Dead Snow - Zombie nazi's in the snow!

[AcesandEights]

so were at 3 nazi zombie movies? Like I said in a previous thread, they should just keep doing them till they get a masterpiece, because Nazis + zombies is a great, initial premise; two tastes that taste great together. I'll brook no dissent on this matter

[sandrock74]

Why is it that running zombies are always made out to be constructed for a less intelligent viewing audience? sorry, i must be missing something. Your not missing anything. Besides, you said it, not me.

[bassman]

Why is it that running zombies are always made out to be constructed for a less intelligent viewing audience? sorry, i must be missing something. That's just my opinion. And I'm sure I'm not alone with it.

[Cody]

No your definately not alone with it. Running zombies are the devil.

[Andy]

Just wondering if anyone else has heard of this yet? a mate of mine posted it on another forums i go on and it looks interesting.. Trailer

[clanglee]

Meh. . . might be good for a laugh or two.

[capncnut]

Looks fun, kinda like The Fog but set in the snow.

[AcesandEights]

Just wondering if anyone else has heard of this yet? Yup. Neil posted a link to the trailer a few days ago and discussion is further down the page of this forum. I do agree it looks like it could be great fun, but a lot of us felt it would have been a bit better if the dead in question didn't run. Either way though, I think it looks like a ball.

[Thorn]

Why is it that running zombies are always made out to be constructed for a less intelligent viewing audience? sorry, i must be missing something. It is more a sign of the times thing, we as a culture are a give it to me now sort of people. From Europe, to the US, and elsewhere in between. The days of sitting back and enjoying slow cuts, long held shots for effect, and talking heads are long gone. We are the MTV generation, and we are accustomed to seeing images blasted into our brain much faster, in rapid succession with cuts so fast at times you can not even appreciate the artistic framing of the shot. It is not that people who like running zombies are less intelligent, it is that this particular spin on the genre A) Goes against what we have accepted as the classic GAR rules and B) It takes the zombie out of it, you might as well watch a movie where Nazi's attack people, and they happen to be cannibals. If you follow me.

[MinionZombie]

I'm not so cynical about the whole notion, except I do believe that fast zombies are used in a film such as Yawn04 because the teenager target audience are morons who enjoy shows like Super Sweet Sixteen, and the likes of James Gunn and Zack Snyder have no idea how to make a slow zombie scary or workable. But look at The Dark Knight - an epic success - and it doesn't involve fast cutting, shaky-cam, or chimps slapping keys on a typewriter to manufacture the script. TDK is thoughtful, it's deeply intelligent, it's moral. It doesn't rely on OTT fakery, and tries to do as much real as absolutely possible. It's directed with intelligence and power and thought, the writing is considered, the camerawork is spell-binding, rather than fit-inducing, the editing is gripping rather than over-cooked, burnt out and chucked in the bin so you can eat a ham sandwich instead ... I could go on, and on, but I'm just making a point. So there is definitely that kind of filmmaking that you describe, Thorn. But the type I've just described is far from over, and certainly never will be, if anything it's the classic style of long-held tradition. Shakycam and over-editing is relatively speaking, a fad.

[Thorn]

Oh I have to agree, especially as it pertains to films outside the horror genre. There are still great movies being made, that is not to say they do not have faster cuts than you saw in the 70's and more style in direction but there are still classic story tellers and there is a lot to be enjoyed. If not for that I wouldn't be such a ravenous movie fan. I simply couldn't. Sadly the horror genre seems to attract a far greater number of hacks that rely on cheap gimmicks, gags, and things of that nature.

[mista_mo]

I actually prefer running zombies now..i mean lets be realistic, shamblers are not very threatening at all, and it is silly to think they would grow at a rate that couldn't be contained. It's not like it'd take long to figure out that the only way to kill them is a shot to the head, and kill groups much like the ones in NOTLD could destroy so many shamblers in such a short time..and that is just the civilian population.... Although why am I trying to argue realism in a friggin zombie movie? Ugh. I'm not going to lie, I don't give 2 s*its about social commentary or any of that...I watch films to be entertained, if i wanted to think about the rise of commercialism, and the gap between the rich and the poor, i'd read a book on the subject. I mean, the first 15-20 minutes of Dawn of the dead 2004 was more entertaining and gripping then either Night or Dawn, and if the movie would had continued being good, it would have blown George Romeros films out of the water. Instead we see the survivors go "Hurr, I dun wna to dii in dis saef maul. Les get 2 and Ice-lend sum wurr in the big waatar derp". Running zombies= scarier and more threatening. Although, it is hard to take them seriously in this film..it seems like a horror comedy, not a horror movie... Sorry for derailing thread etc.

[MinionZombie]

I'm just gonna pretend Mo is on a baconator high, and slide on by that post... Anyway, aye the horror genre is definitely open to a lock of hack-jobs, same as the action genre I'd say. They can both be relatively cheap, and can get away with low substance, and low quality because they can manage a low budget. Speaking of 'gore porn' ( I hate that term), there's a new Brit horror called "Mum & Dad" that comes out on Boxing Day. It's apparently rather ruddy rockin', was made for £100,000, and it's true, proper horror in the vein of the original Texas Chainsaw Massacre - f*cked up essentially, and not in a SAW 5 way, in a proper horror way. I guess genres that are more open to cheap budgets, are likewise more open to cheap filmmakers not bothered to invest some brain matter into their work ... I mean, there's not many James Gunns to the pound in the world of political epics, for example, is there?

[Yojimbo]

I'm not so cynical about the whole notion, except I do believe that fast zombies are used in a film such as Yawn04 because the teenager target audience are morons who enjoy shows like Super Sweet Sixteen, and the likes of James Gunn and Zack Snyder have no idea how to make a slow zombie scary or workable. Amen, brother. Well said. i mean lets be realistic, shamblers are not very threatening at all, and it is silly to think they would grow at a rate that couldn't be contained. It's not like it'd take long to figure out that the only way to kill them is a shot to the head, and kill groups much like the ones in NOTLD could destroy so many shamblers in such a short time..and that is just the civilian population.... I don't know, the shamblers posed a pretty viable threat throughout the GAR films. Yeah, the running zombies are faster, but the shamblers claimed their fair share of victims in their own right. And, strangely, they seem to me much more creepy and ominous than any sprinting ghouls. Sadly the horror genre seems to attract a far greater number of hacks that rely on cheap gimmicks, gags, and things of that nature. Yojimbo agrees with Thorn yet again. Snyder and Boll are prime examples of directors not fit to smell my $hit.

[EvilNed]

I actually prefer running zombies now..i mean lets be realistic, shamblers are not very threatening at all, and it is silly to think they would grow at a rate that couldn't be contained. Ok, let's be realistic: Running zombies? Yeah, they do cause suspense and fit great in an actionfilm. Shamblers? They're way scarier, cause suspense, dread and terror. So which are scarier? Eeeaaasy pick.