Land of the dead remake! omfg!!!

[Bubdotd]

there going to make it eventually like in 10 years or so them unoriginol bastards!!:mad:

Lol and who ever clicked this must of been like OMFG WHAT!?!?!?

just wanted to get your attention.

and btw tell me your thoughts if they remade this sooner then you think.

lol would be utterly retarded but who knows so are they:lol:

i dedicate my ass crack to the people responsible for the "dead" remakes :moon:

[Svengoolie]

Maybe this time, GAR could get his people back together, re-write his own script, and put Savini at the helm of that one....just like he did with NOTLD back in 1990?:D

[AssassinFromHell]

Maybe this time, GAR could get his people back together, re-write his own script, and put Savini at the helm of that one....just like he did with NOTLD back in 1990?:D

Then the head honchos will step in and be like "No! We want Uwe Boll directing, Jim Dudelson producing, Paul W.S. Anderson writing". :eek:

[Svengoolie]

Well, seeing as how GAR and the Pittsburgh Pimp Squad pretty much were the head honchos the first time around, I doubt they'd replace themselves.

But....seeing how it all turned out in 1990 (not to mention with Land in 2005), it couldn't be any worse with the guys you mentioned becoming involved with the project.:rolleyes:

[MinionZombie]

Somehow I think this remaking fad will be over within the next 10 years, easy. With 3-D making a comeback, guaranteed that will be the new fad. We'll have all the old movies re-released as 3-D versions. Remakes are a fad, fads have limited shelf lives. Plus it'd be retarded to remake Land a mere 10 years after it came out, not even Hollywood is that dumb.

[bassman]

Well, seeing as how GAR and the Pittsburgh Pimp Squad pretty much were the head honchos the first time around, I doubt they'd replace themselves.

But....seeing how it all turned out in 1990 (not to mention with Land in 2005), it couldn't be any worse with the guys you mentioned becoming involved with the project.:rolleyes:

Of course, I already know that you are one of the ones that doesn't like "Land"....but what was wrong with "Night90"? That was the best remake yet, in my opinion. Also the one that stayed true to the source material.

That is how "Dawn" should have been re-made.

[MinionZombie]

Indeed, while I'm not much of a fan of Night90, if only it had been allowed to have the gore left in ... and that useless actress playing Judy Rose had been able to act!!! :stunned: ... then it might have been a better flick. It's still hilarious to see the rubber version of Johnny hit the tombstone, so very funny. :p

But yep, it was the best GAR remake to date, obviously helped by GAR being involved as well as Savini and a couple of other Romero-ites, more of an inbred feel rather than farming it out to people who write sh*t like Scooby-f*ckin'-Doo...:|

[Svengoolie]

Personally, MZ...I think it's stupid to constantly try to knock James Gunn for Scooby Doo.

It's not like that was his masterpiece or anything. He didn't write the script and carry a torch for the project his whole life.

He was hired to do a job, and he did it...the same way GAR was hired to direct SK's work a couple of times.

The only difference between the two is that Scooby Doo was a major success, while GAR found only limited success with his adaptations.

[Adrenochrome]

The only difference between the two is that Scooby Doo was a major success, while GAR found only limited success with his adaptations.
those pills must be really kicking in.
Scooby Doo was NOT a "major success" by any means....unless you count all the people that bought the VHS, ripped the guts out and used it to cover the bottom of their pidgeon coop.

Burny, I have an idea.....go pop in your betamax copy of Bad News Bears, stare blandly at your little black and white Zenith and drink a few more Shlitz's.

[MinionZombie]

And isn't that the great thing about democracy, everyone has their right to express their opinion as well as hold it. My opinion is that James Gunn is a wanker who can't write for sh*t, Yawn04 illustrates this time and time and time again. Scooby Doo, 30 mil short of it's own bloated budget on opening weekend? Sounds like a classic Hollywood "flop" to me (using their yard stick).

You can't exactly compare GAR's SK adaps with Scooby-frickin'-Doo either. GAR's were adult horror films, Poopy Doo was a family film and had a feather pillow ride through the system in comparison to GAR's work.

[DjfunkmasterG]

Well in the LAND remake it will have Smauel L. Jackson fighting off zombies. :D

[Svengoolie]

And isn't that the great thing about democracy, everyone has their right to express their opinion as well as hold it. My opinion is that James Gunn is a wanker who can't write for sh*t, Yawn04 illustrates this time and time and time again.

Nobody said it wasn't, or that you couldn't.


Scooby Doo, 30 mil short of it's own bloated budget on opening weekend? Sounds like a classic Hollywood "flop" to me (using their yard stick).


Uh...since when does a movie have to make its entire budget back on opening weekend in order to be considered a success?

Scooby Doo made a total of $153,294,164 in the United States alone. Then (since Land supporters have to throw in their own overseas sales to prove that it was some sort of a success) it made another $122,356,539....for a world-wide grand total of $275,650,703.

GAR never saw numbers like that ever....and never will.

As for the rest....


You can't exactly compare GAR's SK adaps with Scooby-frickin'-Doo either. GAR's were adult horror films, Poopy Doo was a family film and had a feather pillow ride through the system in comparison to GAR's work.

Hey...you're the one who brought Scooby Doo up in the first place. If you can't compare the two, why do you keep on mentioning it?:D

[bassman]

Uh...since when does a movie have to make its entire budget back on opening weekend in order to be considered a success?


Uhh....Burny, you're the one that's always saying that how much a film makes is what determines how good it is.

Which, anyone in their right mind can tell you that's ridiculous....

Minion doesn't like Yawn04 or the people that created it and many people agree with him, just like you don't like "Land" and there are people that agree with you. Why keep having this argument again and again?....the outcome is always the same.

[MinionZombie]

I was bringing up Poopy Doo as an example of Gunn's previous writing, just because some kids go see it, doesn't mean it's a work of art (Titanic, which raked in over a billion in the end was voted worst film of all time a couple of years ago).

I never compared Poopy Doo to GARs work in the first place.


Nobody said it wasn't, or that you couldn't.

I was making a statement in general.

And obviously GAR won't see numbers like that, because he makes ADULT rated movies, mainly in the horror genre, that see comparably limited distribution. Poopy Doo, like I said before, is a mainstream, Hollywood, family film - therefore the target audience is scattergun wide. GAR's flicks target a core audience.

And making a stack of cash doesn't mean the product is any good, look at Paris Hilton.

[bassman]

(Titanic, which raked in over a billion in the end was voted worst film of all time a couple of years ago).

I always hear/read this....but I like "Titanic". I don't see what all the gripe is about. True, the love story gets a bit cheesey in a few parts, but overall it's a well made film.

[MinionZombie]

lol, well made technically, but it's not really that good. Yeah, the whole non-Titanic-sinking story sucks chunks and then blows said chunks out of every orifice ... I guess it's a tad morbid making such an event picture out of a real tragedy...hmmm.

Technically it is very, very proficient (what else would you expect from a Cameron flick?), but I don't think it's a very good movie on the whole. I remember at uni in the first year (Key Issues class - film course) we were discussing Titanic and it was almost unanimous that the film wasn't good. The only people who piped up in its defence were girls defending it as a good chick flick (which basically relates to said, chunk sucky story)...:D

Now come on lads, back on topic, chop chop. :rockbrow:

[bassman]

What is it with you mods? It's like people can't say anything that isn't directly related to the topic of the thread. I would imagine that if someone wants to throw it back into the main topic, all they would have to do is start talking about it again....

Instead, we get someone bawking at us that we're out of line or something:p ....

[Svengoolie]

I was bringing up Poopy Doo as an example of Gunn's previous writing

So...by your rationale, does GAR's sophmore turd There's Always Vanilla have some sort of bearing on Dawn of the Dead's quality?

I don't think so.


And making a stack of cash doesn't mean the product is any good, look at Paris Hilton.

I never mentioned anything about the overall cinematic quality of Scooby Doo. In fact, I haven't even seen it.

Nor did I ever say that a film's quality is always determined by how much money it makes at the box office...although sometimes a film's quality can very well be reflected in those figures indirectly.

Not all great films bomb at the box office...the same way all crappy films don't automatically succeed at the box office.

For some reason, MZ...you and some of the other members of this forum seem hung up on that in regards to my posts, although it's not something I've ever maintained.

I said that Scooby Doo was more successful than GAR's SK outings, and the numbers overwhelmingly reflect this.

Try reading the posts before you respond.

[Bubdotd]

*sneezes*

*Achu!*
:bored:

[Maitreya]

Well in the LAND remake it will have Smauel L. Jackson fighting off zombies. :D

Agreed... I am part of the sect that believes that Samuel L. Jackson deserves a place in a zombie movie (preferrably Romero).

[MinionZombie]

lol, just that we were talking about Land of the Dead and remakes, and now we're chitting the chat about Titanic. That's also the first time I've ever said to go back on topic as well I'll have you know. :p

Bubdotd - Agreed... :lol:

[DVW5150]

He would be the survivor up till the end ... or go out unexpectedly , like in " Deep Blue Pee " Mr. Romero has a vision that few can match ...:dead:

[Brubaker]

So...by your rationale, does GAR's sophmore turd There's Always Vanilla have some sort of bearing on Dawn of the Dead's quality?

I don't think so.



I never mentioned anything about the overall cinematic quality of Scooby Doo. In fact, I haven't even seen it.

Nor did I ever say that a film's quality is always determined by how much money it makes at the box office...although sometimes a film's quality can very well be reflected in those figures indirectly.

Not all great films bomb at the box office...the same way all crappy films don't automatically succeed at the box office.

For some reason, MZ...you and some of the other members of this forum seem hung up on that in regards to my posts, although it's not something I've ever maintained.

I said that Scooby Doo was more successful than GAR's SK outings, and the numbers overwhelmingly reflect this.

Try reading the posts before you respond.

I'll bet that Stephen King was happy with the job Romero did on his work. That was probably the most important thing for GAR, more so than the money they made. I don't think George would be as happy if the films managed to make more money but King wasn't pleased with the finished product. Sure, the money would be nice but the last thing he'd want to do is insult his friend by compromising the films to make a little money.

Ever hear how the original creators of Scooby Doo felt about the movie? Or will that question get swept under the rug once this thread reaches page 3? :lol:

As for the LOTD remake, if they do it soon enough they could use the same actors, eh? Or explain how some of those chumpstains like Riley, Charlie and Slack survived the zombie outbreak for all those years. None of them would have lasted a day (dawn or night) with Rhodes, Roger, Peter or Ben.

[ssbib]

there going to make it eventually like in 10 years or so them unoriginol bastards!!:mad:

Lol and who ever clicked this must of been like OMFG WHAT!?!?!?

just wanted to get your attention.

and btw tell me your thoughts if they remade this sooner then you think.

lol would be utterly retarded but who knows so are they:lol:

i dedicate my ass crack to the people responsible for the "dead" remakes :moon:

Wouldn't surprise me if they did remake it. Although it is testamony to George's work that EVERY Dead film has been remade. Sweet man, go for it. lol

[deadpunk]

Wow! What's with all the Scooby Doo bashing?

Actually, that film wasn't THAT bad. My kids, the demographic it was geared towards, enjoyed it. Not too mention, the film revitalized the interest in that much beloved character, which too me is worth it.

As for remaking LOTD...count on it. 10 years? Mmmm...I'd give it longer. I think this is the one that will wind up waiting until Romero's passing, then they'll try and make it some ****ty tribute type thing that will backfire but revitalize sales of his original movies that will be released in special DVD format (or whatever they're putting movies out on by then).

The whole remaking fad is interesting. True fans are disturbed by it, generally. Yet, it does bring new interest to classics that have been shelved for years. And, really, with improvements in FX and whatnot, why would anyone expect a verbatum remake? And who would pay to watch the EXACT same film, just with a different cast?! Sounds like a renter to me. :P

[CivilDefense]

I dont know why some people bitch about weather this zombie movie sucks or that movie sucks, some are good, some not so good. Im just glad to see someone making zombie movies again.


Hell Id watch a zombie movie if there was ballet in it.

[deadpunk]

I dont know why some people bitch about weather this zombie movie sucks or that movie sucks, some are good, some not so good. Im just glad to see someone making zombie movies again.


I'd say the majority of my problem with remakes, at least, is that it seems filmmakers spend so much time REMAKING films, when they should be spending time offering us up something new.

And let me clarify "NEW". I want an original script. A unique plot. Something that hasn't been mass produced a million times over. Can a brother get surprised up in hyar? :elol:

[Adolf Kitler]

...it'd be retarded to remake Land a mere 10 years after it came out, not even Hollywood is that dumb.

"The Last Man On Earth" was released in 1964..."Omega Man" was released in 1971...only a seven year gap. That's just one example of many. Yes, Hollywood IS that dumb.

[EvilFlyingCow]

I would jump for joy if Dawn was remade in the style of Night90.

[_liam_]

I dont know why some people bitch about weather this zombie movie sucks or that movie sucks, some are good, some not so good. Im just glad to see someone making zombie movies again.


Hell Id watch a zombie movie if there was ballet in it.


yeah but if people just churn out crappy zombie films, it tarnishes the commercial reputation of the sub genre and reduces the likelihood of other zombie flicks being made...

[Danny]

I would jump for joy if Dawn was remade in the style of Night90.

yeah i suppose that wouldnt be too bad, as long as the kept the synthesizer music, that **** was awesome:cool:

AND NO MORE ****ING VING RHAMES!:lol:

[Fleshmunch]

it'd be retarded to remake Land a mere 10 years after it came out, not even Hollywood is that dumb.

Don't be too sure of that! :confused:

[DVW5150]

WHY!?:bored:

[MinionZombie]

Perzactly, by the time Land would be 'eligible' at an incredibly early age, the remake 'fad' will have died off, it's already starting to wane, and like I was saying - by then, the 3-D fashion will be in...then we'll probably be seeing old movies ... IN 3-D!!!

So methinks you'll sooner see Land of the Dead: 3D than Land of the Remake...

[Brubaker]

Why would anyone wait only 10 years to remake Land? Night wasn't remade until over 20 years later. Same with Dawn. As for Day, it is right around 20 years. Bottom line.........you won't see a remake of Land until 2024/2025 at the earliest. Period!

[Minerva_Zombi]

why are we talking about a remake of land. STOP REMAKES. Especially when a studio makes money off a remake and then adds some ****ty sequel. (ex. Hills Have Eyes 2, Texas Chainsaw Massacre : The Beginning, etc.)

Its so sad. They were talking about doing a Dawn Of The Dead 2 for God's sake!

[MinionZombie]

Have you seen Hills Have Eyes 2 (2007) yet though? That's not out yet I don't think, is it? I actually thought the original THHE remake was a very good film, definitely the best horror remake in this latest Hollywood trend, it was actually a good film, because the original wasn't sh*t-hot to begin with.

The problem with remakes is 99% of the time they're trying to remake good movies, or even great movies. What they should be doing is taking tosh from back in the day (e.g. Drive-In Massacre) and remaking that to make something better, like how Hooper's Toolbox Murders is better than the original, or at least by a little bit, as the original is pretty much a load of bollocks ... unless you're in the mood for exploitation kicks and a really out-of-place ending.

[capncnut]

Have you seen Hills Have Eyes 2 (2007) yet though? That's not out yet I don't think, is it?
I do believe Minerva is talking about the 1984 Wes Craven sequel to the original Hills Have Eyes. A big old heap of turd in my opinion. So bad that Wes Craven actually sat on it for two years because he didn't have a clue what he was going to do with it. The sequel is despised primarily for it's heavy use of long flashbacks, even the f**king dog has one! :lol:

I really hope they don't use that story for the 2007 sequel.

[MinionZombie]

Nope, I think he was actually talking about the 2007 version, especially as he mentioned TCM: The Beginning, being a 'sequel to a sh*tty remake' in his words (sumarised words anyway).

I have the Craven Hills 2 sitting around somewhere, but haven't touched it yet, I was kinda weirded out to see Penny Johnson Gerald in it in some dodgy 80's get-up ... what's David Palmer's wife doing running around there?! :lol:

[capncnut]

Yeah, <re-reads post>, my mistake. What a silly Knut. :lol:


I have the Craven Hills 2 sitting around somewhere, but haven't touched it yet, I was kinda weirded out to see Penny Johnson Gerald in it in some dodgy 80's get-up... what's David Palmer's wife doing running around there?! :lol:
I know that chick from The Larry Sanders Show and yeah, I was weirded out by her appearance. Even more so when she got her tits out. :D

[Minerva_Zombi]

The Hills Have Eyes remake sucked. The most cliche'd and rediculous remake. Why are all of the mutants super-human? And why is Leatherface super-human in the new ****? Its pretty silly.

[MinionZombie]

Superhuman? Eh?

And Leatherface wasn't superhuman in the original movies (bar the first ever one). He only got an arm off in the remake.

Now, Michael Myers - he's been shot to sh*t, had a need in the eye and stabbed god knows how many times (and then a lot more), yet he's still ticking. Jason came back from the dead, Freddy is a law unto himself. :rockbrow:

[Minerva_Zombi]

Freddy and Jason movies are really stupid. Leatherface though, do you really see the original Leatherface as "superhuman"? He was a fat retard. Thats basically what he was.

[MinionZombie]

I said "bar the first ever one" though in my post, haha, you can't catch me out sunshine! :D

[capncnut]

Freddy and Jason movies are really stupid.

I said "bar the first ever one."
Talking of first ones :D, A Nightmare on Elm Street and Friday the 13th are two horror classics. When I first saw Freddy as a kid, he s**t the life out of me. It was when they started adding those stupid puns to his dialogue that the series went downhill (from 2 onwards). Friday the 13th is similar but instead of puns, it's Jason's actual presence. I don't know about you but (from 2 onwards) he bored the crap out of me. None of those two movies are remotely close to Halloween though. And Halloween 2 was awesome as well.

[Minerva_Zombi]

the only leatherface that was kinda strong was the one in part 3, but otherwise, hes normal just viciously retarded. i like nightmare on elm street, but friday the 13th. never anything super special to me.

[MinionZombie]

lol Minerva, he was resurrected from the dead via a lightening bolt! He's been drowned, elecrocuted, sent to hell and blown up in space only to come back bigger and stronger than before ... that's pretty specially super if you ask me. :)

[Minerva_Zombi]

i was just talking about the movie. i definatly agree with you on jason though. lol

[capncnut]

He was resurrected from the dead via a lightening bolt! He's been drowned, elecrocuted, sent to hell and blown up in space only to come back bigger and stronger than before...
LOL, when you look at it like that, it makes the Friday the 13th series seem like a total and utter pile of turd. :lol:

[MinionZombie]

Ach! No it ain't, it's crazy - yes indeedy - but it's pure, unbridled slasher-flick goodness. It's my favourite slasher franchise out of the "big 3".

Part 1 - classic, it's dark, scary, has sex, drugs and ignorant teens...plus "ki ki ki, ma ma ma"

Part 2 - JASON! Continues very soon after #1, old school slasher fun, with MORE SEX!

Part 3 - Picks up right after #2, nice, the crappy 3-D cracks me up, hockey mask first crops up.

Part 4 - Savini back on board, the BEST of all the sequels, classic slasher fun, it's dark, ignorant teens are f*cking each other's brains out, the gore is fantastic, Jason is still f*cking really cool and they KILL him off.

Part 5 - lame bar a few moments.

Part 6 - so much fun, it ain't classic Friday anymore, but it's so much fun, Thom Mathews, Alice Cooper soundtrack.

Part 7 - Jason's make-up (under the mask) is absolutely superb, best in the entire franchise, again, more craziness and that auburn-haired chick with the big mouth has crackin' tits.

Part 8 - retarded, but when Jason FINALLY gets to Manhattan it's a lot of fun.

Part 9 - retarded.

Jason X - had a lot of fun, totally removed from the classics of the franchise sadly, but lots of horny, sexy space teens f*cking each other's brains out - IN SPACE! :lol:

I think my all time fave F13 flick is Part 4, it's just the top f*cking dogs bollocks.

[Minerva_Zombi]

i hate cheesy slasher movies like that. i'll watch it for fun, but the friday the 13th series is really not my cup of tea. i prefer the chainsaws or the hellraiser series.

[capncnut]

I think my all time fave F13 flick is Part 4, it's just the top f*cking dogs bollocks.
I'll give you that. IV was a good return to form as was VI (mirrored) but neither are remotely close to toppling the 1st. It's the same with Freddy III and Halloween II, both of which were great. It's only when they hit the 10 mark that's it makes you reflect on the previous episodes and realise what a load of old dogs cock most of 'em are! :lol:

[coma]

The best F13s are when it gets really stupid and removed from the original movies like Jason takes Manhattan and the one with the black cowboy detective guy (goes to hell?). I loved that one.
And boning teens in Space. That was pure entertainment.
All the halloween suck except for 1 and 2. H2o was decent
I hate all the Freddy movies. Even I. Lame.

[capncnut]

Timing I guess. I was 11 when A Nightmare on Elm Street dropped and I thought it was okay.

[coma]

Timing I guess. I was 11 when A Nightmare on Elm Street dropped and I thought it was okay.
I was only maybe 14. I think its just a matter of taste. Most other people really love that movie.

[Brubaker]

Ach! No it ain't, it's crazy - yes indeedy - but it's pure, unbridled slasher-flick goodness. It's my favourite slasher franchise out of the "big 3".

Part 1 - classic, it's dark, scary, has sex, drugs and ignorant teens...plus "ki ki ki, ma ma ma"

Part 2 - JASON! Continues very soon after #1, old school slasher fun, with MORE SEX!

Part 3 - Picks up right after #2, nice, the crappy 3-D cracks me up, hockey mask first crops up.

Part 4 - Savini back on board, the BEST of all the sequels, classic slasher fun, it's dark, ignorant teens are f*cking each other's brains out, the gore is fantastic, Jason is still f*cking really cool and they KILL him off.

Part 5 - lame bar a few moments.

Part 6 - so much fun, it ain't classic Friday anymore, but it's so much fun, Thom Mathews, Alice Cooper soundtrack.

Part 7 - Jason's make-up (under the mask) is absolutely superb, best in the entire franchise, again, more craziness and that auburn-haired chick with the big mouth has crackin' tits.

Part 8 - retarded, but when Jason FINALLY gets to Manhattan it's a lot of fun.

Part 9 - retarded.

Jason X - had a lot of fun, totally removed from the classics of the franchise sadly, but lots of horny, sexy space teens f*cking each other's brains out - IN SPACE! :lol:

I think my all time fave F13 flick is Part 4, it's just the top f*cking dogs bollocks.

I disqualify 5 and 9 from any legitimate discussion on the series because Jason wasn't even the killer in Part 5 (that was the imposter) and he didn't kill most of the people in Part 9 (possessing other people's bodies doesn't count to me). That jerk in the suspenders had so much face time it was sickening. Hodder was hardly in the damn movie.

As for the Halloween movies, I never saw what was so bad about the sequels, aside from H20/Resurrection/Season of the Witch. I thought Loomis was more interesting than Laurie Strode. Those sequels were no worse than most other horror sequels.

[Minerva_Zombi]

Well, if you disqualify 5 and 9 because Jason wasn't the killer, then disqualify the original too. Jason didn't enter the series until part 2.

[Rolfus]

you cannot beat hellraiser too awesome the imortal line in the night club "shall we begin" is the most awesomestests line ever. period. compared friday, halloween, texas and nightmare are just ordinary

[capncnut]

Agreed, the Hellraiser series is awesome (especially 2). Some of the deaths in those movies were truly spectacular and even the later sequels kicked ass. Hey, that just reminded me of something I should've posted ages ago, cheers mon.

[Danny]

yep, just to say i prefer the hellraiser series too.

[capncnut]

The one that was set in space, was that four or five?

[MinionZombie]

I think that was #4, Bloodlines right? Yeah ... that's when I stopped watching those movies...:bored:

[capncnut]

Yeah Bloodlines was cool, as was the one after that. I think they made a sixth but I'm not sure, gonna have to wiki this one... <checks> Damn there's EIGHT!!!

Hellraiser
Hellraiser II
Hellraiser III - Hell on Earth
Hellraiser - Bloodline
Hellraiser - Inferno
Hellraiser - Hellseeker
Hellraiser - Deader
Hellraiser - Hellworld

Looks like I got some catching up to do! :confused:

[MinionZombie]

By the time you get to the English language punching titled "Deader", then there's really no hope at all. :rolleyes: All straight to DVD shiit-fests I've heard.

[capncnut]

The last one I saw was Inferno and it wasn't too sad, I gotta say. Nothing like the first two though.

[Brubaker]

Well, if you disqualify 5 and 9 because Jason wasn't the killer, then disqualify the original too. Jason didn't enter the series until part 2.

Good point there. *Brubaker quickly slips out of the thread having totally missed that one when typing his original post* :D