Opinions on whether the Genre is Tired.

[Wyldwraith]

Hey all,
Been seeing a phrase in some version popping up frequently of late. Ie: "The (zombie movie) Genre is tired."

I don't, to be quite honest, really know which side of the intellectual camps concerning this notion I fit into, because it seems that one day I'm SO over Romero's shot-in-the-dark attempts to make a decent movie without a solid premise, good script and a good group of actors to begin with, while the next day I find myself enjoying the Evil Dead Trilogy more than I had in some time. Then I found myself watching a selection of solid B-grade survival horror flicks I've compiled over the years, and enjoying several of them more than I had in quite some time.

I can see arguments for or against the idea that the genre is wearing/winding down, but as usual I'm more interested in seeing what everyone else has to say on the subject before weighing in myself.

So?

[EvilNed]

Yes, yes, in a way. But not in a way that is beyond repair. But my problem with the Zombie Genre (as it looks today) is that it has steered more towards action than horror and terror. Ever since Dawn of the Dead 04, with it's running zombies, the genre has steered in another direction. This is really unfortunate because it's a direction I don't really like at all.

I really don't like running zombies the way they are presented in most films. A hypertempo of handheld cameras and hissing noises.

So yes, in that way, the zombie genre is tired. But if someone would just take a look at it and go back to it's roots and give us some more shambler-drama, then that would be awesome. And here I'm hoping for The Walking Dead and World War Z. Because even if the zombie genre is tired, it's also untapped. There are soooo many things you can do with it that have yet to be done.

[Publius]

So yes, in that way, the zombie genre is tired. But if someone would just take a look at it and go back to it's roots and give us some more shambler-drama, then that would be awesome. And here I'm hoping for The Walking Dead and World War Z. Because even if the zombie genre is tired, it's also untapped. There are soooo many things you can do with it that have yet to be done.

Well said!

[bassman]

Ever since Dawn of the Dead 04, with it's running zombies, the genre has steered in another direction. This is really unfortunate because it's a direction I don't really like at all.


I agree with all the points in your post, but just wanted to point out that in my opinion, 28 Days Later is when the tide turned. Regardless of whether or not they're zombies or that Return did it in the eighties, it was after 28 Days that the zombie(running, in particular) genre was revived. Then in turn, Dawn04 followed the example and countless more were trailing right behind.

yeah.....the genre has become a bit stale, but as ned pointed out, we just need someone to come in and bring back to the basics. Fingers crossed for TWD.

[Neil]

It feels tired... But that said we've still got loads of films (& TV series) coming out, many of which are great quality wise... The next few years will be interesting I recon, if only because of WWZ!

[EvilNed]

I agree with all the points in your post, but just wanted to point out that in my opinion, 28 Days Later is when the tide turned. Regardless of whether or not they're zombies or that Return did it in the eighties, it was after 28 Days that the zombie(running, in particular) genre was revived. Then in turn, Dawn04 followed the example and countless more were trailing right behind.

Of course, I forgot about that. 28 Days Later definetly inspired Dawn, I think. But it's also much less of an actionfilm than Dawn. It mixes drama and horror quite well.

[JDFP]

Is the genre tired? Of course not. No. People can always tell a good story about zombies or vampires or any other element by simply telling a good story and doing it well.

Are the people working and creating films tired? Oh yes, indeed. Darabont is going to be fresh blood and it will be a welcome change. Quoting from Roger Ebert (and one of my most favorite quotes): "It doesn't matter what the story is about but how the story goes about it."

j.p.

[Trin]

I agree with a lot of the points made here as well.

The genre isn't tired. Or put differently, the interest in the genre hasn't dulled. It's the new entries within the genre that are making it feel tired.

I could write a manifesto on why 28 Days (and 28 Weeks) were great ideas and high potential movies, but ultimately hurt the genre.

Dawn '04 further pushed action over suspense. It paved the way for more movies to attempt to cash in on this direction.

I Am Legend did nothing but show us that great books can become shallow, one-dimensional movies with popularity driven endings.

GAR's entries are mocking the genre at this point. Basically throwing wet towels on any flame of interest in the genre. The man who is well-known for creating the genre is doing everything he can to take it out with him.

No one writes good scripts. No one reads them. No one cares if the stuff on the screen makes sense. Gone are the thoughtful movies with solid plot and plausible motives and actions. Gone are clever plot twists that don't require a huge character flaw to manifest itself for events to play out.

Someone could write a really clever script and blow the genre right back to the top of the charts.

[Neil]

I agree with a lot of the points made here as well.

The genre isn't tired. Or put differently, the interest in the genre hasn't dulled. It's the new entries within the genre that are making it feel tired.

I could write a manifesto on why 28 Days (and 28 Weeks) were great ideas and high potential movies, but ultimately hurt the genre.

Dawn '04 further pushed action over suspense. It paved the way for more movies to attempt to cash in on this direction.

I Am Legend did nothing but show us that great books can become shallow, one-dimensional movies with popularity driven endings.

GAR's entries are mocking the genre at this point. Basically throwing wet towels on any flame of interest in the genre. The man who is well-known for creating the genre is doing everything he can to take it out with him.

No one writes good scripts. No one reads them. No one cares if the stuff on the screen makes sense. Gone are the thoughtful movies with solid plot and plausible motives and actions. Gone are clever plot twists that don't require a huge character flaw to manifest itself for events to play out.

Someone could write a really clever script and blow the genre right back to the top of the charts.

+0.99!!

ie: Virtually completely agree with you!

[darth los]

I agree with all the points in your post, but just wanted to point out that in my opinion, 28 Days Later is when the tide turned. Regardless of whether or not they're zombies or that Return did it in the eighties, it was after 28 Days that the zombie(running, in particular) genre was revived. Then in turn, Dawn04 followed the example and countless more were trailing right behind.

yeah.....the genre has become a bit stale, but as ned pointed out, we just need someone to come in and bring back to the basics. Fingers crossed for TWD.


Is the genre tired? Of course not. No. People can always tell a good story about zombies or vampires or any other element by simply telling a good story and doing it well.

Are the people working and creating films tired? Oh yes, indeed. Darabont is going to be fresh blood and it will be a welcome change. Quoting from Roger Ebert (and one of my most favorite quotes): "It doesn't matter what the story is about but how the story goes about it."

j.p.

One of the main problems is the same story gets told over and over.

How many outbreak scenarios can we stand that depict the same thing?

How many times do I have to sit through half a film before these yo-yo's figure out that they have to shoot them in the head to kill them, that if you get bitten it's a death sentence, and that their loved ones aren't their loved ones anymore?

That unquestionably has gotten stale.

Show us something else dammit! Widespread chaos. How different gov'ts and regions are affected and dealing with it etc. When and if nukes come into play. Different factions that arise from the ashes with their various agendas (To rule the new world in a despotic fashion or a benevolent one?).

The possiblilities are endless with the ghouls as the backdrop but again, all we keep getting is the the same story for over 40 years now and now it's not even being told in a compelling way anymore.

If not stale it's definitely souless.

*edit:

Add what trin said to my post and it illustrates my feelings on this completely.

:cool:

[bassman]

Judging from the few Walking Dead books i've seen, that show may give you the different scenarios you're looking for. I'm sure the more hardcore fans of the series could agree that TWD plays out great stories DURING the zombie outbreak, rather than focusing on the zombie outbreak and all those "rules" or cliches you mentioned.

[darth los]

Judging from the few Walking Dead books i've seen, that show may give you the different scenarios you're looking for. I'm sure the more hardcore fans of the series could agree that TWD plays out great stories DURING the zombie outbreak, rather than focusing on the zombie outbreak and all those "rules" or cliches you mentioned.

One can only hope.

And from that success the copycats that are sure to take their cue from that formula will hopefully defibrilate this thing we hold dear.

:cool:

[SRP76]

How can it be tired? You can almost count the wide-release zombie movies in the past 20 years on one hand. 99% of the population have no idea that all these small, DVD-only type flicks even exist.

[bassman]

How can it be tired? You can almost count the wide-release zombie movies in the past 20 years on one hand.



Dawn Of The Dead (2004)
28 Days Later (2002)
Shaun Of The Dead (2004)
28 Weeks Later (2007)
Planet Terror (2007)
Resident Evil (2002)
Zombieland (2009)
Diary Of The Dead (2007)
Survival Of The Dead(2010)
Land of The Dead (2005)
Braindead (1992)
Dance Of The Dead (2008)
Fido (2006)


These are just a few off the top of my head. Way more than a handful.:shifty:

[darth los]

And That's not counting RE's 3 sequels.

:cool:

[Legion2213]

The genre has also claimed footholds in the book/novel/comic market over the last few decades.

[DEAD BEAT]

Hey all,
Been seeing a phrase in some version popping up frequently of late. Ie: "The (zombie movie) Genre is tired."

I don't, to be quite honest, really know which side of the intellectual camps concerning this notion I fit into, because it seems that one day I'm SO over Romero's shot-in-the-dark attempts to make a decent movie without a solid premise, good script and a good group of actors to begin with, while the next day I find myself enjoying the Evil Dead Trilogy more than I had in some time. Then I found myself watching a selection of solid B-grade survival horror flicks I've compiled over the years, and enjoying several of them more than I had in quite some time.

I can see arguments for or against the idea that the genre is wearing/winding down, but as usual I'm more interested in seeing what everyone else has to say on the subject before weighing in myself.

So?

I guess its a preference.....the genre's not tired the recent lame attempts are but as far as comparisons go i think we all can agree that Romero hit it outta the park with Dawn '78!

"I mean come on we all know that were waiting for a movie to have such an impact as Dawn did!"

That said i enjoyed the evil dead flicks as well as other zombie genre directors...but a true fan never has those doubts a bout something that was that strong to bring them here in the first place!:cool:

[darth los]

I guess its a preference.....the genre's not tired the recent lame attempts are but as far as comparisons go i think we all can agree that Romero hit it outta the park with Dawn '78!

I would call it more lightning in a bottle.

That great of a zombie film will probaly never be made again.

There has been nothing before or since that can go toe to toe with it.

:cool:

[JDFP]

I would call it more lightning in a bottle.

That great of a zombie film will probaly never be made again.

There has been nothing before or since that can go toe to toe with it.

:cool:

Ah-< "Day of the Dead" >-choo!

Feel better now, thanks. :D

j.p.

[darth los]

Ah-< "Day of the Dead" >-choo!

Feel better now, thanks. :D

j.p.

I agree that day is technically the better film. However, if you put the same effects, etc. into dawn i believe it would blow it out of the water.

:cool:

[DEAD BEAT]

I agree that day is technically the better film. However, if you put the same effects, etc. into dawn i believe it would blow it out of the water.

:cool:


dude lemme tell you the 1 reason why i can't level Dawn and Day together is because after reading the original scrip it was shown what the movie could have been...possibly as bad ass as Dawn, but i felt it was half assed...not that it was GAR's fault but to tell truth i don't think he thought he'd ever do another zombie flick again after that one!;)

[darth los]

dude lemme tell you the 1 reason why i can't level Dawn and Day together is because after reading the original scrip it was shown what the movie could have been...possibly as bad ass as Dawn, but i felt it was half assed...not that it was GAR's fault but to tell truth i don't think he thought he'd ever do another zombie flick again after that one!;)

I thought many elements of the original day script made it into land and truthfully it didn't work very well, imo.

:cool:

[SRP76]

Dawn Of The Dead (2004)
28 Days Later (2002)
Shaun Of The Dead (2004)
28 Weeks Later (2007)
Planet Terror (2007)
Resident Evil (2002)
Zombieland (2009)
Diary Of The Dead (2007)
Survival Of The Dead(2010)
Land of The Dead (2005)
Braindead (1992)
Dance Of The Dead (2008)
Fido (2006)


These are just a few off the top of my head. Way more than a handful.:shifty:

Night '90
Dawn '04
Shaun
Land
Zombieland

That's it.

28 aren't zombie movies. Resident Evil are videogame movies, with much focus on creatures other than zombies. All the rest are obscure. Diary was in what, 50 theaters? Same with Survival. And the rest I've never even heard of, and I'm a zombie "fan". So you know the general public isn't aware.

[BillyRay]

Night '90
Dawn '04
Shaun
Land
Zombieland

That's it.

28 aren't zombie movies. Resident Evil are videogame movies, with much focus on creatures other than zombies. All the rest are obscure. Diary was in what, 50 theaters? Same with Survival. And the rest I've never even heard of, and I'm a zombie "fan". So you know the general public isn't aware.

So they only count as decent Zombie flicks if you liked them?

Or if they were reviewed in Entertainment Weakly?

28 days is thematicly a zombie pic. Altho' Rez Evil is based on a video game, those games are grounded in the Zombie genre.

The general public is more aware of obscure films and genres than you realize, Star Child. There's this thing called the Internet, now.

Plus - B-movies by their very nature are "cult". That's why the genre was born, to fill screens at Drive-ins and Grindhouses. To ask for a lot of Big Budget, First-Run Zombie Films is, well, asking for a lot.

[bassman]

28 aren't zombie movies.

To John Q Public, they are.


Resident Evil are videogame movies, with much focus on creatures other than zombies.
That doesn't make them any less zombie movies. The bikers are a big focus of Dawn, does that make it a prequel to Knightriders? Once again, to anyone outside of this site and few others, the RE films are zombie movies.



All the rest are obscure. Diary was in what, 50 theaters? Same with Survival.

True....Diary wasn't in many theaters, but it's been prominently displayed at all of my local stores since release. It's also shown regularly on the premium movie channels. As for the rest....they may not have had huge theater numbers, but they're just as popular on DVD as Diary. Fairly large numbers when you consider the smaller guys like DJ.


The zombie genre is definitely not minimal. There are tons of films out there, small and large. As mentioned before, it's also huge in other mediums such as Video Games, Comics, Books, etc. But it's definitely a thriving genre right now. The real slump was in the nineties. It all picked back up in the early two thousands. The only problem is that there is fewer good than bad.

[BillyRay]

The zombie genre is definitely not minimal. There are tons of films out there, small and large. As mentioned before, it's also huge in other mediums such as Video Games, Comics, Books, etc. But it's definitely a thriving genre right now. The real slump was in the nineties. It all picked back up in the early two thousands. The only problem is that there is fewer good than bad.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturgeon's_Law

[AcesandEights]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturgeon's_Law

Answering a post by Bassman with just a wikipedia link is so evilly delicious that I am forced to approve!

And thank you, as though this sounds familiar I certainly learned more than I knew before I forgot whatever little I had previously learned. :D

[bassman]

Answering a post by Bassman with just a wikipedia link is so evilly delicious that I am forced to approve!


How so? Seems to me that he was agreeing with the thought that most zombie films are bad....

[AcesandEights]

How so? Seems to me that he was agreeing with the thought that most zombie films are bad....

I thought you had a thing against (over?)use of wikipedia during web discussions? I've seen you mention it a few times the last couple of weeks., perhaps I misinterpreted?

[bassman]

I thought you had a thing against (over?)use of wikipedia during web discussions? I've seen you mention it a few times the last couple of weeks., perhaps I misinterpreted?

Ohhhh. In that case, yeah it's pretty funny.

And no I'm not against using Wiki during discussions, but using it to have obvious parts of films explained to you. Long story. Look around the boards and you'll see it.

Someone claimed that it explained Sarah had a dream at the end of Day? :lol:

[BillyRay]

I use Wikipedia as a tool for research.

I never use it as my final source, but as a means to frame what it is that I'm really looking for. It's like the encyclopedia (remember those?) - you could get an overview and some ideas where to look for more detailed analysis...

[bassman]

I use Wikipedia as a tool for research.

I never use it as my final source, but as a means to frame what it is that I'm really looking for. It's like the encyclopedia (remember those?) - you could get an overview and some ideas where to look for more detailed analysis...

Right, but Aces comment was regarding another use in another thread. Nothing against your post. Your post was very true, actually.

[AcesandEights]

Right, but Aces comment was regarding another use in another thread. Nothing against your post. Your post was very true, actually.

Yeah, to be straight on the subject, I wikisurf all the time. I love it and will wiki anything I've never heard of before and most things I already have.

[BillyRay]

Let's just agree that we're all terribly clever and rawk.

[Danny]

Yes it really, really is.

Because by and large a sizeable number of a zombie films audiences' are not horror film buffs specifically, but either survival nuts or close minded isolationist anti social people who reject and fear change and the idea of a low threat, in terms of horror scenarios, situation like this appeals to them.

As such the zombie is the only movie monster whos fans out and out, by and large, reject any change.

To take this to an extreme you will have either filmmakers making bad movies because they felt they must adhere to the the rules of the romero universe even though the works are unconnected, or said close minded viewers will spout venomous diatribes against something, without even having seen it, if they have even an inkling that this film that is not remotely connected to a romero film does not follow the rules of his movies and thus they must follow there fanboy indoctrination and declare a jihad on this heresy.

Which makes the sub genre become stuck in a self perpetuating cycle of stagnation and dry repetition. This is the only movie monster where they are given as little creative freedom as possible because the creators dare not alter it.
Now in videogames this has more leeway, see the necromorphs of dead space, the majini from resident evil or the plant controlled zombies/ mutants from carrier or obscure.
Think about any other creature of the modern movie going mythos. Vampires, werewolves, frankensteins monster, mummys, aliens, forgotten leviathans of the deep and there are dozens of excellent, interesting new spins on the creatures that are accepted and in some cases become more ingrained in the psyche of the general populous than the original.
For example leather clad heartthrob vampires fighting in bullet time replacing the rat faced, plague spreading leech of eastern european folklore.

Now this creativity has been accepted in one slight variation, the fast zombies ala snyders dawn of the dead, and at its most 'extreme' the infectees of the 28 days later franchise but on the whole this is a fanbase that wants the same isolationist fantasy for one reason. The self masturbatory "safe" fantasy of a world where they can finally 'be the hero' in a world with no rules.

Alter the creature to be more than a slow, braindead hungry sickly looking person and the likelyhood of survival decreases more than there fantasies deem safe. and we cannot have that, can we?

We have had a decade of revival, and it was good. On the whole we cannot get anything new because "we" will not allow it. So yeah, its going to die off again because the only projects given a go will be douchebags making yet another film about people hiding in a building and arguing because A: its easy and cheap to film and B: this is the only thing the audience will buy. As someone with a true passion for filmmaking as an art this is pitiful but thats all she wrote essentially folks.
Until someone is brave enough to put out the film that puts a new spin on the zombie and breaks out from under the collapsing, degrading romero shadow we will have nothing new, nothing original, just the same uninteresting, uninspired shit and the truly sad thing is most of you will enjoy it because it "follows the rules" of a mythical creature that does not exist.

[AcesandEights]

Let's just agree that we're all terribly clever and rawk.

http://gaygamer.net/images/thumbs-up.jpg

I've never thought otherwise :p



a sizeable number of a zombie films audiences' are not horror film buffs specifically, but either survival nuts or close minded isolationist anti social people who reject and fear change.

I am monitoring your posts behind the walls of my private compound and I do not approve your message! ;)

[DEAD BEAT]

So they only count as decent Zombie flicks if you liked them?

Or if they were reviewed in Entertainment Weakly?

28 days is thematicly a zombie pic. Altho' Rez Evil is based on a video game, those games are grounded in the Zombie genre.

The general public is more aware of obscure films and genres than you realize, Star Child. There's this thing called the Internet, now.

Plus - B-movies by their very nature are "cult". That's why the genre was born, to fill screens at Drive-ins and Grindhouses. To ask for a lot of Big Budget, First-Run Zombie Films is, well, asking for a lot.


im gonna have to agree with you Billy...not a very good list! lol:confused:

[MoonSylver]

Is the genre tired? Of course not. No. People can always tell a good story about zombies or vampires or any other element by simply telling a good story and doing it well.

Are the people working and creating films tired? Oh yes, indeed.

I was going to write this, but JD already did.:)

The zombie genre (or ANY genre for that matter) is like raw clay. It is up to the sculptor to turn that clay into art. And it's not the clay's fault if all someone produces is crap.

The genre itself should be the BACKDROP for the story & the characters. The canvas upon which one paints the story & the characters (to mix art metaphors...). If all you can produce is illiterate scribbles on that canvas, blame not the canvas, blame yourself for being a shitty artist.;)

[wayzim]

Yes it really, really is.

Because by and large a sizeable number of a zombie films audiences' are not horror film buffs specifically, but either survival nuts or close minded isolationist anti social people who reject and fear change and the idea of a low threat, in terms of horror scenarios, situation like this appeals to them.

As such the zombie is the only movie monster whos fans out and out, by and large, reject any change.

To take this to an extreme you will have either filmmakers making bad movies because they felt they must adhere to the the rules of the romero universe even though the works are unconnected, or said close minded viewers will spout venomous diatribes against something, without even having seen it, if they have even an inkling that this film that is not remotely connected to a romero film does not follow the rules of his movies and thus they must follow there fanboy indoctrination and declare a jihad on this heresy.

Which makes the sub genre become stuck in a self perpetuating cycle of stagnation and dry repetition. This is the only movie monster where they are given as little creative freedom as possible because the creators dare not alter it.
Now in videogames this has more leeway, see the necromorphs of dead space, the majini from resident evil or the plant controlled zombies/ mutants from carrier or obscure.
Think about any other creature of the modern movie going mythos. Vampires, werewolves, frankensteins monster, mummys, aliens, forgotten leviathans of the deep and there are dozens of excellent, interesting new spins on the creatures that are accepted and in some cases become more ingrained in the psyche of the general populous than the original.
For example leather clad heartthrob vampires fighting in bullet time replacing the rat faced, plague spreading leech of eastern european folklore.

Now this creativity has been accepted in one slight variation, the fast zombies ala snyders dawn of the dead, and at its most 'extreme' the infectees of the 28 days later franchise but on the whole this is a fanbase that wants the same isolationist fantasy for one reason. The self masturbatory "safe" fantasy of a world where they can finally 'be the hero' in a world with no rules.

Alter the creature to be more than a slow, braindead hungry sickly looking person and the likelyhood of survival decreases more than there fantasies deem safe. and we cannot have that, can we?

We have had a decade of revival, and it was good. On the whole we cannot get anything new because "we" will not allow it. So yeah, its going to die off again because the only projects given a go will be douchebags making yet another film about people hiding in a building and arguing because A: its easy and cheap to film and B: this is the only thing the audience will buy. As someone with a true passion for filmmaking as an art this is pitiful but thats all she wrote essentially folks.
Until someone is brave enough to put out the film that puts a new spin on the zombie and breaks out from under the collapsing, degrading romero shadow we will have nothing new, nothing original, just the same uninteresting, uninspired shit and the truly sad thing is most of you will enjoy it because it "follows the rules" of a mythical creature that does not exist.

And bury those sad pups along with the rabid (living in their parent's basement/never kissed a girl(or boy)Trek fans. It took forever for them to understand that change was good.
This, of course, came too late to save the potential of a pre Federation world in Enterprise (fear of alienating the fan base )
This was especially true for folk who wrote Trek books, unable to inject even an ounce of originality due to the massive restrictions placed upon the universe by Roddenberry.

Wayne Z

[Wyldwraith]

Well,
I don't necessarily agree that the ENTIRE zombie-movie fanbase is so rigid in their expectations of Romero-clone-type films as the only acceptable format.
Specifically, I reference the Resident Evil franchise that, while derivative by its very origin, freely expands zombie types/abilities and adds other antagonist monsters just as freely.

I believe R.E's approach is the key to breaking free of stagnant plot devices being expected AND demanded by large portions of the fanbase. Call it a "compromise tactic." Give the overly rigid-in-expectation fans what they want by making a large portion of the zombies shamblers, but ratchet up the threat level and desire for more fast-paced action by adding different variants of undead/other significant antagonists.

However, as for Shambler-only movies, I still maintain that there is a huge spectrum of possible and absolutely awesome movies to be made. Everything from taking a more global approach ala WWZ, to involving the protagonists in interesting but reasonable actions taken for survival's sake, beyond simply "Hole up in big well-supplied building".

It's not even a survival horror movie, but look at how much mileage the director of The Book of Eli got out of the main protagonist's journey/commitment to that journey. Maybe the mysterious ambience of such journeys would be hard to capture repeatedly, but nothing stands in the way of, for example:

A journey by survivors to an Infection/Zombie-free area a long way away that they somehow become aware of.

A race against the clock, through a crumbling civilization to gain/retrieve, and then return/disseminate a cure or a means of ending the zombie uprising in time to save mankind.

Just a couple examples, but both (I believe) would be interesting to watch set against a backdrop of a Shambler-zombie-overrun world.

Just my .02

[Boogiedowndead]

I think it will be awhile before see a serious horror flick involving slow moving zombies.


Dawn 04 and Shaun of the Dead changed the game.

This generation just isn't scared of slow moving zombies.

[Danny]

I think it will be awhile before see a serious horror flick involving slow moving zombies.


Dawn 04 and Shaun of the Dead changed the game.

This generation just isn't scared of slow moving zombies.

well think of the age we live. It's no longer the "Red fear" paranoia of night where "the family next door could be enemy reds that look like us", its not even the turn of the century fears of superbugs, its each other. Thing is a human being is faster, smarter, stronger and altogether has a capacity for true evil. A zombie is laughable in comparison.

[JDFP]

I think it will be awhile before see a serious horror flick involving slow moving zombies.


Dawn 04 and Shaun of the Dead changed the game.

This generation just isn't scared of slow moving zombies.

I don't buy it.

This generation hasn't grown up with that many real horror films either. We Gen X kids (born between 1961 - 1981) were really the last generation to have real horror films and who appreciate them. Many Gen Y kids have never had the opportunity. Most of the stuff today could be classified as "horror-comedy" a la "Scream" and "Final Destination" films that are funnier than they are scary. At the same time you have shock films like "Hostel" and "Saw" which aren't horror films either -- they are just violence porn.

This generation isn't scared of slow moving zombies because no one (like Romero) has come along and made a real shamblers zombie flick to scare people. You can't be afraid of something you don't see in film except for going back to the classics.

"This generation isn't scared" is a cop out. It's saying: "Hey, I don't have any creative thoughts on creating a horror film so instead I'll just make it into more action by making zombies fast as a plot element to overcome my creativity!".

As far as it being awhile before we see a serious zombie flick with shamblers all I can do is think of the upcoming "Walking Dead" series as an attempt to right this wrong. Depending upon its success/failure I think it will impact how we see zombies developed over the next 10 years or so. If it does well, I'd imagine we'll probably see much more of traditional zombies.

j.p.

[bassman]

Dawn 04 and Shaun of the Dead changed the game.

This generation just isn't scared of slow moving zombies.

Shaun didn't have running zombies.:shifty:

If anything "changed the game" to super zombies for the ADHD impaired, it was 28 Days Later(technically not zombies - but to the average audience, they are) followed by Dawn04.

[AcesandEights]

Shaun didn't have running zombies.:shifty:



But it helped cement the idea of the 'zomedy' in people's minds and really opened up the flood gates to people churning out crappy, low budget, jibe filled movies they could just claim were "the funniest thing since Shaun of the Dead." Make a horrible zombie film now and you just slap the zomedy tag on it and your project gets just a little bit more lenience.

Shaun of the Dead was a great film, but it certainly helped cement the idea of the genre, in general, and slow zombies, in particular, as fodder for laughs with certain members of the viewing public, especially with all the poor imitations that have popped up in the films wake.

I assumed that's what Boogiedown meant and it's something I agree with and have mentioned in previous conversations, as well.

[bassman]

Aye....in that case I retract my statement. It has set the standard for "zomedies". The only other to come close would be Zombieland, but even that is more of a comedy rather than a zombie film. At least Shaun tried(and succeeded) in becming a zombie film.

Zombieland tried to have the best of both worlds, but just fell flat in the zombie department. It's definitely a comedy above all else.

As said many times before....someone will come along and give us the serious stories that we all crave. As of now it's just a waiting game. A little under two months to go.:elol:

[Trin]

Shaun pointed out the farcical nature of shamblers. You can not notice them in your neighborhood and walk right by them even as they attempt to attack you. You can spend half an hour trying to kill one in the back yard. You can drive circles around the block evading them. You can pretend to be them and walk right by. They're just not that big a deal.

Characters and storyline. Depict the fall of society well and it'll be believable.

[AcesandEights]

Characters and storyline. Depict the fall of society well and it'll be believable.

Oh, I completely agree!



someone will come along and give us the serious stories that we all crave. As of now it's just a waiting game. A little under two months to go.:elol:
Ohhh, yeah! I'm ready for it! Bring it on, I say!
http://www.shacknews.com/images/generated/496c074ee4100_featured_without_text_Randy.jpg

[Boogiedowndead]

Shaun didn't have running zombies.:shifty:

If anything "changed the game" to super zombies for the ADHD impaired, it was 28 Days Later(technically not zombies - but to the average audience, they are) followed by Dawn04.


I was pointing out how Shaun mocked slow moving zombies

[bassman]

I was pointing out how Shaun mocked slow moving zombies

I could see how you would think that, but it didn't really mock them anymore than what's been done before. Even Romero's trilogy kinda pokes fun at them. That's the whole thing....we can fix the situation, we just won't cooperate to allow that.

Shaun is actually pretty damn respectful to the holy trilogy when you think about it. They didn't alter the nature of the zombies. They created comedy around the previously established nature of the zombies. There really aren't too many jokes laughing AT the zombie genre, but rather WITH the zombie genre.

[Wyldwraith]

Hmm,
I see a lot of people pinning their hopes on The Walking Dead, but IT isn't the answer to the genre's problem (and the problem with movies/TV in general), because it too is derivative. We need some gutsy producer to back a truly original winner, and soon, or very soon the idea of original-anything + significant budget will = non-starter/deal-breaker.

Even if The Walking Dead is as successful in its comic-to-TV conversion as everyone hopes, it will have broken no ground that Resident Evil hasn't already broken. The only difference will be in the medium from which the source material of each has been drawn.

Which isn't to say I'm not hoping The Walking Dead is awesome myself. Just that it cannot, by its very nature, do much to help along the prospect of high-quality Shambler-centric zombie movies.

Also derivative, but much more in the right direction would be a highly successful World War Z movie release. We need the scale and the base-scenarios to change if we want the genre to grow, develop, and thus succeed. Which means, as I said before, moving beyond "Hole up in big well-supplied/secured building." The trick is to do a good enough job with an alternative model that not only does that movie succeed, it opens the floodgates for other derivative but still somewhat talented hacks to give us more mediocre knockoffs of the new great film(s). That will sustain the genre like those tiny handheld oxygen tanks could sustain someone about to drown for several minutes, until the next really good movie comes along "Ie: rescue."

I just don't see any other way Hollywood could tolerate allowing change to happen, and I've COMPLETELY given up on Indie/Semi-Indie filmmakers in the years since The Blair Witch Atrocity and hmm...the entirety of the "mainstream" M. Night Shyamalan. Directors like him have truly destroyed the horror film genre, and individuals like Rob Zombie just play around in the ruins left behind.

Just my .02, as always your mileage may of course vary.

Edit: Upon further reflection, I think I was too hard on Rob Zombie. His movies don't purport to be pinnacles of cinematic mastery. They're gory slugfests between protagonists and the monsters. As far as accomplishing the modest goal they set out to attain, they do so more admirably than many an allegedly "first class/mainstream" horror movie does in this day and age.

Also, we need to at last get off the sequel kick. Back in the day when we had plenty of original movies that steadily became available, it was perfectly acceptable if a somewhat schlocky horror movie franchise with a limited but devoted following wanted to churn out 6-12 films. Nowadays however, we have REMAKES of those franchises doing REMAKES of the SEQUELS.

That's like Xeroxing a copy of a copy of a copy. The end result will be completely worthless and a waste of time, energy and resources. The Sequel-Syndrome needs to be contained to limit the damage while a variety of genres attempt to reboot themselves, because these awful sequels suck up a significant share of the finite amount of money available for investment in major movie productions.

With ticket prices at the theater at all-time highs, and the price of new DVDs slowly but steadily rising, potential viewers will inevitably continue to grow more and more wary of expending hard-earned money from a job they hate, but have to be glad to have considering how many are still unemployed.

Thoughts?

[MoonSylver]

Hmm,
I see a lot of people pinning their hopes on The Walking Dead, but IT isn't the answer to the genre's problem (and the problem with movies/TV in general), because it too is derivative. We need some gutsy producer to back a truly original winner, and soon, or very soon the idea of original-anything + significant budget will = non-starter/deal-breaker.

Even if The Walking Dead is as successful in its comic-to-TV conversion as everyone hopes, it will have broken no ground that Resident Evil hasn't already broken. The only difference will be in the medium from which the source material of each has been drawn.

Which isn't to say I'm not hoping The Walking Dead is awesome myself. Just that it cannot, by its very nature, do much to help along the prospect of high-quality Shambler-centric zombie movies.

Eh, don't know that I agree. I think TWD (comic) has been doing EXACTLY what SHOULD gave been done all along - taking the very basic premise & using it to tell REAL stories about REAL characters. I don't think you necessairly need to break new ground to prove something is viable. In this case I think quite the opposite. By going "back to basics" I think TWD (series) can prove that the essentials of the genre are all you need.:)

[shootemindehead]

I haven't read the whole thread, so I assume that this point has been brought in in some way or other.

My problem with the genre (love it as I do) is that it usually equals the same basic story.

Zombies = Apocalypse

Without an "apocalypse", the zombie is a pretty ineffectual monster. Sure, walking corpses are creepy etc...but when there is no world breakdown, they're pretty impotent. A localised zombie outbreak is a ho-hum incident and wouldn't make for a terribly good story in many ways, but something that is happening globally (or at least countrywide) is truly horrifying in the sense that even if every zombie were to suddenly keel over, the world would never be the same again.

So, the most stale requirement of any serious zombie flick / book / series is that a quickly disintergrating society (al la GAR's original scenario) is paramount and that will introduce a certain jadedness to every project from the get go.

Personnally, I love the zombie = apocalypse equation. But most film goers will be quickly turned off.

[Trin]

I gotta tell ya, I'm not looking for directors or writers to attempt ground-breaking. That's how we get zombie baby in a remake and zombie intelligence evolving in the GAR series.

Good, real characters in a well written, plausible storyline. That's all we need. No ground-breaking required. The genre just needs some worthy entries, derivative or not, to re-establish the interest.