|
|
Post by Neko Bazu on May 14, 2007 14:28:35 GMT -1
WARNING FOR THE SQUEAMISH: (AKA 'Not-my-fault-you-threw-up' Disclaimer) The following post(s) contain pictures from zombie films, and as such feature blood, horror, gore, cannibalism and other things best not discussed with your nan at church. View at your own discretion.Lots of people (not just on here) seem to be discussing zombies today, so I was wondering - zombie afficionados, what's your favourite? (I'm feeling generous, so I'll allow films that don't technically star zombies, such as 28 Days Later, to be included  Honourable mention, naturally, has to go to the original Night of the Living Dead for starting it all and still managing to have one of the better endings. Shaun of the Dead, I also have a special spot for, simply for daring to be so different and doing it so well, and the director's cut of Zombie Flesh-Eaters (aka Zombie 2/Island Of The Living Dead) is still the only one to come up with a scene I can't watch without squirming - the infamous eye-gouging scene, which is seen in full from the front in the uncut version:   My number one, though, has to be George Romero's Day of the Dead, starring the strangely lovable zombie known as Bub, who I always end up feeling a twang of pity for toward the end. It steps beyond the bounds of the usual zombie film, instead looking at other ways the usual infestations could go, demonstrating superbly the emotions that sort of situation could bring, while still building up to the inevitable massed hordes and disembowelling scenes (incidentally, this film was the first to go into any graphic detail on that front!)   Anyone else got any offerings? 
|
|
|
|
Post by Travis on May 16, 2007 12:28:26 GMT -1
Romero's Dawn of the Dead without question is the king of the zombie flicks, Neko, though both Night and Day also hold 'classic' status. Land of the Dead, although completely passable lacks the political/social satire of it's predecessors to some extent. Shaun of the Dead is a fantastic pastiche, and while I'm not entirely comfortable with new, fast moving 'zombies' phenomenon, both the Dawn remake, and 28 Days Later were pretty good.
Zombie Flesh Eaters certainly had it's moments, the aforementioned one especially, though I found it to be equally appalling (in a bad way) in other respects.
Re-Animator and the Evil Dead movies obviously deserve a mention, even if they're not as zombie-centric as the other offerings.
|
|
|
|
Post by Neko Bazu on May 16, 2007 12:50:10 GMT -1
Must admit, the fast-moving zombies really don't 'do it' for me either - in the re-made Dawn especially, I found them to be laughable, if anything. It totally ruins the whole point of why zombies are so frightening too (as I stated in another thread). Land of the Dead, I thought was another wonderful 'What if?' story, and I felt it was almost a kind of sequel the Day of the Dead. In Day, we see Bub exhibit signs of growing more intelligent - so what if a whole town did? Granted, it wasn't as fantastic as the afore-mentioned titles, but again, for exploration it was superb. Quite frighteningly, though, I just looked on homepageofthedead.com, and there's a trailer on there for a remake of Day of the Dead - and some of the comments aren't pretty  
somebody still thinks this movie is gonna be the next dawn 04? no way guys... ´there´is the direct to video looks like trailerr for CRAP OF THE DEAD!!!
*~*~*~*~*~*
WHAT???!?!! THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH DAY OF THE DEAD!!!! Atleast Dawn 04 HAD SIMILAR plot. WTF?? IM PI$$ED this is sh!t
*~*~*~*~*~*
Ok, all the bad comments I made BEFORE this trailer came out.....I no longer feel guilty about not giving it the benefit of the doubt. This looks worse than something that can be found on the SciFi channel. Honestly, it looks AWFUL! I think I will come out of the theater thinking Dawn 04' was better.
What a @#$%Q@#$%@#$^@#$&$&#%^%^#$%^#$%^#$%!!!!!!!
*~*~*~*~*~*
interesting...i think, thats a totally different take on things. I mean ****, i knew it would be different...but damn
*~*~*~*~*~*
for the love of l ron muhameed christ,
some of you expect too damn much. it didn't look that bad. it definitly didn't look like something the lame ass sci fi channel made, considering i seen no lame CGI graphics. from what i've read about this, they're not trying remake the original frame for frame (unlike the omen ), just trying to show what happens in a day of the outbreak. the only thing i seen wrong was that the zombies looked liked runners, which i'm not fond of, but i'm not going to discredit the movie over it.
if you wanna-be Eberts think you can do better, have at it. i hope you can take the same criticism that you dish out.
*~*~*~*~*~*
I thought it looked horrible. No where near as good as the Dawn remake. When I saw the trailer for Dawn '04, I couldn't wait to see it! This one made me go "meh."
*~*~*~*~*~*
Yeah, this looks bad. From the super agile zombies screaming like godzilla, to that horrible dialogue. I dont mind remakes as long as there good, but this....looks....really....badThat thread is here: forum.homepageofthedead.com/showthread.php?t=3808And the trailer is here: www.homepageofthedead.com/media/NuDayofDead.mov |
|
|
|
Post by thales on May 16, 2007 12:55:35 GMT -1
Braindead has to be one along with those already mentioned
shaun of the dead
pet cematary
return of the living dead series
|
|
|
|
Post by Neko Bazu on May 16, 2007 13:05:08 GMT -1
Braindead has to be one along with those already mentioned shaun of the dead pet cematary return of the living dead series Ah, yes! Braindead, another brilliant one! ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Neko Bazu on May 16, 2007 13:07:04 GMT -1
Quite frighteningly, though, I just looked on homepageofthedead.com, and there's a trailer on there for a remake of Day of the Dead - and some of the comments aren't pretty [comments here] Read further on in the comments; apparently the cast are mostly pretty/flawless teens more suited to American Pie/Beauty (in the army?!), there's a sex scene, and the zombies don't just run, but jump, dodge, grapple and scream like Godzilla. I'm honestly sickened   |
|
|
|
Post by thales on May 16, 2007 15:22:23 GMT -1
|
|
|
|
Post by Neko Bazu on May 16, 2007 16:02:49 GMT -1
Oh dear...
I just actually watched the trailer. The zombies are reminiscent of Spiderman in the way they move (one leapt the width of a room, and I swear one even scuttled along the wall), and they honestly do have Godzilla-esque voices. It's more reminiscent in mood and style of a typical Hollywood action film than a zombie film.
Just... ouch.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tiffie on May 16, 2007 19:14:04 GMT -1
As goes zombies...well, I guess my favorite has to be Shaun of the Dead, just because it doesn't make me cringe like most of the others - you can't beat that lawnmower scene in Braindead though! ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Teesside White on May 16, 2007 19:17:28 GMT -1
you can't beat that lawnmower scene in Braindead though! ;D that is the highlight of any zombie film.....also the zombie baby from that film lol my favourite zombie-esque film though is 28 Days Later...i love it |
|
|
|
Post by Tiffie on May 16, 2007 19:19:57 GMT -1
you can't beat that lawnmower scene in Braindead though! ;D that is the highlight of any zombie film.....also the zombie baby from that film lol my favourite zombie-esque film though is 28 Days Later...i love it I haven't see 28 Days Later...saw 28 Weeks Later though, 'cause my friend wanted to go see it. Is it worth renting? |
|
|
|
Post by Teesside White on May 16, 2007 19:21:26 GMT -1
that is the highlight of any zombie film.....also the zombie baby from that film lol my favourite zombie-esque film though is 28 Days Later...i love it I haven't see 28 Days Later...saw 28 Weeks Later though, 'cause my friend wanted to go see it. Is it worth renting? yeh its well worth it...i dont think 28 Weeks Later is out over here yet but i will definately be going to see it |
|
|
|
Post by Tiffie on May 16, 2007 19:24:27 GMT -1
yeh its well worth it...i dont think 28 Weeks Later is out over here yet but i will definately be going to see it I liked it - can't compared to the first one, obviously, but it's definitely worth the ticket money! ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Travis on May 17, 2007 9:35:58 GMT -1
Must admit, the fast-moving zombies really don't 'do it' for me either - in the re-made Dawn especially, I found them to be laughable, if anything. It totally ruins the whole point of why zombies are so frightening too (as I stated in another thread). Good to have another 'old skool' zombie kinda guy on the boards, Neko.  Since when has making zombies quicker made them scarier?? The zombies are essentially stalkers, all with the same aim, to kill. In this respect they are no different to the psychopaths from the slasher films of the 1970's and 1980's, and how many of these pyschopaths ran?? Without doubt, the most successful and revered film of the slasher genre is Halloween, a film that has endured because of the direction, the soundtrack and principally, it's killer. Michael Myers in that film never ran, jogged, he barely even broke into a march, and he was all the more terrifying for it, and why?? Because he knew, and you knew, that no matter how slowly he pursued somebody, he was always going to catch them.....and it was that long drawn out feeling of inevitability and helplessness for the victim that made the killer as effective a screen presence as he was. By placing him behind a mask, and completely stripping him of any personality or reasoning, simply took him to the next level. The other major (though infinitely inferior) franchise of the era, the Friday the 13th movies, employed a similar pyschopath. Although A Nightmare on Elm Street employed in Freddy Krueger, a killer that did run, it ceased to be scary after the first chapter, and by giving the killer a personality, it quickly became a parody of itself. Similarly, Scream had a featured a nimble footed pyschopath, and although a very good film, was it really all that scary?? |
|
|
|
Post by Neko Bazu on May 17, 2007 9:48:08 GMT -1
Must admit, the fast-moving zombies really don't 'do it' for me either - in the re-made Dawn especially, I found them to be laughable, if anything. It totally ruins the whole point of why zombies are so frightening too (as I stated in another thread). Good to have another 'old skool' zombie kinda guy on the boards, Neko. Since when has making zombies quicker made them scarier?? The zombies are essentially stalkers, all with the same aim, to kill. In this respect they are no different to the psychopaths from the slasher films of the 1970's and 1980's, and how many of these pyschopaths ran?? Without doubt, the most successful and revered film of the slasher genre is Halloween, a film that has endured because of the direction, the soundtrack and principally, it's killer. Michael Myers in that film never ran, jogged, he barely even broke into a march, and he was all the more terrifying for it, and why?? Because he knew, and you knew, that no matter how slowly he pursued somebody, he was always going to catch them.....and it was that long drawn out feeling of inevitability and helplessness for the victim that made the killer as effective a screen presence as he was. By placing him behind a mask, and completely stripping him of any personality or reasoning, simply took him to the next level. The other major (though infinitely inferior) franchise of the era, the Friday the 13th movies, employed a similar pyschopath. Although A Nightmare on Elm Street employed in Freddy Krueger, a killer that did run, it ceased to be scary after the first chapter, and by giving the killer a personality, it quickly became a parody of itself. Similarly, Scream had a featured a nimble footed pyschopath, and although a very good film, was it really all that scary?? The only killers I've really appreciated being scary and fast simultaneously - or at least having the potential to be; I can't recall it having ever been done - are things that're patently not human. Dracula, for instance, or a werewolf. Even looking at things like Alien and Predator, they were never the fastest movers, were they? I think the inevitability - the mental torture - is what makes things genuinely frightening (just look at Candyman). When it's all over and done with in a big gorey blast, it sort of removes any chance for the terror to build up. And yes, Trav, very much an old-school zombie fan here My brother and cousin are too, and we're having a zomfest evening this weekend, as it happens Taking the opportunity to introduce my girlfriend to some classic titles! |
|
|
|
Post by Travis on May 17, 2007 9:50:35 GMT -1
Good to have another 'old skool' zombie kinda guy on the boards, Neko. Since when has making zombies quicker made them scarier?? The zombies are essentially stalkers, all with the same aim, to kill. In this respect they are no different to the psychopaths from the slasher films of the 1970's and 1980's, and how many of these pyschopaths ran?? Without doubt, the most successful and revered film of the slasher genre is Halloween, a film that has endured because of the direction, the soundtrack and principally, it's killer. Michael Myers in that film never ran, jogged, he barely even broke into a march, and he was all the more terrifying for it, and why?? Because he knew, and you knew, that no matter how slowly he pursued somebody, he was always going to catch them.....and it was that long drawn out feeling of inevitability and helplessness for the victim that made the killer as effective a screen presence as he was. By placing him behind a mask, and completely stripping him of any personality or reasoning, simply took him to the next level. The other major (though infinitely inferior) franchise of the era, the Friday the 13th movies, employed a similar pyschopath. Although A Nightmare on Elm Street employed in Freddy Krueger, a killer that did run, it ceased to be scary after the first chapter, and by giving the killer a personality, it quickly became a parody of itself. Similarly, Scream had a featured a nimble footed pyschopath, and although a very good film, was it really all that scary?? The only killers I've really appreciated being scary and fast simultaneously - or at least having the potential to be; I can't recall it having ever been done - are things that're patently not human. Dracula, for instance, or a werewolf. Even looking at things like Alien and Predator, they were never the fastest movers, were they? I think the inevitability - the mental torture - is what makes things genuinely frightening (just look at Candyman). When it's all over and done with in a big gorey blast, it sort of removes any chance for the terror to build up. And yes, Trav, very much an old-school zombie fan here My brother and cousin are too, and we're having a zomfest evening this weekend, as it happens Taking the opportunity to introduce my girlfriend to some classic titles! LOL!!! ;D You know how to treat a lady, Neko!  |
|
|
|
Post by The Lucky C on May 20, 2007 7:33:40 GMT -1
I haven't see 28 Days Later...saw 28 Weeks Later though, 'cause my friend wanted to go see it. Is it worth renting? yeh its well worth it...i dont think 28 Weeks Later is out over here yet but i will definately be going to see it it is out, and it's well worth watching. i'd go for the original dawn of the dead, shaun of the dead and 28 days later personally. |
|
