For those of you who **have seen** Survival of the Dead - - - opinion poll!

[MinionZombie]

Have you seen Survival of the Dead? If so, step right up and give your opinion of it in this public poll.

I personally voted "Loved It".

[kidgloves]

Disappointed. Very
Too many scenes with zombies randomly walking around corners only to be dispatched for the sake of the setup.
Incoherent story.
Far too many scenes didn't link and completely threw out the flow of the movie and made me go WTF.

On the plus side.
Visually it looked really good.
Soundtrack was well done but was completely out of context in some scenes.
SOME of the acting was above average.

[DjfunkmasterG]

Neither liked it or Hated it.... it was just meh

[Danny]

I liked it, it wasnt great but it was a nice side story sort of thing which made for a nice change of pace to another film about the world falling apart. interesting to see where george might be headed in future movies after some bits i noticed in this one.

[ShadowMan]

Well, I finally saw it. I must say I'm relieved! I really liked it! It was a "different" kind of movie, but it was very enjoyable. It was, however, a little short on zombie attacks and gore, but the story was good...and not silly like I thought it would be with those two Irish families and all.

[clanglee]

So noone hated it yet? Where is Andy's vote? :D

[Ghost Of War]

Watched it last night, and I liked it. Almost loved it, but a few things bugged me, like when Tomboy gets captured after killing the other soldier, how the fuck did she not see the big horse and 2 guys stood right next to her? and one or two of the CGI kills looked too CGI. Other than that, it was pretty solid, very funny in parts, and on the whole quite enjoyable. Out of the newer GAR films, I'd say I like this one the best, followed by Diary, and lastly Land. 7/10.

Oh yeah, someone in the other thread said that it looked like a pilot for a series. I got that feeling at the end of the movie, and would be quite happy if it was followed up that way.

[Russian DeadMan]

Liked it. Could easily love it, but final showdown was way too awkward. :)
And some moments were absolutely inappropriate. For example, masturbating girl in the beginning.
Loved all that great Loony Tunes style gags, though.:D

[MinionZombie]

haha, interesting that you mention the chick rubbing one out - it's so random and unexpected, but I loved the moment anyway. :D Like, it was so unexpected and out-there that it worked, you know?

So, thus far, if we split the "meh" votes either way, we've got 2 people who are anti-Survival, and 14 people who are pro-Survival.

I still laugh my ass off at "don't look at me, start shootin' tha bastards!" - I loved that line when I first heard it in that earliest reel of the flick, and I still love it now. Just thinking about that line makes me chuckle. :D

[DjfunkmasterG]

I thought the chick rubbin one out was a bit out of place, but I wouldn't mind rubbing one out for her. She was cute even if she was a lesbo. :D


Otherwise the movie was meh

[DrSiN]

My problem with that scene is it was just to show she was a "badass". It was pointless. But yea she was pretty hot.

[Danny]

if where posting plot points can we all agree the two zombies at the end just pulling the trigger on empty guns was a great ending shot?

[Ghost Of War]

if where posting plot points can we all agree the two zombies at the end just pulling the trigger on empty guns was a great ending shot?

I concur.

[MinionZombie]

I concur.
Same here. Loved that shot, and the notion as well ... was a nice way to sum up the futility of their clan war. :cool:

[bassman]

Liked it. Could've been better, but definitely could have been worse....

[Monrozombi]

I loved it, but not for obvious reasons.

I felt George had more of himself in this and yeah, even if some of the humor was placed, his overt messages on society were toned down greatly from DiOTD.

I didn't mind the CGI as it used when needed is useful. It was a very fast paced shoot and he just didn't have all the time or money to do it. Disagree if you want but he didn't over use it and I felt there was just enough.

Some of the acting could have been better and some of the dialogue could have been tweeted but I felt it was an overall solid effort compared to some of the films I read reviews about.

[MinionZombie]

Interesting that there's not been a single person who has "hated it"...

[Rancid Carcass]

Interesting that there's not been a single person who has "hated it"...

And yet there are several threads not a million miles from this one that wouldn't be out of place on a 'IhateGreorgeRomeroszombiemovies.com' forum. Maybe people are too busy being shocked and appalled to vote... :lol:

[mista_mo]

I haven't seen it but I voted "Loved it".

[Danny]

Interesting that there's not been a single person who has "hated it"...

vampires vs zombies dude.

you cant hate any zombie film after that one.

[MinionZombie]

vampires vs zombies dude.

you cant hate any zombie film after that one.
Have you not witnessed the sheer horror that was the Land VS Yawn04 threads?

[Danny]

Have you not witnessed the sheer horror that was the Land VS Yawn04 threads?

such an argument is irrelevant, vampires vs zombies is like the borg of zombie films, you cant NOT hate it. resistance is futile. land and dawn 04 are fucking masterpieces of cinema compared to vampires vs fucking zombies!

[SymphonicX]

I voted "liked it".

I watched it again yesterday and yeah there are a few dodgy moments and a couple of things I just don't get....

like (get ready for spoilers) - O'Flynn killing his only surviving daughter at the end to prove a point? That got me...only reasoning I can come to was that he also saw the zombie twin take a bite out of the horse and killed his daughter to prevent the truth getting out...but really that was bizarre and unrealistic...totally didn't make sense...

Also the rednecks, with our group of protagonists shooting them first, felt like they were the bad guys and the rednecks were quite innocent in that situation really...so they stole the kid's stuff? Doesn't make me feel better that they were arbitrarily killed for nothing...

Did Muldoon's dead wife make that food??!?

Iphone advertising section = no.

the CGI gore = no...ESPECIALLY that unnecessary scene of the heads on sticks that somehow could use vocal chords that they no longer possess. And really, they ALL looked badly composited...awful. Just plain awful. I could have done better in After Effects myself.

And finally, some of the acting was just barely acceptable. Nothing evil like in Diary, which was made unwatchable by a bad script and terrible delivery, but some moments you could just tell were pulled off by failed or failing third rate extras who managed to get a starring role. Even Alan Van Sprang was pretty wooden in places, ie where he needed to show emotion.

Other than that I really enjoyed it. Some great moments that were funny and even a couple made me jump...some nice creepy moments too like the group discovering the dead chained up on the island...

[ChokeOnEm]

like (get ready for spoilers) - O'Flynn killing his only surviving daughter at the end to prove a point? That got me...only reasoning I can come to was that he also saw the zombie twin take a bite out of the horse and killed his daughter to prevent the truth getting out...but really that was bizarre and unrealistic...totally didn't make sense....


I think ole George is playing with us a bit here....
Up until that point, O'Flynn is ostensibly the good guy we're rooting for against Muldoon, the film's black hat.
However, in offing his own kin, we see that Patrick is just as stubborn, and just as fatally tied to his own sense of pride as the film's chief villain.
At least that's how I saw it.
I thought it was a neat little twist.

Your other obsverations are also spot on.
I liked it too, but I keep finding myself thinking of ways the movie that could have been improved - never a good sign.
With a little more TLC toward the script, this could have easily bested "Land" I think.

[darth los]

That's exactly why the terms good/evil are so subjective.

It all depends on your point of view.

:cool:

[MinionZombie]

O'Flynn is clearly so doggedly one-tracked in his approach to the problem - as shown at the start of the film - that he'll set aside his personal emotions for his daughter to kill her after she's been bitten.

Likewise, Muldoon is so doggedly one-tracked in his approach to the problem.

I liked that whole aspect of the film, and I loved how it played out at the end - the sense of absolute, 100% futility.

[Trin]

Interesting that there's not been a single person who has "hated it"...
I haven't seen it yet (soon) but I'll work on hating it. :D

[dracenstein]

Voted Like it, I quite enjoyed it, but disagreed with the horse eating scene at the end - and the horse riding zombie!

I thought O'Flynn killed his daughter to stop her telling them her sister bit the horse, which would prove that Muldoon was right.

EDIT: Remembered to add this bit a bit late.

Anybody think that the imposter cops from Dawn might end up on this island?

I would like to think so...

[Danny]

Voted Like it, I quite enjoyed it, but disagreed with the horse eating scene at the end - and the horse riding zombie!

I thought O'Flynn killed his daughter to stop her telling them her sister bit the horse, which would prove that Muldoon was right.

He killed her as part of a nod to the start with the "and what about me? if i were bit would you shoot me da?" line, as for zombies eating other stuff in the diary universe then cool, makes for a nice more agreeable twist to the mythos. Zombies that eat anything like a goddamn wave over a town. no birds. no pets. no people. everything picked clean.:|

[SymphonicX]

would love to see a zombie eat a bird...how that tramp got a pigeon in Shaun of the Dead I'll never figure out...

[Mike70]

...how that tramp got a pigeon in Shaun of the Dead I'll never figure out...

he was an extra in karate kid.

http://www.wearyourbeer.com/images/Karate_Kid_Sweep_Leg_Black_Shirt.jpg

as for "survival": i hated it. the "film" is a complete and total piece of junk for a multitude of reasons that i've already laid out in other threads.

[SymphonicX]

wtf mike you were banned!??!?

[MinionZombie]

wtf mike you were banned!??!?
April Fool's playing it's dirty tricks, lol. Just for clarification for anyone who sees this after 1st April.

Well, there we have it, Mike's our first "hated it" voter on the poll. Clearly though, the good folks of HPOTD are mostly in favour of the flick. 21 vs 4 with 6 people neither here nor there.

[SymphonicX]

in that case...LOL@leg sweep

[Yojimbo]

Voted "loved it" though apparently I am in the minority.

I love a good zombie film and while they are rare this was a decent zombie film. Has a lot of fun watching "Survival" - some weak acting & bad effects notwithstanding.
Yes there were issues in this film, but in my view they were minor and forgivable and some a figment of budget more than a result of bad direction.

Let's face it, DOTD 78, is considered to be by many to be the gold standard of zombie films and even so it too, like Survival, has some flawed acting, fx that did not work, and some flawed logic. I grok that there are those to whom this film will fall short of their high standards and I can respect that- but I for one really enjoyed Survival. Them again I am one of those who, unlike many, did not mind Diary, so I don't mind if I am in the minority here.

"romero is finished" I have heard some proclaim, but this is a view that I do not suscribe to andviewing Survival has not changed my mind. I say that GAR has done a decent job here and would pay high theater ticket prices to see Survival on the big screen if given the opportunity.

[clanglee]

. I say that GAR has done a decent job here and would pay high theater ticket prices to see Survival on the big screen if given the opportunity.

Agreed!!!

[TERROR]

Have to say it wasn't a par on the older ones but it kicked the ass of diary and land.George back to form?

[MinionZombie]

Minority? "Loved It" is second only to "Liked It" ... I think that's a pretty clear signal from the HPOTD community - Survival gets a :thumbsup:

[SymphonicX]

its definitely rewatchable, discussable and in places very enjoyable.

I really have grown to love the guy who plays O'Flynn...especially his last moments in the film, great character and very funny....particularly like the way he speaks to his daughter and the sense of coldness you get that pervades the family...

[MinionZombie]

Hell yeah, I really dug O'Flynn's character. He's got some great lines ("Don't look at me, start shootin' tha bastards!" still cracks me up), and he's an interesting character because of his dogged one-tracked-mindedness in dealing with the zombie problem. Plus he's a tricksy bugger, like at the docks.

It was also interesting when he discovered the bodies of all the people he'd sent to the island, in exchange for all their possessions.

[Yojimbo]

Third viewing of Survival, and I find myself growing fonder of this installment with each viewing. Still love it and it now has surpassed both Diary and Land on my list of favorites. That being said, I have found myself a little more annoyed all the same by that flare gun and extinguisher gag which are like having a hemmoroidal flareup on a beautiful day. But little annoyances like that are inevitable - even existing in DOTD - and by themselves do not ruin the film for me.

---------- Post added at 12:40 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:31 PM ----------


Hell yeah, I really dug O'Flynn's character. He's got some great lines ("Don't look at me, start shootin' tha bastards!" still cracks me up), and he's an interesting character because of his dogged one-tracked-mindedness in dealing with the zombie problem. Plus he's a tricksy bugger, like at the docks.

It was also interesting when he discovered the bodies of all the people he'd sent to the island, in exchange for all their possessions.

O'Flynn character was hilarious- total agreement.

The character that really annoys me is that waif boy who is tagging along. The core story really does not need the character and I find his screen presence irritating. Even my Wife commented that she experiences an overwhelming urge to punch that kid in the nose evertime he I'd onscreen. Not saying that the actor was bad or anything, mind you, but he was not essential to the story line.

[Mr.G]

I can't wait to see this myself. I'm growing envious of all of you who have seen it. I won't watch it illegally so I'm stuck waiting for the DVD.

[Cartma7546]

*spoilers below...maybe*



I'll be honest i watched it a few days ago and it was a good movie, not great, but more entertaining then Diary for sure. I like Gar kept the sarge in the story and i really would hate it if the story has him going to the green and him changing his name to Brubaker as a result of internet fame that was mentioned in this one. Only because we all know his fate and i personally like the character. One major point that bugged the hell out of me were some of the novelty kills. In dawn there was the machete, day the power drill, shovel and so on, and in land there was the charlie kill on the priest in the garage...you know the one.

Now in diary there were a few that made me grab the bridge of my nose and sigh. One being the Amish guy killing himself and the other being the defibrillator in the hospital. These I could let pass but only by a little,

In survival there is the flare gun and the fire extinguisher.
Am i the only one bothered by these as them being a little too silly?

[EvilNed]

Spoilers

Just saw it, and I have to say I really enjoyed it. It was kinda different from anything we've seen so far in the Dead films, and I liked it. I have gripes. For instance the pacing in the end shoot-out is just way off. And come on, a zedhead riding a horse? And a zedhead eating a horse? I don't buy it.

[Trin]

Now in diary there were a few that made me grab the bridge of my nose and sigh. One being the Amish guy killing himself and the other being the defibrillator in the hospital. These I could let pass but only by a little,

In survival there is the flare gun and the fire extinguisher.
Am i the only one bothered by these as them being a little too silly?
The gag stuff is stupid and I'm sick of it. Like the Diary ones you mentioned (don't forget Acid Face) the Survival ones were not believable and diffused any seriousness of the movie. The ones in the classic trilogy made sense at least. Even the Charlie Priest kill was within the bounds of plausible. The Diary and Survival stuff is encroaching on B-movie territory. Do we get Linnea Quigley for the next one?

[bassman]

And to think some people had big problems with the pie fight in Dawn. If only they knew what was to come.

It's not so much the gags that I dislike, but their execution. Instead of the cheap CGI they could have used clever cuts and angles to make it look great with a puppet. Just look at Dr Tongue or the skinny zombies in Land. They looked great and something similar could have been achieved for the gags in Survival.

Instead, the person who once said he hated CGI relied on it to the point of it being laughable in the wrong way.:annoyed:

[DjfunkmasterG]

And to think some people had big problems with the pie fight in Dawn. If only they knew what was to come.

It's not so much the gags that I dislike, but their execution. Instead of the cheap CGI they could have used clever cuts and angles to make it look great with a puppet. Just look at Dr Tongue or the skinny zombies in Land. They looked great and something similar could have been achieved for the gags in Survival.

Instead, the person who once said he hated CGI relied on it to the point of it being laughable in the wrong way.:annoyed:

He also noted in recent interviews that CG is now cheaper to do that practical FX.

I however am not sold on the use of CG in lower budget films, especially in Romero films, and Microbudget cinema. Until CG can look real in those realms I won't use it, and I hope George gets with his VFX team on the next project and gets them to see the issues at hand, but it isn't entirely all there fault either. Good CG costs money, and I bet the cost of good CG is about probably way more than practical, and practical is more expensive then... lets just get it done and not look extremely horrible.

yes the recent Cg in Romero flicks is bad, but nowhere near as bad as n some of the other indie production I have sat through over the last 10 or more years.

[krakenslayer]

I'm pretty sure the main contributing factor in his use of CGI seems to be time. The last two or three movies he's made have been shot on very tight schedules compared with the likes of Dawn and Day (Dawn, I believe, was shot over a whole winter, from September/October until early 1978). I remember reading in an interview something along the lines that he is expected to work a lot faster on set these days because CG can now be added later, avoiding the need for a long set-up before effects shots (which you'd have with animatronics, squibs, etc.). Over the course of a shoot, the time saved by using CG can amount to three of four days, which obviously equates to a big financial saving too, so the producers prefer it.

[Danny]

And to think some people had big problems with the pie fight in Dawn. If only they knew what was to come.




honestly that still bugs me more than anything else george has ever done before or since. it just felt too out of place and pulls me right out of the scene every time. The cgi is like just flicking away a bothersome fly or something and getting back to what your focusing on in comparison.

[bassman]

I've always felt the pie fight is in character with what the Bikers were doing. As Peter says, they're basically a professional army that's been living on the road through the whole ordeal. By the time they get to the mall, they're so comfortable with the zombies that they can have a goof. Kinda like the rednecks that are enjoying the round up in Night90, Diary, etc.

Now if any of the four main characters had participated in the pie fight....that would be a different story.

[DjfunkmasterG]

I've always felt the pie fight is in character with what the Bikers were doing. As Peter says, they're basically a professional army that's been living on the road through the whole ordeal. By the time they get to the mall, they're so comfortable with the zombies that they can have a goof. Kinda like the rednecks that are enjoying the round up in Night90, Diary, etc.

Now if any of the four main characters had participated in the pie fight....that would be a different story.

I agree with Bassman on this statement. I feel for the Bikers this was normal behavior and when the raiding parties gathered supplies in LAND a lot of that behavior was still evident. Probably the only thing in LAND that stuck to DAWN other than SAVINI's cameo.

[MinionZombie]

Indeed. Don't understand the fuss some have with the pie fight - it's 'in character' for those bikers, the sort of people who raid a store to get bowling balls and sneakers among other shit ... like a mannequin before checking their blood pressure. :sneaky:

(Not that the blood pressure gag annoyed me, far from it).

Part of the problem with CGI is that it's not random enough - like, practical blood will fly whichever way it happens to fly. CGI blood flies only in the direction that's been told to. The happenstance is removed from CGI, and you pick up on it ... ... as well as the cheaper stuff not looking 'real' enough, i.e. the issue of contrast perpetuating the 'two layers on top of each other' effect.

I'm not overtly bothered by CGI in Romero's flicks - because, as Kraken said, it's just the pragmatic way for GAR to get shit done these days on cheap budgets, so it's understandable ... just, in the wider scheme of things, it's disappointing.

Practical is always best.

[undead]

I am a massive fan of the Dead series but I saw Survival of the Dead and I found it not boring, but not nearly as entertaining as the previous films.
I thought it was excessive in some places and lacking in others...

Don't me wrong, the more gore the better, but I just didn't feel like the senario was as interesting, or the characters as well positioned.

In comparison to Dawn in particular, I just wasn't feeling as excited about it when I watched it.

[DjfunkmasterG]

I think survival would have been better had it just focused on the National guard guys and being on the road, fuck that dumb ass island and the hatfield and mccoy storyline. That was what ruined Survival for me.

[Trin]

I've always felt the pie fight is in character with what the Bikers were doing. As Peter says, they're basically a professional army that's been living on the road through the whole ordeal. By the time they get to the mall, they're so comfortable with the zombies that they can have a goof. Kinda like the rednecks that are enjoying the round up in Night90, Diary, etc.

Now if any of the four main characters had participated in the pie fight....that would be a different story.
Agree wholeheartedly.

In my mind the biker gang was made up of a bunch of not too bright overaged adolescents with a couple of leader-types ushering them around. The antics inside the mall were them just being dumbasses blowing off steam. You could tell there were a couple of them kinda overseeing the operation and letting the rest do whatever they wanted. Better to let them run off their sugar high inside the mall than back at base camp.

The most annoying thing about the pie fight to me was wondering why there were all those pies months into it.

[mista_mo]

I still don't understand why Peter, Fran and Stephen didn't just sit up on the mall roof and shoot the hell out of the bikers. I mean, they were all decent shots, and it isn't like they needed to kill them...just injure them and let the ghouls finish them off.

[bassman]

I don't think the three remaining characters could have took them all out from the roof. The gang came in huge numbers. Some of them were bound to get in even if they had opposition from the roof. Then that would've only made them look harder for the hiding place upstairs. Also, didn't the bikers have grenades? Not a good thing for the snipers on the roof...

[Trin]

They could sure make their lives hell from the helicopter though. How high can you throw that grenade cheech? I've maintained all along that effective use of the helicopter and some molotovs would be all it takes to deter the biker gang. Heck, with enough time you could eradicate them completely.

[krakenslayer]

Yeah, you wouldn't even have to eradicate them, just kill or injure a few of them before they entered the mall. Force them to run away and regroup and make them think again. By waiting till they were inside to attack them, it meant the bikers were forced to fight back because by then they were in too deep to retreat (although they eventually did).

[bassman]

So you are suggesting that the heroes should have hovered over the gang with the helicopter? The gang with machine guns, grenades, and who knows what else? I just don't see that being a smart idea at all. They take enough fire in that helicopter and they're fucked.

Either way they went, they were far out-numbered and out-gunned. If they had picked them off from the roof they would have dropped a few, but they wouldn't have forced a retreat. Not three guns against hundreds(?), at least. And using the traffic report chopper that's low on fuel as an attack vehicle? Something about that just doesn't jive with me....

The only wise alternative from how it played in the movie is to take off and just get the hell out of there when the bikers arrived. No matter what they did to try and save the mall, it was destined to be overrun by the bikers and zombies. There was no stopping it, imo.

[Trin]

So you are suggesting that the heroes should have hovered over the gang with the helicopter? The gang with machine guns, grenades, and who knows what else? I just don't see that being a smart idea at all. They take enough fire in that helicopter and they're fucked.

Hit and run? Yeah, hit and run.

I don't know how high a bullet can be shot straight up, but I gotta figure I can throw molotovs down from higher than they can retaliate. Especially since bullets shot up come down too.

The low on fuel point is a valid one. But that gets into the whole "wtf were they doing" angle. I would've made securing fuel for the helicopter a very high priority, especially if I have a couple or 10 trucks just sitting around to scout and haul.

My biggest fear would be them finding where I land, refuel, and rest.

I still want to see Dawn of the Dead 1.5 where Peter and Fran fly around in the helicopter dropping stuff on the bikers day and night, stopping only to rest and refuel. That'd be a fun movie.

[MinionZombie]

Realistically, in terms of fighting back, they could have taken careful pot shots from multiple positions on the roof - using distractions. One shoots, then scarpers, while the biker's attention is distracted, the other shoots from a different position before scarpering and then they just repeat the process like that.

Fran, being fairly pregnant, wouldn't be able to help an awful lot - indeed it'd make sense for her to stay clear of it for the safety of the unborn child.

...

Using the chopper wouldn't have been a good idea, especially as you'd want to conserve the remaining fuel you have in case you needed to escape (as they eventually did).

So really, carefully picking them off from the roof, in a hit & run fashion, would be the best way to do it if you were going to fight back. The biker's wouldn't have found the way up to the roof as they'd perfectly covered up that entrance, it was only Flyboy zombie's residual memory that scuppered that plan (I've always been annoyed that they never closed those large steel doors and locked them, by the way) ... the Biker's would have no clue about that fake wall.

[bassman]

Never thought about that door thing. Maybe they kept them open as a back up plan. If for whatever reason they couldn't use the elevator/shafts to get back to the room, they could bust through the wall?

It definitely wouldn't be hard to go through it. Seriously....who makes a wall out of cardboard?:p

[darth los]

So you are suggesting that the heroes should have hovered over the gang with the helicopter? The gang with machine guns, grenades, and who knows what else? I just don't see that being a smart idea at all. They take enough fire in that helicopter and they're fucked.

Either way they went, they were far out-numbered and out-gunned. If they had picked them off from the roof they would have dropped a few, but they wouldn't have forced a retreat. Not three guns against hundreds(?), at least. And using the traffic report chopper that's low on fuel as an attack vehicle? Something about that just doesn't jive with me....

The only wise alternative from how it played in the movie is to take off and just get the hell out of there when the bikers arrived. No matter what they did to try and save the mall, it was destined to be overrun by the bikers and zombies. There was no stopping it, imo.



All this makes me wonder what if Roger had lived. We see What Peter, trained swat probably with a military (nam?) Backround, was able to do singlehandedly. He tore them a new asshole, probably decimated a good percentage of their gang.

If he would have had his little buddy at his side they might not have gotten through the front door. :lol:

:cool:

[ProfessorChaos]

in the book, roger is the one with the 'nam background, never says about peter being in the military.

as for survival, isn't it available to download sometime soon? i gotta see what all the fuss is about...

[ProfessorChaos]

to answer my own question, survival of the dead is available on xboxlive right now for those who've not seen it...

however, they are asking 800 ms points for an SD rental, 1200 for an HD rental. fuck microsoft (yeah, you heard me cooper), there's no way i'm paying that much for a godddamn rental.

guess i'll just wait or check other outlets, such as netflix, on demand, etc.

[mista_mo]

Just download it.

[ProfessorChaos]

holy fuck this movie is terrible so far. people aren't shitting about how campy it is. it's like watching a live-action zombie cartoon on sci-fi with the largest amount of shitty cgi-effects ever.

no kidding, less than 10 minutes in and i'd already seen more crappy cgi zombie deaths than land and diary combined. the accents are terrible, totally moronic characters...only 35 minutes in and i'm throwing in the towel, think george needs to do the same.

at least with the "...of the dead" films. the magic is gone, mr. romero, move on to something else.

i may try to finish this later, but wow....

and i know that i was just gripin' about the "100+ bitches about (movie title)" threads, but i imagine one for survival would practically write itself. get to work, somebody.

[bd2999]

I liked it, better than Diary by a long shot. The story was good IMO and was not as over the top as I feared from the early reports. The gore was good, the acting was pretty good and for the most part I liked it quite a bit.

I found inconsistancies annoying at times. I was not sure how you kill a zombie with a foam fire extinguisher that way and some of those kills put me off. If he just beat it I am fine but that just got me a bit and some of the CGI always puts me a bit out of it. The zombies riding the horse was really strange to me, just that she could stay on it. Then all of the sudden at the end she decides to eat it. She was on it all that time and all these other zombies just decided they could eat animals too? Seems like they should have done that sooner on, but ok I guess.

The thing that sort of got me at the end was the sort of wondering implication that any of the sides were really right. IMO Patrick's was with the need to put them down. I do not see how them eating everything else helps matters. They still like to eat us more than anything else, it just means they will basically try and wipe out life which we are a part.

[Mr.G]

I was in England for 2 weeks and picked up a copy (5 pounds at Tesco) to watch. After my first viewing, I am pretty luke warm either way. It's nothing outstanding but nothing horrible either. My biggest complaint (as others have stated) is the poor CGI...espcially the heads on poles scene.

I was concerned it would be too slapstick but that wasn't the case to me. Hopefully I get another chance to watch it again soon and develop a better feeling of it.

[C5NOTLD]

Some quick views: Watched it via PPV last night and was pleasantly surprised. Not as bad as I heard online - actually liked it. I thought it was much better than Diary. Acting was good as were the characters.

Although it is strange that normally you can tell a GAR film just by watching a few scenes. If this one had the credits cut off and I saw it - I don't think I would have known who made it. Felt like GAR in the scene towards the end - shoot out/zombie feast. Previously in Diary, only felt like a GAR film in the scene where the kids meet up with the soldiers in the building. Perhaps his earlier films, it's the way they were shot/lighted/edited/scored - Can't put my finger on why just those scenes though in Survival...

Music in Survival I didn't care for at all. Overall I liked it and found it entertaining. Thought it was a definite improvement over Diary.



.

[Mr.G]

Music in Survival I didn't care for at all. Overall I liked it and found it entertaining. Thought it was a definite improvement over Diary.



.

I totally forgot about the music...which explains how I feel about it.

[bassman]

Whatever happened to Harrison doing the score, anyway? That would've been a nice reunion.

[MinionZombie]

Whatever happened to Harrison doing the score, anyway? That would've been a nice reunion.
Scheduling conflict, wasn't it?

I don't get all this complaining about the music - I quite like it - especially the track that plays over the DVD menu which is featured in the movie.

Considering the Western overtones, more of a Western vibe might have been an idea, but nevertheless I dig the score. I don't understand the hatred some people lump on it. :confused:

[C5NOTLD]

Whatever happened to Harrison doing the score, anyway? That would've been a nice reunion.

Maybe the same thing that happend with John Carpenter not being allowed to score Land Of The Dead (would have been amazing).

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2010/05/28/meeting-a-horror-legend-the-mighty-george-a-romero/

How they let GAR make a movie and then not let him score it the way he wants to is :mad: Sadly makes you wonder how much control he has over the edit/etc..



.

[Trin]

Overall I've decided I am "Disappointed" with Survival.

Pros - Decent characters, interesting initial plot conflict, nice setting
Cons - Message overrode plot (again), zombie "gag" kills, uninteresting plot, ridiculous/implausible ending

Here's more detail w/spoilers:


Characters - Liked...
Sarge - Liked, borderline Meh... a good, fun character, but he kept flopping between do-gooder and psycho mercenary
O'Flynn - Loved... he doesn't try to explain himself... he doesn't try to hide that he's conflicted... the message is well portrayed in his character
O'Flynn's daughter - Liked
Muldoon - Disappointed... started okay but got too mired in his kooky message-driven position

CGI - Meh... I don't mind bad looking effects if they build the storyline
Gag Kills - Hated... No more, please. They are a movie-killer.
Setting - Liked it... it was a good job of showing how an isolated community could handle zombies
Plot - Disappointed... I LOVED the setup (kill em vs. keep em) ... it drug in the middle... the message-centric ending killed it.
Western Theme - Meh...
Docks scene - Hated it... Every aspect of it was stupid.
Message - Hated it... The message itself was okay but the plot bent too much to accomodate it. Especially the ending.
Zombies - Disappointed... the zombies were not Romero zombies. Their behavior was random and often nonsensical.
Shootout Scene - Hated it... here I was happy cause everyone was a decent shot, then they cannot hit each other for 5 minutes.
Horse-riding - Meh... I know people tend to hate it, but I don't. It's no more implausible than Big Daddy's intellect.
Horse-eating... Hated it... Why? Just why?


Ultimately, Survival strikes me as another Romero zombie parable. He needs to focus on storytelling and character building. Find a story worth telling and tell it well. Create characters that stay true to their motivations. Lose the message, or find better ways of integrating it.

[ChokeOnEm]

Maybe the same thing that happend with John Carpenter not being allowed to score Land Of The Dead (would have been amazing).

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2010/05/28/meeting-a-horror-legend-the-mighty-george-a-romero/

How they let GAR make a movie and then not let him score it the way he wants to is :mad: Sadly makes you wonder how much control he has over the edit/etc..

It was either this interview or another one, where Romero said he did not have final cut approval over Land. Given that the project languished without funding for years, I guess it's not all that surprising. Still, you would think a filmmaker of his stature would have that.

[darth los]

It was either this interview or another one, where Romero said he did not have final cut approval over Land. Given that the project languished without funding for years, I guess it's not all that surprising. Still, you would think a filmmaker of his stature would have that.


Granted.

So waht's his excuse for diary and survival?

The man's work is declining and there's no getting around that.

Each successive film is worse than the last. :(

:cool:

[ChokeOnEm]

Granted.

So waht's his excuse for diary and survival?

The man's work is declining and there's no getting around that.

Each successive film is worse than the last. :(

:cool:

Even *with* final cut, I think Land would be the same. I didn't mean to imply that its failings were the result of studio interference. Flaws like bad dialogue and a laughably campy performance by Big Daddy fall on George’s shoulders and his alone. Sorry if it seemed like I was making excuses. At this point George should either get a co-writer or retire. Grunwald is also clearly not serving him well, and just milking the fanbase with substandard product.

[darth los]

Even *with* final cut, I think Land would be the same. I didn't mean to imply that its failings were the result of studio interference. Flaws like bad dialogue and a laughably campy performance by Big Daddy fall on George’s shoulders and his alone. Sorry if it seemed like I was making excuses. At this point George should either get a co-writer or retire. Grunwald is also clearly not serving him well, and just milking the fanbase with substandard product.

Or at the very least have someone remind him what made the original trilogy classics. Because whatever it was he's not doing it anymore.

How hard is it to follow a formula that he himself invented.

Or maybe it's this. We know he's a laid back "flower child", so perhaps when there's pressure on him to produce he churns out crap like this. However, when he come out of no where with something the final product is usually pretty good.

Something has to explain why the Godfather of the genre has, I'm sorry to say but after 3 consecutive films it has to be said, lost the ability or desire to make a good film.

:cool:

[bassman]

How hard is it to follow a formula that he himself invented.


VERY.

Romero is one of a select few cases of lightning hitting the same spot twice...err...three times. Even then, Day wasn't accepted until years later.

Either it was exteme luck, or he just smoked himself silly during his 20 year break...

[Trin]

Or maybe it's this. We know he's a laid back "flower child", so perhaps when there's pressure on him to produce he churns out crap like this. However, when he come out of no where with something the final product is usually pretty good.
Keep in mind that Day was a "pressure on him" production. And what we got was roughly 1 billion times better than the script would've been given better time and money.

To bassman's point, Day seems like extreme luck to me. How do you explain the man writing up a movie with cowboy quick draw zombies and a walking nitro bomb - then rewriting/directing to become the gem of a movie we got when the budget got slashed last minute?

The formula is exactly the problem and the solution. The problem because Romero refuses to follow the formula he created. A world in chaos. A few survivors. A barricaded, claustrophobic place. Survival against the zombies. The solution because he has it right there in front of him. Follow the damn formula! What would be an interesting group of people in an interesting place? What is unique about their struggle to survive? What kinds of conflicts would they face? Then.... and only then... what message can we draw from that?

[darth los]

The formula is exactly the problem and the solution. The problem because Romero refuses to follow the formula he created. A world in chaos. A few survivors. A barricaded, claustrophobic place. Survival against the zombies. The solution because he has it right there in front of him. Follow the damn formula! What would be an interesting group of people in an interesting place? What is unique about their struggle to survive? What kinds of conflicts would they face? Then.... and only then... what message can we draw from that?

And it's so simple. Just put the requisite people in a setting and it will nescesarily reflect the times it was made in, or atleast people will percieve it that way.

Example: You put a white and a black guy in a farmhouse, both alpha males and both under stress to survive. You instantly have a perception of racial animosity even though it's not overtly shown in the film. There was no bigger issue of the day, besides perhaps Vietnam, other than race relations.

In the decade of decadence, you just put 4 survivors in a mall and after a while they will see that even with all the material things they could want at their fingertips they were still not happy because that's not really what's important in life.

in the 80's put the survivors in a military setting with the world all but gone and basically watch cabin fever set in.

See? No need to beat people over the head with a message every ten minutes ! ( If it didn't happen on Camera it's like it didn't happen right?)

God i still can't get that fucking line out of my head.

:cool:

[BillyRay]

Waitaminnit...

Romero's got a new movie out??

Can't be.

Otherwise it'd be playing in theatres somewhere.

:rant:

[Trin]

Waitaminnit...

Romero's got a new movie out??

Can't be.

Otherwise it'd be playing in theatres somewhere.

:rant:
It's playing in home theaters across the country. Downloaded via Nintendo's.

[BillyRay]

What is this "download" you speak of?

Is it a new sort of movie theatre?

Because if it doesn't get shown in a movie theatre, it might as well be mansquito...

I'm just tired of waiting.

[bassman]

What is this "download" you speak of?



You don't even need to go that far, man.

One word. Google.

[BillyRay]

I'm not gonna download it.

I just wanna watch the new movie in a theater, like it should be watched. Ham-handed social messages, horse-riding zeds and all.

I just want a chance to enjoy this movie how a movie should be enjoyed before I jump on the "Uncle George has lost it" wagon.

I'm more annoyed by the half-assed distribution of Survival than any problems I may find with story structure, acting, etc.

But, it's not like I have any fucking choice, right?

[Mr.G]

Granted.

So waht's his excuse for diary and survival?

The man's work is declining and there's no getting around that.

Each successive film is worse than the last. :(

:cool:

Holy f*cking shit...that notion is depressing as hell. And probably because it's true. (Anyone else feel guilty thinking these thoughts? It's like cheating on a spouse!)

[Trin]

Well, I also just want to see this movie the way it was meant to be seen. On the Sci-fi channel. Military chick + jillinoff = Sci-fi channel. You all know its true.

[darth los]

Well, I also just want to see this movie the way it was meant to be seen. On the Sci-fi channel. Military chick + jillinoff = Sci-fi channel. You all know its true.

If you go back to my old posts I've been saying that for years.

Land of the dead, survival and diarhea( :D ) are of the quality of something the sy-fy channel regularly shows.


Put it like this. If you had no idea who made them and someone showed you those films and told you they were sy fy originals you'd be like: "yeah, that sounds about right." :lol: :(

:cool:

[bassman]

Ehhh...Diary and Survival maybe, but Land doesn't seem very syfy-ish to me. Clark's acting is on par with syfy actors, but the movie as a whole doesn't fit the bill, imo.

[darth los]

Are you Mad!?! :stunned:

Beauty truly is in the eye of the beholder.

LOTD screams sy fy. :shifty:

:cool:

[bassman]

Maybe your opinion of the film has something to do with it? Like it or hate it, I just can't see it as a syfy flick. Something along the lines of the Resident Evil films are syfy material. Land has it's bad moments, there's no denying that, but it's not near as bad as Mega Shark vs Octopus or whatever other crap comes on that channel...

[darth los]

Land has it's bad moments, there's no denying that, but it's not near as bad as Mega Shark vs Octopus or whatever other crap comes on that channel...

Now that we can agree on. ;)

:cool:

[Trin]

I have to agree with Bassman. Land is well above a Sci-cry movie. For all my griping about Land it did feel big-budget and big-theater movie-ish to me.

[clanglee]

Well, I also just want to see this movie the way it was meant to be seen. On the Sci-fi channel. Military chick + jillinoff = Sci-fi channel. You all know its true.

I agree with you for the most part. . . it had that feel. I think the High def adds to that sensation as well. But I found Survival to be a lot more cinematic than Diary.

[krakenslayer]

I agree with you for the most part. . . it had that feel. I think the High def adds to that sensation as well. But I found Survival to be a lot more cinematic than Diary.

Yeah, Survival had some really nice outdoor cinematography and decent sets that helped it look bigger budget than it really was. I think the dialogue and acting - while not bad, per se - were very "genre" and nudged it towards B-movie territory. But I've kind of accepted that about the more recent films in the series and can enjoy them both in spite of and because of it.

[ChokeOnEm]

. I think the dialogue and acting - while not bad, per se - were very "genre" and nudged it towards B-movie territory.

I must say, after seeing the film twice, the dialogue is especially crap. Every line is either a pun or someone repeating a different character's line for dramatic effect. For example, when the lesbo catches O'Flynn as he jumps to the Ferry she goes, "You're lucky I'm me." Later, when O'Flynn tries to save the same lesbo from the hands of the Muldoons, he turns and says to her, "You're lucky I'm me." This happens no less than 6 or 7 times in the film. The script is just plain lazy. On the acting front, only Van Sprang makes a fool of himself. His freak out scenes are laughable, especially when Kenny gets shot. Old hands, Kenneth Walsh and Richard Fitzpatrick, really elevate the material and both have great juicy roles similar to Kaufman or Captain Rhodes.

[SymphonicX]

On the acting front, only Van Sprang makes a fool of himself. His freak out scenes are laughable, especially when Kenny gets shot.

Totally, that was really sub par....he did alright until he had to show emotion...

[MinionZombie]

Totally, that was really sub par....he did alright until he had to show emotion...
I think he did a good job ... except for the Kenny scene.

[ChokeOnEm]

Having finally watched 'Zombieland' over the weekend, Romero's latest may be due for a reappraisal. I heard ALOT of good things, but what I saw was a generic coming-of-age tale awkwardly shoehorned into a zombie film, not to mention some of the most painfully forced hip dialogue this side of Diablo Cody ("spitfuck", "nut up or shut up"). What little plot there is, mostly consists of post-production gimmicks like the on-screen rules, Family Guy type cutaway gags, and Tarantino-esque slo-mo montages featuring retro music. And for the last time, I get it - Woody Harrelson's character sure does love twinkies. Ha..ha..ha?
Glad other horror fans found this to be a breath of fresh air.

[Mr.G]

Having finally watched 'Zombieland' over the weekend, Romero's latest may be due for a reappraisal. I heard ALOT of good things, but what I saw was a generic coming-of-age tale awkwardly shoehorned into a zombie film, not to mention some of the most painfully forced hip dialogue this side of Diablo Cody ("spitfuck", "nut up or shut up"). What little plot there is, mostly consists of post-production gimmicks like the on-screen rules, Family Guy type cutaway gags, and Tarantino-esque slo-mo montages featuring retro music. And for the last time, I get it - Woody Harrelson's character sure does love twinkies. Ha..ha..ha?
Glad other horror fans found this to be a breath of fresh air.

IMO the main difference is Zombieland was intentionally written to be funny where as Survival....well, not so much.

[ChokeOnEm]

IMO the main difference is Zombieland was intentionally written to be funny where as Survival....well, not so much.

I dunno...there's some broad Looney Tunes moments in 'Survival', as well as some typical Romero black humor. 'Survival' at least offers some solid B-movie thrills. 'Zombieland' strains waaay to hard to be offbeat and irreverent. Can't say that I really liked either movie. Haven't seen a truly GREAT zombie flick since "28 Weeks Later".

[Mr.G]

Can't say that I really liked either movie. Haven't seen a truly GREAT zombie flick since "28 Weeks Later".

You might want to take shelter on these forums if you classify 28 Weeks Later as a zombie movie. ;)

[clanglee]

IMO the main difference is Zombieland was intentionally written to be funny where as Survival....well, not so much.

Yeah, I'm gonna have to disagree here. . . there were LOADS of intentional and shlocky funny parts in Survival. The overall theme was not comedic, no, but it had a lot more comedy moments than any of George's previous zombie movies. Kind of why I liked the movie, it didn't take itself seriously.

[MinionZombie]

Yeah, I'm gonna have to disagree here. . . there were LOADS of intentional and shlocky funny parts in Survival. The overall theme was not comedic, no, but it had a lot more comedy moments than any of George's previous zombie movies. Kind of why I liked the movie, it didn't take itself seriously.

Indeed, GAR intended for Survival to have those Loony Toons moments, he's said so himself.


You might want to take shelter on these forums if you classify 28 Weeks Later as a zombie movie. ;)

*fetches his beatin' stick* :elol:

[bassman]

I dunno...there's some broad Looney Tunes moments in 'Survival', as well as some typical Romero black humor. 'Survival' at least offers some solid B-movie thrills. 'Zombieland' strains waaay to hard to be offbeat and irreverent. Can't say that I really liked either movie. Haven't seen a truly GREAT zombie flick since "28 Weeks Later".

I would say the difference between the two is that Romero made a zombie movie with comedy elements, but Zombieland is a comedy movie with zombie elements. Anybody going into zombieland expecting more of a horror film is setting themselves up for disappointment. It was clearly marketed as a comedy from day one. Not the same for Survival, really.

Zombieland is just an amusement park ride, where as Survival tries to be intelligent while throwing out fart gags. :p

[Minerva_Zombi]

After two full viewings, I really love this film. Romero is truly a master. The first viewing I was on the fence, but It just feels so much like Day of the Dead that I can't help but love it.

[Dr Tongue]

I loved Survival, but I also enjoyed Diary and Land. If you are expecting Romero to make another epic like his trilogy, you should give up now and save yourself the disappointment. :)

[MinionZombie]

I loved Survival, but I also enjoyed Diary and Land. If you are expecting Romero to make another epic like his trilogy, you should give up now and save yourself the disappointment. :)
A statement I can agree with. GAR already made the zombie movie with Dawn of the Dead - he's done his part in giving us the best slice of zombie-ness ever, and even if some aren't as keen on Dawn, there's also Night of the Living Dead, which was another milestone.

So the man's done more than enough for the zombie genre - he's just having some fun now and he's earned the right. I was never expecting another Dawn of the Dead from GAR, which is why I enjoy his latest flicks - they do have flaws, but there's so much tosh out there under the zombie genre label that they stand above them with ease ... although Diary is the least one of the three new zed flicks from Uncle George, in my view.

[DjfunkmasterG]

A statement I can agree with. GAR already made the zombie movie with Dawn of the Dead - he's done his part in giving us the best slice of zombie-ness ever, and even if some aren't as keen on Dawn, there's also Night of the Living Dead, which was another milestone.

So the man's done more than enough for the zombie genre - he's just having some fun now and he's earned the right. I was never expecting another Dawn of the Dead from GAR, which is why I enjoy his latest flicks - they do have flaws, but there's so much tosh out there under the zombie genre label that they stand above them with ease ... although Diary is the least one of the three new zed flicks from Uncle George, in my view.

When you set the bar as high as he did with Dawn and Day... then I expect him to live up to those expectations with every zombie film he creates. Why does he get a free pass to half-ass it, or as some say, he deserves the right to do as he pleases...

I disagree, you can't go from making three great films, and then suddenly decide to shit all over the genre you created by just doing whatever you want. That screams laziness and trying to make a quick buck.

Put forth the same amount of quality you did in the beginning. Is that too much to ask?

This is the job and life he chose... My job expects me to put forth the same amount of quality in my work I have done since I was hired on in 2004... that standard doesn't change, nor can I change it to tailor fit my needs and desires... Romero should employ the same work ethic.

[bassman]

you can't go from making three great films, and then suddenly decide to shit all over the genre you created by just doing whatever you want.




"I disagree...."
http://the-daily-show.download-tvshows.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/george-lucas.jpg

:lol:

[darth los]

Kind of why I liked the movie, it didn't take itself seriously.


The problem is that's what the genre has been reduced to. Toungue in cheek comedies.

:cool:

[DjfunkmasterG]

The problem is that's what the genre has been reduced to. Toungue in cheek comedies.

:cool:

Hence why I take it as seriously as I do and try to restore the horror element to the genre.

Many people have suggest i should do this or that in the films, but I say fuck that you wanna do it go make your own movie... I am so pissed at how tongue and cheek zombie films have become it pisses me off to no end, and that is why I won't employee dumb comedic antics for the sole purpose of making the films atmosphere lighter... These are supposed to scary monsters, your brother, your sister, father etc etc coming after you and not stopping until they kill you.

Why is that such a hard concept for people to grasp?

[Trin]

I disagree, you can't go from making three great films, and then suddenly decide to shit all over the genre you created by just doing whatever you want. That screams laziness and trying to make a quick buck.

I tend to agree. Or, moreover, I expect that within the same series the movies will stay true to the concept and tone of the predecessors. Large scale departures from the originals is breaking the director/fan pact, imo.

Quality is another matter altogether. I don't think you can force quality. Day is a good example. A lot of people thought the quality in Day diminished from Dawn, but the tone and concept remained true to the series. I would even argue that Land stayed true to the series even though it has notable quality issues.

Diary took liberties with filming style and added gag kills, neither of which was true to the series. That's where I feel the director has shat on the fans.

If the man wants to go all Toxic Avenger on us, that's fine, just take it to a different franchise where that kind of movie is the expectation.

[darth los]

Diary took liberties with filming style and added gag kills, neither of which was true to the series. That's where I feel the director has shat on the fans.

If the man wants to go all Toxic Avenger on us, that's fine, just take it to a different franchise where that kind of movie is the expectation.

Or don't stray from the formula and expect us to praise the work none the less.

I wouldn't even have a problem if it was a good evolution, but what he's releasing, well... No need to beat a dead horse.


Hence why I take it as seriously as I do and try to restore the horror element to the genre.

Many people have suggest i should do this or that in the films, but I say fuck that you wanna do it go make your own movie... I am so pissed at how tongue and cheek zombie films have become it pisses me off to no end, and that is why I won't employee dumb comedic antics for the sole purpose of making the films atmosphere lighter... These are supposed to scary monsters, your brother, your sister, father etc etc coming after you and not stopping until they kill you.

Why is that such a hard concept for people to grasp?

It's funny because there was an interview on G4 tv a while back, (I posted it here, use the search feature) and they had him look at left 4 dead 2 and asked him his thoughts on it.

You should have seen the man's face. Like, "how dare you ask me about this abomination!?!" I believe he actually said,"these are not MY zombies."

I love the fact that he exopresed such frustration at what hollywood has made out of his intellectual property.

I love it for the simple fact that it may give him a glimpse into what we feel when he peddles out "subpar" work.

Because truthfully Uncle George, as it pertains to his latest films, "these are not our zombies" either.

What GAr has been releasing is not what we all fell in love with. In fact if he had released the 3 most recent films first, before the original trilogy he would have never reached the Rock Star status he has enjoyed.

Not even close.

:cool:

[Dr Tongue]

I agree that a director shouldn't "Shit all over his past work.". But reading interviews, and listening to commentaries, the man just still loves Zombies. He was talking about a book he is still writing, and it got brought up about how Zombies defecate, and he joked about writing in his new book about it. And for all we know he probably will. It just seems like he is having fun with these little stories. And it's not like he's the only director to make worse movies as he's gone on.

Honestly, George has been shit on in terms of money.(Yes, I know copyright issues and his poor judgment can be blamed on this.) he doesn't have the cash to throw around like some of these other Hollywood productions.(Zombieland comes to mind. Which cost 23 Million). When both Diary and Survival cost less than 4 Million each. It may be a little unfair to expect a lot out of a Direct to DVD title.(Yes, I know they had some screenings, but nothing much.)

In my opinion, movies have changed. It seems you need a huge budget to make an epic in today's times. I may be wrong about that though. Someone correct me on that.

Anyway, that is my personal opinion. Yes, I need to be realistic, I can't hold one director above others because he loves Zombies. And I do agree that the gag kills have got to go, but I can ignore them.

I have no idea why, I didn't like Land my first viewing, or Diary for that matter. But over the last year or so I have grown to enjoy them more. And I have always enjoyed Survival. I think the Sarge is one of the best characters he has created in a while. But I remember not liking Day of the Dead all those years ago.

I'm done with my ramblings.

[darth los]

I agree that a director shouldn't "Shit all over his past work.". But reading interviews, and listening to commentaries, the man just still loves Zombies. He was talking about a book he is still writing, and it got brought up about how Zombies defecate, and he joked about writing in his new book about it. And for all we know he probably will. It just seems like he is having fun with these little stories. And it's not like he's the only director to make worse movies as he's gone on.

Honestly, George has been shit on in terms of money.(Yes, I know copyright issues and his poor judgment can be blamed on this.) he doesn't have the cash to throw around like some of these other Hollywood productions.(Zombieland comes to mind. Which cost 23 Million). When both Diary and Survival cost less than 4 Million each. It may be a little unfair to expect a lot out of a Direct to DVD title.(Yes, I know they had some screenings, but nothing much.)

In my opinion, movies have changed. It seems you need a huge budget to make an epic in today's times. I may be wrong about that though. Someone correct me on that.

Anyway, that is my personal opinion. Yes, I need to be realistic, I can't hold one director above others because he loves Zombies. And I do agree that the gag kills have got to go, but I can ignore them.

I have no idea why, I didn't like Land my first viewing, or Diary for that matter. But over the last year or so I have grown to enjoy them more. And I have always enjoyed Survival. I think the Sarge is one of the best characters he has created in a while. But I remember not liking Day of the Dead all those years ago.

I'm done with my ramblings.


Not ramblings. Your opinions are appreciated.

And as for being shit on finacially that's pretty much the only reason i will still support the man even after disappointing films.

It's a crime that a man who pretty much invented the modern zombie (a movie monster on par with any of the classic monsters, i.e. Vampires, werewolves, Frankenstein, imo) did reap a penny from his intellectual property, for dawn and night atleast.

So if he's trying to make some money off his name now with subpar films and tatoos i ain't mad at cha' playa!

:cool:

[Wrong Number]

I liked it, but do feel it was his weakest work.


WN

[darth los]

I haven't seen it as of yet. As i said I'm taking the netflix approach to this one.

It doeasn't release until the 24th anyway.

But from everything I've heard I'm scared to slide it in the blu ray plyer.

I'm hopeful that i'll be pleasantly surprised but judging on the feedback it's gotten here alone it's a fool's hope. :(

:cool:

[MinionZombie]

I haven't seen it as of yet. As i said I'm taking the netflix approach to this one.

It doeasn't release until the 24th anyway.

But from everything I've heard I'm scared to slide it in the blu ray plyer.

I'm hopeful that i'll be pleasantly surprised but judging on the feedback it's gotten here alone it's a fool's hope. :(

:cool:
And yet the majority "love/like" the movie according to our poll - the same thing with Land of the Dead too. The haters hate louder than the lovers, who are too busy spooning and dozing off. :p

[bassman]

I'm hopeful that i'll be pleasantly surprised but judging on the feedback it's gotten here alone it's a fool's hope. :(


If you can make it past the first thirty minutes or so with the crap CGI gags......you should be okay.

[MinionZombie]

If you can make it past the first thirty minutes or so with the crap CGI gags......you should be okay.
It's not, nor was it ever going to be, another Dawn of the Dead. It's just GAR enjoying himself silly. Is it flawless? God no. Is it a disaster? God no.

I was a bit trepidacious (is that a word? sp?) before it came out, but I sat down and watched it and after wavering for the first five minutes, I began to really enjoy myself and then I had a ball with it ... and what's more, I thought just the same the second time around so it wasn't just a fluke either - for me at least.

But as evidenced by our poll, the majority dug the flick.

[Trin]

But as evidenced by our poll, the majority dug the flick.
My personal opinion is that the poll is rubbish.

And I'm not just saying that to be a hater. I think that if Survival had come out first of the new 3 it would've been hated more than Land was. I think Land and Diary softened up the audience enough to win Survival a favorable response. That is, the criteria for "Liked" lowered after 2 stinkers.

Take a look at the "Worst of the Worst" poll and Land did better than Survival. You're bound to discover that people who voted Disliked or worse on Land voted Liked or better on Survival... and yet vote Land better than Survival head-to-head!! That's pretty solid evidence that the bar lowered.

[MoonSylver]

Whelp...pay day is here. So I bought it. I watched it. My reaction?...

:| :stunned: :( :confused: :dead: :bored:

I liked Land. I liked Diary (flawed though it may have been). I went into it fully prepared to embrace it & refute all the claims of those who have been hating it, but in the end...eh....

I'm not going to go into hysetrics & claim it's the worst thing since Adolph Hitler. But I didn't enjoy it very much. Bad dialog. Bad performances ( a shame as I REALLY was looking forward to Van Sprang's character.) Didn't think the over-the-top zombie kills would bug me...but they did. I dunno. Can't 100% put my finger on what didn't work about this one for me, but it just didn't click.

I'll probably give it another view sometime & I have a feeling I might like it a tad better now that I know what to expect. But right now I'm a bit disappointed. And sad.:(

[DubiousComforts]

I voted "liked it" in this rubbish poll.

Will there be a real poll soon?

[MoonSylver]

I voted "liked it" in this rubbish poll.

Will there be a real poll soon?

Errr...most voted Loved or Liked...did I miss something...?:confused:

[MinionZombie]

I voted "liked it" in this rubbish poll.

Will there be a real poll soon?

Rubbish poll? Why? Five options not enough? Two extremes (love, hate), two strong views (liked, disappointed), and one that's in the middle (neither here nor there) - straight forward. What's the problem?


Errr...most voted Loved or Liked...did I miss something...?:confused:

Same thing with Land, most of HPOTD gave it the thumbs up, so it always confuses me when some people say that "most" people on HPOTD hated it. :confused:

[BillyRay]

Just found out it's playing up at the university next week.

I'm going to try and enjoy myself.

[darth los]

Whelp...pay day is here. So I bought it. I watched it. My reaction?...

:| :stunned: :( :confused: :dead: :bored:

I liked Land. I liked Diary (flawed though it may have been). I went into it fully prepared to embrace it & refute all the claims of those who have been hating it, but in the end...eh....

I'm not going to go into hysetrics & claim it's the worst thing since Adolph Hitler. But I didn't enjoy it very much. Bad dialog. Bad performances ( a shame as I REALLY was looking forward to Van Sprang's character.) Didn't think the over-the-top zombie kills would bug me...but they did. I dunno. Can't 100% put my finger on what didn't work about this one for me, but it just didn't click.

I'll probably give it another view sometime & I have a feeling I might like it a tad better now that I know what to expect. But right now I'm a bit disappointed. And sad.:(

I agree with everything you said. I actually got into the storyline and how the humans ultimately cause their own demise. But that's about it.

A couple of things bothered me though.

Gar is having the ghouls do things a mere 6 days into the outbreak that took them years in the original trilogy. They started exhibiting "normal human behavior" years into the outbreak as we saw in the begining of land.

Here right off the top they're delivering mail and riding horses and shit. Very hokey, imo. It almost makes them into a joke.

Also, the cgi kills are simply killing this reboot he's got going. It doesn't look real or blend seamlessly into the film at all. The flare gun kill? Is he serious with that stuff? He's George A. Fucking Romero and should be above that stuff. Well, obviously not right?

Even the army buddy kills at the beginning of the film were aweful. My 6 year old thought it was terrible.

He dabbled with cgi kills in land but there were plenty of conventional/practical effects as well.

It's sad when day's SFX, a 25 year old movie mind you, is lightyears ahead of what he's producing now. :(

:cool:

[ProfessorChaos]

Just found out it's playing up at the university next week.

I'm going to try and enjoy myself.

perhaps you should skip watching survival then. it's nowhere near enjoyable...quite the opposite, actually.

[BillyRay]

perhaps you should skip watching survival then. it's nowhere near enjoyable...quite the opposite, actually.


Regardless of anything I've heard on the site, I'm still going to give it a chance anyway. I'll get to see it on a decent-sized screen for only a couple bucks. I'll form my own opinion based on what I see "up there".


Worst case scenario I get to hand out flyers for my Halloween show to local zombie fans.

[bassman]

Good for you, Billy. Although Survival gets a lot of shit, even from myself, I would still encourage everyone to see it and form their own opinion. I'm shocked to see that some of our UK friends have yet to see it. It's been out over there for months now....

[darth los]

Good for you, Billy. Although Survival gets a lot of shit, even from myself, I would still encourage everyone to see it and form their own opinion. I'm shocked to see that some of our UK friends have yet to see it. It's been out over there for months now....

It's the SFX man! My god the SFX! :barf:

They just took me right out of the film. It like watching "Who Framed Roger Rabbit!" You know none of it is real and actors are acting by themselves with things added in later.

As peter said "It's just no good." :dead:

:cool:

[soulsyfn]

I agree on the SFX but throw in the horrible cinematopgrahy and you have a real problem...

And who the hell would bite off a zombie finger... i mean really... :eek:

WTF!?

[darth los]

I agree on the SFX but throw in the horrible cinematopgrahy and you have a real problem...

And who the hell would bite off a zombie finger... i mean really... :eek:

WTF!?

I know there's never been a concrete explanation as to the cause of the plaugue but if that doesn't scream virus then i don't know what to to say...

:cool:

[Trin]

Same thing with Land, most of HPOTD gave it the thumbs up, so it always confuses me when some people say that "most" people on HPOTD hated it. :confused:
It really depends on your context.

In the Land Yay/Meh/Boo vs. Diary Yay/Meh/Boo poll Land scored:
Land Yay - 37
Land Meh - 34
Land Boo - 8

That's 37 Yay vs. 42 Meh or worse, or a 47% approval rating.


The "sort this out once and for all" poll rates Land at:
Like - 54
Not great, not bad - 27
Dislike - 10

That's pretty Land favorable at 54 Like vs. 37 Meh or worse, for a 59% approval rating.

Another poll asks "is land a good movie as a horror movie on its own":
Yes - 22
No - 12

That's pretty Land favorable at 65% approval.

Where it gets interesting is ratings for Land in the context of the other Dead movies.

The "how Land rates vs. the original trilogy" poll:
Land is as good as the original trilogy. - 8
I liked Land a lot, but it is not in the same class as the original trilogy. - 17
I enjoy Land as a movie in general, but not near as much as the original trilogy. - 7
Land has some good moments, but overall not that great. - 8
Land is no good at all. - 3

That's 8 rating Land as good as the original trilogy and 35 rating it lesser, which comes to a dismal 17% favorable rating.

So if the statement is that most people hated it alongside the other GAR Dead movies, the numbers bear that out.

Ironically, in a pure Like/Dislike rating Land scores 32 for Like and 11 for Dislike in the very same poll, for a 74% approval rating. Which puts an exclamation point on the statement that whether you rate Land in the context of the Dead series or in the context of horror in general is fundamental to the results.

Diary polled at a 66% approval rating (loved + liked), and Survival is running 65% right now. I would suspect that both movies would score similarly to Land as far as worthy entries in the original trilogy, but I didn't see any polls to test that.

Oh, and I still firmly believe that every good GAR fan should see Survival and form your own opinion, as Bassman says. It isn't cut and dried.

[Mr.G]

It like watching "Who Framed Roger Rabbit!" You know none of it is real and actors are acting by themselves with things added in later.

That is probably the most intelligent and greatest analogy I’ve read about Survival. No, I’m not being sarcastic but the Roger Rabbit bit made me chuckle.

[darth los]

Being as I just saw it I voted disapointed. :(

:cool:

[DubiousComforts]

Rubbish poll? Why? Five options not enough?
I have no problem with the poll or the options given. You'll have to read the post two previous to mine to see why it's been considered "rubbish." ;)

[Boogiedowndead]

started out got


Got kind of bland once they got to the island

[Doc]

For a film that's bi*ched at alot I'm surprised too see more liked it, then hated it. :-o

I have yet to see it myself though.

[MinionZombie]

For a film that's bi*ched at alot I'm surprised too see more liked it, then hated it. :-o

I have yet to see it myself though.

Well the haters always have something to shout about, whereas the likers and lovers are contented and so don't usually feel the need to talk as much about it, if that makes sense.

But aye, more liked and loved it than hated it or were disappointed by it.

[bassman]

You can enjoy a film to some extent and still have things to gripe about. And if you don't have anything to gripe about in Survival......you're just lying to yourself.

[Trin]

You can enjoy a film to some extent and still have things to gripe about. And if you don't have anything to gripe about in Survival......you're just lying to yourself.Ha! That's a good way of putting it.

It would be interesting to track the votes from Land through Diary to Survival. I agree with MZ that the haters are louder than the lovers, but I also think we need to remember that this isn't "man on the street" pollling. The people who have stuck with the boards between Land and Survival should be the more dedicated fans I would think. However, that's not to say that being a dedicated GAR fan translates into favorable votes.

Land hit over 90 votes and Survival has just passed 70. Why? It could be that Survival's poor distribution means people haven't seen it yet. We should know after it hits Netflix. If that's the case then how many people who haven't seen it yet are going to vote positively? These are the people who didn't think enough of it to find a way to see it before now. Or did we just lose people between Land and Survival? If so, were those likely to be the lovers or haters?

It'd be interesting to see polling done on other horror sites, or other movie sites.

[BillyRay]

Finally saw Survival last night.

I liked it.

It was a fun monster flick.

Thematically, tho', it was all over the place.

I had a full book report ready, but the site ate it...

[MinionZombie]

Bassman - sure, I do have niggles with Survival, just like I do with Diary and Land ... however, all said and done, I dig it. Diary is still my least favourite from the recent three ... I've had a very tumultuous relationship with that movie with my opinion varying wildly up and down about it. I don't hate it, but it's still my least favourite of the new three.

Land has gone down a couple of notches in my estimation after niggles and "hmmm, I would have done/written that differently" elements came into play, but I remain a Land Liker.

Survival was a ruddy good time from the-off for me, and it was exactly the same way the second time around ... sure there are things I'd have done differently, or things that aren't shit-hot (the CGI is at times dreadfully obvious, and some moments are too slapstick), but I really enjoyed it the first and second time I viewed it (I'll soon get to the double disc R1 version, but this past month has been an expensive one, so I'll get it sometime later down the line ... especially as I've already got it on R2 vanilla).

[Trin]

Land has gone down a couple of notches in my estimation after niggles and "hmmm, I would have done/written that differently" elements came into play, but I remain a Land Liker.
I've come up a few notches on Land. I can pop it in and enjoy the good parts now and then.
*imagines a time when Trin and MZ like Land the same amount*

[strayrider]

Good film. I wasn't expecting a Night, Dawn, or Day and I was dreading a Land or Diary. Needless to say, I was pleasantly surprised that Survival was quite watchable and enjoyable. A couple of things that I really appreciated was GAR's toning down of profane language and silly character nicknames (NOT that profane language doesn't have a place ... but every other word (as seemed common in Land and Diary?) Sheesh).

The "western" theme did not bother me one bit as I am a fan of both westerns and zombies.

Were there things I did not like? Sure. The silly CGI "offings" (as others have previously mentioned) were ... silly ... they distracted from the film, not added to it. Fortunately, there were very few of these.

I think that GAR has finally "got it pegged" as to what we fans really want from his films (Night, Dawn, Day) and is gravitating back in that direction. I hope he gets to make one more dead film. Guaranteed classic.

:D

-stray-

[bassman]

Returning with a second viewing review. I passed Survival while at the store and just couldn't turn it down. In some way I felt like I owed it to *someone* to buy the damn thing. So I did.

My original thoughts still stand. It's an okay movie, but obviously it's very far from the legendary trilogy. In fact, there are a few things that if taken out, could really improve on the film.

1) CGI gags. No more. It looks horrible and takes you straight out of the picture.
2) Horse Riding. No. Just NO.
3) Van Sprang's over-acting. I liked the guy in the last two films, but he just takes it totally overboard with this one. Some of his character's mood swings are enough to give the audience whiplash.

Take out those few things(and they COULD have been edited out), and you've got a decent film. It also could've been a lot worse, imo. Out of the new three, this one is about on par with Land while Diary is the worst yet.

As for the dvd/br - The Walking After Midnight documentary is a fun watch whether you liked the film or not. Regardless of the result, it does seem like they had a good time making it and the doc is a fun time to watch. The commentary I've only made half way through, but it's the usual stuff from Romero and Grunwald's past commentaries. Some decent facts, but nothing that really makes it worth the time.

[MinionZombie]

Interesting note about the commentary there - Romero commentaries are great for past work - his present day commentaries for his latest movies (anything from the 00's) aren't much cop. I listen to them, naturally, but they're nowhere near as good as the more nostalgia-tinted 'ah back in the day, remember when, hey old friends' type chat-tracks on his past works.

It is on my to-get list, but it's been an expensive time recently, and my Quad Core needs repairing, so I'm looking to be tighter-belted for a bit.

[AcesandEights]

Okay, finally got to see it and I have to say it wasn't too bad. I actually voted 'liked it.'

I mean, I had low expectations and it's not a film done in a serious vein, so if you approach from that standpoint it's pretty enjoyable. Is it what I had hoped for? No. I just look at it as a very entertaining & well done Sci Fi made-for-tv level of film, even with that damnably cheesy CGI. They really just should have thought things through a bit more and it could have been something other than a guilty pleasure for me.

Also, I think the commentary level of the film was back in check for most of the movie and a bit more subtle in topic and approach.

[BillyRay]

muldooooooooon!!!

[AcesandEights]

muldooooooooon!!!

The island was obviously a riff on Hy-Brazil.

No? You don't believe that? :( Well, I tried to make sense of it, but yeah, the Irish accent/island culture was annoying and unnecessarily overplayed.

[BillyRay]

Oh yeah, it's one we can pick apart for days.

(And we have!)

I don't have any issue with Zeds + Comedy (Go figure), so I enjoyed it for what it is - a fun little zombie flick that doesn't take itself too seriously (or make a helluva lot of sense).

[AcesandEights]

Oh yeah, it's one we can pick apart for days.

(And we have!)

Yeah, I picked up on that :lol:


I don't have any issue with Zeds + Comedy (Go figure), so I enjoyed it for what it is - a fun little zombie flick that doesn't take itself too seriously (or make a helluva lot of sense).

I'm getting a bit worn out on zeds as a punchline, but I knew what to expect going in and wasn't overly put off by the cornball cgi kills (flare gun/roundhose, some of the other bad cgi 'gags' etc.).

This does make me want to see some personal horror/actually scary zombie films now, though. To me, Survival was a an even cornier action-zed film than Dawn '04 (which I enjoyed for what it was).

[strayrider]

Yeah, I picked up on that :lol:



I'm getting a bit worn out on zeds as a punchline, but I knew what to expect going in and wasn't overly put off by the cornball cgi kills (flare gun/roundhose, some of the other bad cgi 'gags' etc.).

This does make me want to see some personal horror/actually scary zombie films now, though. To me, Survival was a an even cornier action-zed film than Dawn '04 (which I enjoyed for what it was).

Romero is most funny when he isn't trying to be funny. Dawn had a few good laffs (not including the "pie fight") such as the expression on Stephen's face when Peter shattered the glass in the skylight with his rifle, or the way that Roger looked up in awe at he rotors of the chopper after the helicopter zombie rose into the whirling blades. These scenes always got a chuckle in the theater (of course, it WAS the midnight movies and everyone was stoned ... but still).

Humor does have its place in a zombie film, just as it does in life, but c'mon be subtle about it.

I think what I miss most in GAR's recent works is a sense of impending doom and the mood that comes with it. He "almost" recaptured it when VanSprang's Guard buddy bought it, but this scene somehow fell short. In fact (IMHO) every character's death since Stephen has fallen short of the "mark". Since then it's been: "Oh, you've been bitten? Here, let me shoot you in the head before the viewing audience has a chance to grieve over your loss."

C'mon, GAR, one more film ... make it moody ... make it gritty ... make it depressing to the point that we walk out of the theater so downtrodden and stressed that we want to scream. Forget comic books, forget comedy ... forget corny CGI gags ... take our emotions, twist them into knots, and kick us out on the street to deal with it ...

:D

-stray-

[Purge]

Just got done watching it a few minutes ago. Better than I expected. The old Irish countryside was a nice contrast to the ensuing chaos, and it had some nice plot twists.

[AcesandEights]

I think what I miss most in GAR's recent works is a sense of impending doom and the mood that comes with it. He "almost" recaptured it when VanSprang's Guard buddy bought it, but this scene somehow fell short. In fact (IMHO) every character's death since Stephen has fallen short of the "mark". Since then it's been: "Oh, you've been bitten? Here, let me shoot you in the head before the viewing audience has a chance to grieve over your loss."

I definitely agree, Stray! I was a bit put off that they didn't play up the creepiness of the boat and zombies just popped up when GAR felt a 'cool' kill effect or character emphasis was needed (O'Flynn forking a zombie to death :| ). I mean that boat was a little creepy just by nature of how it looked and the fact it was abandoned, toss in a little atmosphere, tension and actors acting a bit more creeped out by the circumstances and and it could have been great!

Anyway, good to see you posting, Stray!

[Gillfigno]

Just watched it on Netflix.

It was heads above Land and better than Diary as well. It was watchable, but I'm not sure if I would buy the movie or not. There were so many instances where I would have done something different, especially in regard to sticking with tonality. The pacing was all over the place and I felt the film could have used more exposition. Maybe have George edit again. One second we're watching a tense scene of a guy diving from an armored car to brave a zombie infested river, and suddenly the film cuts to a looney tunes smoking-hole-in-the-wall explosion gag with matching one-liner.

Not that I want a Romero film that is devoid of humor, I just think that he has been kind of beating a dead horse lately. Well, zombie-eating a dead horse, I guess. It's not like Land where I felt the whole film is trash because of pretty much every aspect I can think of, but this is no where near the quality of Martin and Day of the Dead, two films that are humorless. Romero should be as subtle with the humor as in Dawn or not bother, I think. These are supposedly Horror films, after all. It would be nice to have a zombie be something to be feared, instead they're always used as some kind of gag or deux ex machina in these newer Romero films.

Please no more CG glory kills. It's embarrassing. I can stand a screwdriver to the ear or shovel skull-capitation, which were well set up and had neat effects. I can't take any more weird cartoon CG novelty kills. It's too much like a video game. In fact, the Flare Gun kill was on a game called Blood back in 1997.

Otherwise the film was good but nothing spectacular. Though I would say I 'liked it.'

[MoonSylver]

Welcome aboard. :) Agreed on most if not all of the points above. There does seem to be a lot of consensus on them.


Not that I want a Romero film that is devoid of humor, I just think that he has been kind of beating a dead horse lately. Well, zombie-eating a dead horse, I guess. '

http://pawsru.org/fc/thumb/fc76170_I-SEE-WHAT-YOU-DID-THERE_HOLYSHITs.jpg

:lol:

[Trin]

1) CGI gags. No more. It looks horrible and takes you straight out of the picture.
2) Horse Riding. No. Just NO.
3) Van Sprang's over-acting. I liked the guy in the last two films, but he just takes it totally overboard with this one. Some of his character's mood swings are enough to give the audience whiplash.
I like Bassman's list here. I'd add that message driven plot is no longer acceptable.

I think the comedy has taken on a different tone than in Dawn. The pie fight may have been silly but it served the purpose of displaying the biker's lack of fear, and lack of respect, for the zombies and the dangers they pose. It was obvious that they were used to moving around among them. It also pointed out the callous nature that they dealt with the former living breathing people. No respect for the dead. Peter acknowledges that some "still have respect for the dead" even as they risk their lives to house their dead. The bikers are everything opposite of that. That helped establish them as reckless villains.

The fire extinguisher? The flare gun? The dynamite blowing up the shack? What do any of these gags serve?

[ProfessorChaos]

it amazes me how some like land and hate the other two, some enjoy diary but not the others, and apparently there's even those who prefer survival to either. talk about different strokes....and then there's those who either hate or like all three.

it's funny, cuz there seems to be a trend of not liking at least one of, if not two of the newer dead films...but nobody ever has much negative stuff to say about the older films.

on another topic, i went out with some friends last night, and another friend we ran into at the bars told me that he had rented survival (i got him on a zombie kick, he's a big fan of the first 3 movies and TWD) since it was the newest romero dead film and he'd never heard me mention it...as if i'd not heard of it and he wanted to one-up me, i guess.... i told him there was a reason i didn't bring it up, and asked him what he thought, to which he replied "i should've invited you over and forced you to watch that piece of shit with me...it was bad, man." i told him i couldn't even finish it, and bought him a beer since i indirectly caused him to waste $$ renting it.

[Trin]

it amazes me how some like land and hate the other two, some enjoy diary but not the others, and apparently there's even those who prefer survival to either. talk about different strokes....and then there's those who either hate or like all three.
That is really remarkable. I don't think there are any two people who completely agree on Love/Like/Dislike/Hate across all three newer movies.


...since i indirectly caused him to waste $$ renting it.
GAR has transcended traditional horror. Survival is the true meaning of horror. It takes your money and leaves an empty place in your soul. Enjoying movies is for romantic comedies. Wusses. A horror movie should fill you with hate. Your buddy shoulda come up and punched you in the nose for all the deep suffering you caused him, and then you say, "Yeah, that's right. It was a pretty good horror movie huh."

[MoonSylver]

GAR has transcended traditional horror. Survival is the true meaning of horror. It takes your money and leaves an empty place in your soul. Enjoying movies is for romantic comedies. Wusses. A horror movie should fill you with hate. Your buddy shoulda come up and punched you in the nose for all the deep suffering you caused him, and then you say, "Yeah, that's right. It was a pretty good horror movie huh."

Horror movie performance art? :rockbrow:

:lol:

[AcesandEights]

Survival is the true meaning of horror. It takes your money and leaves an empty place in your soul.

Like Vegas?

[rawr]

There was not a single redeeming quality in this entire film.
Horrible SFX.
Horrible story.
Horrible acting.
Horrible dialogue.
The score was easily forgettable and presented no atmosphere.

I love George Romero, I grew up with his movies just like most of us have, but he needs to stop.

[ProfessorChaos]

i seriously think the only reason some come to the defense of this turd of a film is the fact that it's got "GEORGE A RUHMERO!!!!!!!!!!'s" in the title.

that would be the only redeeming feature i see...and even that ain't saying much these days.

[blind2d]

Chaos is right. While I didn't mind Land or Diary as much... Survival just... it just sucks, in so many different ways. I mean, the gags were dorky and contrived, the entire plot was contrived, for that matter! And there's no point for her being a lesbian other than her being a lesbian! Which is brainless. Also, money? Who would honestly give a shit about money during the zombopocalypse? I guess that was an issue I had with Land, too, but then it felt a little more... I don't know, believable? Class warfare, and all that. Anyway, what the hell is up with her having a twin?! Why did that have to be a surprise? Why did all the "good guys" who died die in such flippant ways? Why did I hate that young man from the woods throughout the entire film? Maybe it's because he didn't fucking do anything! Why the hell did she let herself get bit by her sister? I could go on and on, but yeah... I am disappoint, and though I won't throw my copy away, I must say it'll be a while before I ever get the urge to rewatch it. Damn...

[MoonSylver]

It's growing on me in some odd & unidentifiable way I can't explain. (no fungus or disease jokes please :p ) I don't know WHY, but I have the REALLY strong & irresistible urge to watch it again soon, which is strange, as I really do think it's the weakest of the series...:confused:

[BillyRay]

It's growing on me in some odd & unidentifiable way I can't explain. (no fungus or disease jokes please :p ) I don't know WHY, but I have the REALLY strong & irresistible urge to watch it again soon, which is strange, as I really do think it's the weakest of the series...:confused:

I'll put it in one word:

"MULDOOOOOOOOOOOONNN!!!!!!!

[AcesandEights]

The funny thing is, it seems fairly well received in the poll, I think better than Land or Diary.

For me--to be honest--it was a case of lowered expectations. It was okay and I liked it for what it was: light, made for sci fi channel standard spaghetti zombie film, and a pretty good one at that.

As much as people say the movie is heavily defended by fans of Romero, there's a big time case for people coming on here unduly pissed--pissed about a zombie movie of all things--because Romero disappoints their life long expectations.












PS--Muldooooooooon!!!

[MoonSylver]

http://i1098.photobucket.com/albums/g374/moonsylver/muldoon.jpg

http://i1098.photobucket.com/albums/g374/moonsylver/muldoon3.jpg

http://i1098.photobucket.com/albums/g374/moonsylver/muldoon4.jpg

http://i1098.photobucket.com/albums/g374/moonsylver/muldoon2.jpg

[BillyRay]

My heart is warmed that this is a Thing now...

[Trin]

There was one redeeming.... well, redeeming might be an overstatement...

There was one facet of the movie I enjoyed. The opening conflict between O'Flynn and the family with the children in the cribs. When you hear that the central conflict of the movie is centered around two factions - one who support destroying the dead, and one who support housing them... well, it sounds pretty hokey. I mean, what's to decide there? You eradicate zombies, no debate required. But when O'Flynn is faced with having to put a bullet through the heads of those kids it was very well done. Especially him losing the will to implement his own recommendation. These are not vicous monsters. They are docile children chained in cribs. This isn't years into it. It's maybe a week.

I don't know. I pretty much agree with all the rants about Survival. And I don't think it came through on the solid premise. But for a second there it was pretty cool.

[MoonSylver]

When you hear that the central conflict of the movie is centered around two factions - one who support destroying the dead, and one who support housing them... well, it sounds pretty hokey. I mean, what's to decide there? You eradicate zombies, no debate required.

For a reasonable person yes. But you can bet that early on there would be some people who would try to keep them around thinking "they're not REALLY dead" or "they can be 'cured'...". So I liked the premise, but the execution? Yeah...other than that one moment...:(

[darth los]

For a reasonable person yes. But you can bet that early on there would be some people who would try to keep them around thinking "they're not REALLY dead" or "they can be 'cured'...". So I liked the premise, but the execution? Yeah...other than that one moment...:(

Well, with merely a few days into the plague I can see how there would be those who would be wary of shooting the loves of their lives in the face unless they absolutely had to. A few days into it how do they know they are not just sick or crazy?

But once it's been confirmed that they were actually dead and not sick then keeping them around is not an option.


There was a post not to long ago about the inconsistencies in survival and one of the points was that at first muldoon wanted to keep the dead around,But on the return to plum he was inexplicably shooting zombies in the head with abandon.

Me thinks that he too came to the realization that they were not alive and just sick. Once he found out they were really dead and would that his wife would rip his throat out if given the chance he took a harder stance and tried to look for alternative food sources for them.

:cool:

[Trin]

There was a post not to long ago about the inconsistencies in survival and one of the points was that at first muldoon wanted to keep the dead around,But on the return to plum he was inexplicably shooting zombies in the head with abandon.
It wasn't that inexplicable. At first he was shooting the ones that weren't kin. Especially in light of O'Flynn sending masses of people seeking safe haven to the island I can see how he'd be led to thin the heard of walkers. Later he was shooting them as he couldn't control them or entice them with food. He was getting overrun and knew it.


Me thinks that he too came to the realization that they were not alive and just sick. Once he found out they were really dead and would that his wife would rip his throat out if given the chance he took a harder stance and tried to look for alternative food sources for them.But did his wife make any indication she'd rip his throat out? I found it odd that some of the zombies were very docile even with humans quite close. She seemed to be one of them.

The alternate food source thing was the biggest "inexplicable" for me. Why does GAR harp on finding alternative food sources? They don't get full so it won't pacify them (like food does me). They don't degrade without food so there's no need to feed them while awaiting a cure. If they won't eat bacon then are they worth saving anyhow?

[krakenslayer]

The alternate food source thing was the biggest "inexplicable" for me. Why does GAR harp on finding alternative food sources? They don't get full so it won't pacify them (like food does me). They don't degrade without food so there's no need to feed them while awaiting a cure. If they won't eat bacon then are they worth saving anyhow?

The idea in Survival was not simply to get them to eat that which is not human, but to redirect the craving onto something else. By default, a zombie craves human flesh - it sees someone walking around and lunges after them drooling - but if you get it to eat something else, and it enjoys that "something else", and that "something else" is made more accessible than human flesh, then it stands to reason that they will, by degrees, become less interested in pursuing the unobtainable human meat (which most of them have never succeeded in tasting anyway) and rechannel their hunger towards this new food source. It might work - it's fairly sound from a behaviourist psychology perspective - or it might not.

In Day, Frankenstein's plan was somewhat similar, but geared towards a different end. He wanted to find something that the zombies enjoyed, something that could be used as a reward, in order that he could train them. It's like training a dog: it does something good, you give it a treat; it does something bad, you withold the treat. Eventually, the behaviour becomes so ingrained that they will do the "good" action even in the absence of a treat. What was the potential benefit of this? It's only implied in the film, but very clear in the original script: they can train the zombies to kill other zombies.

[MoonSylver]

If they won't eat bacon then are they worth saving anyhow?

:lol:

"Paging Lou Cipher...Lou Cipher to the white courtesy phone..." ;)

[FunkyPertwee]

I grew up with the first three Romero movies and the remake by Savini, but this movie was total crap.

Its like he just wanted to give a hand to a college film crew and just stuck his name on the finished product.

[krisvds]

Naaah. Survival is a bloody good time. It's Romero not taking his 'legacy' serious at all and having a ball. Sure, the CGI was crap but I really dug the overall tone. It's a playful '...of the dead' film that i liked a whole lot more than 'Diary'. Let's just stop waiting for another 'dawn' or 'day' and enjoy these recent films for what they are: smart, witty horror films that are very different from whatever else the genre has to offer. (ducks for cover)

[bassman]

enjoy these recent films for what they are: smart, witty .....

http://thegodof.net/images/blow_my_brains_out3.jpg

[triste realtà]

http://thegodof.net/images/blow_my_brains_out3.jpg

Typical Walking Dead fan if you insult the show

Copied from Amazon:


I personally love zombie movies but this show goes along a different route. It's not simply action with shooting and killing zombie after zombie from what I've seen, this show actually has feeling and emotion behind it (family drama etc.)! Here that moms? This is a heartfelt show that you would probably enjoy watching with your kids, after all...it's rated TV-14. The kids probably won't be up to see it because it's on at 10pm but you can still enjoy it! Oh hell, I'll admit it...it even almost made me cry a couple times! BEAUTIFUL!

http://www.smileysnetwork.com/lol/lol15.gif

[krisvds]

http://thegodof.net/images/blow_my_brains_out3.jpg

Pfffff. Weak.

Come on. Face it: Zombies in these days of romero remakes and zombie soaps on tv have become a parody of themselves. For Romero the zombie movie is just a vehicule to express an idea. Here he also toys around with the lexicon of the western.
His latest 'of the dead' films aren't instant classics, nor are they made for his hardcore fanbase who keep praying for another danw/day. Not gonna happen. And thank god for artists who refuse to repeat themselves to please their jaded followers.
Survival is one of the most funny misanthropic films dealing with religion and humanity's worst behaviour in recent history. It's done in a lighthearted tone but it IS way smarter than most recent horror films.

Now if you want to blow your brains out because of that ....

[bassman]

http://i1098.photobucket.com/albums/g374/moonsylver/muldoon.jpg

[LouCipherr]

:lol:

"Paging Lou Cipher...Lou Cipher to the white courtesy phone..." ;)

*pick up white courtesy phone*

Hello? Yes, this is him. What? They won't eat bacon? FUCK 'EM, KILL THEM ALL!" :lol:

[clanglee]

Typical Walking Dead fan if you insult the show

Copied from Amazon:



http://www.smileysnetwork.com/lol/lol15.gif

but. . . I do watch it with my kid. . . . . she loves the show.. . . . Bad dad?

[Gryphon]

Pfffff. Weak.

Come on. Face it: Zombies in these days of romero remakes and zombie soaps on tv have become a parody of themselves. For Romero the zombie movie is just a vehicule to express an idea. Here he also toys around with the lexicon of the western.
His latest 'of the dead' films aren't instant classics, nor are they made for his hardcore fanbase who keep praying for another danw/day. Not gonna happen. And thank god for artists who refuse to repeat themselves to please their jaded followers.
Survival is one of the most funny misanthropic films dealing with religion and humanity's worst behaviour in recent history. It's done in a lighthearted tone but it IS way smarter than most recent horror films.

Now if you want to blow your brains out because of that ....

I enjoyed Survival. No, it's not "Dawn" or "Day," but it is a fun zombie movie for what it is. Sometimes I just want to watch a zombie movie and giggle. And, I just love the end, with the two clowns who ran the familes, dead, on that hill, firing empty guns at each other till the end of time ;) Typical human behaviour really.

[blind2d]

And that is the point of the scene, Gryph. Best part of the movie, I think... and maybe the child zeds at the beginning.
But yeah... I think "Bite Me"'s flare gun effects were better (or at least somewhat more realistic) than the one in 'Survival'... anyone with me here?

[Gryphon]

And that is the point of the scene, Gryph. Best part of the movie, I think... and maybe the child zeds at the beginning.
But yeah... I think "Bite Me"'s flare gun effects were better (or at least somewhat more realistic) than the one in 'Survival'... anyone with me here?

Just saw "Bite me" and yeah, that was very well done, and probably more realistic. Maybe GAR just wanted to see a zombie with it's head on fire ;)

[blind2d]

Yeah, I guess so... it was a funny idea, but the fake fire just looked... too fake, y'know? You could really tell it wasn't real... still, good idea, just kind of poorly executed.

[Gryphon]

Yeah, I guess so... it was a funny idea, but the fake fire just looked... too fake, y'know? You could really tell it wasn't real... still, good idea, just kind of poorly executed.

True. What did you think about the acid-on-the-head zombie in Diary, though?

[blind2d]

i actually thought that was pretty neat. I don't know if other people thought so... but I liked it!

[MinionZombie]

Well a clear majority "liked it", so once again - like with Land and Diary - HPOTD's response was more positive than negative by a decided margin.

The haters who shout the loudest might not like it, but it's the way it is.

[bassman]

Having now seen it several times....I think my vote was a bit too generous....

[MinionZombie]

Having now seen it several times....I think my vote was a bit too generous....

What did you vote originally?

[bassman]

I voted I liked it at first. But the more time I've had to sit on it.....I would now probably vote disappointed or meh.

No biggie. Opinions change.

The bad part is that both this film and Diary have been dropping on my charts. I still enjoy Land, maybe even more as time goes on, but these two are sinking faster and faster...

[darth los]

Having now seen it several times....I think my vote was a bit too generous....

LMFAO !

Survival sucks hairy donkey nuts.

That is all.

:cool:

[ProfessorChaos]

Well a clear majority "liked it", so once again - like with Land and Diary - HPOTD's response was more positive than negative by a decided margin.

The haters who shout the loudest might not like it, but it's the way it is.

i'd argue that the majority of HPotD'ers were on drugs or blinded by romero-fan-boy-ism when they saw this film and voted.

i honestly couldn't find any redeeming qualities at all in survival, and find the results of this poll to be very questionable....

[darth los]

i'd argue that the majority of HPotD'ers were on drugs or blinded by romero-fan-boy-ism when they saw this film and voted.

i honestly couldn't find any redeeming qualities at all in survival, and find the results of this poll to be very questionable....

You can add my name to that petition.

I posit that Gar released diary and survival in order to make Land look like a masterpiece.

:cool:

[Gryphon]

i actually thought that was pretty neat. I don't know if other people thought so... but I liked it!

Same here :D

[Andy]

Well a clear majority "liked it", so once again - like with Land and Diary - HPOTD's response was more positive than negative by a decided margin.

The haters who shout the loudest might not like it, but it's the way it is.

The majority of germans in 1930 thought Nazism was good, that make that right?

[MinionZombie]

i'd argue that the majority of HPotD'ers were on drugs or blinded by romero-fan-boy-ism when they saw this film and voted.

i honestly couldn't find any redeeming qualities at all in survival, and find the results of this poll to be very questionable....

Haters hate. :rolleyes:


The majority of germans in 1930 thought Nazism was good, that make that right?

http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/files/2010/02/double-facepalm.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

[Andy]

Sorry id had more than a few last night, it was my birthday this week so sank a couple of gentleman jacks.

[DubiousComforts]

The majority of germans in 1930 thought Nazism was good, that make that right?

Nazi Germany, Andy? Seriously?

Perspective = kaput!


Well a clear majority "liked it", so once again - like with Land and Diary - HPOTD's response was more positive than negative by a decided margin.
Noo, since your poll doesn't jive with certain opinions, MZ, the only logical conclusion is there must be conspiracy and intrigue afoot.

A new poll is required right away to get to the bottom of it!

[MinionZombie]

You can't define your opinion by either loving it, liking it, neither here nor there, being disappointed by it, or hating it? :rockbrow:

Must there be options for "I like it, but only on Sundays whilst eating a cheese sandwich"? :rolleyes::D

Haters never change...:shifty:

[Trin]

The polls do have some blatantly contradictory results. For example, more people voted Liked or better for Survival than did for Land. So comparing separate polls shows that Survival was better liked than Land. However, in the comparison polls Survival does worse than Land. Huh? The only thing I can figure is that people's expectations went down after Land and Diary such that Survival was judged less harshly on its own merits.

Personally, I find it amazing that this poll showed Survival to be this well liked. It may be that the haters gonna hate like MZ says. But I think it's just as likely that the results are skewed based on the fact that people had to work harder to see the movie than either Land or Diary. How many people who hated Land didn't bother to see Survival?

[AcesandEights]

The polls do have some blatantly contradictory results. For example, more people voted Liked or better for Survival than did for Land. So comparing separate polls shows that Survival was better liked than Land. However, in the comparison polls Survival does worse than Land. Huh? The only thing I can figure is that people's expectations went down after Land and Diary such that Survival was judged less harshly on its own merits.

Exactly. Survival totally got graded on a curve, for me anyway.

Survival can thank Diary if it ever manages to graduate and get into med school.

[bassman]

You've also got to consider the passage of time. Opinions can change as time goes on. Some people could see Survival for the first time and think "hey, that wasn't too bad!", but after letting it simmer for a while and maybe giving it extra viewings, their opinion of the film starts to drop. This also works both ways.

When I first saw Diary I thought it was good. Then I watched it some more and started to very much dislike it. The same goes for Survival. When I first saw it I liked it and while I now don't dislike it as much as Diary, it's also dropped on my personal charts a bit.

Land is the only one that's stayed constant and maybe even climbed a few notches. Which is odd considering how it divided these boards. I honestly expected it to drop, but I'm still digging it....

[blind2d]

Not me, senor. I saw Survival first time, thought "... okay... I forget, was there anything good in there?"
Second time, "... nope! Oh well..."
Just me, a'course.

[DubiousComforts]

The polls do have some blatantly contradictory results. For example, more people voted Liked or better for Survival than did for Land. So comparing separate polls shows that Survival was better liked than Land.
Perhaps this simply demostrates there are many people here with a sense of perspective.

[MinionZombie]

Or the polls could be entirely independent of one-another. :rockbrow:

[Gryphon]

Or the polls could be entirely independent of one-another. :rockbrow:

What a concept! :eek:

[blind2d]

No need for the smiley, Gryph. Your avatar there works juuuust fine...

[ChokeOnEm]

My local Blockbuster was going out of business, so I managed to pick up "Diary" and "Survival" for five dollars a piece. Must say, "Diary" still hasn't grown on me at all. Just a real heavy-handed tough slog of a movie to sit through. As for "Survival"...the concept of "the Hatfields vs. McCoys with zombies" has a quirky charm, but the execution remains poor. Muldoon and O'Flynn are prolly George's most colorful characters since Kaufman and Captain Rhodes. Kenneth Welsh makes the movie for me. That emo twirp from Saw III remains the film's Big Daddy. When will somebody save George Romero from himself? Glad to finally add "Survival" to my collection. "Diary" isn't even worth five bucks.

[Epidemic79]

Well,I liked it enough to say it was'Okay'. But clearly Not Romero's best what so ever. It had its good moments tho.

[hawk44]

Where is the "This movie was a fucking joke " option? Didnt see that choice....

[ProfessorChaos]

^

( i like this guy already! )

:lol:

[erisi236]

Having just watched it for the first time just now I'll put my vote as "meh". It was better then Diary just for the fact that as least Survival is a film and not random bullshit tossed together, I *really* hated that flick.

[Yojimbo]

After viewing Survival a few more times, I still find that I like this film, however there are a couple of things that do bug me - flare gun/fire extinguisher kill/clumsy cgi and detestable waif boy notwithstanding.

I agree with those posters who have pointed out how ridiculous Sgt. Nicotine's overacting was at points, especially when he over-emotes in the armored truck. Don't know it it was bad direction, or maybe Sprang is an actor without much of a range. Still he is head and shoulders above all of the crappy acting in Diary, a film which has become over time to be my least favorite- primarily because I hated all the primary characters and thought that their acting was crap with the sole exception of the drunk professor - though I still do like that film all the same.

I am also beginning to think that there was a "They killed Kenny! You Bastards!!!" line that was probably filmed and later dropped.

Also, I think it was Blind that questioned the twin daughter angle --I agree with him and this still does not seem to make much sense to me. After thinking it over, I am beginning to believe that maybe this twin stuff was written in later and that initially there was only supposed to be one daughter, but for some reason - maybe a continuity error or something else- they decided to explain away the issue by making her a twin. The entire twin angle does seem way too clumsy and makes things so weird and complicated that there must have been a reason for it.

I do also agree that the attack on the rednecks at the beginning was a little awkward too, and they have my sympathies. I think a little more could have been done to make it seem that they deserved to be executed since it seems too severe if all they were being taken down for was mistreatment of ghouls. Yeah, I get that one of them went for a weapon, but still it could have been better done.

I still do not have a problem with the humor though - actually still like the bits, however over the top they were.

[Doc]

As much, as people loathe Romero's recent films I can't help but, think they'll be just like the Star Wars Prequels. Sure we don't like them, but the hate will die with this generation. Just like no kids hate the SW prequels, I doubt future generations of Dead fans are gonna have the high expectations, and hopes we did when these were coming out. I'm not saying they won't be criticized, but I doubt we will ever get future fans going batshit over the latter films.

[ChokeOnEm]

After viewing Survival a few more times, I still find that I like this film, however there are a couple of things that do bug me - flare gun/fire extinguisher kill/clumsy cgi and detestable waif boy notwithstanding.


The mass feeding frenzy at the end really bugs me. The farmhand opening the gate and letting the deadheads out after being shot is too similar to Miguel in Day of the Dead. Also, George plagarizes himself when Muldoon at one point explains how "he keeps the people fed on the island and employed." It's pratically the same speech Kaufman gives in Land about "providing games and booze to the people." Again, where's the quality control?

[blind2d]

I totally forgot they called 'em 'Deadheads', probably about three times as bad as 'Stenches'!
So what, only Grateful Dead fans can be zombies now? I just... grr...

[MoonSylver]

I totally forgot they called 'em 'Deadheads', probably about three times as bad as 'Stenches'!
So what, only Grateful Dead fans can be zombies now? I just... grr...

Let's see...they smell, they mindlessly stagger across the country, they have a ravenous hunger....

If the shoe fits....:lol:

[blind2d]

Lolz, Moon. That made my evening!

[ProfessorChaos]

Lolz, Moon. That made my evening!

http://www.iphonefootprint.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/thats-what-she-said.jpg

[MoonSylver]

Lolz, Moon. That made my evening!


http://www.iphonefootprint.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/thats-what-she-said.jpg

They really just write themselves don't they? My work here is done...:clown:

[kirathesaviour]

I loved the movie. If i'm honest, i'm a much bigger fan of the classic Dawn of the Dead and others from around that era, but as far as modern Zombie films go, Survival was one of the best. Brilliant ending, good old fashioned mexican standoff and it definitely hit all the buttons with gore. Top Notch! Probs 4 and a half stars from me.

[Darksider18]

It was a hell of a movie! haha.

Seriously on-the-spot acting, the bad guy was seriously nasty (and a nasty death scene to match lol), loved the plot, zombies were scary and the jamaican actor was my favourite. :). i loved the film. end of. lol.

[glazedoverdead]

Totally disappointed. I could only have been more disappointed if I hadn't been so disappointed when I first saw Diary. Seriously, the storyline is great, the music, and effects are pretty good, but come on... The whole "not spending money on decent actors" is getting really old. The actors are totally unbelievable. I can't get into the movie at all if the lines the actors are reading sound exactly like lines the actors are reading. Also, some of the one liners in the screenplay are cheesy and I just lost my interest in the whole story. It worked great in 78... but its played out now.

[blind2d]

Glazed quotes Daley. And perhaps he is right.

[AcesandEights]

The whole "not spending money on decent actors" is getting really old. The actors are totally unbelievable.

I couldn't disagree more. I thought Kenneth Welsh nailed his role, I just don't get why he never got his lucky charms!!!

http://imabouttocomealive.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/luckycharms1.jpg

[MoonSylver]

I couldn't disagree more. I thought Kenneth Welsh nailed his role, I just don't get why he never got his lucky charms!!!

http://i1098.photobucket.com/albums/g374/moonsylver/mySuperLamePic_f6294d3549ffc3d099f4f4041c510c81.jp g

[glazedoverdead]

Ok ok...I'll give you Kenneth Welsh. His acting was actually the only believable acting in the movie and he is pretty good.

[AcesandEights]

Sorry for the misunderstanding, GlazedOver. I was actually joking. I thought Welsh was waaaaaaaaahaaaay over the top.

[Mr.G]

Sorry for the misunderstanding, GlazedOver. I was actually joking. I thought Welsh was waaaaaaaaahaaaay over the top.

Whose acting WASN'T over the top? That's a better question! ;)

[glazedoverdead]

Whose acting WASN'T over the top? That's a better question! ;)

Good point he definately doesn't deserve an oscar, but atleast he can OVER act, while the other cast members acted like a special ed highschool drama team... :D cheers

[blind2d]

Kenny died pretty well.

[Gryphon]

Kenny died pretty well.

They killed Kenny. Those bastards!

[blind2d]

Mwa-mwa. Had to be said, didn't it? Good show. Gold star for you.

[Yojimbo]

They killed Kenny. Those bastards!

Like I said, I wouldn't be suprised if they filmed that dialogue - seemed too much of a setup.

[ZombieKeeper]

Disappointed. Very
Too many scenes with zombies randomly walking around corners only to be dispatched for the sake of the setup.
Incoherent story.
Far too many scenes didn't link and completely threw out the flow of the movie and made me go WTF.


Agree with the above.

[Tom Price]

Disjointed pile of dog vomit from beginning to end full of non-sequiturs.
Favorite one when pseudo tough ex army guy finds dead non zombie people in the lake "WHO DID THIS I want a piece of him".
When he finally does guess what happens?
RIGHT,....NOTHING

[darth los]

And with that sarge is probably the best actor in the film.

:cool:

[blind2d]

I thought her horse was the best actor. Amazing death scene, rivaling Kenny's.

[DeadJonas190]

I was disappointed with it. I felt it had a lot of potential in the story, but the terrible CGI distracted from the movie so much.

I watched the special features where George said that the cost of using actual effects was too high in comparison so he went with CGI. He used the example of them shooting the heads on the stake and said something about how if the muzzle flashes didnt match the explosions then they had to clean up the entire set and reshoot. Then, George goes on to say how that all the muzzle flashes in the movie were CGI... so my question was why not just use squibs to blow the heads so it looks good and then do CGI muzzle flashes so they match up. It was little things like that which distraced me from the film and honestly, it's the only Romero zombie movie I have no desire to own because of this. However, I did like them bringing the guy from the previous 2 movies in playing the same character, that was cool.

[ChokeOnEm]

Watching the Romero-produced "Deadtime Stories" now. You think "Survival" blows goats for quarters? Check this camcorder dreck out. I used to criticize Wes Craven for slapping his name on every substandard production that came his way (i.e Wishmaster, Dracula 2000, They) but nothing compares to this. Oh, how the mighty have fallen. For shame, Mr. Romero. For shame (and I’m only eleven minutes into it!)

[Trin]

I was disappointed with it. I felt it had a lot of potential in the story, but the terrible CGI distracted from the movie so much.
So it was the terrible CGI? And not the fact that the terrible CGI was bringing to the screen ridiculous events like zombie heads on stakes and fire extinguishers exploding eyes and a flare gun igniting a zombie head? For me the CGI can't ruin it because the plot got there first.