LAND OF THE DEAD - Reviews and Discussion Thread
06-24-05, 05:08 AM
#51
DVD Talk Godfather
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: City of the lakers.. riots.. and drug dealing cops.. los(t) Angel(e)s. ca.
Posts: 54,199
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Wow. well that movie was just fan-fucking-tastic. Loved it. Sure the head zombie could have used a bit more acting lessions in Zombie 101, but eh. Over all that was really pushing it for an R rated film. The level of gore was really up there.
The acting, while still having the characters not develope much was great. The cliched character roles was fitting and you know what, it was a good mindless fun fest. I loved it.
Though I missed out at the cameo of pegg and frost, which I'll have to keep my eyes open for next time I see, it was pretty hard to not realize the big cameo that was a throw back to Dawn very easily and got a lot of cheers.
I'll watch this one again this weekend. Well worth it.
The acting, while still having the characters not develope much was great. The cliched character roles was fitting and you know what, it was a good mindless fun fest. I loved it.
Though I missed out at the cameo of pegg and frost, which I'll have to keep my eyes open for next time I see, it was pretty hard to not realize the big cameo that was a throw back to Dawn very easily and got a lot of cheers.
I'll watch this one again this weekend. Well worth it.
06-24-05, 05:14 AM
#52
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: So Cal
Posts: 7,071
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I just got back from a midnight sneak. It was OK in my opinion. At times it really felt like a Romero film, other times it felt like a modern hack-and-slash. Something that I felt really weakened the movie was the underemphasis on showing how humans live in this post-zombie world. We're only allowed a few vigneettes. How do people live without modern necessities like insulin? what happens to the old and the infirm? are they isolated in the even that they might die and come back as a potential threat? Romero makes smart horror, and this movie felt really dumb. The political and social commentary was there for sure but it felt really heavy-handed and I could have gone without it this time around. Dawn of the Dead was great because of the dispair of the people involved not just in facing the horrific events of the movie but because they have to adapt themselves to a new way of living.
Something I felt was really out of place were the "shocker" horror moments that were few and far between in the Dead trilogy. They made the movie tiresome - there are only so many times you can frighten the audience. It really felt overused, especially by the end of the movie.
The ending was great though, it fit in with the other Dead movies. The people who still cling to their humanity see the Zombies as a force of nature that, if not properly respected, will be the end of them. The ambiguous note that the movie ends on was a great touch as well.
Oh yeah, one last thing
Something I felt was really out of place were the "shocker" horror moments that were few and far between in the Dead trilogy. They made the movie tiresome - there are only so many times you can frighten the audience. It really felt overused, especially by the end of the movie.
The ending was great though, it fit in with the other Dead movies. The people who still cling to their humanity see the Zombies as a force of nature that, if not properly respected, will be the end of them. The ambiguous note that the movie ends on was a great touch as well.
Oh yeah, one last thing
Spoiler:
06-24-05, 08:23 AM
#53
Moderator
Some blurbs from MetaCritic:
The Hollywood Reporter Michael Rechtshaffen
The latest installment could well be Romero's masterpiece. Taking full advantage of state-of-the-art makeup and visual effects, he has a more vivid canvas at his disposal, not to mention two decades worth of pent-up observations about American society.
Los Angeles Times Kevin Thomas
Romero easily commands an enormous cast, a plethora of action sequences and a cornucopia of special effects -- some of them very gory -- and creates one darkly dazzling image after another that allows Land of the Dead to emerge without any nudging whatsoever as a bleakly humorous, hard-charging allegory.
Variety Justin Chang
George A. Romero shows 'em how it's done in Land of the Dead, resurrecting his legendary franchise with top-flight visuals, terrific genre smarts and tantalizing layers of implication.
USA Today Mike Clark
It's fairly solid fun, though, without breaking any new ground, just as January's remake of "Assault on Precinct 13" was.
Washington Post Michael O'Sullivan
Land of the Dead is fairly intense. Intensely gory and violent, that is, as has come to be expected from the genre. It's just not very frightening. Not half as frightening as, say, last year's "Dawn of the Dead."
Roger Ebert's 3-star review here.
The Hollywood Reporter Michael Rechtshaffen
The latest installment could well be Romero's masterpiece. Taking full advantage of state-of-the-art makeup and visual effects, he has a more vivid canvas at his disposal, not to mention two decades worth of pent-up observations about American society.
Los Angeles Times Kevin Thomas
Romero easily commands an enormous cast, a plethora of action sequences and a cornucopia of special effects -- some of them very gory -- and creates one darkly dazzling image after another that allows Land of the Dead to emerge without any nudging whatsoever as a bleakly humorous, hard-charging allegory.
Variety Justin Chang
George A. Romero shows 'em how it's done in Land of the Dead, resurrecting his legendary franchise with top-flight visuals, terrific genre smarts and tantalizing layers of implication.
USA Today Mike Clark
It's fairly solid fun, though, without breaking any new ground, just as January's remake of "Assault on Precinct 13" was.
Washington Post Michael O'Sullivan
Land of the Dead is fairly intense. Intensely gory and violent, that is, as has come to be expected from the genre. It's just not very frightening. Not half as frightening as, say, last year's "Dawn of the Dead."
Roger Ebert's 3-star review here.
06-24-05, 08:33 AM
#54
DVD Talk Godfather
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Gateway Cities/Harbor Region
Posts: 63,299
Received 1,815 Likes
on
1,131 Posts
Originally Posted by Matthew Chmiel
Romero and Carpenter have had both their great filmes and their failures. Romero has the Dead series, The Crazies, and Creepshow. For each one of those, we get a Two Evil Eyes (one of Argento's worst as well), The Dark Half, and Bruiser. Carpenter has Halloween, The Thing, They Live, and In The Mouth of Madness. For each one of those, we end up with a Ghost of Mars, Village of the Damned, Vampires, and Escape from LA. If it had to come down to it, Romero's lesser of an output in filmmaking reigns supreme over Carpenter as simply put, the man has been involved with a lot of shit. Whereas Romero does make a comeback with Land of the Dead, Carpenter has been making shit films after They Live (with In The Mouth Of Madness being the rare exception to the rule).
And Carpenter having more resources? Pffft. Each one of the man's film is a "homage" or a "remake" of a previous film. He may get the bigger budgets, but the man has very few original ideas. He's made some damn fine creative spins (The Thing is one of the few remakes better than the original), as I mentioned earlier, the man hasn't made a good film in over a decade.
And I'll agree with everything jaeufraser posted.
The man may not have the studio backing Carpenter does or the money, but Romero has brought things to the genre that nobody else has. His films might not be the most profitable or have the biggest of budgets, but the man is a fantastic storyteller.
And Carpenter having more resources? Pffft. Each one of the man's film is a "homage" or a "remake" of a previous film. He may get the bigger budgets, but the man has very few original ideas. He's made some damn fine creative spins (The Thing is one of the few remakes better than the original), as I mentioned earlier, the man hasn't made a good film in over a decade.
And I'll agree with everything jaeufraser posted.
The man may not have the studio backing Carpenter does or the money, but Romero has brought things to the genre that nobody else has. His films might not be the most profitable or have the biggest of budgets, but the man is a fantastic storyteller.Uhm, Vampires rocked.
06-24-05, 12:50 PM
#56
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
but the man is a fantastic storyteller.
06-24-05, 01:19 PM
#57
DVD Talk Gold Edition
More capsule reviews from Metacritic.
Romero's newest is a horror movie for hard-core fans of the gory and the gruesome and a classic genre film for genre aficionados. CHI TRIB
One of the enormous pleasures of genre filmmaking is watching great directors push against form and predictability, as Mr. Romero does brilliantly in Land of the Dead. One thing is for sure: You won't go home hungry. NY TIMES
Land of the Dead is Romero's long-awaited masterpiece, a slyly suspenseful and droll thrill-ride that expounds on both the highbrow and the chewed-off-brow concepts of his previous trilogy, then flippantly dismisses the cheap scare tactics of the control-pad generation's gimmicky genre knockoffs. PREMIERE
I've never seen a horror film (or rarely) get this many great reviews.
Romero's newest is a horror movie for hard-core fans of the gory and the gruesome and a classic genre film for genre aficionados. CHI TRIB
One of the enormous pleasures of genre filmmaking is watching great directors push against form and predictability, as Mr. Romero does brilliantly in Land of the Dead. One thing is for sure: You won't go home hungry. NY TIMES
Land of the Dead is Romero's long-awaited masterpiece, a slyly suspenseful and droll thrill-ride that expounds on both the highbrow and the chewed-off-brow concepts of his previous trilogy, then flippantly dismisses the cheap scare tactics of the control-pad generation's gimmicky genre knockoffs. PREMIERE
I've never seen a horror film (or rarely) get this many great reviews.
06-24-05, 01:50 PM
#58
DVD Talk Gold Edition
Just got back from seeing Land, and here are my first impressions.
It was pretty good, but disappointing. That's not to say it's bad, because it was very enjoyable and had some pretty good moments. I think Romero just missed the mark at parts. Those parts would be that it was too short and didn't have the character moments. I don't necessarily mean development, but scenes where the characters breath, and just be people. They all were on missions and they never just let themselves out of that mode.
I think that could have easily been fixed with an extra half hour. To me it felt as if we started in the middle of the film, and that it ended a little too early. A sequel could certainly be created (actually one is needed).
Other than that, everything else worked really well. These are easily the best zombies ever to be put on film. Well actually, let me talk about Big Daddy. He worked for what he had to do, but never quite reached the level of Bub. Bub for me is the ultimate zombie, he has the intelligence yet never did I think he was anything but a zombie. Howard Sherman was just fantastic. Eugene Clark can't touch him. Big Daddy was good, just not Bub good. I enjoyed his role a lot, but thankfully, there were other memorable zombies.
Number 9, and Butcher zombie were great. I really liked Butcher's walk, and nine had some cool makeup. There are certain other zombies I don't want to spoil, but I will say some badass things happened.
That brings me to the gore. Of course it was incredible. I can't believe this is R. It seemed like it had more gore than the unrated Dawn remake (which I thought could have been an R). I guess zombies being mutilated are A-OK for ther MPAA. It wasn't just gory stuff, it was quite creative as well. I can't wait to see what was cut.
Okay so now onto my favorite scene. It was definitely when we first met Slack. That sleazy nightclub, cage arena place was great. It had a lot of personality. And for anyone who didn't know this is were Simon Pegg and Edgar Wright are. They start off the scene if I am remembering correctly. Just a really great moment.
Other good moments would be some of Kaufman's and Cholo's stuff. They had some great lines, and to me seem liked the most real humans. Kaufman wasn't very developed, but we knew who he was and why he was like that. Certainly cliched but effective and quite enjoyable.
The worst scene was probably, I guess there wasn't really one. There was nothing I thought was so bad. There was stuff that could have been better though. Fiddler's Green could have been more explored. I don't think it was necessary, but it might have helped. The ending I like quite a bit, but it wasn't perfect. Like I said it needed something more. It wasn't quite a happy ending but some cheese certainly slipped in there. A few different lines, or maybe if they were just cut, would have improved it.
Okay, so how does it rank. Well that's though. I've only seen it once. I've seen the others countless times, and a large part of why they are so good is that they hold up very well to repeats. I think this one will as well, actually, but I can't say. I thought the Dawn remake might be better a second time, and that was only worse. Time will tell. I do however have an inclination to place it last. My rank is Dawn, Day, Night, Land. Maybe it is just as good as Night. Hard to tell.
I actually just watched Night last night (HarHar), and was suprised to find Land reminded me of it the most. The zombies in Night seemed pretty smart. They took out headlights, and almost seemed to be communicating. The first zombie we see, at one point seemed to motion to these other two to follow him. I had completely forgot that. It was really great to see, actually.
There really is a lot more to talk about. Like the links to the other films, the music (which was great), the atmosphere created, etc., but I feel that I am getting a little long. One last thing though, I feel he did create a very believeable universe, and he as really developed these films quite well. I hope he gets to make another. I am eagerly anticipating it.
It was pretty good, but disappointing. That's not to say it's bad, because it was very enjoyable and had some pretty good moments. I think Romero just missed the mark at parts. Those parts would be that it was too short and didn't have the character moments. I don't necessarily mean development, but scenes where the characters breath, and just be people. They all were on missions and they never just let themselves out of that mode.
I think that could have easily been fixed with an extra half hour. To me it felt as if we started in the middle of the film, and that it ended a little too early. A sequel could certainly be created (actually one is needed).
Other than that, everything else worked really well. These are easily the best zombies ever to be put on film. Well actually, let me talk about Big Daddy. He worked for what he had to do, but never quite reached the level of Bub. Bub for me is the ultimate zombie, he has the intelligence yet never did I think he was anything but a zombie. Howard Sherman was just fantastic. Eugene Clark can't touch him. Big Daddy was good, just not Bub good. I enjoyed his role a lot, but thankfully, there were other memorable zombies.
Number 9, and Butcher zombie were great. I really liked Butcher's walk, and nine had some cool makeup. There are certain other zombies I don't want to spoil, but I will say some badass things happened.
That brings me to the gore. Of course it was incredible. I can't believe this is R. It seemed like it had more gore than the unrated Dawn remake (which I thought could have been an R). I guess zombies being mutilated are A-OK for ther MPAA. It wasn't just gory stuff, it was quite creative as well. I can't wait to see what was cut.
Okay so now onto my favorite scene. It was definitely when we first met Slack. That sleazy nightclub, cage arena place was great. It had a lot of personality. And for anyone who didn't know this is were Simon Pegg and Edgar Wright are. They start off the scene if I am remembering correctly. Just a really great moment.
Other good moments would be some of Kaufman's and Cholo's stuff. They had some great lines, and to me seem liked the most real humans. Kaufman wasn't very developed, but we knew who he was and why he was like that. Certainly cliched but effective and quite enjoyable.
The worst scene was probably, I guess there wasn't really one. There was nothing I thought was so bad. There was stuff that could have been better though. Fiddler's Green could have been more explored. I don't think it was necessary, but it might have helped. The ending I like quite a bit, but it wasn't perfect. Like I said it needed something more. It wasn't quite a happy ending but some cheese certainly slipped in there. A few different lines, or maybe if they were just cut, would have improved it.
Okay, so how does it rank. Well that's though. I've only seen it once. I've seen the others countless times, and a large part of why they are so good is that they hold up very well to repeats. I think this one will as well, actually, but I can't say. I thought the Dawn remake might be better a second time, and that was only worse. Time will tell. I do however have an inclination to place it last. My rank is Dawn, Day, Night, Land. Maybe it is just as good as Night. Hard to tell.
I actually just watched Night last night (HarHar), and was suprised to find Land reminded me of it the most. The zombies in Night seemed pretty smart. They took out headlights, and almost seemed to be communicating. The first zombie we see, at one point seemed to motion to these other two to follow him. I had completely forgot that. It was really great to see, actually.
There really is a lot more to talk about. Like the links to the other films, the music (which was great), the atmosphere created, etc., but I feel that I am getting a little long. One last thing though, I feel he did create a very believeable universe, and he as really developed these films quite well. I hope he gets to make another. I am eagerly anticipating it.
Last edited by Drop; 06-24-05 at 02:26 PM.
06-24-05, 02:01 PM
#60
DVD Talk Hero
Originally Posted by deadlax
They were giving out free Land of the Dead t-shirts at the first showing today here in Atlanta. 12:20pm
Did you get one for old Buford? :buford:
06-24-05, 02:52 PM
#61
DVD Talk Godfather
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Gateway Cities/Harbor Region
Posts: 63,299
Received 1,815 Likes
on
1,131 Posts
Originally Posted by Geofferson
Even though it was a BO failure, I liked Ghosts of Mars just the same.
06-24-05, 04:30 PM
#62
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: NJ, the place where smiles go to die
Posts: 7,393
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Saw it last night & absolutely loved it, every single second of it, my favorite film of the year. The only problem I had in the whole thing was that it was way too short (well, that & the obligatory Savini cameo b/c I loathe the man). The thing just moves so F'n fast before I knew it, it was over.
It just felt so good watching a master go back to his own genre & Romero did not dissapoint in the least & so good watching an American film with gore in it again, something I never though I'd see in today's pansy PC world. It was such a perfect example to kids (god, I sound old & I'm not) & people that think zombies need to run fast to be scary, that zombies can still plod along & be truly menacing & only Romero in what short time they are on screen, is able to give each zombie its own personality.
It just felt so good watching a master go back to his own genre & Romero did not dissapoint in the least & so good watching an American film with gore in it again, something I never though I'd see in today's pansy PC world. It was such a perfect example to kids (god, I sound old & I'm not) & people that think zombies need to run fast to be scary, that zombies can still plod along & be truly menacing & only Romero in what short time they are on screen, is able to give each zombie its own personality.
Last edited by Sessa17; 06-24-05 at 04:32 PM.
06-24-05, 05:16 PM
#63
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Loved it. Nice to see lurching zombies on the screen again. I was a Dawn remake detractor until I saw the film and ended up liking it a lot. But still...
Two boys (I'd guess about 12 years old) ahead of me in line bought tickets to Mr. and Mrs. Smith. I noticed that they were sitting in front of me. Nice to see the system still doesn't work.
Ah, okay. I kept a lookout for Pegg and Wright, but didn't see 'em. I noticed in the credits they are listed as "photo booth zombies" (or something like that). When I see this again, I'll know when to be alert.
Surprised that no one has started the obligatory "Who's better: Bub or Big Daddy" thread yet.
Although it was a cool effect, I wonder how the
. Quibbling about biology in a zombie movie is silly, though.
Was that a different take of Hopper's "zombies, man..." line used in the trailer? In the movie, he picked his nose while delivering it (funny).
This question may have been answered elsewhere, but is there any official word on how soon after Day of the Dead this takes place?
didn't look terribly decomposed.
Two boys (I'd guess about 12 years old) ahead of me in line bought tickets to Mr. and Mrs. Smith. I noticed that they were sitting in front of me. Nice to see the system still doesn't work.
Originally Posted by Drop
Okay so now onto my favorite scene. It was definitely when we first met Slack. That sleazy nightclub, cage arena place was great. It had a lot of personality. And for anyone who didn't know this is were Simon Pegg and Edgar Wright are. They start off the scene if I am remembering correctly. Just a really great moment.
Surprised that no one has started the obligatory "Who's better: Bub or Big Daddy" thread yet.
Although it was a cool effect, I wonder how the
Spoiler:
Was that a different take of Hopper's "zombies, man..." line used in the trailer? In the movie, he picked his nose while delivering it (funny).
This question may have been answered elsewhere, but is there any official word on how soon after Day of the Dead this takes place?
Spoiler:
Last edited by DJLinus; 06-24-05 at 05:19 PM.
06-24-05, 05:52 PM
#64
DVD Talk Legend
Originally Posted by DJLinus
This question may have been answered elsewhere, but is there any official word on how soon after Day of the Dead this takes place?
didn't look terribly decomposed.
Spoiler:
Spoiler:
And as of now, there is no "true" answer to when Land takes place in comparision to the other three.
06-24-05, 06:43 PM
#65
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Virginia Beach, VA
Posts: 787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First I have to say I'm a huge fan of Night and Dawn. (and the Dawn remake) I caught a LOTD matinee this afternoon and have to say I'm disappointed. I enjoyed the Dawn remake SOOO much more. IMHO, Romero lost his touch in '85 and never got it back. My rank is Night, Dawn, Dawn remake, Day, Land. Day and Land are in a distant fourth and fifth.
06-24-05, 06:49 PM
#66
DVD Talk Godfather
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: City of the lakers.. riots.. and drug dealing cops.. los(t) Angel(e)s. ca.
Posts: 54,199
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Any particular reason as to why you were let down?
Sort of interested to see if the Dawn remake added anything to folks expectations on the scare level of a zombie.
I thought the film was a great in giving us another look into Romero's zombie world on a larger view. Added in his typical social commentary with the zombies and was great.
As for your question Matthew, I'm going to jump to the conclusion that it was indeed playing the role of Blades since he had that and was using it in zombie form. God I loved that.
Sort of interested to see if the Dawn remake added anything to folks expectations on the scare level of a zombie.
I thought the film was a great in giving us another look into Romero's zombie world on a larger view. Added in his typical social commentary with the zombies and was great.
As for your question Matthew, I'm going to jump to the conclusion that it was indeed playing the role of Blades since he had that and was using it in zombie form. God I loved that.
06-24-05, 07:03 PM
#67
I thought it was above average, but nothing new. The film doesn't give you any reason to root for the characters. They're all so dull. Did like the gore effects and was surprised by how much was in it.
2 things I hated! The Big Daddy zombie just sucked. Even as a zombie, that guy couldn't act. The other thing I hated was the Charlie "can't you tell by looking at my face" character. They should have just given him a shirt with that on it to wear. That way he wouldn't have to say that line every 5 minutes in the movie.
I enjoyed last year's remake of Dawn better. Much better characters. This was still a decent horror flick.
2 things I hated! The Big Daddy zombie just sucked. Even as a zombie, that guy couldn't act. The other thing I hated was the Charlie "can't you tell by looking at my face" character. They should have just given him a shirt with that on it to wear. That way he wouldn't have to say that line every 5 minutes in the movie.
I enjoyed last year's remake of Dawn better. Much better characters. This was still a decent horror flick.
06-24-05, 07:26 PM
#68
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Originally Posted by Matthew Chmiel
The question is...
Spoiler:
Perusing the FAQ on the IMDB boards, they give a link to a pic of Simon Pegg all zombiefied: http://www.cokey.co.uk/images/pegg.jpg
06-24-05, 07:39 PM
#69
DVD Talk Godfather
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: City of the lakers.. riots.. and drug dealing cops.. los(t) Angel(e)s. ca.
Posts: 54,199
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Oh, nice. I was keeping my eyes open for a shaun zombie but couldn't find one. Looking at that picture he had some heavy make up on him.
06-24-05, 07:47 PM
#70
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 4,551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Matthew Chmiel
And as of now, there is no "true" answer to when Land takes place in comparision to the other three.
06-24-05, 09:08 PM
#73
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 852
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cool. Glad to hear I'm not the only one who was HUGELY disappointed in this as well. All the great things I liked about the previous films were replaced with pretty standard action sequences.
The other three flicks had more character development, and more more human vs. human conflict rather than human vs. zombie conflict. Land of the Dead to me just seemed like a bunch of zombie vs. human battles.
The other three flicks had more character development, and more more human vs. human conflict rather than human vs. zombie conflict. Land of the Dead to me just seemed like a bunch of zombie vs. human battles.
06-24-05, 09:25 PM
#74
Suspended
Originally Posted by Matthew Chmiel
The question is...
And as of now, there is no "true" answer to when Land takes place in comparision to the other three.
Spoiler:
And as of now, there is no "true" answer to when Land takes place in comparision to the other three.
06-24-05, 09:39 PM
#75
DVD Talk Legend
I saw it, loved it, but after my first viewing I'm left with the feeling that something was missing. That feeling is likely to go away after I see it again though.
If you love zombie flicks, especially Romero's work, you'll more than likely be pleased with this one.
Am I just crazy, or did I read somewhere that this is the first of a possible new trilogy?
I don't know about everyone else, but I really, really like Dennis Hopper. I think one of the things that left me with a feeling that something was missing is that he didn't really do a whole lot of anything in this movie. I wont spoil anything, but I almost didn't really see the point of his character, they seriously didn't really do shit with it, and that pissed me off. His storyline with Legizamo just felt tossed in for the hell of it, without much meat at all to it.
I think you are right NoCalMike, I felt like a LOT was missing (cut) from the final print. I'm sure the DVD will either be an extended version of the film, or will at least have tons of deleted scenes.
That would be my only complaint, everything else was pretty much perfect for a flick like this.
So who was able to catch Simon Pegg? I wasn't able to, but I saw his name listed in the credits as one of the "photo booth zombies".
I think I'm going to watch it again to see how everything sits with me again, but I think I'll still have the same main complaint.
All of that said, everyone who is a fan of this sort of thing should go see it. It does indeed feel like GR was reinventing the genre he created...that is NOT just hype, trust me. There were also a few "new" types of deaths and attacks, so even the deaths and the such felt fresh for the most part.
If you love zombie flicks, especially Romero's work, you'll more than likely be pleased with this one.
Am I just crazy, or did I read somewhere that this is the first of a possible new trilogy?
I don't know about everyone else, but I really, really like Dennis Hopper. I think one of the things that left me with a feeling that something was missing is that he didn't really do a whole lot of anything in this movie. I wont spoil anything, but I almost didn't really see the point of his character, they seriously didn't really do shit with it, and that pissed me off. His storyline with Legizamo just felt tossed in for the hell of it, without much meat at all to it.
I think you are right NoCalMike, I felt like a LOT was missing (cut) from the final print. I'm sure the DVD will either be an extended version of the film, or will at least have tons of deleted scenes.
That would be my only complaint, everything else was pretty much perfect for a flick like this.
So who was able to catch Simon Pegg? I wasn't able to, but I saw his name listed in the credits as one of the "photo booth zombies".
I think I'm going to watch it again to see how everything sits with me again, but I think I'll still have the same main complaint.
All of that said, everyone who is a fan of this sort of thing should go see it. It does indeed feel like GR was reinventing the genre he created...that is NOT just hype, trust me. There were also a few "new" types of deaths and attacks, so even the deaths and the such felt fresh for the most part.