For Romero being the master of all things zombie, i expected more from the film. I have been into Romero's work since I saw dawn of the dead. He has a directorial eye for focusing alot on the setting. He uses it as a scare factor. And in Land Of The Dead i felt he kind of strayed from that ideal.

getting rid of the bodys of the people that hopper took out cause they were getting in his shit.

it didn't creep me out at all.

Land of the Dead
 

Land of the Dead was the WORST of the series. How you can go from a classic and awesome remake like Dawn of the Dead to this crap is beyond me. Who's idea was it for these monsters to not be able to run? In "28 Days Later" the zombies ran. It was awesome. In "Dawn of the Dead" the zombies ran. It was awesome. Who wants to see slow-walking zombies after that? NOT ME!

Re: Land of the Dead
 

Out. Get Out now.

Re: Land of the Dead
 

My answer would be Fulci. ;)


Other than that i 100% agree with you. The movie was a great disappointment. Felt like it was rushed, incomplete and reminded me more of a sequel to "Resident Evil" than "Dawn of the dead".

:mad:

Re: Land of the Dead
 

Ooh! Ooh, I still want to see slow moving zombies! Ooh! And 28 Days Later aint a zombie flick! Ooh! And going from a remake of a classic to a movie by the originator of the genre is a good idea!

Re: Land of the Dead
 

Are you kidding me, you don't even know what your talking about. In 28 Days Later not the zombies but "THE INFECTED" ran. Did you even watch the movie? In "Dawn of the Dead" Remake the zombies ran because Hollywood wanted them too, plus in a way they were "The Infected" cause unlike the original Dead films, the only way you became a zombie was if you were bitten, in the original Dead films you became a zombie if you were KILLED or BITTEN. It shouldn't of even been called Dawn of the Dead. The only similarity was the fact that they were in a shopping mall. To answer your question "Who wants to see slow-walking zombies after that?". Well as you can see zombies really never ran. Judging by the rules of your typical zombie flick. They were simply infected. Even if you want to call Dawn of the Dead Remakes zombies acutual zombies. I still would like to see them walk. It just makes more sense.
Just follow these rules:

Living Dead/Zombie- 1) Is someone who has died and come back to life with it's brain still connected to the body.
2) Or someone who has been bitten by another dead person.
3) Typically walks.

Infected - 1) Is ONLY someone who has been bitten.
2) Typically runs because technically that person is still alive.

Thats basically how I think of it. If the Dawn of the Dead Remake zombies acutally could die and come back to life maybe we could debate, but their is a fine line between Zombie and Infected.

BTW- Hollywood does the dumbest shit just to make money. Thier is now talk about a Dawn of the Dead 2. Can you believe that bullshit. Its a sequel to the Dawn of the Dead Remake. ITS NOT DAY OF THE DEAD, but Dawn of the Dead 2. It's the dumbest shit ever. I wish they would just stop making remakes and start making new stuff. I have to constantly explain to my friends the order of horror movie franchises. Between remakes and sequels "normal people" just don't know. Almost all my friends thought that Land of the Dead was another remake. I had to explain to them that it was a sequel ...and between the original films, the remakes and the Return of the Living Dead series they had no idea in what order to watch it. Its joke, Hollywood and Horror just seem to be in differnt directions now.

Re: Re: Land of the Dead
 

http://tfp.killbots.com/scans/041_bender-applause.gif

Re: Re: Re: Land of the Dead
 

lol