[quote=“zombi86”]
Zombies should be slow and dumb.
[/quote]
That makes a good comedy but that concept is outdated. Its just silly IMO. If zombies were all slow and dumb no one would get killed unless they were asleep.
I say there should be different degrees of mobility. The newly departed could be fast while the rotten zombies could be slow and dumb. Makes sense, yes?
[quote=“Naman”]
Yeah pretty much. Though the bit at the end was even more convoluted- where Big Daddy throws the barrel down the parking lot to set fire to the car’s petrol.
Like, where did THAT come from lol?
And the thing with LOTD was that the zombies weren’t the principal bad guys, which kinda blew as well.
[/quote]Zombies are never the bad guys, they’re just there without reason, zombies are people who have been victimized by an ongoing phenomenon. If you look at Night Of The Living Dead or Dawn Of The Dead, the zombies are victim to an unethical sport by the “rednecks”, they are brutalized and their bodies desecrated. Compare their kill to say Peter’s kills. He dosen’t toy with the zombies or mocks them, he shoots them clean. The real villains in George’s films are regular people. They are their own worst enemy. If the people in the farmhouse would have worked together, they would have survived through the entire thing; but instead they all chose to work individually, it was the stubborness of Ben and Harry that proofed to be the tragic-downfall of the entire group.
[quote=“DexPac”]
I think we already have moved passed the traditional zombie.
If fact every zombie movie that came out in the 40’s and 50’s
slightly reinvented the zombies. I just think rotting corpses
should have limitations. If the writer/film maker doesn’t like
it, he should pick or create a new “monster”.
[/quote]No movies in the 40s or 50s changed anything. Most zombie movies dealed with voodoo mytholog, example: Revolt Of The Zombies, I walked with a zombie, White Zombie. . .nothing changed until 1969 when Romero brought us Night Of The Living Dead.
[quote=“Naman”]
Yeah pretty much. Though the bit at the end was even more convoluted- where Big Daddy throws the barrel down the parking lot to set fire to the car’s petrol.
[/quote]If you recall, the “Big Daddy” character could work a gas pump, he worked in a Texaco gas station as mentioned in the LOTD screenplay. So with that picture you know what he did in the past. So when “Big Daddy” remembers how to use the nozzle and stuff, he also remembers that gas is flammable. Someone also mentioned something about Big Daddy using a gun. I guess he learned by watching other people shooting their guns. . .or maybe not, who cares!
[quote=“Knoxville Kingpin”]
That makes a good comedy but that concept is outdated. Its just silly IMO. If zombies were all slow and dumb no one would get killed unless they were asleep.
[/quote]
But it would take people a while to realize that they were indeed dealing with zombies.
If the first zombie you see is your little sister, you’re not gonna say “Huh, she’s walking
slow, I’d better put something through her brain before she get’s near me.” You’re not
gonna see it coming 'til it’s too late, and so it spreads until they out number us and attack
in droves.
[quote=“Biohazard”]
No movies in the 40s or 50s changed anything. Most zombie movies dealed with voodoo mytholog, example: Revolt Of The Zombies, I walked with a zombie, White Zombie. . .nothing changed until 1969 when Romero brought us Night Of The Living Dead.
[/quote]
Revolt of the Zombies and most of the other voodoo zombie movies were in
the 30’s. The 40’s was kinda when the more “sci-fi” zombie movies came
out where the zombies were created by Nazi scientists, atomic energy,
or even aliens.
[quote=“Biohazard”]
If you recall, the “Big Daddy” character could work a gas pump, he worked in a Texaco gas station as mentioned in the LOTD screenplay. So with that picture you know what he did in the past. So when “Big Daddy” remembers how to use the nozzle and stuff, he also remembers that gas is flammable.[/quote]
I did indeed recall, I just meant that from eating people alive to working out how to set alight petrol in under 20mins is a little convoluted. Meh.
Land of the Dead was just TERRIBLE. Complete disgrace to the rest of Romero’s career.
Running zombies are only logical if its a fresh kill. That’s the philosophy behind the script i’m writing for production next summer. They start fast, but slow down as they decay. makes perfect sense.
And as silly as Snyder’s 2004 DOTD remake is at times, i love it.
[quote=“Bluesteel”]
Running zombies are only logical if its a fresh kill. That’s the philosophy behind the script i’m writing for production next summer. They start fast, but slow down as they decay. makes perfect sense.
[/quote]
Are your zombies the type caused by magic or the chemical type or something else?
[quote=“Bluesteel”]
Land of the Dead was just TERRIBLE. Complete disgrace to the rest of Romero’s career.
Running zombies are only logical if its a fresh kill. That’s the philosophy behind the script i’m writing for production next summer. They start fast, but slow down as they decay. makes perfect sense.
And as silly as Snyder’s 2004 DOTD remake is at times, i love it.
[/quote]
I wouldn’t say Land of the Dead was terrible, especially compared to Dawn of the Dead. I mean,
sure, the way he wanted us to feel for the zombies was incredibly hokey, but all his movies have
been incredibly hokey.
And for the record running zombies are never practical.
I hate running zombies. Zombies should be scary, rotting, smelling and slow.
There are several camps. Some have no preference… running zombies or the classic shuffling zombies. Some prefer one over the other, for whatever reason. I’m in the no preference camp.
I’m a huge fan of LAND OF THE DEAD. A really cool Hollywood studio zombie movie with George Romero social commentary.
[quote=“Thousand Eyes”]
Are your zombies the type caused by magic or the chemical type or something else?
[/quote]
still debating. chemical type probably.
and running zombies are completely practical. we have just been fed and raised on the Romero '68 slow rotting zombs. Give the other type a chance.
And Land of the Dead was just ridiculous. Big Pappa or whatever his name was. So ridiculous. I was laughing the whole way through it. in a bad way. social commentary was barely present. Story was crap. Acting was worse.
I just hope Diary of the Dead will be better since Romero went completely independent on it.
Big Daddy was the bomb!
[quote=“Bluesteel”]
and running zombies are completely practical. we have just been fed and raised on the Romero '68 slow rotting zombs. Give the other type a chance.
[/quote]
I don’t know I guess maybe running zombies is just something that’s never been done right.
The only reason it worked in the Dawn of the Dead remake is because Snyder still kept the
movie about the living and kept the focus off the Zombies. My main problem with the running
Zombies in that one was that they didn’t just run, they ran faster than most normal people.
They came across as super humans rather than undead humans, but only sometimes. I feel
if you’re going to go that route with it, then don’t call them Zombies, call them Sci-Fi Mishap
Super Humans.
And for the record slow rotting zombies have been around since long before Romero. That’s just
what Zombies are. They’re Mummies, without all the toilet paper.
As far as Big Daddy in Land of the Dead, I liked the idea he represented, I just didn’t like the way
the idea was represented. I love the thought that zombies can evolve and “learn” through instinct
almost like a wild animal, I just think Romero rushed it. It all happend way too damn fast. It should
have just been left with the zombies figuring out that the fireworks are a distraction thing and that
should have been it.
ya i dunno. the whole evolving thing just seemed so stupid. they are dead. they cannot learn…the brain doesnt work anymore.
and i tottaly agree with you about the running thing. they are usually portrayed in a super-human fashion. I don’t plan to do that. they will be fast in my film, but not like SUPERNATURALLY fast and strong. no more than an average human
LAND OF THE DEAD is just taking the place of DAY OF THE DEAD with the onslaught of venom it has been receiving.
Big Daddy is just the evolution of the thinking zombie, begun with Bub in DAY OF THE DEAD.
I was introduced to the concept of the running zombie in the great RETURN OF THE LIVING DEAD.
Umberto Lenzi’s NIGHTMARE CITY is an interesting low budget running zombie movie. It could be the first film to have running zombies.
[quote=“DexPac”]
As far as Big Daddy in Land of the Dead, I liked the idea he represented, I just didn’t like the way
the idea was represented. I love the thought that zombies can evolve and “learn” through instinct
almost like a wild animal, I just think Romero rushed it. It all happend way too damn fast. It should
have just been left with the zombies figuring out that the fireworks are a distraction thing and that
should have been it.
[/quote]
The fireworks bit would have been much creepier if the zombies began to ignore the fireworks on there own like if someone got close to them while they were watching the fireworks and thought they would be fine but then they get attacked… that would have been more effective… well in my opinion anyway…
I dont really see anything particularly wrong with zombies that have some quickness… but when you have them running down a street at you in plane sight… its not that effective… it would be better if they came out of the darkness… even if they are fast you should probably be careful at how they are displayed… if your going for the scare factor… Atmosphere and presentation are the main things if you want them to be scary…
[quote=“Bluesteel”]
ya i dunno. the whole evolving thing just seemed so stupid. they are dead. they cannot learn…the brain doesnt work anymore.
and i tottaly agree with you about the running thing. they are usually portrayed in a super-human fashion. I don’t plan to do that. they will be fast in my film, but not like SUPERNATURALLY fast and strong. no more than an average human
[/quote]
I think displaying them as learning makes the viewer a bit too familiar with the zombies… and makes them less frightening… generally you want to avoid this… if they do learn then it shouldn’t be shown directly… in fact you should use it to take away any expectations the viewer might have of zombies…
The fireworks were a pretty distraction to keep the zombies at bay.
This film is a social satire about the haves and have nots and big governemt (namely the Bush Administration). Romero loved it when Dennis Hopper decided to play his role like Rumsfeld. Romero’s zombie films are never just zombie movies. Big Daddy represents the disenfranchised rallying against the crooked leader in power.
Uhh… anyone can express/ represent what they like but that doesn’t make a work great itself… ( except when its obscenely profound ) artist have been slopping crap together for ages and saying its good because it means this and it means that… but its only when you get a film ( or the equivalent ) that works on its own levels and is seamless in execution that the " meanings " parallels ect become something to appreciate and speculate upon… LAND OF THE DEAD seemed a bit odd carrying the meanings it did… Still I like it in other ways…
[quote=“moviemike”]
Big Daddy represents the disenfranchised rallying against the crooked leader in power.
[/quote]
Yeah, but so do all the “main” characters in the film.
[quote=“Thousand Eyes”]
Uhh… anyone can express/ represent what they like but that doesn’t make a work great itself… ( except when its obscenely profound ) artist have been slopping crap together for ages and saying its good because it means this and it means that… but its only when you get a film ( or the equivalent ) that works on its own levels and is seamless in execution that the " meanings " parallels ect become something to appreciate and speculate upon… LAND OF THE DEAD seemed a bit odd carrying the meanings it did… Still I like it in other ways…
[/quote]
Um, What makes a work of art “obscenely profound” and what do you mean by “works on it’s
own levels”? And how do you determine “seamless execution” only seeing the final product?