I am Pissed

[clanglee]

I was going to finally be able to go on monday to see this movie. But I just found out that the last time it's playing in Durham is thursday. So, I guess I have to wait for DVD. I am livid!! :mad:

[Mike70]

I was going to finally be able to go on monday to see this movie. But I just found out that the last time it's playing in Durham is thursday. So, I guess I have to wait for DVD. I am livid!! :mad:

well that doesn't sound like good news at all if it is already slipping off of screens instead of being added to them.

next stop DVD?

[clanglee]

I guess so. I really am quite upset. :(

[Moon Knight]

I don't think it was never supposed to have a long theater life, amirite?

Besides, I wouldn't mind having the DVD that much sooner.
However, that sucks, Clang, wish you would have gotten the chance to see it. :(

[bassman]

I don't think it was never supposed to have a long theater life, amirite?


That was my understanding. I know that the theater I saw it in only played it for a week or so....

[MinionZombie]

According to that interview with John Harrison the Weinstein's wanted to treat it theatrically like an art-house movie that people would have to go out of their way to see.

Whelp! I'll be getting my ass IMMEDIATELY down to the cinema when it opens, lest it all goes Death Proof on my ass and I miss it immediately. :rolleyes:

7th March people! MZ'll be popping off all over yo faces...:lol:...f*ckin' ewwww...

[blind2d]

theatre prices are getting too high anyway...

[Trin]

Now I'm just scared. I have plans to see it this coming Saturday night.

Each week I've planned to see it and something has come up. I sit on pins and needles waiting to see if it'll be pulled before the next weekend.

The theater that is showing it here has it advertised through next week. I hope it's not a lie.

[DubiousComforts]

According to that interview with John Harrison the Weinstein's wanted to treat it theatrically like an art-house movie that people would have to go out of their way to see.
That is the dumbest distribution strategy that I've yet to hear. Granted, it's not Spiderman IV and doesn't need to open on 2000+ screens. But when you're at a fan convention and a majority of the attendees that you speak with (i.e. the target audience) still haven't seen the movie and even the film's director is shocked that you've been able to see it... well, there is a big problem.

[bassman]

People seem to forget that Diary was originally intended to go straight-to-DVD. It wouldn't have been in ANY theater. The Weinsteins were the ones that wanted it to go to theater, so it was their decision on how to play it out.

Romero only wanted to make the film, show it at some festivals, and put out the DVD. With a film like this, we're lucky that it was shown in any theater at all.

[DubiousComforts]

Romero only wanted to make the film, show it at some festivals, and put out the DVD. With a film like this, we're lucky that it was shown in any theater at all.
It doesn't matter what Romero intended or anticipated--he's the director, not the distributor. This movie isn't playing in "art houses" so it's complete nonsense to pretend that was the plan all along.

[bassman]

It doesn't matter what Romero intended or anticipated--he's the director, not the distributor. This movie isn't playing in "art houses" so it's complete nonsense to pretend that was the plan all along.

It never was the plan all along. The plan was DVD. The Weinsteins decided on the art house thing. There was no theatrical distributor and the producers never really entertained the idea.....then Weinsteins saw it and bought the theatrical distribution rights.

The film was never intended to be in theater. We should all be happy for Romero that he's making a few extra bucks from it.

[DubiousComforts]

It never was the plan all along. The plan was DVD. The Weinsteins decided on the art house thing. There was no theatrical distributor and the producers never really entertained the idea.....then Weinsteins saw it and bought the theatrical distribution rights.
But it's not playing in art houses, so that is just an excuse made in hindsight for mishandling the property. How do you know what "the plan was all along"? I think the real plan was to buy up as many "living dead"-related properties for as cheaply as possible so there wouldn't be any competition on DVD or otherwise.



The film was never intended to be in theater. We should all be happy for Romero that he's making a few extra bucks from it.
The man himself told me that he's shocked anyone has actually seen it. I've been around long enough to have seen The Crazies, DAWN, DAY, Monkey Shines, Two Evil Eyes and more be completely botched in theatrical distribution, so this is simply par for the course. No reason to be appreciative of it.

[bassman]

Exclude the "art house" phrase. All I'm saying is that I remember Romero saying all he intended was a DVD release. Then the film got put into a few theaters on top of that. You should have known that it would not get a wide release.

Then again, I was lucky enough to see it, so I guess you've got some anger building up over this.

[Harold W Brown]

But it's not playing in art houses

Sure is in Philly.

ritzfilmbill.com (http://ritzfilmbill.com/synopses/films.php?movie_id=1281)

[DubiousComforts]

Then again, I was lucky enough to see it, so I guess you've got some anger building up over this.
And I've seen it twice, so your point?


Sure is in Philly.

ritzfilmbill.com
Okay, that's one art house, and I believe the Angelika in Dallas is one, so that makes two. All the AMC theaters where it's been playing, however, are far from the art house circuit.

[bassman]

And I've seen it twice, so your point?



Then why the f*ck are you complaining???:lol:

Most people here haven't been able to see it.

And can someone describe to me the details that make a theater an "art house"?:rockbrow:

[Harold W Brown]

Art houses specialize in limited release film exhibition, and you usually only find them in cities. Also, there's usually no goddamn kids there.

[bassman]

Art houses specialize in limited release film exhibition, and you usually only find them in cities. Also, there's usually no goddamn kids there.

Sweet! Then add Atlanta to the list of art houses it's played at. It was a cool place, too. It's the oldest theater in the city and had posters plastered all over the wall in a collage(sp?) kind of style. Had Night, Dawn, Day, Evil Dead, and MANY others. And they have weekly Midnight screenings of Rocky Horror Picture Show. AWESOME place.:D

[DubiousComforts]

Then why the f*ck are you complaining???:lol:

Most people here haven't been able to see it.
You just answered your own question! What is it with you? As long as you get to see it, everyone should agree and be appreciative that the film has even been shown in theaters at all? I thought this was about what's good for George.

Wake up, quit swallowing the BS that the studios like to spew and THINK! :D

[Trin]

We have an art house theater here in KC. That's where I saw Bubba Hotep. It caters to a completely different type of movie then the chain theaters.

Diary is showing at one of our AMCs. It's huge and caters to the blockbuster movie crowd.

My only point would be that by showing alongside blockbuster movies Diary is going to be judged against them. I'd never expect Bubba Hotep to compete with the likes of I Am Legend because it was in an entirely different class of movie, but had it been playing in the same theater at the same time for the same price, as Diary is, then the comparison becomes a valid one.

[bassman]

You just answered your own question! What is it with you? As long as you get to see it, everyone should agree and be appreciative that the film has even been shown in theaters at all? I thought this was about what's good for George.

Wake up, quit swallowing the BS that the studios like to spew and THINK! :D

WTF are you talking about? "What the studios spew"? "Think"? Someone's off their rocker....

All I'm saying is why complain if you've seen it and others can't? Count your blessings. I guess that concept flies over some people's heads these days...

[DubiousComforts]

WTF are you talking about? "What the studios spew"? "Think"? Someone's off their rocker....

All I'm saying is why complain if you've seen it and others can't? Count your blessings. I guess that concept flies over some people's heads these days...

I'm just giving you a hard time, it's all in fun. :D

But this argument is nothing new: a niche property gets a limited release theatrically or on DVD, and the studio heads (like the Weinsteins, in this case) come up with an excuse why they couldn't get behind it. I'm telling you not to buy into the b.s. and think for yourself. DIARY is certainly not a blockbuster property, but it clearly hasn't been able to reach its intended audience, which is the distributor's job. Don't be appreciative of the fact that they botched it.

[bassman]

I'm just giving you a hard time, it's all in fun. :D

But this argument is nothing new: a niche property gets a limited release theatrically or on DVD, and the studio heads (like the Weinsteins, in this case) come up with an excuse why they couldn't get behind it. I'm telling you not to buy into the b.s. and think for yourself. DIARY is certainly not a blockbuster property, but it clearly hasn't been able to reach its intended audience, which is the distributor's job. Don't be appreciative of the fact that they botched it.

:annoyed:

I do think for myself. And I'm thinking that it's great that I got to see it. Sure, it could have been released to more theaters, but then it would have lost money. Face it. It would have.

The Weinsteins didn't come up with an excuse at all. They had the plan for a limited release from the beginning(according to interviews). Romero shouldn't be too upset...he made money before the film was ever released and he has DVD sales to look forward to. At least the film was made and released in some form or another....let's put it that way. Romero may not have ever done another film. In this case, we got a small theatrical run instead of Straight-To-DVD. Like I said...count you blessings.

And I really don't see how you think i'm buying into the studios(especially with an independent film:rockbrow:) and not thinking for myself just because I don't think there's anything to be totally angry over...

[Mike70]

i am more disappointed than anything at not even really having a chance to check it out in a theater.

i can understand the anger though of people like clang who had plans to go only to find that the movie has been pulled. that would suck.

i was hoping to be able to support the movie by seeing it in a theater but the way i look at it, i will still be supporting it by buying a DVD, i just won't get that theater experience.

[bassman]

i was hoping to be able to support the movie by seeing it in a theater but the way i look at it, i will still be supporting it by buying a DVD, i just won't get that theater experience.

I think that with a film like this, the theater experience isn't really necessary. Just by the way it's shot, I mean. I could have watched it on my tv at home and got the same effect, to be honest...

[Harold W Brown]

I think that with a film like this, the theater experience isn't really necessary. Just by the way it's shot, I mean. I could have watched it on my tv at home and got the same effect, to be honest...

There's an undeniable rush to seeing a Romero zombie flick on the big screen though, just because it's so damn rare...

[bassman]

There's an undeniable rush to seeing a Romero zombie flick on the big screen though, just because it's so damn rare...

Oh yeah...no doubt. I was like a giddy school girl when I went to see Land in theater. It was my first Romero-in-theater experience.

I'm just saying that the overall impact of Diary won't be any less on home video, imo.

[Mike70]

Oh yeah...no doubt. I was like a giddy school girl when I went to see Land in theater. It was my first Romero-in-theater experience.

I'm just saying that the overall impact of Diary won't be any less on home video, imo.

that is another subject of disappointment for me. up to this point i have managed to see all of romero's zombie films on the big screen - mostly at halloween showings at the esquire or when the danbury theater in cincy broke out a bunch of old horror flicks a few summers ago and had midnight showings of them on fri and sat.

something makes me think that i won't get that opportunity with diary. i hope i am wrong though.

[DubiousComforts]

:annoyed:

I do think for myself. And I'm thinking that it's great that I got to see it. Sure, it could have been released to more theaters, but then it would have lost money. Face it. It would have.
There's nothing to face because you really have no idea at what point it would have lost money theatrically. Surely there must be a more reasonable medium between 48 and 2000 screens so that they could have effectively taken the money of all the diehards still waiting to see it.


And I really don't see how you think i'm buying into the studios(especially with an independent film:rockbrow:) and not thinking for myself just because I don't think there's anything to be totally angry over...
As I've said, this has been argued before and invariably someone always takes the "count your blessings" side. The reality is that God has nothing to do with motion picture distribution, so I don't consider this a blessed event. Sue me. :p

[bassman]

Okay pal. Stay angry over something you can't possibly change. Good one. And since when does religion have ANYTHING to do with this?

Troll?


I'm done with this.

[Harold W Brown]

Oh yeah...no doubt. I was like a giddy school girl when I went to see Land in theater. It was my first Romero-in-theater experience.

I'm just saying that the overall impact of Diary won't be any less on home video, imo.

It'll play the same, but I think people want that "experience", especially if they've had it before! (I know I've been chasing the high of seeing Day of the Dead in theaters for years.)

[DubiousComforts]

Okay pal. Stay angry over something you can't possibly change.
Who's angry?

[MinionZombie]

I was like a giddy school girl when I went to see Land in theater. It was my first Romero-in-theater experience.

I was exactly the same, I saw Land opening night. My first GAR flick in the cinemas, and it was his new zombie one too, so that was doubly awesome.

I plan to repeat the experience with Diary. :)

[clanglee]

Who's angry?

Me, I'm angry. I appreciate the "It was never meant for the movies, so just be happy it came to the theaters at all" sentiment, but that is as helpful to me as an unnecissary hole in the head. I wanted to see the damn movie in the theater. I live right next to largest city in NC, but in their wisdom they chose Raleigh/Durham. Ok whatever, its a college area, but how much money would they have lost just releasing the movie in ALL large population cities? None. How much more money would they have made? Lots.

But I was set to drive the distance finally, and the rug was pulled out from under me at the last minute. Seriously just 2 weeks? at one theater in a 500 mile radius. Screw that!!

[Griff]

Don't get too angry. I spent over 200 dollars on tickets to see 7 other movies just to see DIARY at the premiere. At least I got to see the new Argento, though.

[Mike70]

Don't get too angry. I spent over 200 dollars on tickets to see 7 other movies just to see DIARY at the premiere. At least I got to see the new Argento, though.

:stunned: damn. wow. how was the new argento flick by the way?

[JohnoftheDead]

Well I just found out it's playing in Ohio about an hour from my crib so I'm gonna try to head to Cleveland to see it tomorrow. The problem is we've just tied the record for the most snow in February in Ohio ever, so everyone wish me luck & pray that mother nature is kind to me tomorrow!

[Mike70]

Well I just found out it's playing in Ohio about an hour from my crib so I'm gonna try to head to Cleveland to see it tomorrow. The problem is we've just tied the record for the most snow in February in Ohio ever, so everyone wish me luck & pray that mother nature is kind to me tomorrow!

frak. it would be playing in fricking cleveland. i am going to have to recheck the listiings now. hopefully it might be added in columbus or better yet dayton.

by the way- we just got more snow down here yesterday but nothing near a record.

[CoinReturn]

Holy ****! Thanks for the heads up JohnoftheDead, I had no idea that a Cleveland area show was added. Valley View is 20 minutes away from me, and the theater is awesome to boot. Going to see it at 10:25 tonight :D

[Mike70]

well i have checked those listings and it is also showing columbus now. that is about 100 miles away from here. hhmmm i am wondering should i take a small road trip? if this was playing in dayton or cincinnati i'd be there like a dung beetle on elephant crap.

the interesting thing is it doesn't look like there are more than 40 or so showings nationwide. seems like they might be shipping these prints about from place to place.

[ProfessorChaos]

dude!!!!!!!!! i am so elated!!!!! just found out that this is playing in st louis. packing my sh!t right now, gents!

two theaters showing it, so i'll be catching either a 3 or 3:45 showing!!!!!

HERE WE GO!!!!!

EDIT: posting a short series of my musings over diary in another pre-existing thread...done in a jiffy.

[MoonSylver]

well i have checked those listings and it is also showing columbus now. that is about 100 miles away from here. hhmmm i am wondering should i take a small road trip? if this was playing in dayton or cincinnati i'd be there like a dung beetle on elephant crap.

the interesting thing is it doesn't look like there are more than 40 or so showings nationwide. seems like they might be shipping these prints about from place to place.

Holy crap ! That's 20 min from me! AWESOME! :eek: :thumbsup: :D :stunned: :)

[clanglee]

Well then, where are they shipping the north carolina print? probably even further from me. :(

[Yojimbo]

I think that with a film like this, the theater experience isn't really necessary. Just by the way it's shot, I mean. I could have watched it on my tv at home and got the same effect, to be honest...

I don't know bassman, it was kind of cool to see this one in a theater full of weirdos who were obviously fans of the genre like me. The content of the film will be the same whether on DVD or on screen, but the loss of the collective conciousness when you view a DVD as opposed to viewing it in a group...it's a different effect to be honest. So I am glad that I experienced this in an "arthouse" venue with like minded zombie freaks.

That being said, having to watch this in a mainstream AMC theater crowded with crying infants, unruly tweens, disruptive teenagers who say "I liked Swimfan better" and adults who could care less about the genre and say "George Romero who?" is an experience that I would rather miss. So maybe it is on some level better to have the limited screens that we had. I don't know, just a thought!




I'm just saying that the overall impact of Diary won't be any less on home video, imo.

But yeah, I agree with you there!

Just another thought: My guess is that since this one is considered art house that it will show up for years to come as a "midnite" screener for cult heads, much like Rocky Horror, NOLD 68, Mondo Cane and The Big Lebowski does. So it is possible that even if you have missed this on during the first run you might be able to lobby for a screening at your local arthouse/revival theater and be rewarded.

[bassman]

I don't know bassman, it was kind of cool to see this one in a theater full of weirdos who were obviously fans of the genre like me. The content of the film will be the same whether on DVD or on screen, but the loss of the collective conciousness when you view a DVD as opposed to viewing it in a group...it's a different effect to be honest. So I am glad that I experienced this in an "arthouse" venue with like minded zombie freaks.


Well, yeah. If you're seeing a film with a group of dedicated fans such as yourself, of course it will be more fun. I'm talkling about the film itself, being viewed by a single person. Seeing it at home won't detract from the overall effect because of the first person/documentary style of the film, imo.

[clanglee]

Still doesn't stop me from wanting to see it in the theater tho.

[MoonSylver]

Still doesn't stop me from wanting to see it in the theater tho.

I'm with ya Clang. I understand everyone's concerns about the viewing experience at the theater, but I think it's important to get out there & spend the $ on a ticket to support a filmmaker like GAR.

Sorry you lost out on getting to see it in your area. Based on the fact it's leaving your neck of the woods & entering mine (I'm going TONIGHT!), I'd say anyone who had it playing in their area (outside of the BIG big cities) may have about a 2 wk window of opportunity before they ship off the print to another screen.

[CoinReturn]

I saw it with a few friends last night, and I was pleasantly surprised to see the theater about half full. Anyway, it was much, much better than I expected. Reading some of the comments on here led me to believe I'd paid $8.50 for a stinker. I found myself engaged throughout, though the movie did falter a bit in the final act (some of the dialog is groan inducing). If I had to rank the films, it would go something like this:

Dawn
Diary
Day
Night
Land

[ProfessorChaos]

i saw this yesterday and totally dug it. i have convinced my gf that we need to go see it tonight to help with the overall ticket-sales (to show that there's still a market for well-developed movies with shambling zombies).

only a couple more hours till i get to see it again.

by the way, i posted my thoughts on it in the sticky reviews thread at the top of the diary forum, if anyone cares to check
em out.

[mcurio]

I guess it won't help matters if I tell you I saw Diary today for the sixth time...:D

[MoonSylver]

Ok, I saw it, I'm back & it was great. My thoughts are in the review thread for those interested.

Oh, & I saw it with about 30 other people, & had no crying babies, ringing phones, snarky comments, annoying teenagers, or any of that. So see, it IS possible to go to the movies & have a pleasant experience! :D ;) :p

[MinionZombie]

I guess it won't help matters if I tell you I saw Diary today for the sixth time...:D
If you're not joking, I'd love to thump you. :D

Share the wealth around, I haven't even seen it once yet! Well ... not yet anyway, 5 more days and that bitch is in our cinemas over here!

Woo, saw a trailer on TV for it last night. Canny wait! Canny wait! :hyper:

[Yojimbo]

Well, yeah. If you're seeing a film with a group of dedicated fans such as yourself, of course it will be more fun. I'm talkling about the film itself, being viewed by a single person. Seeing it at home won't detract from the overall effect because of the first person/documentary style of the film, imo.

Gotta agree with you there. In fact, minus the fan aspect, watching it in the comfort of your home is probably a superior experience to watching it at a mainstream multiplex

[CoinReturn]

Gotta agree with you there. In fact, minus the fan aspect, watching it in the comfort of your home is probably a superior experience to watching it at a mainstream multiplex
I saw it in about the most mainstream multiplex you can get, and the crowd was great. I think the fact is that the only people who are seeking out and paying to see this film are hardcore Romero fans. Plus, seeing on the big screen with surround sound is hard to match at home.

[Yojimbo]

I saw it in about the most mainstream multiplex you can get, and the crowd was great. I think the fact is that the only people who are seeking out and paying to see this film are hardcore Romero fans. Plus, seeing on the big screen with surround sound is hard to match at home.

Glad to hear that there are mainstream venues out there that are not plagued with obnoxious theatergoers! My experience with the mainstream venues here in Los Angeles usually is pretty lousy, admittedly with a few exceptions.

I think that you may be right in your thought that the only people who are going to see Diary are the folks with enough motivation to seek it out. Plus, the "R" rating might be keeping a lot of the self-obesessed tweens and teens away.

It is true that big screen and surround sound is totally hard to match at home, but I do agree with Bassman's assertion that the movie itself will translate well to the small screen. Personally I am hoping that the DVD release will have a lot of extras, plus maybe some deleted scenes and ramped up gore and effects.

[bassman]

Glad to hear that there are mainstream venues out there that are not plagued with obnoxious theatergoers! My experience with the mainstream venues here in Los Angeles usually is pretty lousy, admittedly with a few exceptions.

I think that you may be right in your thought that the only people who are going to see Diary are the folks with enough motivation to seek it out. Plus, the "R" rating might be keeping a lot of the self-obesessed tweens and teens away.

It is true that big screen and surround sound is totally hard to match at home, but I do agree with Bassman's assertion that the movie itself will translate well to the small screen. Personally I am hoping that the DVD release will have a lot of extras, plus maybe some deleted scenes and ramped up gore and effects.

Speaking of the gore on DVD.....did Romero use the "someone walks in front of the camera" tactic on this film too? I can't remember.

As for my theater experience - I think there was a total of about 6 people. Including my girlfriend and myself.:dead:

[MinionZombie]

I remember when I saw Land in the cinema - our nearest chained multiplex (now a different brand since 2005) - and there was me, my mate, 3 randoms who blatantly couldn't get in to see Revolver (Guy Ritchie's new film at the time, which came out the day before) and a handful of GAR faithful.

They were a bunch of mid-teens, and initially I was critical, thinking they were just numpties watching the only film they could legally get in to see, but I eavesdropped on their conversation and they were talking about other GAR films, so I was pleasantly surprised.

The 3 randoms ran out when the guts starting flying, n00bs. :lol:

I had a f*cking great time.

This time around, especially with it being an 18, there's probably going to be very few people there to see it. There are also several other films at lower ratings that will gather up the punters, so...

Anyway, fingers crossed for Friday March 7th. I think I might very well end up doing it billy-no-mates style.

[clanglee]

Excuse me while i go brain myself against this wall here.

[bassman]

Excuse me while i go brain myself against this wall here.

You're excused. Have someone let us know how that all turns out for ya...

[Yojimbo]

The 3 randoms ran out when the guts starting flying, n00bs. :lol:



Dude, this happened at the show I went to! It was my second viewing of Diary, and due to too much coffee before the show, I had to go out to the lobby to visit the facilities, about a quarter of the way through the film right after some of the gory bits were on screen. In the lobby there were at least two couples that were fleeing the theater, both of which consisted of a guy who looked quite upset at his girlfriend/female companion for the show who was going on about how disgusting the film was.

Gotta say, it brought a smile to my face and a warm feeling to my heart. GAR would have been proud!

[Mike70]

I remember when I saw Land in the cinema - our nearest chained multiplex (now a different brand since 2005) - and there was me, my mate, 3 randoms who blatantly couldn't get in to see Revolver (Guy Ritchie's new film at the time, which came out the day before) and a handful of GAR faithful.

i went and saw land in the middle of the afternoon. it was showing at huge multiplex over in newport (most of the interesting things are on kentucky's side of the river but i digress). there was only one or two other people in the whole theater besides me. it was great, sort of like having my own private showing.

[ProfessorChaos]

As for my theater experience - I think there was a total of about 6 people. Including my girlfriend and myself.:dead:

same here, man. the first time i saw it, there were no more than ten people present, and none were obnoxious tweeny-boppers. one dude was pretty cool, and we stood around and shot the bull for a few afterwards.

the next time my gf and i saw it, there were maybe fifteen, and all were very respectable and enjoyed the movie without a bunch of typical reactions you hear at the movie, such as "OH DAAAAMNN!!!!"

aren't we romero-fans the best?:thumbsup:

[MinionZombie]

aren't we romero-fans the best?

Yes. Yes we are. :)

[Mike70]

Yes. Yes we are. :)

we need to have our own secret handshake and password.

[jim102016]

we need to have our own secret handshake and password.


Must have been one hell of a wrap up party. If I realized what a piece of **** I'd just made I think I'd spend 8.5 million on a party. Hookers, drugs, booze, the works. Why the hell not?

Of course, if I was man enough to admit I'd just taken a huge piss on an original work by GAR, I'd shoot myself.

[clanglee]

I am no longer pissed. Well, about the movie being available here anyways. It came out in 2 theaters in Charlotte. Horray!! About the movie however? Well I havn't decided yet. There was a lot that I didn't like though. . I have to admit. I think I liked it a little bit better than Land. Meh. . . let me think about it.

[Trin]

I have to say I'm relieved that I'm not the only person that found things that I didn't quite like.

I'm not sure if I liked Diary better than Land. Diary had fewer "give me a break" moments and the plot seemed to hang better. But Diary had a smaller scope and took few risks. It should have hung together better.

I started on the fence. I've taken some time to think about it and the more I think, the more the things that bothered me in Diary really continue to bother me. The things I liked were not so great as to clearly excuse the problems. But I'm still kinda on the fence.

[ProfessorChaos]

what sort of things bothered you that much about it?

my biggest gripe:


the only part that really stands out to me is when they forget to close the gate behind them at ridley's place, which then leads to the best-looking girl in any romero film taking off like an idiot later on....aside from these two moments, i felt the film worked very well.

[clanglee]

It was really an overall thing for me. It just didn't sit well. The acting was not at all the best, but I think the main problem was in the script. The characters were just to. . . glib. I never quite bought the seriousness of the situation because the characters never did. Reduced the scare factor for me.

[MinionZombie]

Interesting you should mention scare factor. While I don't usually jump or get wigged out by horror movies these days (I've seen so many now), I did get one jump from Diary - and I saw it coming from a mile away, but for some reason still jumped.

Near the end, when the documentary bloke leaves the panic room behind but the camera is pointed at the floor, then it whips up and shows the Mummy guy as a zombie.

Saw that coming from a mile off, but it still gave me a medium jump. :p

[clanglee]

No, Diary did have some good "jump out" scare scenes. POV movies lend themselves to that type of scare easily. They build tension well. The scare factor I'm talking of is the overall "sh#t is hitting the fan, the world is ending, everyone is gonna die!!" kinda scare factor. The actors, or script , or something just didn't bring me along for the ride. I didn't NOT like it, I just wish it was better.

[MinionZombie]

Meeeeeeehhhhh, I duno...I was fairly creeped out by the first 20 minutes where it all starts going off and they're all confused and panicking and there's radio reports coming thick and fast...coulda been stronger...but you could say that of so many things in life...:)

[clanglee]

yeah, once again tho. . .i can't really put my finger on it. something about the characters tho. i can forgive bad acting, i think it was more the script. like that whole "dead doctor, dead nurse" line. ok, light for the situation, but not terribly so. . but then she follows it with "makes sense" totally glib and uncalled for. little things like that just pushed it over the cheese line and left me behind. but again, let me say, i did not dislike the movie, I just didn't love it, or really even like it really. :|

[MinionZombie]

I think I smelled Romero getting prepared or trying smaller ideas out for this zombie comedy he's got in mind, he was breaking free from the seriousness of Night through Land, and going fast & loose with Diary, so it's a gear change and something to get used to when watching it.

I look forward to seeing it a second time (most likely when the DVD comes out, I've been t'cinema 3 times this month and it's bloody expensive just for a friggin' ticket alone), because then I'll know exactly what to expect ... and I'll be able to read what the Amish guy was writing on his board. :rolleyes: (see my *experience* post a few posts down).

[Trin]

I'm not saying I hated Diary. The camera motion and narrator weren't a problem for me. I liked most of the main characters okay. The progression of events and character's actions were logical for the most part (with notable exceptions).

To answer the question about what specifics I disliked, I made a list:


- The Hospital scene made no sense. That early in the outbreak either the hospital would be locked down with security all around or it would be lost and overrun by zombies.

Some of the characters were just messed up:

- Jason was irritating and paradoxical. He wouldn't put the camera down to help his friends, but at the same time he was content to film the zombie outbreak from the periphery while the real action was happening in the major metropolitan areas and being shown on YouTube. I was really happy when he died.

- The National Guard guys were looting canned food from a bunch of college kids in an RV. Yet they were "military minded" so they left them their guns. Please. With looting opportunities plentiful they were idioits to risk some college punk being a vigilante.

- Jason gets lost in the warehouse at the exact same time the survivor group "lost" one of their own who had heart problems and died. That tension was so contrived it hurt.

- Samuel stabbing himself through the head. I mean, come on. Who does that? It was not a "great zombie kill". It was ludicrous.

The zombies were inconsistent in behavior and numbers:

- The pool zombies were content to stand unmoving in the pool even with humans walking all around, but then at the movie end, with no humans in sight, they all start climbing out of the pool and converging on the house.

- The mansion fortress had zero zombies in the neighborhood, no zombies appear after they drove up, none appeared as they were standing around talking, eating, and unloading gear, then all of a sudden dozens of zombies converged on the place.

- The survivor base in the middle of a town with lots of humans holed up within had zero zombies around it.

- Yet the Amish farm was crawling with zombies. Were any of the zombies even Amish?

- Zombies going unconscious then getting up again later.


Not one of these issues is by itself a killer. Most aren't even a big deal. But combine them all together, and add little standout good things to offset them, and the movie just left me feeling blah.

[Danny]

well im pissed because it ended the run around here before i could see it.

[MinionZombie]

Did it ever make it to your local?

This is the thing, anytime a kinda niche marketed film hits you've gotta get in there immediately. Heck, even Death Proof and Planet Terror vanishes from the screens inside 2 weeks each. :(

[Danny]

its because they arent going to pull in the punters like ,ugh, step up 2.

...even saying that i cringe and laugh at the same time.

[clanglee]

Trin, I completely agree with you about the Amish guy. That is a physical impossibility and it was poorly done and just plain silly. Most people seem to love that scene. It just made me go "What?!? are you kidding?" Ahh well.

Never even thought about the hospital, but you are quite right, that place would have been teeming.

[Choas]

It never came to theaters were I live. I am so pissed off. Just have to wait till it comes out on dvd.:mad:

[AJ]

Its still playing in 2 theaters not far from where I work in Richmond, Virginia according to the Moviefone site tonight. If you haven't seen it, don't stress over it. I actually forgot that I had seen it until I got to work 4 days later and saw the poster on my PC wallpaper. I love everything the man has done but I'm not too happy about this one. I'll get the DVD and give it another chance though. The sooner it gets out of the theaters the better for getting the DVD out. The best thing about the movie was when one of the main characters (don't want to spoil it) asks to be killed after being bit, my son suggested that the proffessor guy stand over him and shoot an arrow into his head:lol:

I want to do a movie where Roger and Peter end up on "The Planet of the Apes" (original '68 style) instead of those lame-ass astronaut pussies that lose their only gun.

[Trin]

Trin, I completely agree with you about the Amish guy. That is a physical impossibility and it was poorly done and just plain silly. Most people seem to love that scene. It just made me go "What?!? are you kidding?" Ahh well.

Never even thought about the hospital, but you are quite right, that place would have been teeming.
What's most disturbing for me about the hospital scene is that Dawn '04 did a great job portraying an early outbreak hospital scene and Diary wasn't at all realistic.


Another thing I didn't like - when the professor takes the bow instead of the gun. He makes his pithy little statement about how it seems more humane or something. Whatever. But my perspective is that if dead things are roaming around killing people and I have to choose between a bow or a gun - I take BOTH!!! I don't make a political or ethical statement out of survival!!!

[Griff]

What's most disturbing for me about the hospital scene is that Dawn '04 did a great job portraying an early outbreak hospital scene and Diary wasn't at all realistic.

As I recall, the hospital scene in DAWN04 only portrays the absolute very beginning of the phenomenon, yeah? Like, nobody has even heard about re-animating corpses, let alone seen it happen, yeah?

The hospital scene in DIARY is set a little further into scenario...

Robert Rodriquez says something interesting during the audio commentary for PLANET TERROR. He mentions how he asked his doctor (who actually plays the role of a doctor in the film) what would he do in a situation whereby some sort of terminal infection, probably viral, was rapidly spreading throughout the hospital and killing the patients. His doctor replied that, if there was nothing he could do, then self-preservation would have to take precedence. In other words: he'd get out of there and save his own arse.

Probably not the reality of the situation we'd like to believe but the one that, ultimately, is most likely.

I'm reminded of how all the rescue stations in DAWN were being shutdown. Was it because the authorities truly couldn't handle the onslaught of the undead? Or because they chose not to?

Sorry if this challenges anyone's faith in humanity.

[MinionZombie]

Aye, I liked that sense of 'I be getting the fudge outta here, mate' in Planet Terror, and aye, Yawn04 barely has anything in a hospital and it's just people with bites coming in. I wasn't excited or anything, if anything - as seen in my bitch list - I was pissed off by Ana for some reason. She just annoyed the crap out of me, complaining about being an hour over her shift - oh my god, if you're so fussed about that, don't be a f*cking nurse - OR JUST LEAVE, nobody's forcing you to stay, christ! :eek::rant::annoyed:

*deep breath*

Calm...calm...woo-sah...woo-sah. :D

I dug the Diary hospital scene, although I get the impression it's a much smaller hospital than the Yawn04 one. I liked the sense of everybody just clearing the f*ck out to save themselves, it ties in quite nicely with GAR's protagonists across many of his films. People running off to hide in their own holes, so-to-speak.

[clanglee]

Yeah, but "Dead Doctor, Dead Nurse, makes sense." :rolleyes: come on!!

[Trin]

Aye, I liked that sense of 'I be getting the fudge outta here, mate' in Planet Terror, and aye, Yawn04 barely has anything in a hospital and it's just people with bites coming in. I wasn't excited or anything, if anything - as seen in my bitch list - I was pissed off by Ana for some reason. She just annoyed the crap out of me, complaining about being an hour over her shift - oh my god, if you're so fussed about that, don't be a f*cking nurse - OR JUST LEAVE, nobody's forcing you to stay, christ! :eek::rant::annoyed:
Actually, the reaction in the hospital in Dawn '04 was extremely realistic. There were a lot of little details that indicated they were in the first stages of implementing trauma protocols. There was confusion over the relatively minor wounds becoming life threatening ones. The halls were filling with patients and there was the push to keep nurses on for extra shifts. It was a short scene but it used every second.

Btw - I'm married to a nurse and they don't like to have to stay past their shifts. And here in the states they are legally required to stay at the hospital if the situation requires. That dialogue and reaction was very realistic. I get to hear it all the time.


I dug the Diary hospital scene, although I get the impression it's a much smaller hospital than the Yawn04 one. I liked the sense of everybody just clearing the f*ck out to save themselves, it ties in quite nicely with GAR's protagonists across many of his films. People running off to hide in their own holes, so-to-speak.
I don't buy the idea that the entire hospital staff would clear out to save themselves. Not that early into things. That's a sad, sad take on humanity.

I also don't buy that the hospital, no matter how small and rural, wouldn't be overrun with patients seeking medical attention. The place was just deserted. No patients. No staff. And only a handful of zombies. Weird.

[clanglee]

At the very least you would expect the place to be swarming with undead. All the people that converge on a hospital in an emergency situation, All the people that get trapped, eaten, killed. I always imagined a hospital would be the worst place to go in a zombie epidemic. It should be a hotspot.

[Yojimbo]

At the very least you would expect the place to be swarming with undead. All the people that converge on a hospital in an emergency situation, All the people that get trapped, eaten, killed. I always imagined a hospital would be the worst place to go in a zombie epidemic. It should be a hotspot.

The thing is, we do not know what the situation at the hospital was before everyone arrived. I used to manage an urgent care clinic in West Los Angeles, and I can tell you that if a bomb threat was called in, or there was a fire alarm, or if a gunman ran through the building, within 10 minutes practically everyone inside the building would have been cleared out, with the exception of those who could not easily be moved, and even those folks would have been cautiously moved out as soon as possible.

Additionally, I got the impression that in Diary, the kids did not do an exhaustive search of the entire hospital, and that their adventures were limited to the ground floor (which incidentially is where the Emergency Department is usually located). In fact, it seemed to me that their rather quick time in the hospital was limited to the Emergency Departmet section entirely. So, maybe it isn't too far off the mark that the area they searched only had a few ghouls, and maybe there were more elsewhere (other floors, the morgue section, etc)

But for what it is worth, I agree that it would have been cooler if there had been more than just a measley few zombies in the hospital scenes.

[Mike70]

Robert Rodriquez says something interesting during the audio commentary for PLANET TERROR. He mentions how he asked his doctor (who actually plays the role of a doctor in the film) what would he do in a situation whereby some sort of terminal infection, probably viral, was rapidly spreading throughout the hospital and killing the patients. His doctor replied that, if there was nothing he could do, then self-preservation would have to take precedence. In other words: he'd get out of there and save his own arse....



Sorry if this challenges anyone's faith in humanity.

it shouldn't challenge anyones faith in that. being able to recognize a lost cause and then extricating ones person from it, is just plain common sense/intelligence.

[MinionZombie]

Well said Yojimbo.

I will also add the good old chestnut of - budget.

Being that Diary was so low budget, certainly in comparison to Land, they wouldn't have been able to afford to shoot a massive hospital scene. Budget would also be the reason for the lower amount of zombies and gore moments in the film, but fortunately they make them count, rather than just whacking up a bunch of any old gore...which I find to be quite charming in a way...

Anyway, budget wise, it's flat-out impossible to have made the hospital scene any larger than it was ... that's what I ultimately reckon.

[Choas]

I heard the dvd is coming out May 20th.:D

[Trin]

I didn't get the impression that the hospital scene turned out as it did because it lacked budget. I mean, sure the movie had budget issues, but I don't think the hospital scene suffered them. I think GAR wanted the hospital to appear deserted to give it a creepy, spooky factor. I don't believe he would've put in a swarm of zombies or a frantic staff and loads of patients if he'd had the money. That would've wrecked the suspenseful mood he was trying to establish with the kids getting weirded out over what was happening and finding places deserted, etc.

And I can see how some might think that was the better choice. The scene was creepy. It did add suspense. It just didn't work for me from a plausibility perspective.

The dormitory scene was a good example of a location where deserted makes sense. That worked for me.

To the point of hospital evacuation - I could certainly understand if they'd evacuated the building. But in that case I'd expect the building to be secured such that a group of teenagers couldn't just walk in and wonder why no one was around. There would be guards outside, secured doors, a sign indicating that the place was closed... something. If the situation had been soooo bad that they evacuated and abandoned the site without any of those measures then there would've been more evidence of that. More zombies, blood, disarray, something.

Another possibility is that the hospital was so rural and small that the doctor and nurse (and perhaps a few others we never saw, but were dead) were the only people on staff and the kids were just the first patients to show up? It's a bit weak for my taste, but possible.

[MinionZombie]

Scale is surely always an issue of budget.

Where can you rent a space to film in, is it in a real hospital? You've got insurance to cover, you've got props to buy or rent, you've got your cast and crew to pay, you've got food to provide, you've got a whole bunch of different things to take into account and can't blow too large a load on one single scene.

Then there's the issue of time. If you've only got a small amount of time, you'll have to limit set-ups and the amount of action going on as well as the amount of gore getting thrown around.

...

Now, if you had a shedload of cash to splash on it - boom, several rooms, tons of extras, loads of gore, plenty of time.

Also, clearly it was intended in GAR's script to be as such. It's what he wanted and was happy with.

[Trin]

Also, clearly it was intended in GAR's script to be as such. It's what he wanted and was happy with.
I'm not sure I was clear. I actually agree with your latter statement quoted here.

I'm not saying that he could've done more with the budget. I think he did a great job with the money he had. All I'm saying is that he got exactly what he wanted from the hospital scene and the budget didn't hold him back. That is, he wouldn't have added much of anything had he had more money to do so.

[SRP76]

It's still not here yet, but it will be.

The theater behind where I work has the poster up, under "Coming Attractions". I guess it will be arriving a whole month after most other places.

[Zombie Snack]

It just opened in Auburn Alabama, It was the first theater I have made a delivery to so far that has had it...But I only deliver to the Carmike chain theaters east of the mississippi.

[SRP76]

Saw it, and wasn't impressed.

But other than the movie itself, I have other reason to gripe. Let me tell you about my theater adventure:

I get to the multiplex, and check showtimes. Diary starts in about an hour. Okay, I buy a ticket. 7 bucks for matinee. Christ, why not just take my left nut?

I then wait around until showtime. I walk into the multiplex, thinking someone's going to take my ticket stub. Nope. I head up the ramp to the wing with theaters 6-14, thinking someone will be there to take my stub. Nope. I head on to theater 10, where Diary is showing. I figure someone here will take my stub. NOPE!

I ended up watching the movie, getting up, leaving, and sitting in my car...with my ticket stub still attached! Nobody - NOBODY - even attempted to make sure I had paid for a ticket! Dammit, I could have just strolled right in and watched the movie without spending 7 dollars, and nobody would have tried to stop me. Makes me angry that I wasted my money, since it could have been free.

Of course, I wouldn't be so angry if the movie had been good. But it wasn't. If anybody but Romero had made this movie, people would be napalming it left and right. But Romero seems to get a free pass.

[clanglee]

Not everyone loves the movie man. I'm still withholding my final judgement, but like you, my first impression was not great.

[Mike70]

yeah it seems there is a real love/hate thing going on with diary at first view.

my first impression of the movie was positive. i enjoyed it as a whole quite a bit but i did have some issues with it and they don't revolve around whether a hospital ought to be abandoned or not- i really don't care about that, i'll file it under suspension of disbelief.

my first point of contention was those god damn voice overs, which literally made want to plug my ears up when they came on so i didn't have to listen to the pseudo-philosophical bullsh*t that was being spouted off. i have never been a fan of voice overs and in the case of diary they go from irritating to fingernails on chalkboard by the end.

my other point of contention is that, aside from the professor, i really didn't get into the characters that much. there wasn't anybody (other than the professor) that i could identify with or really care about.

also, if i was in a situation like this with someone like jason, i would undoubtedly take that camera and smash it into a million pieces. i was irritated with that guy from jumpstreet and his character just got more infuriating as the film went along.

[MinionZombie]

Diary certainly hasn't had a "free pass", and Land never got one either.

Both are love-or-like/meh-or-loathe films.

I personally dug Diary, but liked Land better. I had the odd gripe with Diary, but over all I enjoyed it.

I think second viewing will really establish my opinion of it though. With such a build up and initial information-drought about the movie, when you actually get to see it, you always have that sort of vibe of a smidge of disappointment ... in a way.

Not that I was disappointed, it's a case of how you might say, 'the wait is always better' ... I'm thinking I'll feel the same about GTA4 when it comes out. Such a build up, such anticipation and excitement, then you finally get it and all that excitement and build up is gone immediately - there's a period of adjustment.

I experienced the same thing with STALKER - and as many of you chaps know (particlarly hellsing) I'm flaming for STALKER. :)

[SRP76]

my other point of contention is that, aside from the professor, i really didn't get into the characters that much. there wasn't anybody (other than the professor) that i could identify with or really care about.



That was issue #1 for me: that I really didn't give a rat's ass whether any of these clowns lived or died. I didn't like the "professor" either, with his stupid "drunk who has seen war" crap.

Not one of these characters made me care about them in the least kind of way. When you sit through the movie, and root for the zombies, there's a problem. In fact, other than Jason, Deb, and Ridley, I can't even remember any of their names (and I've got a damned good memory). That how much of a non-impression they make.

Character issues aside, I still think the movie sucked. It seemed so nonsensical, with the zombies appearing out of nowhere when they shouldn't, zombies being absent when they should be all over the site, the stupidity of every single "survivor" (in a warehouse FULL of supplies, nobody thinks to grab a flashlight?! "Oh, let me just lurch around in the dark, and hope I don't get eaten"), and the continuity errors (Ridley gets clubbed on the head out in the woods in front of Jason....then ends up in the house jumping the guy in the shower before Jason can even get back inside...WTF did he do, teleport?!)....the list goes on and on.

Add to that the whole "we're trying to get home" drama....only to get to ONE person's house, then turn around and GO RIGHT BACK to Ridley's....which is exactly where they were invited to go, and refused, and the beginning of this crap!! WTF was the point of the "road trip", then?! Just to tease the other 8 survivors who DON'T get to try to go home?!

It was bad in a lot of ways.

[bassman]

When you sit through the movie, and root for the zombies, there's a problem..

So I guess you've never seen Romero's earlier films? Welcome to the fold.:D

[Mike70]

i think that i have a soft spot for drunken academics. the folks who have known me for a long time on this board will know why.:D

[SRP76]

So I guess you've never seen Romero's earlier films? Welcome to the fold.:D

Saw the others. Ben was great. I wanted him to live (not that I got my wish). Peter was the ultimate hero. He was the guy to cheer for. I know I wasn't "supposed" to, by I cheered for Rhodes, because he was such a good character, and John and McDermott were pretty cool. Even Cholo and Charlie were somewhat likeable.

But this group of fools...I don't see anybody to get behind. It was like a bunch of also-rans from the other movies. Nobody even got to Steele-level interest. If "meh" could be personified, it would be the group from Diary.

[MinionZombie]

Aye I dug the drunk prof guy.

I also quite liked the goofy guy in the glasses, although he didn't do much.

I also liked the Jason Creed character, if only because I sort of identified with him. As a fellow filmmaker, I could fully understand his obsession with footage gathering. I think in the same situation, I'd be similarly consumed - although not at the risk of those around me or myself I might add.

As in:

I would have got in the f*cking panic room! :D

The zombies are always rooted for to some extent in GAR's flicks, he himself has said - especially with Land - that his allegiance changed sides to favour the zeds, which was part of the purpose in Land.

Think about Day - Bub - the most loveable zombie in existence. In Dawn, there's a variety of zombies you root for, the hero zombies, like the Nurse, or the elevator one, or the one with the gun.

Night was more straight forward, root for the people, the zombies are the enemy.

[bassman]

Night was more straight forward, root for the people, the zombies are the enemy.


I agree.....yet also disagree. I remember when I was first seeing Night, I was getting pretty pissed off about how the people were fighting in the house while the "enemy" was outside. I think I even went as far as to scream at the screen, "I hope you die!", like a loud fat lady in a theater.:p

It wasn't really rooting for the zombies, but it wasn't rooting for the humans either...

[Mike70]

In Dawn, there's a variety of zombies you root for, the hero zombies, like the Nurse, or the elevator one, or the one with the gun.

the zombie in dawn that i always "feel" for is the guy in the baseball uniform. clearly, fran feels some sort of sympathy for that guy as well.

i think another thing that sets the characters in dawn apart is that while they are "happy" that they are able to clear the mall of zombies, ultimately they are rather sickened by the whole experience.

one of my fav parts in dawn (and in any of the dead movies) is that great scene after they have killed all the mall zombies. they are leaning over the rail in front of foxmoor and you can tell by the looks on their faces that they are all sickened by what they've had to do. they did it because they needed to survive but yet, in the end, they took no real joy in it and they still feel something for the former living people that they had to mercilessly shoot in the head. they have, in the midst of everything going on around them, stayed human.

[MinionZombie]

Bassman - aye you're right now that I come to think of it more. Some of the humans are useless or bastards, but you totally root for Ben and a couple of others. There weren't any zombies with any real 'personality' if you will though.

Scip - aye very good point regarding the post-massacre scene, as well as that Bach's Arco Pitcairn shirt-wearing zombie. I always feel sorry for him too, he's not trying to eat her, he just looks dumbfounded by his entire existence ... and then there's the nun zombie - a peaceful zombie seemingly, just gawping around for the rest of her existence.

[SRP76]

I never felt sorry for those things. Like the man said, "they're just dead flesh...and dangerous!"

Zombies can make puppy-dog eyes all they want; they're still the enemy, that would eat the living folks if they got the slimmest chance.

[Mike70]

i don't think sympathy necessarily equals feel sorry for nor does it mean that you don't consider them dangerous.

i think the sympathy the dawn characters feel is more of a recognition that what are now these mindless, flesh eating things were once living, breathing people that had families and whatnot. it probably also has something to do with the realization that under different circumstances, they (dawn characters) could be just like them.

[MinionZombie]

As well as some of the zeds in GAR's films are just fun characters in and of themselves.

Anyone who doesn't get a bit choked up when Bub discovers his friend & master lying dead in the freezer is a heartless bastard, I say. :)

[Choas]

As well as some of the zeds in GAR's films are just fun characters in and of themselves.

Anyone who doesn't get a bit choked up when Bub discovers his friend & master lying dead in the freezer is a heartless bastard, I say. :)



I agree.

[Yojimbo]

i don't think sympathy necessarily equals feel sorry for nor does it mean that you don't consider them dangerous.



Agreed.

Ever see footage of a convicted murderer on death row in the final moments before they are led to the execution chamber? You might feel sorry for the guy and have sympathy for the very horrible time that the dude must be having, but he is still a murderer, and as such you certainly don't want him alone with your little sister.

[Trin]

I have to say that initially I was okay with the characters in Diary, but after reading the comments over the past few pages by Scipio70 and SRP76 I'm starting to feel a bit worse. It really puts things into perspective when you compare the Diary crew against Ben, Peter, John (from Day), and Riley/Charlie. There's just no one in Diary that stands out as the person you'd most like on your side during a zombie outbreak.

I'll wait for the DVD to comment further on continuity problems but I agree that some of the ones listed are probably going to bug me now that I'm watching for them. And I'm sure the narrator is going to bug me more on a second viewing.

[Yojimbo]

There's just no one in Diary that stands out as the person you'd most like on your side during a zombie outbreak.


I wouldn't mind having the professor on my team. Handy with a sword, sureshot with a bow, and probably a wealth of useful information. Even with his drinking, he was never a liablilty.

Though the rest of that crew -with maybe the exception of the Texas girl who can repair cars - I agree, is not worth having except as ghoul fodder.

[Mike70]

I wouldn't mind having the professor on my team.

me neither. really the only character in diary that i got into. you are right about the girl from texas she could be useful given her knowledge of mechanics.

the rest of them i am rather meh about. i still liked the movie, i just wish that i could've gotten into the characters more.

[Trin]

I thought they were all about the same in terms of relative worth. Pretty so-so. A lot of the guys were probably not bad to have around but no moreso than Tom from Night, or Steele, or Pillsbury, or any number of other ancillary characters along the way who were not stand-out heroes but had useful skills.

I'd agree that purely as an asset in a zombie outbreak the professor was not a bad character to have around. Nonetheless I got tired of his pithy remarks. He won't take the gun because it's too easy to use? He can put an arrow through the head of Deb's little brother but he's not okay with using a gun?

I can only believe that he was concerned that if he had a gun he would not be able to resist the desire to shoot Jason in the head. :lol:

The Texas gal that can fix cars. Sigh. I'd simply put her entire character out of my head.

Deb was actually a pretty resourceful character. I'd have faith that with her on the team things would get done, decisions would be made, and no pithy bs would get us killed.

[clanglee]

Yeah, I'm sorry, but I found the Professor character to be very one dimensional and trite. Sadly, he was one of my favorite characters in the movie. :rolleyes:

[SRP76]

It takes more than "having a useful skill" to be a great character. In fact, skills don't even come into play.

Rhodes had no apparent useful skill, and yet he was awesome.

Motown could hotwire a car, and yet she sucked.

[Yojimbo]

It takes more than "having a useful skill" to be a great character. In fact, skills don't even come into play.

Rhodes had no apparent useful skill, and yet he was awesome.

Motown could hotwire a car, and yet she sucked.

SRP, I agree that having a useful skill does not a great character make. But, entertainment aside, I'd rather have the mechanically inclined albeit annoying blonde texan on my bug out team than Rhodes. Admittedly, though, Rhodes would be a more entertaining dude to have around, if for nothing else just to hear him curse at you in that ultra cool way he does. You point is well taken!