put in charge of saving humanity in a time of great crisis!

If you'll recall back to the "DAY" thread we had ("John"), I was one of the strongest advocates of staying down there doing what they had to do, calling John out for wanting to get the hell out of Dodge, but it doesn't mean that even if they had successfully created some type of "vaccine" it would have done any good that far into it. How would they have reported it? How would they have distributed it? How would they have administered it to enough people if distributed?


I do remember asking him if he had wanted to have sex with Gaylon Ross back during filming!

I'll go ahead and ask it before anyone else, how'd he respond to THAT very pertinent question? :lol::lol::lol:

j.p.

[Mike70]

i think that staying down there in search of a "cure" or to "save humanity" is pretty much a pipedream. we only see 3 scientists (granted we are told that one had died/been killed) and that isn't enough. to find a medical reason for the zombie plague, let alone a cure, would take a team of doctors, epidemiologists, biologists and chemists that would dwarf the entire cast of day. whether it is just story driven or is ignorance on romero's part ( in the original sense of the word, meaning "lack of knowledge") is open to debate. there is simply no way that a team of 3 is going to be able to do the science, research and experimentation required to find a medical basis for zombies, let alone a cure for the same.

it's a losing proposition. hell, you might as well ask a sycamore to pretend to be a hawthorne for all it's worth.

[Philly_SWAT]

If you'll recall back to the "DAY" thread we had ("John"), I was one of the strongest advocates of staying down there doing what they had to do, calling John out for wanting to get the hell out of Dodge, but it doesn't mean that even if they had successfully created some type of "vaccine" it would have done any good that far into it. How would they have reported it? How would they have distributed it? How would they have administered it to enough people if distributed?
Those are all good questions. However, for THEM to focus on those questions instead of more pertinent medical questions would have been of no value.




I'll go ahead and ask it before anyone else, how'd he respond to THAT very pertinent question? :lol::lol::lol:

Believe it or not, he actually said no! When I questioned him as to why, he just said things like "I just didnt think of her in that way".


i think that staying down there in search of a "cure" or to "save humanity" is pretty much a pipedream. we only see 3 scientists (granted we are told that one had died/been killed) and that isn't enough. to find a medical reason for the zombie plague, let alone a cure, would take a team of doctors, epidemiologists, biologists and chemists that would dwarf the entire cast of day. whether it is just story driven or is ignorance on romero's part ( in the original sense of the word, meaning "lack of knowledge") is open to debate. there is simply no way that a team of 3 is going to be able to do the science, research and experimentation required to find a medical basis for zombies, let alone a cure for the same.
I would think that budgetary constraints would have something to do with there only being 3 scientists in the cave. Its not like GAR could afford to have 100 extras milling around, all using some fancy science equipment. I understand your point though, but didnt Sarah say something about "other facilities" such as theirs? If so, that at least implies that Washington planned on gathering data at several locations and have a more advanced team there work with all the information available.



it's a losing proposition. hell, you might as well ask a sycamore to pretend to be a hawthorne for all it's worth.You might as well ask me to pretend that I know what a sycamore and a hawthorne are! :lol:(Trees I am thinking?)

[Trin]

Gawds, this thread has exploded. I was only gone 2 days mangs!! I've gone lots of reading/responding to do. :)

However, to one point - I attempted to use the printed calendar at the beginning of Day during the very heated Land comes before Day thread a while back when the topic was first put forth by Philly as evidence that Day could have at most been a year beyond the outbreak start. Printed calendar at the beginning with pumpkins on it. Hand written calendar at the end on the beach. Highly unlikely that they had future printed calendars on hand when they set up shop.

I believe the counter-argument (which I considered implausible) was that they could've used any old printed calendar to mark off days and not worried too much about how the days lined up with the weekdays, thus they really only needed to find a handful of old calendars in the store of junk in those RVs and stuff to last years.


Dr. Foster says at the beginning of Dawn "for three weeks you have not listened". To me, that implies that the events we see in Dawn are three weeks after the events we see in Night.

Oh, yes, and I had to say this. How do we know that they hadn't been not listening to him for 2 weeks before the outbreak? ROFL!!!

More to come....

[Philly_SWAT]

Gawds, this thread has exploded. I was only gone 2 days mangs!! I've gone lots of reading/responding to do. :)

However, to one point - I attempted to use the printed calendar at the beginning of Day during the very heated Land comes before Day thread a while back when the topic was first put forth by Philly as evidence that Day could have at most been a year beyond the outbreak start. Printed calendar at the beginning with pumpkins on it. Hand written calendar at the end on the beach. Highly unlikely that they had future printed calendars on hand when they set up shop.

I believe the counter-argument (which I considered implausible) was that they could've used any old printed calendar to mark off days and not worried too much about how the days lined up with the weekdays, thus they really only needed to find a handful of old calendars in the store of junk in those RVs and stuff to last years.


Oh, yes, and I had to say this. How do we know that they hadn't been not listening to him for 2 weeks before the outbreak? ROFL!!!

More to come....

I guess since you got more reading to do you will find out eventually, but I cant help but post here that the calendar with the pumpkins at the beginning of Day was in a dream. But dont leave threads like this for 2 days!

[ProfessorChaos]

I guess since you got more reading to do you will find out eventually, but I cant help but post here that the calendar with the pumpkins at the beginning of Day was in a dream. But dont leave threads like this for 2 days!

sorry to bust your bubble philly, but it is also in the movie. just before sarah gives miguel the sedative against his will, he is leaning against a wall and the calendar is clearly visible behind him. it's the same one that's on the wall in the dream at the start of the film.

however, upon examination, it's a rather generic looking calendar: one that has a october-ish picture, the title of the month (no year indicated), and blank squares without any writing. so technically, it could be that they found a bulk supply of blank calendars that they could fill in the dates on....so your theory still holds that it could be a few years into the outbreak.

[Mike70]

You might as well ask me to pretend that I know what a sycamore and a hawthorne are! :lol:(Trees I am thinking?)

:lol:

sycamore

http://www.dnr.mo.gov/greenbldg/wildflowers/images/sycamore-tree.jpg

hawthorne

http://irelandgenealogyprojects.rootsweb.ancestry.com/PiperStones/HawthorneTree.jpg

it's an expression that i use quite often.

[deadpunk]

I have never understood this timeline debate. :annoyed:

While Night and Dawn clearly fit into a timeline, you would be hard pressed to decide which came first between Day and Land. My personal opinion is that they were presented in the order they took place in, but that Land throws you for a loop because, like Episodes I, II, & III of Star Wars, it got the budget it deserved, which Day clearly didn't.

You want a real discrepancy? Look at the vehicles from Night and then look at Dead Reckoning... really? We've had to suffer the LD that long and still managed to make those kinds of advancements?

Yeesh.

[sandrock74]

I have never understood this timeline debate. :annoyed:

While Night and Dawn clearly fit into a timeline, you would be hard pressed to decide which came first between Day and Land. My personal opinion is that they were presented in the order they took place in, but that Land throws you for a loop because, like Episodes I, II, & III of Star Wars, it got the budget it deserved, which Day clearly didn't.

You want a real discrepancy? Look at the vehicles from Night and then look at Dead Reckoning... really? We've had to suffer the LD that long and still managed to make those kinds of advancements?

Yeesh.

I guess it was a good thing that in Night, Ben didn't run into the Dead Reckoning in the diners parking lot! If he had a hard time with the truck, he would've thought the DR was from Mars!

[MoonSylver]

:lol:

sycamore

http://www.dnr.mo.gov/greenbldg/wildflowers/images/sycamore-tree.jpg

hawthorne

http://irelandgenealogyprojects.rootsweb.ancestry.com/PiperStones/HawthorneTree.jpg

it's an expression that i use quite often.

The Larch...
http://www.flowerphotographer.net/roth/attributes/bigimages/golden%20larch.jpg
...The Larch...The...Larch...
http://i193.photobucket.com/albums/z115/zehnkatzen/Blog%20Illustrations/MichaelPALIN1.jpg

;):lol:

[Trin]

You dont think that right now in real life there are people in positions of authority that look down at their underlings with disdain?
The question isn't whether those people exist, it's whether Kaufman was one of them. I think the answer to that is NO given how quick he was to eliminate people. So could he have had Cholo as an underling who "took out his garbage" prior to the outbreak? It's possible. But I believe it unlikely.


Here is where we have a huge difference in our opinions. In my opinion, using real life as a basis for assumption, I assume that there is NO WAY IN HELL that a scant 3 years after the worst situation in the history of the world that people would have pulled together, worked in tandam, etc. to bring about a semi-utopia where they live in relative harmony and can forget all about the zombie threat right outside the city walls. I could see how close to the start of the outbreak people could have worked and/or lucked there way into a good situation, but not come back from a destroyed world to having a functioning city in 3 years.
I was commenting on their mental attitudes as having regrouped, as evidenced by their behaviors and demeanor, and I maintain that those things could only be true in a 3+ year situation. I never said they came back from a destroyed world or commented in any way on how their city evolved to where it was.

That said, from a practical standpoint you have to acknowledge that the city was functioning in ways no normal city would function pre-outbreak, and that wasn't just something they fell into as civilation declined. Dead Reckoning had to be built. The electric fences had to be erected and reliable power established. Social heirarchy established under Kaufman's leadership. Food and medicine rationing had to be established. Military/police control had to be established. Organization of the scavenger groups. And control exerted over them since they weren't offered any incentive to do the dirty work.

Many of the things you're saying you don't believe could have been done in a scant 3 years you are asserting either survived from the previous civilization or somehow miraculously were accomplished in a few months.


Again, I think you WAY overestimate how long in would take to re-introduce concepts of money and economy successfully in a post-outbreak world. I would take DECADES, if no longer, for this type of re-introduction to take place, IMO.
And you overestimate the resiliency of money in a crisis of that magnitude. There's no way the system of currency marches on when basic survival is in question. Guns, ammo, food, water, medicince become the basis of barter almost immediately in that situation. Government falls and with it the backing of money. In order for currency to exist in their society Kaufman would have HAD to re-establish it.

Would that take decades? No, I don't think so. This is where the argument for people wanting the familiar has merit. People would WANT money to have tangible value again. And if Kaufman steps up and says, "I will honor your money," and he can back that up by exchanging goods and services for cash, and paying wages for jobs, people would flock to that. In fact, we know that's partly responsible for how he came to power. He's the one who paid for the guards. He's the one who spent money putting the entertainment in place.


Zombies "pretty much dont come around here anymore" I thought was only in reference to that area of electrified fence, not that they were so few and far between that they were all but extinct.
You literally have two guys standing guard outside the protected area, completely at ease outside the fences, shooting guns off in the dark, and they were SURPRISED to see a zombie. You have a kid on the docks on a skateboard wearing headphones across the river from the protected city. Wake up man!! There were no zombies!! The zombies were off holding hands taking strolls down to the park to listen to the zombie band playing.

Take that general attitude - two guys outside the protected area surprised to even see a zombie - and you have all the evidence you need for Land to be 3+ years post-outbreak. That lax, comfortable, routine acceptance of their situation is seen throughout the movie. Over and over again by everyone. And the only way it happens is if the people had been living post-outbreak a long, long, long time.

[deadpunk]

You literally have two guys standing guard outside the protected area, completely at ease outside the fences, shooting guns off in the dark, and they were SURPRISED to see a zombie. You have a kid on the docks on a skateboard wearing headphones across the river from the protected city. Wake up man!! There were no zombies!! The zombies were off holding hands taking strolls down to the park to listen to the zombie band playing.

Take that general attitude - two guys outside the protected area surprised to even see a zombie - and you have all the evidence you need for Land to be 3+ years post-outbreak. That lax, comfortable, routine acceptance of their situation is seen throughout the movie. Over and over again by everyone. And the only way it happens is if the people had been living post-outbreak a long, long, long time.

This is perhaps the most well thought out argument in this entire debate.

:D

[Philly_SWAT]

The question isn't whether those people exist, it's whether Kaufman was one of them. I think the answer to that is NO given how quick he was to eliminate people. So could he have had Cholo as an underling who "took out his garbage" prior to the outbreak? It's possible. But I believe it unlikely.So, you think that Kaufman was quick to "eliminate people" prior to the outbreak? Highly unlikely. And he would need people to do his dirty work pre-outbreak as well, assuming that he wasnt a model citizen pre and became an ass post. And pre, Cholo would be in no position to try to edge in on Kaufmans turf, hence, less need to "eliminate him".



I was commenting on their mental attitudes as having regrouped, as evidenced by their behaviors and demeanor, and I maintain that those things could only be true in a 3+ year situation. I never said they came back from a destroyed world or commented in any way on how their city evolved to where it was.No you didnt say that, but if the world was more or less destroyed, by your own arguments you are saying they did in fact come back, to have all these miraculous accomplishments in the Green, as you state below.





That said, from a practical standpoint you have to acknowledge that the city was functioning in ways no normal city would function pre-outbreak, and that wasn't just something they fell into as civilation declined. Dead Reckoning had to be built. The electric fences had to be erected and reliable power established. Social heirarchy established under Kaufman's leadership. Food and medicine rationing had to be established. Military/police control had to be established. Organization of the scavenger groups. And control exerted over them since they weren't offered any incentive to do the dirty work.
There are several very long threads about this very topic in the past. Suffice it to say now, if the area of "the Green" had been overrun with zeds, it would have been a MASSIVE undertaking to clear out all the zeds, re-establish power, do all the things you mention. It would have been much easier to choose an already empty land area. Look at the problems they had in Dawn just clearing out/securing the mall. You dont think a whole major downtown area would be much more difficult? It only makes sense that the Green was HELD, not re-taken. All the things you mention would be much easier to accomplish if the area was held.



Many of the things you're saying you don't believe could have been done in a scant 3 years you are asserting either survived from the previous civilization or somehow miraculously were accomplished in a few months.Yes, I am saying the basic premise survived the "previous" civilization, if you want to call a few months ago "previous" and not "same".



And you overestimate the resiliency of money in a crisis of that magnitude. There's no way the system of currency marches on when basic survival is in question. Guns, ammo, food, water, medicince become the basis of barter almost immediately in that situation. Government falls and with it the backing of money. In order for currency to exist in their society Kaufman would have HAD to re-establish it.

Would that take decades? No, I don't think so. This is where the
argument for people wanting the familiar has merit. People would WANT money to have tangible value again. And if Kaufman steps up and says, "I will honor your money," and he can back that up by exchanging goods and services for cash, and paying wages for jobs, people would flock to that. In fact, we know that's partly responsible for how he came to power. He's the one who paid for the guards. He's the one who spent money putting the entertainment in place.
The history of money, monetary policy, etc. would be quite a lengthy one in regards to real life, much less after the fall of civilization to a zombie menace and then re-establishing money as a means of exchange after re-establishing a society that had fallen to a zombie menace. Yes, people would WANT money to have a tangible value, because they could go into the deadlands and just get it from banks (like gold miners in the old days). But there is no way by 'magic' that Kaufman could make people in a desparate situation think that pieces of paper were valuable when the majority of people in the safe zone were living on the streets with no meds for their kids, and all the money in the world (literally) wouldnt get them any meds from the power elite.

You are correct that "There's no way the system of currency marches on when basic survival is in question." I agree wholeheartedly. I also say that there is NO WAY a system of currency comes into being over a relatively short amount of time (3 years). That is not the way money works. So how do I agree with both things? That the Green was HELD, and holdover from pre-outbreak life was still relevant there, unlike most everywhere else in the world. That is why the concept of "money" still works, they are barely removed from normal life.




You literally have two guys standing guard outside the protected area, completely at ease outside the fences, shooting guns off in the dark, and they were SURPRISED to see a zombie. You have a kid on the docks on a skateboard wearing headphones across the river from the protected city. Wake up man!! There were no zombies!! The zombies were off holding hands taking strolls down to the park to listen to the zombie band playing.
I think most people agree that the dude on the skateboard was one of the stupidest characters we have seen in any GAR movie, if not THE stupidest. And we saw what happened to him, as well as the two guys completely at ease...they ALL THREE got killed by zombies!! I am not sure that lends any credence to either of our time arguments, just to the idea that it is dumb to let your guard down when there may be zombies afoot.



Take that general attitude - two guys outside the protected area surprised to even see a zombie - and you have all the evidence you need for Land to be 3+ years post-outbreak. That lax, comfortable, routine acceptance of their situation is seen throughout the movie. Over and over again by everyone. And the only way it happens is if the people had been living post-outbreak a long, long, long time.
Or, you have all the evidence you need that it is so close to pre-outbreak times, that not a lot of zeds have shown up there yet. That is why the military/police types are so comfortable..they havent really been challenged much yet. And that happens only if people had been living post-outbreak a short, short, short time.

[Trin]

Or, you have all the evidence you need that it is so close to pre-outbreak times, that not a lot of zeds have shown up there yet. That is why the military/police types are so comfortable..they havent really been challenged much yet. And that happens only if people had been living post-outbreak a short, short, short time.
Yeah, I'm pretty sure that is the most ridiculous thing I've heard contended about Land. But it does bring all your arguments into focus.

[deadpunk]

Or, you have all the evidence you need that it is so close to pre-outbreak times, that not a lot of zeds have shown up there yet. That is why the military/police types are so comfortable..they havent really been challenged much yet. And that happens only if people had been living post-outbreak a short, short, short time.

That really makes little sense, Philly. A short, short, short time after the initial outbreak, people would be in a state of panic. Even if they weren't in an area where the LD were very active and not being challenged.

Look at the state of panic this country is in at the moment over H1N1. The reality is that most people have zero chance of being exposed to the Swine Flu, yet people are people and they panic regardless.

At the beginning of a zombie outbreak, people would be people and they would lose their ever lovin' minds. You can bet those guys would be so high strung, they'd shoot each other for farting too loud while on guard duty.

Not to mention, that early into an outbreak, there is no way we're going to see people comfortable enough to be doing the things that they were doing in the club scene. That entire scene alone implies that the LD have been around for quite some time and everyone views them as an annoyance, little more.

[sandrock74]

At the beginning of a zombie outbreak, people would be people and they would lose their ever lovin' minds. You can bet those guys would be so high strung, they'd shoot each other for farting too loud while on guard duty.

Not to mention, that early into an outbreak, there is no way we're going to see people comfortable enough to be doing the things that they were doing in the club scene. That entire scene alone implies that the LD have been around for quite some time and everyone views them as an annoyance, little more.

I agree. People won't be relaxed at the beginning of the zombie threat...they won't be relaxed until much later. By then, they've adapted to the ever present threat; those who couldn't are already dead.

[Philly_SWAT]

Originally Posted by Trin
Take that general attitude - two guys outside the protected area surprised to even see a zombie - and you have all the evidence you need for Land to be 3+ years post-outbreak. That lax, comfortable, routine acceptance of their situation is seen throughout the movie. Over and over again by everyone. And the only way it happens is if the people had been living post-outbreak a long, long, long time.


Originally Posted by Philly_SWAT
Or, you have all the evidence you need that it is so close to pre-outbreak times, that not a lot of zeds have shown up there yet. That is why the military/police types are so comfortable..they havent really been challenged much yet. And that happens only if people had been living post-outbreak a short, short, short time.

This was my initial post, which was a direct reference to Trin's post above. I thought it was obvious due to the incredible similar wording that I was being a smart-ass...not in my belief that Day takes place after Land, but in using the phrase "short, short, short time", was a direct smart ass remark toward his long, long, long time statement. In any event, uses of words such as LONG and SHORT, which are obviously open to interpretation, do not lend themselves to precise arguments such as these.


Yeah, I'm pretty sure that is the most ridiculous thing I've heard contended about Land. But it does bring all your arguments into focus.
Ridiculous why? You may 100% disagree with the point, but I dont think it is some incredible far fetched idea.


That really makes little sense, Philly. A short, short, short time after the initial outbreak, people would be in a state of panic. Even if they weren't in an area where the LD were very active and not being challenged.

Look at the state of panic this country is in at the moment over H1N1. The reality is that most people have zero chance of being exposed to the Swine Flu, yet people are people and they panic regardless.

At the beginning of a zombie outbreak, people would be people and they would lose their ever lovin' minds. You can bet those guys would be so high strung, they'd shoot each other for farting too loud while on guard duty.

Not to mention, that early into an outbreak, there is no way we're going to see people comfortable enough to be doing the things that they were doing in the club scene. That entire scene alone implies that the LD have been around for quite some time and everyone views them as an annoyance, little more.
I would go as far as to say that anyone that was ALIVE ON EARTH pre-outbreak would be forever freaked out post-outbreak for as long as they live. Sure, they would adapt somewhat as time goes by, but life as they knew it would be changed for the worse forever. When you go from driving your Mustang to and from work to work in a nice safe air conditioned office, buying all the fresh food you want from a variety of stores and restaurants, to having to watch your back at all times because a zombie attack may happen, you have to forage for food, or....gasp....grow your own.....life would suck, and you would be afraid. If you were in a zone that had NEVER FALLEN (which is my contention for the Green) you would be much more likely to have a non-chalant attitude about the whole thing. I can not believe that a grizzled vetern of zombie wars, who had seen friends torn apart limb from limb by zeds, that had seen women and children killed, body parts strown across the countryside for years on end, that these veterns would be all happy-go-lucky when dealing with zeds inside a safe perimeter. Their "attitudes and demeanor" that was mentioned earlier, could only be attributed to the fact that they had little reason to be bent out of shape. Had they seen even ONE fellow soldier ripped apart, I doubt their attitudes would be so cavalier.




I agree. People won't be relaxed at the beginning of the zombie threat...they won't be relaxed until much later. By then, they've adapted to the ever present threat; those who couldn't are already dead.
People would not be relaxed on DAY ONE or anything, but human beings are generally kind of lazy, and I think if immediate danger of attack was all but eliminated, they would easily relax in a shorter time period than you may think if they never had to deal with....'outside of safe zone' conditions.

[deadpunk]

I would go as far as to say that anyone that was ALIVE ON EARTH pre-outbreak would be forever freaked out post-outbreak for as long as they live. Sure, they would adapt somewhat as time goes by, but life as they knew it would be changed for the worse forever. When you go from driving your Mustang to and from work to work in a nice safe air conditioned office, buying all the fresh food you want from a variety of stores and restaurants, to having to watch your back at all times because a zombie attack may happen, you have to forage for food, or....gasp....grow your own.....life would suck, and you would be afraid. If you were in a zone that had NEVER FALLEN (which is my contention for the Green) you would be much more likely to have a non-chalant attitude about the whole thing. I can not believe that a grizzled vetern of zombie wars, who had seen friends torn apart limb from limb by zeds, that had seen women and children killed, body parts strown across the countryside for years on end, that these veterns would be all happy-go-lucky when dealing with zeds inside a safe perimeter. Their "attitudes and demeanor" that was mentioned earlier, could only be attributed to the fact that they had little reason to be bent out of shape. Had they seen even ONE fellow soldier ripped apart, I doubt their attitudes would be so cavalier.




People would not be relaxed on DAY ONE or anything, but human beings are generally kind of lazy, and I think if immediate danger of attack was all but eliminated, they would easily relax in a shorter time period than you may think if they never had to deal with....'outside of safe zone' conditions.

I'm not sure I follow your logic... humans could or could not adapt to the concept of the Living Dead as a constant threat? You seem to be straddling a fine line between yes and no.

[Philly_SWAT]

I'm not sure I follow your logic... humans could or could not adapt to the concept of the Living Dead as a constant threat? You seem to be straddling a fine line between yes and no.

They could. The longer you were into the threat, the less likely you are to be all happy-go-lucky and non-chalant. A non-chalant attitude would be more likely to last longer for a person who was never in grave danger to begin with than for one who has been constantly under immediate threat.

[deadpunk]

The longer you were into the threat, the less likely you are to be all happy-go-lucky and non-chalant. A non-chalant attitude would be more likely to last longer for a person who was never in grave danger to begin with than for one who has been constantly under immediate threat.

I'm sorry, but I tend to have an opposite view. I feel that those who had been traumatized would be quick to recover and go about living in the status quo provided a place like the Green existed.

I feel that those who never had to deal with the shamblers on a regular basis would live in a state of constant paranoia. Imagine living in the Green and not knowing if the guy next to you at the grocery store isn't just going to drop over dead from a heart attack... The threat would always exist, even in a secure location.

In order for people to be non-chalant at all, regardless of location, they would have had to have been contending with zombies for an extensive period of time. :)

[Andy]

I Agree with DP, when a zombie apocolypse hits, we almost always see a state of panic in every Z movie, it would be the natural reaction for people.

If you have dealt with zombs for a while, and got yourself a fairly secure location, then you are going to become complacent in your dealing with the undead.

[Philly_SWAT]

I'm sorry, but I tend to have an opposite view. I feel that those who had been traumatized would be quick to recover and go about living in the status quo provided a place like the Green existed.

I feel that those who never had to deal with the shamblers on a regular basis would live in a state of constant paranoia. Imagine living in the Green and not knowing if the guy next to you at the grocery store isn't just going to drop over dead from a heart attack... The threat would always exist, even in a secure location.

In order for people to be non-chalant at all, regardless of location, they would have had to have been contending with zombies for an extensive period of time. :)


I Agree with DP, when a zombie apocolypse hits, we almost always see a state of panic in every Z movie, it would be the natural reaction for people.

If you have dealt with zombs for a while, and got yourself a fairly secure location, then you are going to become complacent in your dealing with the undead.
Well, look at real life for a second. Here is the United States, we have not had foreign armies marching thru out streets since the 1770's (unless you want to count the civil war somehow as "foreign" armies, then make that the 1860's). No one alive in the US today has seen armies on our land. We know it has happened in the past, but we have not had to deal with it. Do we live "in a constant state of paranoia", or do we act all happy-go-lucky and non-chalant? Look at the Middle East in real life. There has been constant battles over there for centuries. Do they act all happy-go-lucky and non-chalant, or do they live in a constant state of paranoia? Your answers to those questions should shed a light on which of our two scenarios of behavior are more likely.

[deadpunk]

Well, look at real life for a second. Here is the United States, we have not had foreign armies marching thru out streets since the 1770's (unless you want to count the civil war somehow as "foreign" armies, then make that the 1860's). No one alive in the US today has seen armies on our land. We know it has happened in the past, but we have not had to deal with it. Do we live "in a constant state of paranoia", or do we act all happy-go-lucky and non-chalant? Look at the Middle East in real life. There has been constant battles over there for centuries. Do they act all happy-go-lucky and non-chalant, or do they live in a constant state of paranoia? Your answers to those questions should shed a light on which of our two scenarios of behavior are more likely.

You're kind of comparing apples to oranges though.

You really can't dictate the behavior of the survivors in Land by comparing it to any real life scenario. Even the deployment of troops on US soil is something that can be concieved of by a rational mind. The raising of the dead is such a unique event that there is nothing that it can be compared to.

If you want a human situation that you can compare this to, you would be further off comparing it to this one: throw a child in his bed, turn off all the lights, and then tell him the Boogeyman is real. Let me know how quick the kid goes to sleep.

[Philly_SWAT]

You're kind of comparing apples to oranges though.

You really can't dictate the behavior of the survivors in Land by comparing it to any real life scenario. Even the deployment of troops on US soil is something that can be concieved of by a rational mind. The raising of the dead is such a unique event that there is nothing that it can be compared to.

If you want a human situation that you can compare this to, you would be further off comparing it to this one: throw a child in his bed, turn off all the lights, and then tell him the Boogeyman is real. Let me know how quick the kid goes to sleep.Well, IF he believed you, he may in fact have trouble sleeping the first night, maybe for a few nights, which fits right in with my previous point that...

People would not be relaxed on DAY ONE or anything
But as the days went by, and the kid was NEVER attacked by the boogeyman, and never SAW the boogeyman, then I think he would be able to sleep fine after a very short while.

[Trin]

Ridiculous why? You may 100% disagree with the point, but I dont think it is some incredible far fetched idea.
If you are contending that the survivors in Land had yet to face any serious zombie threat then I consider the idea far fetched.

You are expecting us to believe that the residents of the city allowed themselves to be forced into a shanty town so Kaufman could have a nice quiet area around his shopping and dining mecca. How did he become ruler? With his paid for security force? And why didn't the police or military stop him? And how did he convince the scavengers (who were highly experienced operating in the zombie wasteland) to hand over all their spoils to him? And why did Mulligan have a hard time convincing people to rise against Kaufman? Assumedly, these were all people who were recently screwed by Kaufman, having been displaced from their homes and possessions. And we know that a small untrained group of unarmed stenches could overthrow Kaufman. And the people also never tried to leave? And there were no cars around for them to do so? And no one had guns? They just handed them over to Mr. K in the first couple weeks ("take it out of my cold dead hands" comes to mind). And do we accept that this "ruler" could force women into prostitution, as he did Slack? So civil rights and morality died in the first few weeks? And they just continued to live isolated and without threat even as Dead Reckoning rolls through town after town and never brought back a zombie horde? And all the while money continued to work just fine.

And again, the zombies. Earlier in the outbreak would mean more zombies, not less. Zombie poplulations would be the highest concentrated in high population areas, like cities, so throw up all the electric fences and block all the bridges you want, in the early days you're not escaping the problem by hiding from it.

Regarding attitudes and demeanor - Cholo and Riley saw a kid bitten and blow his own head off. Cholo was like "wha-eva" and Riley was sympathetic but business-like. They both shook it off by the time they were back at the motorpool. Riley was more pissed at Cholo's attitude than upset over the death. And no one else even reacted. At the penthouse Cholo saw the guy suicide and beat his head in. The wife and son were horrified but Cholo was not. And we know Riley witnessed his brother bitten and turned. These people were not innocents just seeing it all for the first time.

I'm sorry man, there's just too much contradicting that theory.

I think it's less far fetched to contend that they were 10 years post-outbreak. That explains a lot more.
- They'd whittled away the zombies to the point that they really aren't a threat in the immediate area any longer. "They don't much come around anymore," makes a ton of sense.
- The people were still living under the fear and horror of the early outbreak when zombies were prevalent outside. They had become complacent under Kaufman's rule. So much so that they never noticed that the outside world is not so dangerous anymore ("I see those walls as a prison"). Also explains why Mulligan gets no support.
- And look at the new recruits. The kid with Cholo and the girl being introduced to the military at the fences. They both seemed like young people who were getting their first job.
- The military and guards had been years since facing zombies, thus they were relaxed and out of practice. The defenses were minimal and lax, which explains how Big D gets in so easily.
- The scavengers were the experts on zombie killing because they were the only ones still facing the threat week by week.
- No one even tries to look for survivors or contact other cities. No radios or helicopters or anything were in use.

I think that makes a lot more sense while leaving far fewer holes.

[clanglee]

Or, you have all the evidence you need that it is so close to pre-outbreak times, that not a lot of zeds have shown up there yet. That is why the military/police types are so comfortable..they havent really been challenged much yet. And that happens only if people had been living post-outbreak a short, short, short time.

I think that you can tell by the emaciated state of many zombies in the movie, that this is not the case. There are zombies in Land that are rail thin and almost unable to move. Like the one that bit Cholo. It would take a long while to get to that state I would think. They look almost mumified.

[Suicycho]

Trying to apply rational logic to Land is like trying to piss into the wind. It shouldn't be done.

Land is much easier to understand when you see everything as the allegory its supposed to be. It is not a zombie movie. It is GAR's far left political beliefs and prejudices using zombies, big daddy, the Green, Kaufman, Cholo, Riley, the dead reckoning, sky flowers etc. as political allegory.