I wondered why the people who didn't live in the tower didn't make their life if not better than the tower. The people in the tower were stuck there.
Example: If that happened in Chicago all the people would have to do is form a city watch gang to clobber the zombies. We would have the lake front beach & wrigly field to have our fun. Who wants to be stuck in towers for the rest of their lives. Everybody would hot wire any car they want and cruise all summer.
But clearly the filmmaker wanted to make it look like big white corporation guy lives tower better than poor white people on the street. Hmmm, where was the blacks,mexicans & puerto ricans living in the street that we all see in our cities? Why did the majority on the street have to be white? If they tried to be truthful in this movie than it wouldn't have been a liberal message.

I hope so. It had a much better cast, better acting, and a better story. No Big Daddy shit in that film. And they were treated as zombies in that film, instead of dead people "just looking for a place to go".

I dunno man. I think some people just want to make something out of nothing. And I guess you didn't watch the film at all if you didn't notice John Leguizamo, the black zombie leader, or the Samoan army guy all of whom played substantial roles.

Wait a second...

JOHN LEGUIZAMO IS FUCKING WHITE??!?!

Christ, I thought he was an Italian all these years after his role in Super Mario Brothers.

He's not Italian either. He's Latino.

You're detector isn't sensing anything? change the batteries. Matthew was making that statement. Leguizamo is Latino. And from the look of the bars and underbelly of that society a lot of minorities were there. They spoke spanish in the club.

I chalk it up to lower theater count and considering how much the budget difference is for both of the films (dawn remake 26 million/ Land 15 million) it really isn't getting its ass handed to it. It is still going to break even on theatre release and the massive amount of sells on both a unrated and rated dvd of this will make it very successful.

well, i won't dare say it wasn't good or that i didn't like it. it was decent and solid, despite some plot holes and the whole big daddy guy (fast zombies should be way more forgivable than his intelligence.) on a side note, yeah Bub showed some learning and whatnot but this was brought on through repitious training/experiments. should the dead be fast or slow, i'll leave it up in the air. the one thing they shouldn't be is smart, meaning in no way what so ever should they be able to EVOLVE. i know in "canon" this is foreshadowed but i don't care.

i think the major downfall of this film was where it picked up in the story. would of been much more interesting to see the building of the society. basicly this movie feels way too much like the middle chapter of a triliogy.

also it didn't have the, hmm, bite? that the remake had. i liked this movie, i did, just thought it would of and could of been better. but the remake had me glued to the screen. this, not so much. ok so two different approaches (to film making) plus land has a time frame.

it was done well though. can't wait for the UR dvd. but if i had to right now, choose between a land of the dead 2 or whatnot, i'd go with dawn remake 2. althought i'd really like both to continue and go on.

let me add a bit more.

i didn't read the whole thread but i did see the post mentioning big daddy setting up the kill of dennis hopper. hmm, not only did (atleast as much as we were shown) big daddy never saw hopper's character, he stalks him. and when he is found, what does he do? he kills him! umm, "brains!!!!" anyone? zombies eat the living. it is their food. here the zombies are on some kind of mission. this defies so much.

and as i mentioned zombies evolving... the circumstance that cuased zombies should always remain a mystery; science run amok, or for god/supernatural reasons or something inbetween. a zombie evolving, ie, being smart, narrows down that openess of, "how? Why?" in dawn, it is mentioned that they come to the mall because they remember it. that is one characters opinion. it is never shown truely why. i can accept zombies having faint memories and so much so that they can recognize a past job or tool used with it, etc. however, land ups it way too much. the mystery is lessened

I am a HUGE Romero fan, and think that Dawn of the Dead (original) is the GREATEST horror movie of all-time. Land of the Dead was EVERYTHING I was hoping it would be, great gory deaths, good story, great characters, and Tom Savini... What more could you want??? This film shows that Romero is still and shall always be the "Master" of the Zombie Genre!!!

Exactly. Zombie's need our bodies to survive, we are their food supply, so why would they slaughter us and not even eat us? Why would they simply get "smart", track us down, invade our safe house , slaughter us and then move on? It makes no sense.

I also think once you make zombies so smart they can track us down and use weapons against us, some of the fear is lost.

You missed his point.

I think he's saying that in typical Hollywood style it's an "Greedy Evil Coporate type" against "the people". As far as having minorities in key roles Romero, unlike directors like Ron Howard, has always done that in his Living Dead films.

I disagree. It surpassed the original in many ways and it matched it in others. It was an updated version that thankfully ditched some of the silly shit from the original.

Hey all,

As mentioned before, being a huge fan, i liked this movie -- it may take a few more viewings in my own theater to have it sink in. My only "thing" was that I don't really care for the Mad-Max-ish feel of the gritty pseudo-futuristic vehicles. It reminds me of the opening of the terminator movies, minus the lasers, of course. I wish it wasn't such a run-down war-zone atmosphere... I would rather have barren, creepy spaces than packed, dirty, debris-laden war zones...

**SPOILER** I also liked the


Any thoughts?

Matt

I'll give Barbara some credit towards the end. She did kind of come out of her catatonia and helped....but it was too late.

***************

Saw "Land" this weekend and would give it a solid "B+".

Re: Land, I enjoyed it, but I wouldn't call it great. As mentioned in the above post, I could've done without the Road Warrior vehicle motif and there were plenty of eye-rolling moments (the headphone guy and "Is this a battle or a massacre" ). The gore was awesome and the sets were pretty convincing. I will be looking forward to the unrated DVD for more of the good stuff.

I was pleasently suprised by the gore allowed (i dont get the DVD Talk review, were we watching the same film?) neck bitings and arm bitings never looked so good, it was like all the greatest hits of the earlier films in a nice 2005 polish. Where I found the film lacking is in the lack of characterization for the leads and the inner workings of the city, a comment i find ironic in that people criticized the Dawn remake as being less character driven than the original Dawn but I cared more for the people in the Dawn remake than I did for anyone other than the lead's badly scarred friend in Land. I think a longer cut will benefit this movie when it hits DVD.

No, it seems YOU missed his point. Reread his post. He's saying that Land DIDN'T use minorities, that it only had white people in both the corporate locales and the poor locales. Which of course is totally ignorant on his part.

No, I didn't miss his point. But that's my fault. The first sentence was addressed to you and your comment and the second was to him and his comment and it was meant to support what you said.

I agree, but even though the lack of characterization was a slight hinderance - but visually, Romero really delivered on the over the top violence and visuals. Another major quibble - I really don't care for the CGI tweaking of the gore effects - give me Tom Savini's "Dawn" basic SFX any day. Another problem I had with it was that it wasn't really that frightening or scary - "Night" delivered in that department - here "Land" felt like it was showcase for the latest in special makeup effects.

I guess I learn something new everyday from these posts.
I learned having only 1 latino in the lead as a combat soldier and only 1 black as a leader of the zombies overshadows a whole tower of whites and a whole city below of whites as being equal. But as long as the message is rich sticking to the poor aka Bush to minorites that's what matters.

I don't think the above applies to the Romero zombie.

Didn't Dr. "Frankenstein" Logan in DAY state that eating is primarily an instinctual action? Zombies don't need us for nourishment - they eat us because they're hard-wired to. And if that were the case, and if the zombie could evolve to a point where it could supress these primal desires consciously, then it shouldn't be a huge leap of logic to accept monsters like Bub and Big Daddy. The former showed early signs of repressing his hunger, and the latter exhibited no urge to consume flesh at all. Big Daddy is the pinnacle of zombie evolution - he could even solve puzzles (barriers and obstacles such as fences and rivers) presented to him.

And Big Daddy wasn't marching on Fiddler's Green for the sole purpose of eliminating Kaufman. He, like the rest of the zombies, wanted in, and maybe also to exact a little payback for all the hurt that's been inflicted on them. Remember, Kaufman shot at Big Daddy. It seems only natural that the deadhead would then chase after him.

Liked it but I would say one could wait for video for it. I rank it just below Resident Evil. I liked that they had a zombie guy that was living biker guy in dawn of the dead. Thought they needed more closeup zombies. I notice one zombie that was killed early was walking around again later on.

I don't think Big Daddy made the zombies smarter. They were already smarter than the average zombie. Bid Daddy just gave them direction.

Saw this Friday, disappointed as well...same complaints as most others. Same reaction in the theater, as well.

I think the problem is that this movie appeals to Romero fans, and that's about it. No attempt was made to move it into the mainstream. While it's good to stick to what works, you can't really expect a movie that doesn't make that attempt to succeed with the mainstream audience.

Either you want a niche movie and get a niche crowd, or you want a mainstream movie and get the mainstream crowd. Crossover successes are rare, especially lately.

Well, if you didn't notice, the Zombies killed all the mexicans, blacks, asians first, as they were less important in society.

Someone always has to play the race card.