Survival of the Dead - Finally watched it...

[Neil]

Well, I finalllllly sat down and watched it.

To set the scene, from the recent history (eg: Diary put a big dent in Romero's history for me) and various reviews/comments of it, I wasn't expecting much from Survival. However, it exceeded my expectations.

Was it a good film? Don't know. I'd say passable. What's frustrating is it could have easily have been a lot better:-

1) Too many characters doing too many stupid, things:-
1a) Risking their lives for no obvious reasons. eg: Walking up to the dead and hugging them and putting their hands near faces, just waiting to be bitten.
1b) Shooting at each other for no clear reason. ie: Coming across the guys in the woods, and basically shooting them for no real reason.
1c) Forgetting you were enemies just 2 seconds ago. One minute people are shooting at each other, and the next best buddies?

2) Gimmicky kills. There were just a few too many contrived CGI silly kills.

3) Poorly written character behavour and scenes.
3a) eg: Seamus shooting the gun out of Patrick's hands? Really? Why not just have Patrick go to take a step forwards towards the kids, a shot rings out, and bullet hole appears in the floor boards straight infront of Patrick? Far more plausible... And just as effective?
3b) The introduction to Tomboy? Was that really necessary? Tacky! Why not do it with a bit more style? Maybe she pulls out a mag, and then it's revealed and it's Playboy?
3c) The entire last scene with loads of back shooting and contrived gun fights.
3d) Zombie riding a horse? Hmmm... Not sure... Zombie eating a horse? Why? There's lots of people standing nearby, so why no interest in that direction?

Anyway, I'd probably give it a 5.5/10 for some of the good moments in it.

[kidgloves]

I think you're being generous Neil.
I've only seen it once, mainly cause i cant bring myself to watch it again.

[Neil]

Maybe... Possibly I've waited a long time and being more forgiving than others?

[MinionZombie]

Maybe... Possibly I've waited a long time and being more forgiving than others?

The poll wouldn't particularly bear this out - those that "Liked It" are clearly in the majority out of all options. Yes, those who were disappointed by it, or neither here-nor-there about it are equally pegged, but those who "Loved It" aren't far behind in numbers to either of those and "Hated It" is the least voted-for option.

And seriously - you've only just gotten around to seeing it?! :stunned:

[Danny]

better than diary. not great but there was little bits here and there like the final shot that were great and made it worth watching. Diary on the other hand has no redeeming qualities for me.

[BillyRay]

>coff coff<

(ahem)

MULDOOOOOOOON!!!

[MinionZombie]

>coff coff<

(ahem)

MULDOOOOOOOON!!!

One of my favourite things about the movie - Kenneth Welsh. :cool:

And I'm not even being sarcastic, like the complainers have been regarding his performance - Welsh was entertaining as all get-out in the flick, IMHO.

[Neil]

And seriously - you've only just gotten around to seeing it?! :stunned:

Yes... Diary's to blame for that!

[krakenslayer]

It was just alright. Like a half-decent mid-season episode of a GAR universe TV show, as opposed to the big movie horror event it should have been.

[Trin]

I think Land and Diary lowered people's expectations far enough that Survival is passable. I found some things in Survival to like... and I guarantee you that wouldn't have been the case had I gone into Survival the same way I went into Land.

Survival is just really really bad writing. That's it. The whole of it from start to finish.

[Neil]

I think Land and Diary lowered people's expectations far enough that Survival is passable. I found some things in Survival to like... and I guarantee you that wouldn't have been the case had I gone into Survival the same way I went into Land.

Survival is just really really bad writing. That's it. The whole of it from start to finish.

It had some sparks every now and then... But yes, there were too many unecessary daft/weak moments unfortunately... :( [As my OP pointed out I think]

[ZombieKeeper]

His last two films were just plain terrible. I understand if offered money to make a movie, you should because its how you make a living. However, there comes a time when your name is more important than a paycheck. I don't imagine his upcoming Deep Red remake will be much better. This is a film that should never be touched or re-envisioned due to its utter brilliance.

[blind2d]

Agreed, Deep Red was great: an under-appreciated classic.
Also, I guarantee that if you watch Contagium before Survival, the latter will seem about 20% cooler. (brony alert)

[Trin]

One of my favourite things about the movie - Kenneth Welsh. :cool:

And I'm not even being sarcastic, like the complainers have been regarding his performance - Welsh was entertaining as all get-out in the flick, IMHO.
The whole of the O'Flynn character was a nice surprise. I didn't like some of the writing around his character towards the end, but it wasn't any worse than anything else.

The initial confrontation with O'Flynn and posse confronting the family with the dead kids in the crib... that was just a good scene. I loved when he didn't have the heart to shoot the kids. Good stuff.

[Neil]

The whole of the O'Flynn character was a nice surprise. I didn't like some of the writing around his character towards the end, but it wasn't any worse than anything else.

The initial confrontation with O'Flynn and posse confronting the family with the dead kids in the crib... that was just a good scene. I loved when he didn't have the heart to shoot the kids. Good stuff.

Yes, there were some nice elements to it at times! But even that scene was ruined by the shooting the gun out of the hands bit - As I mentioned in my OP.

[shootemindehead]

An utterly wretched film, which nobody would give the time of day to if it was directed by somebody else.

[Neil]

An utterly wretched film, which nobody would give the time of day to if it was directed by somebody else.

Don't get opinions like this? Have you not seen an Asylum production?

[Andy]

I Sincerely do not understand the hatred towards diary in particular, i personally thought diary of the dead was the strongest of romeros new trilogy.

Yeah i said it. Does that make it a good film? Not by a long shot, its a f*cking stinker alright... but it's head and shoulders above both survival and land at least..

[Neil]

but it's head and shoulders above both diary and land at least..
Fixed?

[Andy]

How can diary be better than diary or land? :confused:

[shootemindehead]

Don't get opinions like this? Have you not seen an Asylum production?

Yep, I had the misfortune to sit through 'Giant mega octoshark' or whatever.

Bloody awful.

That doesn't make 'Survival of the Dead' any better though.

[Neil]

Yep, I had the misfortune to sit through 'Giant mega octoshark' or whatever.

Bloody awful.

That doesn't make 'Survival of the Dead' any better though.
You think Survial of the Dead is no better than Titanic 2 for example? Because a description of "utterly wretched" doesn't leave much room for manouver does it :/

[Yojimbo]

Agreed, Deep Red was great: an under-appreciated classic.
Also, I guarantee that if you watch Contagium before Survival, the latter will seem about 20% cooler. (brony alert)
No, sorry blind, I think youre a cool guy and all, but fuck that shit! Contagium?
Survival may not have been perfect, but compared to Contagium it may as well be Mozart or Beethoven as compared to Miley or Bieber.

[blind2d]

...Which is what I'm saying, Yojimbo. In comparison to the fecal matter that is Contagium (still my favorite movie to hate), Survival doesn't seem as bad. Do you not know what 'latter' means?

[JDFP]

I thought "Survival" was atrocious and made "Diary" look like a Cannes-award-winning-film by comparison. Personally, I enjoyed "Diary", so that's that. At least both of them were an improvement over "Land' though!

With "Land" and "Survival" both being as bad as they were, I would say they're better than any film EVER made by The Asylum though!

j.p.

[Mr.G]

...Which is what I'm saying, Yojimbo. In comparison to the fecal matter that is Contagium (still my favorite movie to hate), Survival doesn't seem as bad. Do you not know what 'latter' means?

I think this comment sums it up. I find it funny that we are comparing Survival to Contagium! That says it all....both are crap. The magic is gone; enjoy the original trilogy and be happy people are still making zombie movies.

[mpokera]

I have stated before that I actually enjoyed 'Diary'. Was it a great movie? No, but at least I was able to enjoy it without constantly being pulled out of the picture by incredibly over the top stupidity like in 'Survival'. I didnt think 'Land' was very good either but at least it felt like it was trying. I still cant believe even GAR thought 'Survival' was working. It felt to me like a film student effort.

[shootemindehead]

You think Survial of the Dead is no better than Titanic 2 for example? Because a description of "utterly wretched" doesn't leave much room for manouver does it :/

That's not really the point though Neil, is it? It's a terrible film, regardless of what it's put up against. 'Titanic 2', I'm sure is rubbish as well, but I have to admit that I haven't had that particular viewing pleasure. I doubt anyone's "cinematic hopes" are going to be crushed by the likes of 'Mega Shark VS Giant Octopus'. Anybody watching an Asylum film knows exactly what they are in for.

But, take this into account, the made for TV Asylum movies are designed to be crap. The producers are deliberately trying to achieve a "So bad it's good" vibe, which is why they fail miserably. However, George was relatively serious about both 'Diary...' and 'Survival of the Dead'. Which makes the failure of those particular films even more galling.

'Diary...' and 'Survival of the Dead' just aren't good films, with the latter being an incredible misfire in particular, in fact you could say the this whole "reboot" nonsense was a misfire, and the Hobson's choice of 'Survival of the Dead' or an Asylum film isn't going to make it any better.

[mpokera]

As for the 'Asylum' films. My family and I look forward with great anticipation each week to the Saturday crappy syfy movie! They are designed to be crap. Glorious flaming crap, and that can have a joy all its own. We call it BMB time, (Bad Movie Buddies) and the only time they really disappoint is if they for some reason try to take themselves seriously. 'Sharktopus' and 'Dinoshark' type films are horrible yes, but horribly funny too. Seeing former stars making a desperate money grab adds to the fun. You can imagine the cast and crew sitting around laughing as they are made, knowing the cheesiness they were producing. But with 'Survival' I think everyone was constantly telling GAR how brilliant and deep it was, talk about the 'Emporer's new Clothes'.

[BillyRay]

I thought 'Survival' was a fun horror-comedy, overall. Not in the same league a 'Shaun of the Dead' or 'Fido', and certainly not in the same ballpark as the Original Holy Trilogy, but a Roger Corman-y B-movie romp. The worst parts were the longer dull bits - I s'pose that was suspense building, but the dialogue/acting was lousy enough that the movie drags at those points.

I enjoyed 'Land' on it's own big-budget schlocky merits, but thought 'Diary' was Uncle George rehashing Cinema Verite elements done better in 'Blair Witch' and 'Cloverfield'. He was following trends on that one, not being the thoughtful, inventive director we all got into in the first place.

[Neil]

It's a terrible film, regardless of what it's put up against.
IYHO of course...

For me it was an average affair. Not as good as Romero's classics, but no where near as bad some say the recent Day remake...

Just can't see how anyone can level "utterly wretched film" at something that is fairly well produced, and although clearly has faults, does have some redeeming moments :deadhorse:

[MoonSylver]

Something can be well made, but if in the subjective tastes of the person watching it has NO redeeming moments, then they can call it "utterly wretched". Bassy & I had that exact conversation in regards to the "Star Trek" reboot. He was utterly baffled by my distain for that movie. And regardless of how "well" (ie professionally) it was made, it was utterly devoid of enjoyment for me what so ever.

[DjfunkmasterG]

I Sincerely do not understand the hatred towards diary in particular, i personally thought diary of the dead was the strongest of romeros new trilogy.

Yeah i said it. Does that make it a good film? Not by a long shot, its a f*cking stinker alright... but it's head and shoulders above both survival and land at least..

I think Diary is the strongest of the new trilogy, and I do sort of like Survival Better than Land.

I wish Survival would have just stuck with the Sarge and Company on the road would have been better than Romero's goofy comic book wannabe western zombie thingy he had going on. It just became to stupid with the whole Hatfields and McCoy angle, plus add in the zombie riding horse and you have the dumbest element ever put into a zombie film, next to the FRANKEN-BIG DADDY-STEIN ZOmbie thing. How do you go from NIGHT DAWN and DAY, to LAND DIARY and SURVIVAL.... YIKES!

[ChokeOnEm]

I don't imagine his upcoming Deep Red remake will be much better. This is a film that should never be touched or re-envisioned due to its utter brilliance.

This isn't happening. George called Dario and was told that the remake did not have his blessing, so George backed off. The Romero/Savini remake of "Children Shouldn't Play with Dead Things" will happen tho.

-- -------- Post added at 10:23 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:14 PM ----------



What's frustrating is it could have easily have been a lot better.

This is what's so frustrating about all of Romero's new dead films. After waiting sooo long for 'The Master' to return, it turns out that many fan-fiction scripts and unofficial zombie ripoffs are waaay better. "Survival" has its moments, but the script is a first draft at best. Some scenes just occur and linger with no point whatsoever - like the annoying kid confronting Jane in the woods and asking her what she would do with a million dollars. Who cares? Moreover, what purpose did the Brinks truck serve, if any? Additionally, just how cliched and lazy is the B-story line of Francisco ingesting blood. There's no suspense to be derived from the question of "will he or won't he" turn into a zombie. We've grown up with these kind of movies, and already know the answer long in advance. For whatever its worth, the RED cameras make some wide-shots look gorgeous. When Monkey Shines and Bruiser came out, fans were pining for the days that Romero would make zombie films again. Now he's back doing zombie films and fans either want him to return to non-zombie material or sadder still, retire altogether. A Fulci-like abundance of gore might've been able to save Survival, but even in this department, it's sorely lacking. What more can I say? Fuck this movie.

[rongravy]

Retire?
No way.
Or you could just not watch his new movies, though I still will.

[Yojimbo]

...Which is what I'm saying, Yojimbo. In comparison to the fecal matter that is Contagium (still my favorite movie to hate), Survival doesn't seem as bad. Do you not know what 'latter' means? My bad, brother blind. I should know what "latter" means, but for some reason I just misunderstood your original post. You are returned to the realm of coolness as far I am concerned if that makes any difference. Sorry again for the doubt, brother.

[shootemindehead]

IYHO of course...

For me it was an average affair. Not as good as Romero's classics, but no where near as bad some say the recent Day remake...

Just can't see how anyone can level "utterly wretched film" at something that is fairly well produced, and although clearly has faults...

As said above, something can be "well produced", but still fall in the crap film bin. 'Survival of the Dead' is poorly written, not terribly well acted, with dreadful decisions, stupid scenarios, zero horror and awful so called "comedy". The zombies are reduced to clowns and the human dialogue (complete with ridiculous "Oirish" accents) is shite.

Of course, this is "my opinion", as that's all I can write about. But seriously, if you are getting something out of 'Survival of the Dead' then that's great. I'm just not seeing it.

[blind2d]

My bad, brother blind. I should know what "latter" means, but for some reason I just misunderstood your original post. You are returned to the realm of coolness as far I am concerned if that makes any difference. Sorry again for the doubt, brother.

Hey man, don't sweat it. We all make mistakes. Some more than others (blind, I'm looking at you). Thanks for your apology, anyway.

[AcesandEights]

The poll wouldn't particularly bear this out - those that "Liked It" are clearly in the majority out of all options.

Yeah, but I've heard a number of those of us who 'liked it' admit that it was graded heavily on a curve. For example, I 'liked it' in comparrison to Diary. I 'liked it' about on par with a cheesy sci-fi made for tv film (albeit a better than crap sci-fi made for tv film, and not one of the worst ones).

[Tom Price]

"The Romero/Savini remake of "Children Shouldn't Play with Dead Things" will happen tho."

Personally I would think Savini won't touch it or help in any shape or form judging by Romero's TRIFECTA of FAIL.
IE: His last 3 movies.

I PEED MY PANTS x 8 "anyone got a dry pamper? "

[ChokeOnEm]

Retire?
No way.
Or you could just not watch his new movies, though I still will.

I NEVER said he should retire. However, given just how mind-numbingly awful his films have become, it may become necessary to have a self-appointed Romero movie watcher - much like the royal food tasters of medieval times. Thank you for volunteering.

-- -------- Post added at 10:12 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:10 AM ----------


"The Romero/Savini remake of "Children Shouldn't Play with Dead Things" will happen tho."

Personally I would think Savini won't touch it or help in any shape or form judging by Romero's TRIFECTA of FAIL.
IE: His last 3 movies.

Romero didn't the write the script, so it could be solid. Savini talks about it briefly in the new Fangoria out now.

[Trin]

Yeah, but I've heard a number of those of us who 'liked it' admit that it was graded heavily on a curve. For example, I 'liked it' in comparrison to Diary. I 'liked it' about on par with a cheesy sci-fi made for tv film (albeit a better than crap sci-fi made for tv film, and not one of the worst ones).Yes, exactly. Run Survival on the heels of Day after a 20 year wait and the WTF rating would've been sky high. But after Land and Diary have set the bar down a few notches and sure, it's not bad.

@Moonsylver - I HATED the Star Trek reboot... I'd love to rant for an hour with you about how shee-ite-e it is. An hour might not be enough.

I hated Diary. Gimicky and preachy and implausible and lame. I think I actually like Survival more than Diary. At the least the message in Survival was confused enough it didn't feel like a sledgehammer hitting me scene after scene.

I hate to say it, but as much as I bashed Land after it came out I freakin love Land now. So Cholo was an idiot about money, there were no zombies around, and Big Daddy was a horrible direction to take zombies... those faults seem minor compared to Jason and his stupid camera, Muldoon vs. O'Flynn, horse eating, zombie horse riding, ingestion of zombie blood causing infection, etc.

[bassman]

I hate to say it, but as much as I bashed Land after it came out I freakin love Land now. So Cholo was an idiot about money, there were no zombies around, and Big Daddy was a horrible direction to take zombies... those faults seem minor compared to Jason and his stupid camera, Muldoon vs. O'Flynn, horse eating, zombie horse riding, ingestion of zombie blood causing infection, etc.

Yeah, the last two films have only helped Land, imo. I enjoyed Land when it was first released but considered it a sort of bonus chapter to the original three. Not on the same level, but a decent effort. As time has passed and Romero released the last two, I'm starting to see Land as the only true entry out of the modern films. The other two are just.....bah....I dunno. I'm kinda trying to act as if they didn't happen. But Land has definitely climbed the ranks since 2005 and has just about earned it's spot with the first three...

[darth los]

Yeah, the last two films have only helped Land, imo. I enjoyed Land when it was first released but considered it a sort of bonus chapter to the original three. Not on the same level, but a decent effort. As time has passed and Romero released the last two, I'm starting to see Land as the only true entry out of the modern films. The other two are just.....bah....I dunno. I'm kinda trying to act as if they didn't happen. But Land has definitely climbed the ranks since 2005 and has just about earned it's spot with the first three...

Agreed. As long as that spot is number 4. ;)

:cool:

[Mr.G]

Yeah, the last two films have only helped Land, imo. I enjoyed Land when it was first released but considered it a sort of bonus chapter to the original three. Not on the same level, but a decent effort. As time has passed and Romero released the last two, I'm starting to see Land as the only true entry out of the modern films. The other two are just.....bah....I dunno. I'm kinda trying to act as if they didn't happen. But Land has definitely climbed the ranks since 2005 and has just about earned it's spot with the first three...

Agreed! Maybe GAR needs someone in 'corporate' to tell him what is a good or bad idea. The last two could be seen as GAR having total control and nothing but 'yes' people hanging around. Any chance to see the old Image 10 or Laurel group getting together and trying to make one more classic?

[clanglee]

Bassy & I had that exact conversation in regards to the "Star Trek" reboot. He was utterly baffled by my distain for that movie. And regardless of how "well" (ie professionally) it was made, it was utterly devoid of enjoyment for me what so ever.


@Moonsylver - I HATED the Star Trek reboot... I'd love to rant for an hour with you about how shee-ite-e it is. An hour might not be enough.

. But. . but . . .but. . . I usually agree with you guys on almost everything!!! How could we disagree on something this big!? ?? ;)

On Survival. . . .I liked it, but yeah. . it was graded on a curve, and my absolute and completely fierce hate for Diary really helped it. And yeah. . . both movies have indeed made Land MUCH better for me as well. It was like Romero was thinking "Well Chris was picking Land apart, so I'll give him some movies with so many faults that his head will spin. THEN. . .oh THEN he will like my movie!!" Well George. . it worked. . .:(

[rongravy]

I NEVER said he should retire.

You also edited your post. I should've quoted you, because you've changed your words. Add sentence, my Aunt Fanny. You know what you did. You most certainly said he should retire originally. Someone else besides you needs to tell me I'm wrong on that one.
WTF?!?!?

I may have been drunk Friday and Saturday, but I was pretty durned sober yesterday.
I'd still take the job, though. I loved Land, Diary was pretty decent, and Survival, well...
Ok, I was also funk as druck, but it wasn't anywhere NEAR some of the crap I've seen out there.
From what I can remember.

[MoonSylver]

But. . but . . .but. . . I usually agree with you guys on almost everything!!! How could we disagree on something this big!? ?? ;)

I understand your confusion. Being wrong can do that. :lol: (Or so I'm told. Thank goodness it's never happened to me. :D)

[DEAD BEAT]

Well, I finalllllly sat down and watched it.

To set the scene, from the recent history (eg: Diary put a big dent in Romero's history for me) and various reviews/comments of it, I wasn't expecting much from Survival. However, it exceeded my expectations.

Was it a good film? Don't know. I'd say passable. What's frustrating is it could have easily have been a lot better:-

1) Too many characters doing too many stupid, things:-
1a) Risking their lives for no obvious reasons. eg: Walking up to the dead and hugging them and putting their hands near faces, just waiting to be bitten.
1b) Shooting at each other for no clear reason. ie: Coming across the guys in the woods, and basically shooting them for no real reason.
1c) Forgetting you were enemies just 2 seconds ago. One minute people are shooting at each other, and the next best buddies?

2) Gimmicky kills. There were just a few too many contrived CGI silly kills.

3) Poorly written character behavour and scenes.
3a) eg: Seamus shooting the gun out of Patrick's hands? Really? Why not just have Patrick go to take a step forwards towards the kids, a shot rings out, and bullet hole appears in the floor boards straight infront of Patrick? Far more plausible... And just as effective?
3b) The introduction to Tomboy? Was that really necessary? Tacky! Why not do it with a bit more style? Maybe she pulls out a mag, and then it's revealed and it's Playboy?
3c) The entire last scene with loads of back shooting and contrived gun fights.
3d) Zombie riding a horse? Hmmm... Not sure... Zombie eating a horse? Why? There's lots of people standing nearby, so why no interest in that direction?

Anyway, I'd probably give it a 5.5/10 for some of the good moments in it.

I finally bought & saw it for the first time, and lemme tell ya if i could reach id shove my own foot up my ass! ;)

[Neil]

^^ Ummm... Is this good or bad then?

[ChokeOnEm]

You also edited your post. I should've quoted you, because you've changed your words. Add sentence, my Aunt Fanny. You know what you did. You most certainly said he should retire originally. Someone else besides you needs to tell me I'm wrong on that one.
WTF?!?!?

Don't have time for your whiny fanboy tantrum...
The added sentence was about the lack of gore. Nice try tho.
The truth is, if I wanted George to retire I would openly say so. I have already called "Diary" and "Survival" the outright pieces of shit that they are. Why would I mince words regarding anything else Romero-related? As bad as their recent output is, I love the fact that all the former horror greats (Argento, Romero, Carpenter) are still playing with karo syrup on a soundstage somewhere.

[rongravy]

Don't have time for your whiny fanboy tantrum...

Yawn. Then why'd you bother to quote me yet again? I think you're full of shit. Arrogant noob, I have as much right to like any and/or every movie of his that I want to. Wah wahhhhhh, the attack of the fanboys...(That insult/argument is getting a bit stale, dont you think?)
Deal with it, if you can find the time. That is, when you're not changing posts after the fact.

[ChokeOnEm]

Yawn. Then why'd you bother to quote me yet again? I think you're full of shit. Arrogant noob, I have as much right to like any and/or every movie of his that I want to. Wah wahhhhhh, the attack of the fanboys...(That insult/argument is getting a bit stale, dont you think?)Deal with it, if you can find the time. That is, when you're not changing posts after the fact.

What truly sets you apart from the usual ADHD-afflicted lumpy fanboy, is that most engage in cyber-battles over franchises worth defending. If you want to spend your time defending Romero's latest umpteenth "Generic Cashgrab of the Dead" be my guest. I'm just setting the record straight - I never called for his retirement. I don't want him to retire. I just want him to make good movies again.

[MinionZombie]

Choke, Ron, leave each other be, it's getting heated up in here.

[SRP76]

I'm going to be an arrogant noob and throw a whiny fanboy tantrum now.

I watched Survival a few weeks ago, and wasn't impressed. Wasn't aghast, either, though. I thought this movie was just plain mediocre. Does it deserve to be in the same sentence? As Night, Dawn and Day? No, so it isn't. But, it also isn't nearly as beaten with the retard-stick as a lot of other modern horror films (which, strangely, probably made more money).

[darth los]

I understand your confusion. Being wrong can do that. :lol: (Or so I'm told. Thank goodness it's never happened to me. :D)

I lean toward the saying:

"I'd agree with you but then we'd both be wrong."

You're welcome. ;)

:cool:

[Trin]

But. . but . . .but. . . I usually agree with you guys on almost everything!!! How could we disagree on something this big!? ?? ;)

On Survival. . . .I liked it, but yeah. . it was graded on a curve, and my absolute and completely fierce hate for Diary really helped it. And yeah. . . both movies have indeed made Land MUCH better for me as well. It was like Romero was thinking "Well Chris was picking Land apart, so I'll give him some movies with so many faults that his head will spin. THEN. . .oh THEN he will like my movie!!" Well George. . it worked. . .:(
So you're saying that Romero wrote the Star Trek reboot? Yes... now that you mention it... that does make sense. It was so full of faults I like Survival more because of it.

@darth - yes, thank you... I will use that one

[paranoid101]

I did enjoy survival more then diary but less then land.

I find Land while not as good as night, dawn and day of cause, very watchable

[MoonSylver]

I lean toward the saying:

"I'd agree with you but then we'd both be wrong."

I once thought I was mistaken, but I was wrong. :lol:

[darth los]

I once thought I was mistaken, but I was wrong. :lol:


That sounds like one of those Dos Equis commercials starring "The most interesting man in the world.":

"He once purposely tanked a question on an exam, just to see how it felt to be wrong."

Stay thirsty my friends ! :D

:cool:

[MoonSylver]

That sounds like one of those Dos Equis commercials starring "The most interesting man in the world.":

"He once purposely tanked a question on an exam, just to see how it felt to be wrong."

Stay thirsty my friends ! :D

:cool:

:lol: http://www.runemasterstudios.com/graemlins/images/notworthy.gif

I gotta stop there. Can't top that really. :D

[rongravy]

Choke, Ron, leave each other be, it's getting heated up in here.
he started it. i called him out on his bullshit, that is all i did. i'm trying to keep it gentlemanly. i may be a fanboy, but dayumn, WTF?!?!?

[ChokeOnEm]

he started it. i called him out on his bullshit, that is all i did.

If you have proof that I retroactively edited my post concerning Romero retiring, let's hear it. Otherwise, I kindly suggest you go back to riding Big Daddy's gangrenous black pecker. If I wanted Romero to call it quits, I would say so. I have no problem speaking my mind. TY.

[MinionZombie]

he started it. i called him out on his bullshit, that is all i did. i'm trying to keep it gentlemanly. i may be a fanboy, but dayumn, WTF?!?!?


If you have proof that I retroactively edited my post concerning Romero retiring, let's hear it. Otherwise, I kindly suggest you go back to riding Big Daddy's gangrenous black pecker. If I wanted Romero to call it quits, I would say so. I have no problem speaking my mind. TY.

Don't care who started it, or who said what, both of you just leave each other be and cease the quarrel - damn guys, it's just a movie.

[rongravy]

Don't care who started it, or who said what, both of you just leave each other be and cease the quarrel - damn guys, it's just a movie.

I hear ya, done. But you'd be pissed too if someone was full of shit all over you. I don't want a guy like that to ruin my experience here, I know I haven't been officially here since '09 but I've been coming here, and searching the undead, since '01. I just wanted it to be known he is a dirty, dirty post changer after the fact. And that it's not cool...
I have an opinion, and maybe it's not mainstream, but it's still mein. At least I have a non changing belief. I will be happy to push the ignore button on him. Choke? Fuck yeah...

[ChokeOnEm]

I hear ya, done. But you'd be pissed too if someone was full of shit all over you. I don't want a guy like that to ruin my experience here, I know I haven't been officially here since '09 but I've been coming here, and searching the undead, since '01. I just wanted it to be known he is a dirty, dirty post changer after the fact. And that it's not cool...
I have an opinion, and maybe it's not mainstream, but it's still mein. At least I have a non changing belief. I will be happy to push the ignore button on him. Choke? Fuck yeah...

YAWN. If this is your attempt at some Andy Kauffman-esque performance art, it's pretty lame. Didn't change my posts one syllable. Sorry. Not afraid to call for Romero's retirement (which I DON'T want), just as I'm not afraid to call you out for your exasperating ploys for attention. Keep amusing yourself at the expense of this thread. Such an act of self-congratulatory forum masturbation will only result in your immediate banning. By all means, keep it up! I beg you!

[MinionZombie]

What did I just tell you two?

Ron, Choke - the both of you, pack it in and knock off the scrapping. Ignore each other - it's quite simple.

[rongravy]

What did I just tell you two?

Ron, Choke - the both of you, pack it in and knock off the scrapping. Ignore each other - it's quite simple.
Lol, ok. worth a few chuckles, though. i'm shaking it off as we speak...

[Rancid Carcass]

Lol, ok. worth a few chuckles, though. i'm shaking it off as we speak...

It's quite ironic really, in a thread about Survival, you guys were turning into O'Flynn and Muldoon of HPOTD! And people think George has lost it - he's got us sussed out pretty good. All we need now is an island somewhere, a few horses and a lesbian... :D

[SRP76]

All we need now is an island somewhere, a few horses and a lesbian... :D

If you have the lesbian, you really don't need anything else.

[Neil]

If you have the lesbian, you really don't need anything else.

What is it with Romero and lesbians recently. There was that tacky lesbian scene in Land too wasn't there, when the zombies invaded...?

[rongravy]

If you have the lesbian, you really don't need anything else.
hear, hear. sounds like a plan.

[Rancid Carcass]

What is it with Romero and lesbians recently. There was that tacky lesbian scene in Land too wasn't there, when the zombies invaded...?

At a guess, I'd say it was a visual metaphor, a commentary on the transient nature of zombie sexuality – for no matter what your sexual orientation in life, the neurological re-wiring that affects the brain during the zombification process and subsequent revival means that in death you'll happily chow down on both men and women.

Or something.

Or maybe George discovered the internet and thought, I'm having some of that!

:lol:

[Trin]

What is it with Romero and lesbians recently. There was that tacky lesbian scene in Land too wasn't there, when the zombies invaded...?
I assume that over the pond you all use Tacky to mean Awesome!

[AcesandEights]

Yeah...it was just those Lesbians that were poorly written and unbelievable. :poke:

[darth los]

Perhaps he just wants to be inclusive as he's always done.

Having a Black man play the lead of your movie in 1968 couldn't have been too popular a choice but he did it anyway. Perhaps he wants to reflect the different components in society in his art.

:cool:

[Trin]

What is it with Romero and lesbians recently. There was that tacky lesbian scene in Land too wasn't there, when the zombies invaded...?What would've been a good gag would be to have the invading zombies get to that couple and all the male zombies stop and stare at them slack-jawed while the female zombies roll their eyes.

[AcesandEights]

What would've been a good gag would be to have the invading zombies get to that couple and all the male zombies stop and stare at them slack-jawed while the female zombies roll their eyes.

Ahhh, a post-feminist commentary on the stilted societal views and acceptance with regards to same-sex coupling practices.

Yup, GAR should have been all over that message. :D

[Trin]

They are just doing what they were doing in life.