So, no opinions on my previous post? Everyone’s satisfied with the ending? You know, maybe I’m wrong or just didn’t get it . . .
[quote=“diceman”]
So, no opinions on my previous post? Everyone’s satisfied with the ending? You know, maybe I’m wrong or just didn’t get it . . .
[/quote]
No, the ending, if you follow the America-is-Fiddler’s-Green and zombies-are-everyone-else, the ending is pure bleeding heart liberal mush that doesn’t make any sense in the literal context of the movie, either. Still, everything up to it was good, imo.
I thought fiddlers green was just the rich. The regular people lived on the streets. And the zombies are “born again” christians.
I’ve never heard that one before.
I believe the film is about retribution. Kaufman, being the parallel of the Bush corporation. Kaufman is cynical, corrupt, and untouchable. There’s a line that Slack says “He can fuck it, shoot it up, it belongs to him”. Kaufman own Fiddler’s Green and its inhabitants. The zombies are seen as terrorists by Kaufman but in reality they are the victims. Through the eyes of “Big Daddy”, we experience the ordinary life of zombies. They are tortured, shot down, used as sport until “Big Daddy” decides that enough is enough. The same way the terrorists of today have been pushed around by this country, with the proliferation of democratic policies in foreign countries, countries which have diffrent principles and relegious beleifs. It’s defiance, terrorist fight for what they beleive is right. Same way with “Big Daddy” and his clan, they are fighting for their existance, they have a right to exist. There’s a line that Kaufman says when “Big Daddy” and his army invade The Green. Kaufman: “They have no right!” – But Big Daddy disagrees! That’s why in the end when Riley stops Pretty Boy from gunning them down, he says “They’re just trying to find a place, just like us.” Riley understands that “Big Daddy” and his army are just trying to live in peace, (even though they have an insatiable love for human flesh!). . .as long as you stay out of their way, it’s good in the neighborhood! Kaufman gets what’s coming to him in the end. . .I think Romero feels the same about Bush, push someone around for quite some time , and you’ll be sorry.
Couldn’t the film just be about the atmos and scaring the audience in new ways… its a friggin zombie film… why dont they call this 2nd Term of the Dead…
The movie, Im pretty fuckin’ sure, is about being scared of the living dead and a guy stealing a kick ass ATV.
It’s a George A. Romero movie, not a fucked up Resident Evil or Planet Terror type of film. Romero always tries to reflect on what’s happening and then weave that into the plot. Even Romero says it in the special features, and in the commentary
[quote=“Biohazard”]
It’s a George A. Romero movie, not a fucked up Resident Evil or Planet Terror type of film. Romero always tries to reflect on what’s happening and then weave that into the plot. Even Romero says it in the special features, and in the commentary
[/quote]
mmm… i guess thats just not what i value in his zombie films… cool though…
[quote=“Thousand Eyes”]
mmm… i guess thats just not what i value in his zombie films… cool though…
[/quote]You don’t? What do you like about Romero, then?
[quote=“Biohazard”]
You don’t? What do you like about Romero, then?
[/quote]
Aww hmmm you mean compared to other zombie films? ( actually a lot of other zombie series are not so great ) regardless, i value films that actually scare you, the 1968 Night of the Living Dead was ground breaking and yeh frightening at first ( when i saw it that is i havnt said i was around when it was first released ) And the other films in the series often retain the claustrophobic feel and shocks… Anyway i find the ways he deals with zombies to still be stylistic and his zombie “rules” to be down to earth ( cept maybe recently ) of course there’s the guilty pleasure of seeing zombies shot up/ blown up/ set on fire ect… I value that as well :-[ soo many good memory’s
What do you mean by recently, nothing has changed. The only new thing I saw in LOTD were the fireworks.
He’s talking about them getting smarter and using weapons. Maybe he hasn’t seen Day of the Dead.
[quote=“Biohazard”]
What do you mean by recently, nothing has changed. The only new thing I saw in LOTD were the fireworks.
[/quote]
I mean in a particular zombie becoming more life like and instructing the other zombies to use weapons… or has that happened before? Oh yeh day of the dead… 
unless you consider 1985 recent… and not quite as much…
( someone said this while i was writing… well ill post it for confirmation purposes )
[quote=“Thousand Eyes”]
I mean in a particular zombie becoming more life like and instructing the other zombies to use weapons… or has that happened before? Oh yeh day of the dead… unless you consider 1985 recent… and not quite as much…
( someone said this while i was writing… well ill post it for confirmation purposes )
[/quote]I’ve seen them use weapons in all of the movies, but yeah, “Big Daddy” was sort of advanced. But I wouldn’t see that as a change, I mean the rest of them were still dumb.
yea but it was supposed to be like follow the leader one was more suppior then the other kinda like in todays society then the rest of the babys will slowly grow up.
Land of the Dead wasn’t everything it could have been. Even with all the locations the film felt small compared to the original Dawn of the Dead.
yes but in my opinion dawn the orginal was the greatest horror movie of all time nd i dont think antyhing compares to it
[quote=“Jjp”]
yes but in my opinion dawn the orginal was the greatest horror movie of all time nd i dont think antyhing compares to it
[/quote]
whys it better then Night of the Living Dead? well it is you opinion id just like to know?