Land Of The Dead - what's wrong with it?

[MinionZombie]

Good to see you back erisi, it's been a while. I've posted before on the money issue and explained why I think it works, so skim back through the thread for my thoughts on that one... On the other thing, it's a fair point being that it's 5 years after the outbreak, but I figure that the rich of Fiddler's Green have always had someone to protect them. They've never had to get their hands dirty - they've always had a safe place to hold up with trained guards doing any of the dirty work. You look at them in the Green and they've forgotten the world outside completely, they're obsessed with shopping and living the good life. Meanwhile those on the streets like Riley have to venture out into that world routinely. They're calm and cool when it comes to zombies, but the feather-bedded rich folk are hiding in cotton wool, so when the shit hits the fan at the end they're slung into the deep end and can't fend for themselves - therefore, panic and terror. Plus, mob mentality - if most people are freaking out, it's likely to encourage everyone else to do the same.

[benohmart]

Not a thing wrong with it. I liked it a Hell of a lot better than Document, which I couldn't get thru 10 minutes of because of the way it's filmed.

[Wyldwraith]

Late to the thread and a trifle off-topic but.... Someone mentioned John Carpenter as one of the directors that took the hard downward-spiraling turn at some point and I felt that merited comment. Ever seen the absolute DREK that was VAMPIRE$? Carpenter's name is all over it, but it was (surprisingly) an excellent novel before it was an abominable movie. The reason I mention it, is that if you plot Carpenter's work post-"John Carpenter's VAMPIRE$" you'll see it's where the proverbial plane nosedived into the ground. Coincidence?

[AcesandEights]

Ever seen the absolute DREK that was VAMPIRE$? Carpenter's name is all over it, but it was (surprisingly) an excellent novel before it was an abominable movie. The reason I mention it, is that if you plot Carpenter's work post-"John Carpenter's VAMPIRE$" you'll see it's where the proverbial plane nosedived into the ground. Coincidence? I remember there were a few people around here who actually liked that overcooked ham of a movie. It's an okay B-grade movie, but for the names attached it should have been at least a straight up decent film, but nope.

[MinionZombie]

I remember there were a few people around here who actually liked that overcooked ham of a movie. It's an okay B-grade movie, but for the names attached it should have been at least a straight up decent film, but nope. I'd agree with Wyld in that Vampires marked the deline point ... that and Escape From L.A. - for John Carpenter. Now, Vampires starts out as a pretty damn cool flick in the first act, but then after that it really loses a lot of it's attitude and coolness that it had in the start. Losing almost the entire cast in a massacre really saps the wind out of the movie and it never really recovers. On the other hand there are cool bits throughout - and Sheryl Lee, woo! - but yeah, the decline of JC started with that film. I saw one of his most recent movies a while back - "The Ward" I think it was called (with Amber Heard). It was set in a mental ward in the 1960s, but it was so bland. There was potential there, but it didn't pan out - and as a result I can't remember a single damn thing about it. At least with Vampires I remember a lot of imagery and some neat moments from it, as well as a bunch of the actors ... although, ultimately, it too was a disappointment.

[krisvds]

It's a weird phenomenon, these once brilliant genre directors losing it to the point their output has almost nothing to do with what they once were able to produce. Carpenter indeed. Argento anyone? In comparison to Argento's latest films Land of the Dead is Citizen Kane.

[Neil]

It's a weird phenomenon, these once brilliant genre directors losing it to the point their output has almost nothing to do with what they once were able to produce. Carpenter indeed. Argento anyone? In comparison to Argento's latest films Land of the Dead is Citizen Kane. Guess they just use up all their mojo!

[MinionZombie]

From Argento's post-2000 work I've only seen Sleepless, which was decent but not a patch on his work in the 70s/80s, and then The Card Player, which has a neat conceit for the modus operandi, but apart from that it's dreck. What's more, The Card Player looks terrible - so bland and flat and lifeless. I've heard only bad things about Mother of Tears, and Giallo too.

[shootemindehead]

Argento was never that great. I was always amazed at the kudos he received. I think in the case of Carpenter and Romero, the lashing they got for their magnum opus knocked them for six, I reckon. Carpenter never got over the reaction to 'The Thing' and Romero was always baffled by the hate 'Day of the Dead' got. I think it softened them. It cut their balls off. That said, Carpenter still went on to make some good pictures. I've always liked 'Prince of Darkness' and have grown to to like 'At the Mouth of Madness'. But, they're nowhere near the level of intensity that 'The Thing' had. I've even come to like some of his films that I hated, like, 'They Live' and 'Big Trouble in Little China'.

[Neil]

have grown to to like 'At the Mouth of Madness'. I've even come to like some of his films that I hated, like, 'They Live' and 'Big Trouble in Little China'. I've always enjoyed "They Live" and "Big Trouble In Little China" in a fun campy sort of way. But never never liked "At The Mouth Of Madness". I recall going all the way upto London to see it especially, and feeling utterly let down. Maybe I need to give it another watch...

[krisvds]

Argento was never that great. I was always amazed at the kudos he received. . To my taste Suspiria and Profondo Rosso are two of the greatest horrorfilms ever made. Those two films cemented his reputation I believe. I guess it's an acquired taste but wether you like those films or not there's no denying the sublime photography and use of lighting. Especially in Suspiria. Where Carpenter is concerned, if memory serves me right The Thing wasn't all that well received when it first came out. Didn't it take the VHS years for it to be recognised as the obvious masterpiece it really is?

[JonOfTheShred]

Woah woah woah, let's not get ahead of ourselves and dog Escape From LA. Both Escape From movies kicked a whole lot of ass. I don't care if it almost seems like a satirical remake of NY, LA kicks ass too! That set design was epic as f*ck and the action was good too. NY felt way more horror, but I still enjoy the over-the-top action vibe of LA.

[AcesandEights]

Woah woah woah, let's not get ahead of ourselves and dog Escape From LA.

[Suicycho]

These directors start buying their own hype and get an over-exaggerated sense of their own importance. Romero bought into the hype about how "political" his films were and how they made a "statement" so set out to make a very political film and make a statement with land. He should have set out to make an entertaining zombie movie first with sly political subtext and insinuation thrown in. Instead, the entire movie is political allegory and symbolism, and really has nothing to do with zombies which is why the story is so illogical and ridiculous.

[shootemindehead]

To my taste Suspiria and Profondo Rosso are two of the greatest horrorfilms ever made. Those two films cemented his reputation I believe. I guess it's an acquired taste but wether you like those films or not there's no denying the sublime photography and use of lighting. Especially in Suspiria. Where Carpenter is concerned, if memory serves me right The Thing wasn't all that well received when it first came out. Didn't it take the VHS years for it to be recognised as the obvious masterpiece it really is? 'Suspiria' is decent, if stupid. I own both that and 'Deep Red' and they are the only pictures of his I can say that I will watch again. But, having seen all of his output, I can honestly say that I have never been THAT impressed. He has a nice little shop in Rome though. Yes, 'The Thing' was shredded when it came out. Feck knows why, as even as a child I could recognise its classic status. You're correct, it took years of video to get it where it truly belonged. But, Carpenter became known as "failure" pretty much, because of it and I truly believed it damaged him. I happen to really like John Carpenter. He comes across as honest and truthful in his interviews. He lacks the bollocks talk that a lot of directors indulge in. He seems a genuine guy. It's just unfortunate that his reputation is not bigger than it is.