Dreaded Days of the Dead

[AcesandEights]

I do, but it's only slightly pessimistic hope, though that makes me Mr. Light-at-the-End-of -the-Tunnel Optimist around here. I've always seen Day as the weakest of the original trilogy, so it doesn't bother me in the least that it's going to be remade. Again, I understand why diehards will hate on it, and want to hate it, but if it's a decent zombie movie (of which there have been few that I've seen) I'll be happy. All the histrionics are kind of fun to watch, but people just dropping in this board to drop some hate on hollywood ruining their childhood memories and how the price of sugar has gone up since they were a kid and all the other angsty garbage is why this board will probably be more trouble than it's worth; very few people will reply to anything on this board in a positive manner. See how negative I just was? And I wasn't even trying Oh, well

[garjo]

I agree with you. I loved the fact that I was helping people, so don't get me wrong. I worked very hard and put in tons of time and brain power. I had grand dreams of going to school to become the next to the greatest special effects guru. Tom of course being the greatest. I thought why not get a first hand look at the real deal. If you remember Tom Savini was a photographer for the military taking pictures of the some of the worst bloodiest things that we couldn't even imagine. He took all of these horrible images and used them to shock and entertain us. I was only trying to do the same. To re-create a broken arm why not see what one really looked like first. To make a perfect scene where someone blows their head off, then why not walk into a room where someone really did. It was all research as a second priority. Helping those who needed it was first. Don't judge to quickly.

[radiokill]

I agree with you. I loved the fact that I was helping people, so don't get me wrong. I worked very hard and put in tons of time and brain power. I had grand dreams of going to school to become the next to the greatest special effects guru. Tom of course being the greatest. I thought why not get a first hand look at the real deal. If you remember Tom Savini was a photographer for the military taking pictures of the some of the worst bloodiest things that we couldn't even imagine. He took all of these horrible images and used them to shock and entertain us. I was only trying to do the same. To re-create a broken arm why not see what one really looked like first. To make a perfect scene where someone blows their head off, then why not walk into a room where someone really did. It was all research as a second priority. Helping those who needed it was first. Don't judge to quickly. that's cool. however, watch the way you word things! Read your initial post minding the fact that you omitted the revelation of dream job. It sounds pretty demented!

[garjo]

[QUOTE= Also, it sounds like you're throwing a hissy fit [/QUOTE] I am throwing a hissy fit. I was talking about Day though. I know that your points are still the same. Thanks for the welcome

[SteveIPRN]

Night 3D sounds like it is going to suck badly. GAR isn't involved and they are ripping him off since its in the public domain. Lets give credit where credit is due but some cash would be nice, I'm sure. He's got to be one of the most copied guys in the business and we owe him more. A lot more DayOTD2. I have mixed feelings about it. Hopefully he will get to follow his original script and do it his way this time. I read they were going to film in Bulgaria? Whats that all about. Who is doing the effects? For the record, I will go see it in the theater and buy it once it comes out on DVD. Dawn2 was, I thought, good. The running zombies were a bit of a stretch but it worked for that film.

[dmbfanintn]

Dawn2 was, I thought, good. . For the love of Jah, please don't call it "Dawn 2", please!

[AcesandEights]

For the love of Jah, please don't call it "Dawn 2", please! That is pretty funny.

[Brubaker]

What gets lost in this is that the people putting together these remakes are fans of Romero's zombie movies, same as everybody posting here. Regardless of how well some of these movies turn out, the people behind them more than likely enjoyed the originals.

[bassman]

What gets lost in this is that the people putting together these remakes are fans of Romero's zombie movies, same as everybody posting here. Regardless of how well some of these movies turn out, the people behind them more than likely enjoyed the originals. Umm....I guess you didn't see Hack Snyder's "Dawn of the Dead"? He's clearly not a fan. He was probably just hired straight off of a car commercial with no prior knowledge of Romero's films or what they're about. Just like the Scooby Doo guy....

[radiokill]

I enjoyed Dawn 04, but you could definitely tell Snyder was not a Romero fan

[Brubaker]

Umm....I guess you didn't see Hack Snyder's "Dawn of the Dead"? He's clearly not a fan. He was probably just hired straight off of a car commercial with no prior knowledge of Romero's films or what they're about. Just like the Scooby Doo guy.... Umm....I saw it. So I guess you got off on the wrong foot. Just because you don't like the movie doesn't mean Snyder wasn't a fan of Romero's work or of zombie movies in general. How do you know if he was or not? Saying you can tell just by watching it is laughable. How about some hard evidence, like an interview or quote, saying he wasn't a fan of the original version? How about actually asking him? I read a thread or two on this board where at least one or two users talk about having met Zack Snyder. Nobody bothered to ask him? Just because he gave interviews saying he wanted to reinterpret the movie or update it doesn't mean he wasn't a fan of the first movie. Was he supposed to create a movie that looked like it had been shot back in the 1970's, complete with the same dialogue that you were allowed to get away with in a horror/suspense movie back then? You should consider yourself lucky he didn't do a word-for-word remake of the original Dawn, like we saw with Psycho several years back. As uptight as you are about preserving the original movie, which is funny since you aren't GAR, would you rather have random actors giving inferior performances of Peter, Roger or Flyboy complete with the very same script and course of events? That would have been a much bigger insult than the remake we ended up getting. I am assuming he was a fan of the original unless I hear otherwise.

[bassman]

Umm....I saw it. So I guess you got off on the wrong foot. Just because you don't like the movie doesn't mean Snyder wasn't a fan of Romero's work or of zombie movies in general. How do you know if he was or not? Saying you can tell just by watching it is laughable. How about some hard evidence, like an interview or quote, saying he wasn't a fan of the original version? How about actually asking him? I read a thread or two on this board where at least one or two users talk about having met Zack Snyder. Nobody bothered to ask him? Just because he gave interviews saying he wanted to reinterpret the movie or update it doesn't mean he wasn't a fan of the first movie. Was he supposed to create a movie that looked like it had been shot back in the 1970's, complete with the same dialogue that you were allowed to get away with in a horror/suspense movie back then? You should consider yourself lucky he didn't do a word-for-word remake of the original Dawn, like we saw with Psycho several years back. As uptight as you are about preserving the original movie, which is funny since you aren't GAR, would you rather have random actors giving inferior performances of Peter, Roger or Flyboy complete with the very same script and course of events? That would have been a much bigger insult than the remake we ended up getting. I am assuming he was a fan of the original unless I hear otherwise. Touched a nerve, did we? You misunderstood me, twinkletoes. I wasn't saying that it should have exactly followed Romero's original. I wasn't saying that at all. I'm simply saying that he missed everything within Romero's original. The commentary, the suspense, the REAL horror - to name a few. He missed it all. Making me believe that he may have seen the original "Dawn".....but didn't understand it. About the only thing that he brought from the original "Dawn" into his film is the mall. That's it. And that along with the zombies, my friend....are the least important aspects of Romero's classic.

[Brubaker]

Touched a nerve, did we? You misunderstood me, twinkletoes. I wasn't saying that it should have exactly followed Romero's original. I wasn't saying that at all. I'm simply saying that he missed everything within Romero's original. The commentary, the suspense, the REAL horror - to name a few. He missed it all. Making me believe that he may have seen the original "Dawn".....but didn't understand it. About the only thing that he brought from the original "Dawn" into his film is the mall. That's it. And that along with the zombies, my friend....are the least important aspects of Romero's classic. I wouldn't say he didn't understand it. Snyder simply saw it differently. He seemed to think the movie centered around the zombies. He could very well have "gotten" a lot of the commentary but chose to ignore it. Not every director feels the need to send a message. From what I read, he was really into the zombies: 1. http://www.ugo.com/channels/dvd/feat...cksnyder_1.asp This line says it all....... "ZACK: I like zombies, so when I got the script I decided to do it. I had a feeling that the genre was ready to blow up again." or 2. http://movies.about.com/cs/dawnofthe...wnzw031004.htm INTERVIEW WITH DIRECTOR ZACK SNYDER: Q: Why did you choose to make “Dawn of the Dead” your first feature film? A (ZACK): I think “Dawn of the Dead” as a project is inherently cool. Zombies are inherently cool. There’s nothing you can do to get away from that. People have gravitated toward zombies for a variety of reasons and for me, it is mostly [because] you can kill them with impunity. There’s no moral imperative. Like you’re watching it and go, “Hey, you killed too many zombies in that movie! You know, that’s crazy!” No one is going to be morally outraged. So there’s that, which I think is great. But also beyond that, they present like an anonymous enemy that doesn’t rely on politics or skin color to make you think, “Oh, that’s the bad guy.” They are clearly that – and they are everyone. I think that’s one of the reasons [to do this film]. I don't know. I just prefer to give the guy (Snyder) the benefit of the doubt for three reasons: 1. He was excited about the project. 2. How many directors, particularly a first-timer, are going to turn down the opportunity to remake/revamp an all time classic? Why would anyone blame him for taking the job in the beginning? It's a great opportunity for any director, especially knowing that their movie would get a good push in theaters and eventually a dvd release. You can't say it hurt his career except in the eyes of the people who post here that didn't like the movie. 3. I see his finished product not as good or bad but different. Different like the Jurassic Park movie sequel, The Lost World, which had virtually nothing to do with the book version (by Crichton) of the same title. There were wholesale changes that seemed to deny both of Crichton's books. It was strange when you consider the first Jurassic Park movie at least resembled the initial book a little bit. However, I managed to enjoy both the book and movie of The Lost World, to some extent.

[bassman]

I wouldn't say he didn't understand it. Snyder simply saw it differently. He seemed to think the movie centered around the zombies. He could very well have "gotten" a lot of the commentary but chose to ignore it. Not every director feels the need to send a message. That's what I meant. He chose to ignore it. And in doing so(to me, mind you) he made a pointless, cheap scares, teenager sleepover flick. To me, ignoring the purpose of a film and it's potential to have a significant meaning on the viewer is just bad film making. That's my opinion mind you. Like I said before, I know people like it. To me, it's just a bad film(except for certain occasions). Regardless of the way the zombies move, Romero's mythology, etc.

[CivilDefense]

Just to stick in my two cents, its not day of the dead 2, as that already exists and trust me, that movie was, worse than being eaten by a zombie Sandra Bernhard. Eh, its a movie with zombies, I will see if it sucks or not, I fully support zombie edutainment.