legally blonde II could have done that

My friend's girlfriend saw it and said it was "epic"...

Another example of the misuse of "epic".

I haven't seen a lot of previews or posters for this movie and I go to the theatre about 4 times a week. Hope it does well, I know it will kick ass. Saw a lot of trailers on TV, maybe I'm just missing the movie theatre ads. But I'm sure Romero's fan base will back it up.

2 more days!

You go to the theatre 4 times a week?!

not all of us have families :)

Yes, I know, but I dont think I make enough money in 3 years to got to the movies 10 times in a year, let alone 4 times a week! Damn rip-off, the movies are.

I have that Simon Pegg pic as my desktop now:D

So damn excited for this:D :D :D :D

yeah, it's really getting expensive now n days and I probably shouldn't, but what can I say, I love seeing movies in the theatre. And I don't spend my money on lots of things that people normally do (don't eat much, don't smoke or drink, rarely buy new clothes) so it leaves more room for movies. especially Land of the dead. don't care if it's my last 10 bucks

Only 8 hours and 45 minutes until the first showing in my hometown. I should be going to bed, but I'm way too excitied to sleep. lol

I just got back from the midnight showing. Here are my opinions on it. (SPOILERS AHEAD !!!!!!!)
I imagine the scene went down like this:
Hollywood Exec #1: How should we rip off the public this time ?
Hollywood Exec #2: Remakes are hot right now.
HE#1: True, but all the stupid old tv shows have been done already.
HE#2: How about a proven cult film. These kids today love that crap, esp since they never seem to know there was an original.
HE#1: Right again, but every title worth remaking has already been done, too.
HE#2: Maybe we can combine a few films then and market as something new ?
HE#1: We need some action and adventure. That always sells.
HE#2: Like the 'Mad Max' or 'Escape From New York' ?
HE#1: Both ! Now we need something where an inhuman army overthrows it's less than human ruling class. Like that 'Planet of the Apes' movie with the orange jumpsuits.
HE#2: You wanna use apes in the movie ?!
HE#1: Don't be an idiot ! Horror movies are hot right now. We'll use zombies.
HE#2: That's a great idea, too. How will we get everyone to see it ? Zombie movie fans can be a very fickle bunch. We can't possibly get all of them in to see it. Can we ?
HE#1: Of course. We'll have the Great One himself direct it.
HE#2: Wayne Gretzky ?
HE#1: Idiot ! George Romero ! All the great horror directors of the last 30 odd years didn't make much off their classic films. It's time for him to get an overdue pay day. It's a win-win situation for him and us.
HE#2: That's why you're the #1 boss and I'm only #2.
HE#1: Stick with me, kid, and I'll teach you how to make someone as inept as Paris Hilton into a box office draw.
In case you can't tell, I didn't care for it at all. It borrowed so much from other films, I wouldn't be surprised if the lawsuits started piling up. For example, when the anti-hero of the film is hired by rich badguy in tower who has "rebuilt" the city after the apocolypse, what does anti-hero ask for as payment to recover badguy's super tank ? His car and enough gas to get him away from the city/fortress. Sound familiar ?
Every possible character type was used here. The tough girl prostitute, the anti-hero's dim sidekick, the 2nd in command with big dreams of running the show, the cigar chomping badguy in the penthouse suite, etc. Everyone handled their roles well, but the story itself was pointless and redundant from other great films to a much lesser degree.
Zombies are now a learning and reasoning bunch thanks to their "leader" (Big Daddy). Why overtake the big city only to leave it moments afterwards ? I guess for a big finale since there didn't seem to be any other reason. Other than that, they're back to basic zombies (not like the runners in '28 Days Later' or 'Dawn of the Dead 2004'). Of course there always seems to be one floating around every other scene just to remind us that this is supposed to be a zombie film. Otherwise they appear out of nowhere at inconvenient times for the characters and disappear after enough fx are shown to keep the audience interested. Sadly, I think the film failed. There was a full house at the theatre tonight so you know everyone there was a die-hard fan. Everyone just seemed quiet and rather dejected by this installment when exiting. I have to agree. It would seem the master now imitates his imitators. Sorry.
CK

Completely, 100% agree with you there, my friend. :)

My local paper gave it a one out of five stars. I will be going to see it anyway.

so will i...

opening night (which looks like it'll be later than in the US - i havent seen any dates up here yet.


there arent a lot of horror films that get critical acclaim .. and who knows - maybe we are all in for a huge letdown ...

(i did hear a while back from an extremely close source that there was a bit of trouble and confusion on the set re. Romero)

but screw it - i want to see it no matter what.

Dunno bout in Ontario, but it's already open here [NB]

Gonna go tomorrow night, gettin my tickets later today:D

I go alot more than that, sometimes I go to see things a second time if I'm bored.I've seen Batman and High Tension 3 times each so far which I'm not bragging about at all because all it shows is that I have no life and way too much time on my hands.

Actually, it got some very, very good revews.

RottenTomatoes.com

67% of reviwers gave it "thumbs up".

Damn good for a horror movie, if you ask me.

This movie has been promoted from Upcoming to Modern Horror so I just started a new thread for it over there for anyone that's seen it to discuss it.

you know what I didn't understand?
what was the realivance of money? When hopper was leaving the city he took a bag of cash. I mean what the fuck? I suppose it could be symbolic, but you know sometimes symbolism is a cop out big time.

I have yet to see it but you should post "SPOILER" if you are gonna say an important part of the movie, Barbra. Hopefully, its not an important part of the movie and it wont ruin it for me when i check it out.

I actually was wondering that too. There was about 10 people in the theatre when we went, and I literally said out loud "What the fuck is he bringing that for? Why does he need money?", then these two nerds in front of me high-fived.

It was confusing.

Holy shit this is definatly the best in the series since Dawn. I did not know what to expect because they didn't show that much in the trailers(which is a good thing). The gore was awsome, and I'm surprised they got away with that much. Oh and by the way money still works in their society as it does in ours. People still do stuff for money so they can eventualy live in the big building thing (Cholo). The people who don't have much money live on the streets.

well, I hope it does


you think all the survivors in the world would still be dependent on money? I mean, he took a big bag of money, no guns. You have to make it to the next refuge. seems silly. And I was also wondering, when they went looting in the towns did they loot shops to help restock their shopping mall that only the super elite where alowed in? and how did all the loot get disturbited through out all the social classes? there where restraunts in the tower and in the slums it was like a carnival. If I lived in a zombie nation, I think that amo would be more valuble than money...

watch out for spoilers above.. ;)

oh yeah and what was with all the technology?

SPOILERS**************************Lots of them

I saw it today and liked it... Money was still be using by everyone whether rich or poor and Kaufman was a greedy SOB so his concern was money of course... Also, I wouldnt expect Kaufman to grab as many guns as he can and storm out there looking like Arnold in "Commando". But he did take 1 handgun with him when he was heading out. He also blew away some guy when he said "Look out, get down!!" and bang!!... I love that part. I was cracking up. I also remember him wanting the big truck with all the weapons on it thats why he sent out his goons with Riley and Slack. "Thats my truck i paid for it".
Cholo worked for Kaufman and remember how Cholo said Kaufman owed him tons of money for his work... I was assuming he did his crap work like going into the slums to re-stock that hotel/mall and whatever else... Cholo even wanted to live there but Kaufman denied him.

Usually, when you post spoilers in a movie, its to make a point. I'm not tryin' to be an ass, but this just seems to be in the context of how you liked the film.

The zombies ran.

Reply to ItsAlive:

If you look 2 posts above mine, you will see Barbra asking some questions. She was asking about the importance of money... Then I answered.... That was the POINT. Then she made referrence towards guns and then I said he had a handgun and was also try to get that truck back..... Do you see the point? Questions and then Answers. That post was REPLYING to Barbara's post and the questions.

yeah the truck would have been bitchin' but the idea of zombie invading the city wasn't really a concern at that point, just getting back the truck that he paid for. I don't really remember if they mentioned other survivors but the use of money really is silly. I don't think that hopper was looting the SLUMS to fill his mall either.

Hopper had money so he literally never had to loot the slums.... Cholo and his guys were working for Hopper and I would assume Cholo would go into the zombie areas for "necessities" and "non-necessities". Thats why i think Cholo was expecting tons of money. I think he said 80 grand. What do you think Cholo was doing for Hopper that cholo expected all that money?

Like I said, I'm not tryin' to be an ass... so don't be a dick.

If you're replying to Barbra's question, then quote her question so I know you're replying to it. If it was 2 posts above yours, how am I supposed to know? You just started it with SPOILERS: LOTS OF EM. Again, not bein' an ass, I was just confused.

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