The problem with remakes is that they too become old. In a few years, this remake wont be fresh and contemporary, but it wont be the original either, it will just float out there.

With regards to running zombies, I'm impartial either way. I never understood why people who run like hell could never get far enough away from the monster whos just putzing along. Running zomibies means frantic chaos, slow zombies is more like an impending doom, either one can be scary if handled properly.

OK I have a question. All 4 of the original characters were represented in the remake in some way, so I'm assuming. How was Steven represented?

LittlePill said:

I haven't seen it, but apparently Steven is a millionaire ladies' man.

Lammastide said:

That asshole was supposed to be Flyboy!!!??

Yeah....


It was better when it was called 28 Days Later...

Been there, done that.

I hope that the zombies don't run !( like in 28 days) does anyone here has seen the movie May?

Ashtheking said:

Agreed. The original is one of my favorites, and while this new version didn't share much beyond the superficial with it, I really had a good time. Lots of blood and headshots, great action and suspense, twisted humor and some solid performances. This is a great popcorn movie and it delivers the goods.

gemini13 said:

Except that 28 Days Later was a snooze-fest! Boooooring! This was the movie that 28 days should have been!

NightGod said:

jn2 said:

They run, at top speeds, in groups of a hundred or so, but fear not! Each person with 15 rounds in his or her gun is able to aim dead on (no pun intended) and fight them off everytime and escape to safety. And as far as gore, don't blink.

I do think it funny that 'Dawn' beat "The Passion" out of the number one slot!

LittlePill said:

Its not funny its symbolic.....

PusherMan said:

Not really. It could have been any movie. It could've been Starsky and Hutch.

I saw the movie last night and really wasn't impressed. It was a "Hollywood" version of the original, which means it was packed with action and bullshit. I hate that fast motion film style that so many movies have these days. They wanted to make it close to 28 Days later, with the zombies running around and being very aggressive.

What made the original zombie films so great was the real sense of dread and hoplessness. The zombies were better because they were really mindless and slow. But even though they were slow, once they gang up on you, it's your ass. In this one, they're just running around and jumping around, like rabid monkeys. Zombie films suck when they're made into action films. But that's Hollywood for ya.

George Romero, where the fuck are you?

EvilWhiteMale said:

Last I heard, he's been stuck in development hell for the last decade and a half trying to get a fourth part made.

He said it might be set in a city where all the rich live at the top of high-security skyscrappers and travel around by air or armoured car trying to ignore the zombie problem, the way they do now with the homeless.

So, a weak-ass remake can get the cash but the a bona-fide sequel from the orignal master can't get off the block.

daned said:

Sad but true.

EvilWhiteMale said:

Didn't we have a date??



I saw it on Saturday. It was, well, OK. They did an OK job of building up anticipation in parts. I laughed quite a bit, though mostly unintentional (but I enjoy that sorta thing). My expectations weren't high, so I wasn't really disappointed.

ok i saw it

i cant compare it to the bleak low budget reality of the original


but it had its moments , not alot but it tried i quess

the cameos were cool

the johnny cash thing was nice

i wait for

twighlight

I don't understand why the writer didn't use the "you die you become a zombie" principle, that's the more frightening and the true definition of a zombie

shausler said:

"Land of the Dead". That's the current title. Incidentally Fox, or whatever movie company, are being assholes and trying to force their own vision on George Romero before they give him the green light. There is a petition asking them to give him the go ahead and let him do his own thing. here's a link so that you can PLEASE sign it. It's been almost 20 years since Romero has given us a zombie movie and I really want to see this one!

http://www.gopetition.com...petid=2059

CarrieMpls said:

We did have a date, but see, you saw it it even before I did.

LittlePill said:

At different points the title has been "Twilight Of The Dead", "Dead Reckoning" and "Land Of The Dead". Personally, I like "Twilight" best, since its in keeping with the titles of the previous three.

While I enjoyed this silly remake, it is no substitute for Romero's real zombie flicks! Bring 'em on!!!

jn2 said:

Yeah and they never even attempted to explain how it all started either.

LittlePill said:

Actually, I liked that they never explained it. That made it a tad bit more frightening. It was like the whole world just went to hell in a handbasket, and no one understood why. It was a plague suddenly unleashed on the world without a clear explanation why.

JediMaster said:

When you put it that way it sounds like a mutated form of AIDS. THAT'S a scary concept.

jn2 said:

yes

this was a big disappointment


if it aint dead dont fix it i say

shausler said:

Hi Stranger

MostBeautifulGrlNTheWorld said:

hey Beautiful

awww

i want one