Just watched Dawn of the Dead 04 again....

[Trin]

Cheers Neil. I think the zombie genre deserves a really vast, huge scale outing, I want to see seas of those undead bastards, 10's of 1000's of 'em. (we got a small taste of that in Dawn 04, especially when they left the mall). You did see your sea of zombies. It just never made it off the poster onto the screen. Zach has some work to do to become the next GAR. Dawn '04 was an action flick first and foremost, and lacked the additional facets of the Night/Dawn/Day era GAR. Even Land (for all the faults I have with it) was a much richer, fuller film than Dawn '04. My opinion is that Dawn '04 was more successful at delivering what it attempted to deliver than Land. That doesn't make it better. Land tried to do a lot more than Dawn '04. None of these guys seem capable of scratching the zombie movie itch.

[darth los]

None of these guys seem capable of scratching the zombie movie itch. And we're gonna include the post 90's Gar on that list as well right?

[Trin]

And we're gonna include the post 90's Gar on that list as well right? Opinions vary, of course, but for me the post 90's GAR movies don't scratch the itch. They're more like rubbing poison ivy on it. And with 2 post 90's GAR movies in my collection and the synopsis of the third posted I'm not sure GAR is gonna be the one to scratch that itch. I hate to even think this, but if I had to choose between a new GAR zombie movie and a new Zach Snyder zombie movie.... I mean, the answer should be obvious right? At least for me it isn't...

[darth los]

Opinions vary, of course, but for me the post 90's GAR movies don't scratch the itch. They're more like rubbing poison ivy on it. And with 2 post 90's GAR movies in my collection and the synopsis of the third posted I'm not sure GAR is gonna be the one to scratch that itch. I hate to even think this, but if I had to choose between a new GAR zombie movie and a new Zach Snyder zombie movie.... I mean, the answer should be obvious right? At least for me it isn't... It's interesting that you say that. Imo, what made the first 3 dead films great just isn't there And damn if i know exactly what that is. Gar just went off on an intelligent zombie tangent and too many people just aren't feeling it. Now there will be some that say that it was the direction he was always headed in. I think that it was o.k. when there was an intelligent ghoul peppered into the series here and there. But to just have the whole "race" evolve doesn't seem right. Don't get me wrong, it's his franchise and he can do what he wants with it but, imo, the intelligence premise was much more effective when it was the eception and not the rule.

[Wyldwraith]

The problem's simple, GAR has never felt obligated to give the fans what they want. This worked out ok for him when coincidentally he happened to want to go in the direction that entertained so many of us, but now that it isn't he's still inflexibly plodding on with his "My Social Commentary > All elements which make a movie entertaining" direction. He slipped Land through on the laurels of past achievements, but Diary proved that his cult following valued his past achievements as exactly ONE Get Out of Jail Mostly Free card. If George doesn't wake up and realize that a successful director first and foremost has to deliver a film that people want to watch he's finished and we all know it. What bothers us though is that he STILL shows no signs of comprehending this. Well, non-conformity is great, but people just aren't going to part with 10$ for a ticket, 5-7$ for the gas to get to the theater and another 10-20$ on snacks to listen to another of his commentaries when the thin veil he draws over it is a crappy movie of the Uwe Boll caliber.

[Phildogger]

You did see your sea of zombies. It just never made it off the poster onto the screen. Zach has some work to do to become the next GAR. Dawn '04 was an action flick first and foremost, and lacked the additional facets of the Night/Dawn/Day era GAR. Even Land (for all the faults I have with it) was a much richer, fuller film than Dawn '04. Highly Disagree. Dawn 04 takes a lot of heat from this board, but I think it did a great job of making us like or hate the characters in a very short time. I know I liked some of them quite a bit, and still get torn up when CJ bites it. Land had none of this, and most of those characters were unlikeable. (especially Argento's character).

[mista_mo]

I must be one of the few who actually enjoys Dawn 04...Diary was okay, and so was land, but the overall feeling i got from them was "wow, This is the 1st George Romero movie I've seen in theaters". And that is it. I saw it because it was a George Romero film, not because it was a zombie film, and that is the type of fanboyism I am so against- seeing and supporting a movie because of an attached name. I hope Zach gets behind the seat and directs another zombie film- perhaps continuing where Dawn 04 left off, or maybe pull a Romero and tell anouther story in the same setting. It's sad to say, but i'm more excited at the prospect of Zach helming another film then Romero.

[darth los]

The problem's simple, GAR has never felt obligated to give the fans what they want. This worked out ok for him when coincidentally he happened to want to go in the direction that entertained so many of us, but now that it isn't he's still inflexibly plodding on with his "My Social Commentary > All elements which make a movie entertaining" direction. He slipped Land through on the laurels of past achievements, but Diary proved that his cult following valued his past achievements as exactly ONE Get Out of Jail Mostly Free card. If George doesn't wake up and realize that a successful director first and foremost has to deliver a film that people want to watch he's finished and we all know it. What bothers us though is that he STILL shows no signs of comprehending this. Well, non-conformity is great, but people just aren't going to part with 10$ for a ticket, 5-7$ for the gas to get to the theater and another 10-20$ on snacks to listen to another of his commentaries when the thin veil he draws over it is a crappy movie of the Uwe Boll caliber. Wow, you just tore him a new a**hole. The Uwe Boll reference was below the belt. LOL He seems to have that "stay the course" mentality that old people tend to have no matter what kind of chaos it's causing. McCain 08' !!

[Trin]

Highly Disagree. Dawn 04 takes a lot of heat from this board, but I think it did a great job of making us like or hate the characters in a very short time. I know I liked some of them quite a bit, and still get torn up when CJ bites it. Land had none of this, and most of those characters were unlikeable. (especially Argento's character). I agree with you 100% on the characters. I'll grant that win to Dawn '04 no questions asked. But that doesn't put Zach in GAR territory when you look at Night/Dawn/Day. Those movies delivered much more than just characters. It might put him in the ballpark with GAR if you're looking at Land/Diary. GAR has never felt obligated to give the fans what they want. ... What bothers us though is that he STILL shows no signs of comprehending this. True. If GAR was interested in the fans he'd be watching Dawn '04 and taking some things away from it. He should be wondering how anyone could get so worked up over a remake of his classic. But, no, he'd rather thumb his nose at everyone and everything. If George doesn't wake up and realize that a successful director first and foremost has to deliver a film that people want to watch he's finished and we all know it. Tell me that the studios haven't already figured this out. I think this was the sentiment even before Land. I got the impression that Land was a calculated risk for Universal, a mistake in retrospect, and not something any studio is likely to do again anytime soon.

[SRP76]

But that doesn't put Zach in GAR territory when you look at Night/Dawn/Day. Romero gets an unfair handicap in that regard. With Night, it was the first movie of its kind; nobody had seen something like that before. By the time of Dawn, there still wasn't any competition; it was still one of the very, very few movies in this genre. So Romero basically got two movies in before anyone else even joined the market. He was a monopoly. And since those were almost the only zombie flicks for over a decade, they couldn't help but be the best. That gives him a HUGE headstart on everyone. And since his movies were "the firsts", nothing ANYONE is going to do is going to be able to escape that shadow; everything's going to be "a ripoff of Romero's creation". If some other guy was out there in '68 making a zombie movie as well, it could be a whole different story. But when someone had a monoploy for years and years and was the first of his kind, there's simply no way to ever knock him off that pedestal, no matter how good the competition gets 40 years later.

[Trin]

GAR was not the only one making zombie movies back then. Before Night: I Eat Your Skin - 1964 Plague of the Dead - 1966 Shortly after Night: Tombs of the Blind Dead - 1971 Horror Rises from the Tomb - 1975 Dead People - 1975 There's a pretty long list of zombie movies out there spanning back decades. I spent my entire high school and college era watching zombie movies and I never seemed to run out. There were tons of them. And if you're talking about the whole survival horror genre then you have to look at Last Man on Earth which was 1964. Romero wasn't the first and only in that category either. Do you really believe that GAR had hits with Night and Dawn and no one tried to duplicate his success? Yeah, lots of people tried. The fact that they all fell short for decades is simply another reason why Zach Snyder shouldn't be thought of in the same category.

[Bub666]

GAR was not the only one making zombie movies back then. Before Night: I Eat Your Skin - 1964 Plague of the Dead - 1966 Shortly after Night: Tombs of the Blind Dead - 1971 Horror Rises from the Tomb - 1975 Dead People - 1975 To be fair,none of those movies are even close to being in the same league as Night and Dawn.

[Trin]

To be fair,none of those movies are even close to being in the same league as Night and Dawn. I agree 100%. If fact, I think that should be further evidence of how much above the rest GAR stood out. His movies have endured as the great ones to the point that few people even remember that other zombie movies came out at the same time. In contrast, Dawn '04 came out at a time with very little competition in the zombie genre. Who really had the unfair handicap?

[darth los]

It's a given that 28 day/weeks are better films than dotd 04' and it's debateable whether land is. Even given all that dotd 04' is one of the better zombie flicks and imo is more entertaining than the previously mentioned films.

[DjfunkmasterG]

Yeah, yeah, yeah....we've been through this before and it's all personal opinion. and we are trying to change yours good sir. ROTLD is a funny film. It is sharp, funny, has good pacing, and is decently written for a zombie comedy.