Do you think Land will.....

[Doc]

Become a classic like the first 3 dead films?

[SRP76]

No.

Much of the reason for the others being so popular is because they went against the norm. Land is just like every other modern flick.

[Legion2213]

No. SRP76 nails the reasons in his post above, there is nothing to seperate Land from any other modern day flick. Very Sad.

[Dead Hoosier]

It's possible many might soften on it over time, but it'll never be considered "classic."

[darth los]

No.

Much of the reason for the others being so popular is because they went against the norm. Land is just like every other modern flick.


It's possible many might soften on it over time, but it'll never be considered "classic."


I'll tell you what. The more zombie flicks i see, the better and better land looks. I think people will see that over time. I don't think that it will surpass its 3 predecessors though.

[MinionZombie]

The previous 3 all have at the very least TWO DECADES of fan worship and cultural positioning over on Land, so it's a kinda daft question...also a bit too simple really.

I guarantee however that Land will age well and haters will soften up to it and so on. Day crashed and bombed and then became a fan favourite, while I won't say the same for Land right now purely to avoid getting into an argument with the haters saying "no it won't, gol!" (:rolleyes:), it will weather time far better than the likes of the Resi's or Yawn04 I say.

Ironic that somebody mentioned the other films going against whatever else was going on, meanwhile Land doesn't stick to the hater's specific visions of what 'Land should be' and gets blasted. :rolleyes:

...

*taps fingers on desk...awaits the inevitable "it's not that, it just sucked, it didn't live up to what it was supposed to be, it didn't do this, nor that, nor the other, waaaaaah". :p:lol::D

Anyway, I blates cast my vote as "yes", despite the question being a bit too simple for such a discussion/future prediction, in my view.

[bassman]

No it's not, MZ! Land sucks!

Seriously though....I voted yes although I'm not very sure that's what I wanted to vote. Just like MZ says....it's a bit tricky. Even now while I think that it's a worthy addition to the series, I don't know if I could consider it a "classic" because the others have been part of history for so long. I went ahead and voted yes due to the fact that I know it will become more widely accepted in the future.

....wait a minute....this seems like an attempt for the haters to win a poll because the pro-land people stomped their asses on all the other polls.:p :hyper:

[MinionZombie]

....wait a minute....this seems like an attempt for the haters to win a poll because the pro-land people stomped their asses on all the other polls.

ZIIIING! Nice shot, Sir. :)

Indeed, it's gonna take 20 years, or 18 now really, to see where Land will stand in comparison to the others on a fairer playing field, but even then there's still going to be a 20 year gap between Day and Land...a lot happens in 20 years, a lot of views, ideas and opinions change in 20 years.

Not only do I mean Day now in comparison to then, but I also mean Land in comparison to Day (and likewise the rest of the series) both in terms of GAR and in terms of us, the audience...as well as the production itself, the script too.

[Doc]

....wait a minute....this seems like an attempt for the haters to win a poll because the pro-land people stomped their asses on all the other polls.:p :hyper: Um No. :| but if the haters want to see this as a victory then whatever....... I don't hate Land entirely it's just that alot of things should have been better. I mean jeez it should have blown Dawn '04 out of the water, but it did not. :(

[darth los]

The best thing that could happen to land in terms of increasing its popularity is diary sucking balls. Then there will be another film to crap on.:D

[acealive1]

day was not greatly received when it came to theaters,worse than land. but i guess people are morons who will go see a remake over the real mc coy. friggin limp wristers:mad::mad:

[darth los]

It's true. The movie IQ of the average moviegoer is such that they aren't even aware that most of the crap that the movie studios peddle nowdays are either remakes of old fims or adaptations of novels comics or cartoons.

[acealive1]

It's true. The movie IQ of the average moviegoer is such that they aren't even aware that most of the crap that the movie studios peddle nowdays are either remakes of old fims or adaptations of novels comics or cartoons.



nothing could be truer than that. half the theater didnt understand the ending to the new alien vs predator movie

[MinionZombie]

I mean jeez it should have blown Dawn '04 out of the water, but it did not.

In my (and I'm sure bassman's) opinion it did.

But see, this is the problem, and why I got fed up with the whole Day vs Land thread (and others prior) because it's all subjective to the individual mostly...and it just ends up being two opposing brick walls weathering slowly in front of one another. :rolleyes::p

[Doc]

The best thing that could happen to land in terms of increasing its popularity is diary sucking balls. Then there will be another film to crap on.:D True, but from what I've seen it looks like Diary in gonna be alright......I just wish they would release a trailer or tv spot or something!:annoyed:






In my (and I'm sure bassman's) opinion it did. May the rest of the film, but Land just can't defeat the first 20 mins of Dawn '04


But see, this is the problem, and why I got fed up with the whole Day vs Land thread (and others prior) because it's all subjective to the individual mostly...and it just ends up being two opposing brick walls weathering slowly in front of one another. :rolleyes::p

:lol: Come on Mr. Minion Zombie don't give up just yet!

[clanglee]

"Wahhhh Land is awesome and I don't want to hear any negative comments about it!!! Booo hoo.:(" Come on man. :rolleyes: Quit with the premptive "assuming you know why people dont like the movie" crap.

I did vote no. But mainly it's because of the sheer numbers of movies that are coming out now. Night, when it was released, was the first movie of its kind. It spawned not only hundreds of homages, but a new type of horror movie. Dawn was the best movie of it's kind, Not a lot of competition and it refined the zombie genre. Cemented it. Now Day, I like Day a lot, and I think it deserves to be in the trilogy, but I don't consider it a classic. At the time it came out, the genre was established, and It had a lot of competition. Return of the Living Dead trounced it at the box office. I love Day because it was the Dead movie i most identify with being a child of the 80's, and it IS a GAR zombie movie. But to me, it didn't stand out from the pack enough to be a classic.

Land suffers all of the same problems that Day did to a much greater extent. It will never be a classic to me, and I doubt it will ever be generally considered a classic because it never stood out. It doesn't shine like those first two movies with any originality, and unlike Day, it sucks!! ;):p

Sorry couldn't resist

[MinionZombie]

Come on Mr. Minion Zombie don't give up just yet!

Ah but you joined in October 2007, I've been having this area of back-and-forth on 'ere since the film was released. :lol:

I think I'm tuckered out completely. :D

[clanglee]

Ahhh, but then again. . you never know. Plan 9 from OuterSpace is considered a classic by many people. :p

[darth los]

I believe it's recogized as a classic because it's universally recognized as arguably the worst film ever. Although, NOTLD 3D is giving it a run for its money.:barf: There's even a sienfeld episode, the one where they go to the chinese restaraunt, where they plan to see plan 9 and it is acknowledged as absolutely hideous and is therefore not to be missed.

[clanglee]

My point exactly!! :D

[darth los]

My point exactly!! :D

Harday har har. I see your point but i don't think land is anywhere near the putrid film that plan 9 and NOTLD 3D are. I think a film has too be that bad in order to be revered as a classic.

[clanglee]

I know man. It's not that bad. Just poking fun.

[Doc]

I think I'm tuckered out completely. :D To think I looked up to you!:lol:

[Trin]

Night and Dawn were considered great movies when they came out and have spent decades recognized among the greatest horror movies of all time. I do not see how Land deserves a 20 year grace period before it is judged against that standard. Mainstream horror has already relegated it to the heap. It's chance to be influential is past. It will never secure a spot among the greatest horror movies of all time. In every way it has no chance of achieving the heights that Night and Dawn achieved. Asking for 20 years to let time tell is just stalling.

That said, Land may become a cult classic among GAR faithful. It may take a place alongside Day. But becoming a cult classic isn't enough to be considered a horror classic and as much as I love Day it is not a horror classic. No one in mainstream horror cares about Day just as no one cares about or will care about Land. They're both going to end up footnotes to the successes of their predecessors.

I also feel like the negative sentiment among GAR Dead fans is much worse against Land than it ever was against Day. And it didn't take Day any 20 years to become a cult classic among GAR fans.

[MinionZombie]

To think I looked up to you!:lol:
Bah, you young scamps can keep playing fruitlessly at the Land argument game...but I'm a veteran of it, I'll hobble off to a park bench nearby to keep an eye on ya damn kids so you stay off my damn lawn! :D

[SRP76]

No, I'm pretty sure that if I think a movie sucks now, I'm going to think it sucks later.

And I sure as hell don't consider Day a "classic", in the first place. Romero should have stopped at two.

[Legion2213]

Seriously SRP? I like Day, not as good as Dawn (IMO), but still a great movie.

[Doc]

Seriously SRP? I like Day, not as good as Dawn (IMO), but still a great movie. I agree yeah so it wasn't the first and not the best zed film, but oh well you can at least give it credit for having the best gore effects and zombie make-up in the series.




Bah, you young scamps can keep playing fruitlessly at the Land argument game...but I'm a veteran of it, I'll hobble off to a park bench nearby to keep an eye on ya damn kids so you stay off my damn lawn! :D Don't worry Mr. MZ you will always be the second best member on this board in my eyes!:p

[bassman]

How could someone not like Day even if just for Bub? Bub is da man.

[SRP76]

How could someone not like Day even if just for Bub? Bub is da man.

Bub's a large part of the reason why I don't like it. Not so much the fault of Bub himself, but the whole concept of Bub.

I am a lot like Rhodes: "you want to teach 'em tricks?!"

At that point, the whole thing took a left turn into the oooooooo-EEEEEEEE-oooooo Realm.

That isn't the only reason, but it is a major one.

[bassman]

So you're one of those people that don't want to see evolution in the dead films? Big Daddy wasn't a good example, but Bub rocked the sh*t.

And his intelligence is very minimal, anyway. A great, steady progression of intelligence from Night and Dawn.

[Doc]

So you're one of those people that don't want to see evolution in the dead films? Big Daddy wasn't a good example, but Bub rocked the sh*t.

And his intelligence is very minimal, anyway. A great, steady progression of intelligence from Night and Dawn.

:thumbsup: Is it alright if I high-five you. :)

[SRP76]

So you're one of those people that don't want to see evolution in the dead films?

Of course. It changes what the movie is.

It's like trying to watch an Alien movie, and, all of a sudden, they aren't aliens anymore; now, they're Androids. Well, I don't want to see an Android movie; that's why I tried to watch an Alien movie!

[bassman]

Then all of them would be the same thing over and over. Boring.

[SRP76]

Then all of them would be the same thing over and over. Boring.

The evidence points to the exact opposite:

1. Night: cool
2. Dawn: cool
3. Day: boring
4. Land: coma-inducing boring

Coincidence? Maybe.....

[bassman]

Coincidence? No.
Opinion? Yes.

[Trin]

Bah, you young scamps can keep playing fruitlessly at the Land argument game...but I'm a veteran of it, I'll hobble off to a park bench nearby to keep an eye on ya damn kids so you stay off my damn lawn! :DLol - Grab a seat next to us frustrated Day fans. Your 20 years is just starting. Young-un. ;)

[darth los]

The evidence points to the exact opposite:

1. Night: cool
2. Dawn: cool
3. Day: boring
4. Land: coma-inducing boring

Coincidence? Maybe.....


I have to disagree on the day is boring one. Sometimes we think less of things that fail to meet our expectations. Maybe you were expecting a action packed zombie gorefest, which we did get at the end by the way. As was mentioned earlier, it would be the same zombie flick over and over again otherwise and that would truly be boring. Day palys out like a twighlight zone episode. It's a psychological in nature. It's not about the zombies. None of the dead films really are. It's about the tension that develops between the protagonists with the zombies as the catalysts. That story could have been told with many other doomsday scenarios taking the place of zombies, such as if a meteor hit the earth or a nuclear holocaust. Replace the zombie scenario with those and you could have made virtually the same film.

side note:
The biggest surprise to me is that sarah wasn't gang raped halfway through the film.

[clanglee]

I love Day, it's my second favorite GAR movie period. But I have to disagree with you Bass on one point. I don't see Bub as a study of advancing zombie intelect from the first two movies. Bub was just a special zombie. He himself was quite smart, but I'd say he was one of a kind. Before Land came out, that was never a theory. GAR himself never really had that whole evolution thing in mind until Land. Seeing as how I dislike the whole zombie evolutions theory, I don't like to see it applied to the previous movies. Not backwards compatible as it were.

[ProfessorChaos]

side note:
The biggest surprise to me is that sarah wasn't gang raped halfway through the film.


disturbing, but good point....

[bassman]

I love Day, it's my second favorite GAR movie period. But I have to disagree with you Bass on one point. I don't see Bub as a study of advancing zombie intelect from the first two movies. Bub was just a special zombie. He himself was quite smart, but I'd say he was one of a kind. Before Land came out, that was never a theory. GAR himself never really had that whole evolution thing in mind until Land. Seeing as how I dislike the whole zombie evolutions theory, I don't like to see it applied to the previous movies. Not backwards compatible as it were.

No, I don't mean that all the zombies were as smart as Bub. Bub was more advanced than the rest, but Night and Dawn both throw hints out there that the dead ARE capable of thinking, using tools, etc.

What I meant is that Bub himself is the next step in the evolution of the zombie mind. Yes, he was slightly more advanced and trained, but he was the beginning of something. Logan knew that if Bub could be helped and had reasoning power then the rest of the undead could possibly be reasoned with as well.

It could be argued that Romero never meant to have this evolution in mind when he made Night even though use of tools is present, but he DEFINITELY had the idea when he made Dawn. So with Bub and Day, he just took it slightly further and singled out one zombie that we could feel for. Then 20 years later(not so many if you count the fact that the script was around for years) he decided to bump it up a notch with Big Daddy. Too bad Big Daddy didnt turn out as good as Bub.

[sandrock74]

Yes, I think Land of the Dead will become considered a "classic" over time because people cried and whined about how much Day of the Dead sucked until Land came out. All of a sudden, all I hear is nowadays is how GREAT Day is! Where were all the Day fans in 1999? (That's when I started lurking here.)

[clanglee]

Nah, I didn't see any differences in the intelligence level of the zombs in Night and Dawn. They revealed a bit more about the zombie in Dawn, but rather than evolution, I saw this as new information that was existing, but previously undiscovered. Bub, while retaining more of his memory than most zombies, was also trained. Meh, maybe GAR did have a bit of the evolution theory in mind with Day tho. In the script, Bub was closer to Big Daddy than the Bub we all know and love. He was a super Clint Eastwood zombie with a quickdraw. *shudder* But still, in that script, GAR focused on behavior modification as the catlyst(sp?) for the increased zombie intelligence. I couldn't see Bub leading the other zombies in any way. Matter of fact, I think his increased intelligence would make him identify more with the living than the undead. hmmm

[darth los]

One angle that has failed to be brought up is up until bub, yes zombies were capable of "thinking" so to speak and using tools. But what is being overlooked is that in each of those instances these signs of intelligence or reason were in the pursuit of food. It was to facilitate the most basic of instincts which is to feed. Bub took it to a new level. I wouldn't exactly call shaving, talking on the phone or listening to a walkman a basic instinct.

[Trin]

So you're one of those people that don't want to see evolution in the dead films? Big Daddy wasn't a good example, but Bub rocked the sh*t.I'll be the first to say that I don't want to see evolution in the Dead films if it means changing the nature of a zombie. Explore the mindset of the surivivors or the evolution of the society but leave the zombies alone. They need to present a consistent threat and backdrop to the human conflict.

I don't believe that the zombies changed from Night to Dawn to Day. And I don't see Bub as evidence that they did. I've always seen Bub as neither smarter nor more evolved than the other zombies. He's simply been trained. Given the opportunity to reach his potential. There's nothing to suggest that taking any of the zombies and spending that much time with them wouldn't result in the same thing.


What I meant is that Bub himself is the next step in the evolution of the zombie mind. Yes, he was slightly more advanced and trained, but he was the beginning of something. Logan knew that if Bub could be helped and had reasoning power then the rest of the undead could possibly be reasoned with as well.That's an interesting point. I think it helps me understand your perspective on zombie evolution a bit better. What I like about that observation is that by trying to reason with Bub they ended up making a worse monster out of him.


Before Land came out, that was never a theory. GAR himself never really had that whole evolution thing in mind until Land.
I definitely agree with this. I think GAR was looking no further than the end of his nose with each of the original movies.

[clanglee]

I definitely agree with this. I think GAR was looking no further than the end of his nose with each of the original movies.

Like Lucas. You can't tell me that he had originally planned to have Luke and Leah be siblings.:rolleyes:

[Dead Hoosier]

I too don't consider Day to be a "classic." To me it is the third-best film in the genre...but we're talking about a piss-poor selection of films overall. I didn't care much for Day for a long time, but it grew on me. It was never going to be Dawn...but what is?

[darth los]

What does it say about the genre when the best 4 films in it, with dawn being the crown jewel, are made by the same man? Just some food for thought.:confused:

[clanglee]

Well GAR was the creator of the genre, but I don't consider Land in the top 4. I liked Return of the Living Dead and Night '90 and Dawn 04 better than Land. Hell, I like Children Shouldn't play with Dead things better than Land. Land is probably in the top 10 for me, but not the top 4.

[darth los]

Well GAR was the creator of the genre, but I don't consider Land in the top 4. I liked Return of the Living Dead and Night '90 and Dawn 04 better than Land. Hell, I like Children Shouldn't play with Dead things better than Land. Land is probably in the top 10 for me, but not the top 4.

Well, that's up for debate. Oh well, it looks like we have another good poll topic. " Which gets your vote for the fourth best zombie film?" It's a tough choice indeed.:annoyed:

[Legion2213]

Like Lucas. You can't tell me that he had originally planned to have Luke and Leah be siblings.:rolleyes:


Luke was going to be a woman, held captive on the mighty Death Star in his original story, he was also going to be "Luke Starkiller" in another draft of the script (after he'd been changed to a bloke, obviously). The original scripts used to ba available online, there were several of them.

[Arcades057]

Become a classic like the first 3 dead films?

Sorry....but I don't think that Dawn or Day are considered "classics" by anyone but horror freaks.

[bassman]

Sorry....but I don't think that Dawn or Day are considered "classics" by anyone but horror freaks.

Good point. But on the other hand, I've seen a lot of critic's top lists and suprisingly Dawn is mentioned quite a bit.

I mean...it's no secret that Ebert loves Dawn and he's considered one of the biggest critics in history. There are a few normal movie buffs and movie-goers that still consider Dawn a classic. Day...not so much.

[MinionZombie]

Day is perhaps more for the horror set, but Dawn is definitely considered a genre classic as well as cinema classic.

Heck, just t'other day Channel 4 were showing that poo-storm Yawn04 and something along the lines of 'remake of George A. Romero's classic' in the info box. Whenever I see Dawn mentioned, in magazines and on TV etc, I see the word "classic" sitting next to it.

And I'd have to agree whole-heartedly. :)

[clanglee]

Once again I am forced to agree with you Minion. Darn you and your occasional bouts of rationality. ;)

Dawn is a classic by any definition. It has a HUGE following, And its really the first movie people usually think of when zombies are mentioned. It's very definitely a classic among horror fans, and it has enough cult status to have instituted itself in Pop culture.

[Dead Hoosier]

Agreed. Few films transcend their genre, but Dawn was certainly one. It was a pinnacle that has never been approached in horror...IMO.

[Arcades057]

The fact of the matter is, boys:

You can label any movie a "classic". Hell, I've heard people call "Dumb and Dumber" a classic.

But, that doesn't necessarily make it so.

At this point, I'd say that more people are familiar with the remake than they are the original....

[Doc]

At this point, I'd say that more people are familiar with the remake than they are the original.... Yeah I remember when I saw the dvd case for the remake.....I actually though it was original :annoyed:

Then I saw the dvd case for the original and read the description.....I though the plot sounded like crap:dead:..... Actually I didn't know the film was called Dawn of the Dead.( I had a short attention span back then)


But then 3 years later that would all change....:D

[SRP76]

The fact of the matter is, boys:

You can label any movie a "classic". Hell, I've heard people call "Dumb and Dumber" a classic.

But, that doesn't necessarily make it so.

At this point, I'd say that more people are familiar with the remake than they are the original....


More people are familiar with Harry Potter than The Wizard of Oz, too. That doesn't mean jack. Guess which one is the classic? It isn't Potter.

[Arcades057]

More people are familiar with Harry Potter than The Wizard of Oz, too. That doesn't mean jack. Guess which one is the classic? It isn't Potter.

It's a classic....but at this point--so is Harry Potter. Probably more so than The Wizard of Oz.

Times change, and so do audiences. It's already to the point where the original Psycho, and the original Exorcist, aren't **** to most modern fans. They feel that they're slow moving, bland, and definitely not scary. Just like the original Dawn of the Dead.

[Trin]

There is no single accepted definition of what the term "classic" means when applied to movies, and you are certainly welcome to dub any movie a classic that suits you, but to suggest that Harry Potter or Dawn'04 are classics is such loose definition of "classic" as to have no meaning at all. It certainly doesn't infer such qualities as timeless or influential or unforgettable.

[IRA_LCPL]

well I geuss that is kinda like on AMC the American Movie Classics channel they started playing Super Troopers and American Pie WTF!!!

[clanglee]

There is a difference between popular and classic.

[MinionZombie]

I think Harry Potter, the first film, will eventually be considered classic - because of it's status and the influence and so on. Likewise, the Rings trilogy definitely will be a classic, if it's not already.

Yawn04 though...that's popcorn dregs stuck to the base of some American Pie-wannabe teen's doodle.

[IRA_LCPL]

I hav a hardtime seeing the newest star wars episodes 1-3 as classics personally.

[Arcades057]

I think Harry Potter, the first film, will eventually be considered classic - because of it's status and the influence and so on. Likewise, the Rings trilogy definitely will be a classic, if it's not already.

Yawn04 though...that's popcorn dregs stuck to the base of some American Pie-wannabe teen's doodle.

Say what you will about Dawn 04, it's still an excellent flick that caught GAR's eye. See his rip-off of Dawn 04's opening credits montage and you'll see what I mean.

Dawn 04 succeeded where Land didn't.

Personally, I'd rather watch a quality flick like that than sit through another GAR snore-fest that gets praised by horror fans more due to the old man's cult of personality than any actual merit.

[bassman]

Say what you will about Dawn 04, it's still an excellent flick that caught GAR's eye. See his rip-off of Dawn 04's opening credits montage and you'll see what I mean.

Romero has said that the Dawn remake is an action flick and not a horror film. Other than that, where has it influenced his filmmaking? There is no comparison between the opening of Dawn04 and Land.


Dawn 04 succeeded where Land didn't.
Dawn made more money.....since when does money determine whether a movie is good or not? Some of Uwe Boll's films have made decent money.....


Personally, I'd rather watch a quality flick like that than sit through another GAR snore-fest that gets praised by horror fans more due to the old man's cult of personality than any actual merit.

:rolleyes:Or maybe people enjoy it? Just because you didn't enjoy it doesn't mean that everyone is liking it just because of romero's name. It's all opinion.

[capncnut]

Say what you will about Dawn 04, it's still an excellent flick that caught GAR's eye.Romero has said that the Dawn remake is an action flick and not a horror film.
Yup. In fact, I read an interview from a link here where GAR pretty much mocks Dawn 04, saying, "I was disappointed. I didn't like it because it was too over the top". The only modern zombie movie to my knowledge that he has spoke highly of is Shaun of the Dead.

[Doc]

Yup. In fact, I read an interview from a link here where GAR pretty much mocks Dawn 04, saying, "I was disappointed. I didn't like it because it was too over the top". The only modern zombie movie to my knowledge that he has spoke highly of is Shaun of the Dead. Wow, you remember which thread? I want to see that myself.

[capncnut]

Searching for a GAR interview in this place is like looking for a grain of salt at the beach. I have no idea what thread it was in but if youre gonna look, I'd use the search engine 'cos it will take years manually. :D

Anyway, whether they were the exact words or not I ain't sure but they were to that effect. If you find it, bump the thread so we can all see.

[Doc]

Searching for a GAR interview in this place is like looking for a grain of salt at the beach. I have no idea what thread it was in but if youre gonna look, I'd use the search engine 'cos it will take years manually. :D

Anyway, whether they were the exact words or not I ain't sure but they were to that effect. If you find it, bump the thread so we can all see. Wait I think I remember seeing a link to GAR's comment about the Dawn remake I think it was in the.......

[Arcades057]

Yup. In fact, I read an interview from a link here where GAR pretty much mocks Dawn 04, saying, "I was disappointed. I didn't like it because it was too over the top". The only modern zombie movie to my knowledge that he has spoke highly of is Shaun of the Dead.

Uh...would you expect anything less?

Shaun and his crew basically blew GAR for over an hour and a half.

For his sake, I hope the old man got his jollies.:D

[bassman]

Uh...would you expect anything less?

Shaun and his crew basically blew GAR for over an hour and a half.

For his sake, I hope the old man got his jollies.:D

:rockbrow:

They used his zombies and a few music cues from Dawn. That's a big blowjob right there.:rolleyes:

[IRA_LCPL]

and perodied a couple of scens off the top of my head Ed and Noel-Bub and Frankenstein idea to make em loyal.

[Arcades057]

:rockbrow:

They used his zombies and a few music cues from Dawn. That's a big blowjob right there.:rolleyes:

Uh....did you see the same movie I did?

Almost the entire film was a homage to the original trilogy.:moon:

[clanglee]

I actually agree it was an homage, but it was done with sophistication and class.

[bassman]

Uh....did you see the same movie I did?

Almost the entire film was a homage to the original trilogy.:moon:


Of course it is. It's a tribute to Romero's Dead films, but they also made a very original film at the same time.

[SymphonicX]

Gotta love "Foree electronics" where Shaun works in that movie...brilliant..."We're coming to get you barbara" as well, fantastic..."we're not using the z-word!!" ...ahh its great...not side splittingly funny but still a great flick.

[MinionZombie]

Gotta love "Foree electronics" where Shaun works in that movie...brilliant..."We're coming to get you barbara" as well, fantastic..."we're not using the z-word!!" ...ahh its great...not side splittingly funny but still a great flick.
Duno about you, but I was gasping for breath when I saw it in the cinema. Larfed me arse off throughout the entire thing...then got lost for an hour trying to drive out of the city the cinema was in afterwards. :D

[Legion2213]

Shaun was a great movie...I immediately adopted the phrase "cock it" after seeing it. :)

[Mutineer]

Shaun was hilarious; one of my favs in the genre.

-

I don't forsee Land becoming a classic. The film simply flopped on its arse in an age and height of the genre popularity. It should have been a slam dunk; it was a flop.

Films like Shuan, 28 Days Later and Dawn 04 all blew it away domestically for a reason, they were well made, entertaining films. Land simply was not entertaining and not particulary well made.

Comparing DAY and LAND is absurd. How can one suggest LAND is remotely as good a film as DAY ?

[Doc]

Comparing DAY and LAND is absurd. How can one suggest LAND is remotely as good a film as DAY ?
Who knows man :confused: I've seen people prefer Land over Day and all they keep tellling me is Day sucked....That's what they always say. They never give a reason. :rolleyes:

[SRP76]

Who knows man :confused: I've seen people prefer Land over Day and all they keep tellling me is Day sucked....That's what they always say. They never give a reason. :rolleyes:

Many of the same exact reasons Land sucked. For all the defending it'll get, it had pretty much all the same points.

The only thing keeping Day out of the toilet is the awesome Captain Rhodes.

[Mutineer]

Captain Rhoades is the best part of Day :D

"I'm running this monkey show Frankenstein, and I wanna know, WHAT THE **** YOU"RE DOING WITH MY TIME !!!!!!!!!!????????"

LMAO!

[SRP76]

I wonder if Romero gets pissed off that the guy he pointed to as the supreme villain ends up being most people's favorite character.

[Legion2213]

Captain Rhoades is the best part of Day :D

"I'm running this monkey show Frankenstein, and I wanna know, WHAT THE **** YOU"RE DOING WITH MY TIME !!!!!!!!!!????????"

LMAO!


Agreed! Rhodes and then Frankenstien himself are my fave characters in that movie. The three "hero's" didn't realy do much for me to honest...I still think it's an excellent movie though.

[bassman]

I wonder if Romero gets pissed off that the guy he pointed to as the supreme villain ends up being most people's favorite character.

I know a bunch of people like Rhodes, but I always figured that Bub would be the #1 pick for favorite character.

I know that he's my favorite character out of all the movies.:cool:

[MinionZombie]

Rhodes is badass and fun to watch/quote, but he's still a bastard and you'd not be chummy with him if you were in the film probably.

Bub is awesome, and yeah, I'd pick him as my favourite GAR-zed-flick character of all time too. :cool:

[Mutineer]

True Minion

I thought his character was the more rational of them all; he just wanted them to all drop dead.

In Dawn 04; as much a dick Steve was, I kind of liked him too. Just his whole attitude was great, if not someone you want to be hanging with during the crisis.

[bd2999]

Yes but not because it itself is special. It was good but because it is the next in line of three movies that are classic it will natural gain semi status and people will watch it because they saw the others.

[lifelikecarcass]

This is merely my opinion, take it for what it's worth.

I'm a movie fan, not a zombie fan, not specifically a horror movie fan, or a faithful follower of any filmmaker, I enjoy films for what they are.
I don't go into a theater with high expectations because I used to, and I was let down so much that I had to revise my philosophy on film going.

I liked Dawn04 alot, just as yet another zombie film not as a rival to the original.
I could care less about the issues surrounding it from the POV of the hardcore Romero fanatics.
All that crap makes no sense to me, I don't understand why people feel like it somehow tarnishes the original.
They're 2 totally different movies.
I understand the rights issues that were involved.
It just makes no difference.
Dawn78 isn't the film that I measure all other zombie flicks by, and it's not my bible.

Truth be told, my all time favorite zombie flick is "Return Of The Living Dead pt.1".

All that being said, I liked Land, but I see why some people feel let down by it.
With all the fanboy rhetoric and hype surrounding the original "Dead" films by Romero, people were expecting this mind blowing epic that they built up in their mind as something like the new testament of the bible.
There's just no way that a film by anyone could live up to those expectations.
So when people discuss what it is that ruined that film, they put it off as studio interference, bad casting, whatever.
But in reality they are to blame themselves, the hardcore fans.
For setting the bar so high that nothing could come close to reaching it.

Romero is just a man, like any other.
Yeah, he made some great films, but he's still just a man.
Land was just the last installment of his original masterpieces, it wasn't made to be the film that you saw in your own mind while waiting for it to be released.

Anyone who's ever made even a film short, or a simple character study in sketch, knows that there's always something lost from what you saw in your mind and what you were able to flesh out.
It's just the nature of the craft.

In conclusion, I don't think there's a chance in hell for Land to be accepted the same way that Dawn or even Day are now.
As was already stated, times were different then.
The modern craft of filmmaking was maturing in the days of the original Dawn and was very influential after the fact as it pertains to the horror genre.
So the aspects that made Dawn groundbreaking in those days has been picked apart and copied over and over again.
It leaves you to wonder what could have been done by Romero to recreate that kind of magic again in this day and age where every-thing's been done and redone?
Short of actually creating a virus that brings the dead back, and putting them in a contained city and doing a reality show, whatever he does will just blend into the horror film cesspool that he played a big role in establishing.
Like the saying goes, "lightning never strikes the same place twice".

The same thing happened with George Lucas and the Star Wars franchise.

[Mutineer]

It leaves you to wonder what could have been done by Romero to recreate that kind of magic again in this day and age where every-thing's been done and redone?


Have a good story.

Have more than 20 Zombies in the LAND of the Dead.

Not directed it; he lacks the chops to work in todays industry and prowse modern filmmakers have.

:annoyed:

[Mike70]

no i don't think land will end up being reappraised as time goes by.

1. this film, even though i like it, has left a profoundly bad taste in the mouths of many romero fans. so bad a taste in fact that many die hard romero fans might not even bother to watch it again or give it the second or third view that leads some folks to change their minds about something they previously were blah about.

2. compared to romero's earlier zombie films it just doesn't stand up. it doesn't have the interesting, strong characters and FX pizzaz of day nor does it have the great story, very likable characters and social commentary of dawn nor is it ground breaking/revolutionary like night 68.

3. i think that as younger people come up and get interested in the genre, this in my opinion, is not the movie that is going to capture their interest and make them zombie freaks like the rest of us.