2004-03-20 03:32 am (UTC)
I have a bigger objection.
What could be worse than a story dragged through the mud with a poor re-make?
People loving it and declaring it the best zombie film ever . . . ?
Read some of the crap here:http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0363547/board/threads/
I don't normally go off on rants with big negatives, but some of these people are either 12 year olds with nothing to reference, or they're leading to my worst fears . . .
As follows . . .
I have a problem with people who claim 28 Days Later
was not as good because it, quote, "dragged along" . . . implications of 28 Days
being slower, and therefore, dumb, or not as good.
Perhaps they should make a 90 minute music video with constant slaughtering and no plot. As long as the slashes per minute are 40-50 or so, and the beats per minute of your latest shit rockers are over 160, then I guess that's what people want, right?
I think that to rate this version of Dawn
above Dead Alive
, Night of the Living Dead
, Romero's other original, the older Dawn
, and probably many others including 28 Days
. . . you would have to be looking for something out of the paragraph above this.
I mean, shit, I could do a 90-minute MTV movie gorefest with no plot . . . just hire the best special effects people, hire someone who's done more than a few music video shoots, and there you go . . . exactly what the people want, right?
Everyone's fine to desire what they want . . . my thoughts that wanting a 90-minute MTV slaughterfest with no actual plot, so what if I think it's idiotic . . . that makes me dumb for thinking it, right?
There is validity in pushing the older films aside with comments like "who would want to watch that old movie again?" I mean, shit, anything past 1995, that's never as good as the latest film, which has to be the best ever, because it's 2004, right?
Recent history makes for the best films, right? I guess we shouldn't reference anything, for sure, because history is boring, right? Who gives a damn about some old silent film, or a film made 10 years ago, or a film released yesterday . . . I mean, that was yesterday, right? The past is lame, right?
2004-03-20 06:50 am (UTC)
Re: I have a bigger objection.
Let's just hope to God they never decide to remake Godfather or Scarface. If they do, I'm boycotting the movie industry forever.
2004-03-20 01:42 pm (UTC)
Re: I have a bigger objection.
Well, they just might, if they think by the merits of Godfather 3 . . . they could make a lot of money with a clever update, especially if the underworld returns to focus in the media, probably sometime after The Sopranos airs its last episode.
Trust me, it's probably talked about in Paramount boardrooms, not too far from me.
even though i've yet to see it this entry kinda of swayed me to wait until it comes out on dvd. o and i had planned on seeing it when i'm up in nyc. now i sure as hell ain't going to shell out 20$ to see something that's not worth it. i believe that 20$ would be better off seeing 'eternal sunshine of the spotless mind'.
but i terribly wanted to see it. i love zombie flicks. i loved romero's zombie trilogy. gah what to do what to do.
i read somewhere that there were tons of inaccuracies. one being that it was filmed in canada in a mall, so all the stores are canadian instead of american. another being they used the wrong tv station for that area.
yeah, perhaps it's best left to be seen on dvd.
I'm not sure about the Canadian mall . . . unless there is Starbucks, I think it was a Starbucks . . . that coffee shop got heavy product/service placement.
It was supposed to be Milwaukee, and I did notice that one of the stations started with a K, which implies West Coast. They were watching them in a TV store, so satellites could be explained for the K-starting station.
Romero, from what I'm hearing, didn't want much to do with it. It shows.
What was wonderful about the original film in particular, Night of the Living Dead dealt with subplot of social conflict. At the time of that first movie's release, around the late 1960s, that was a fresh conflict. LBJ and JFK had worked hard for Civil Rights, and there still was quite a display of separatism between caucasians and blacks.
The separatism, in this film, was between 'security' and commoners, but that didn't ring true because Ving Rhames was a cop with a conscience.
Also, the other separatism was between the elite rich class and the commoners. This wasn't treated heavily because the rich guy basically played the bit comedy role, and he was just an asshole. He did, however, make a couple of points toward his importance and standing over the other folks.
It was an ill-conceived script, and that ruined it for the hard core fans like me.
By all accounts, everyone's lovin' Eternal Sunshine.
My roomie just returned from Detroit and watched it there, and he loved it. Apparently, Kate Winslet truly was relied upon for the major comedy, and she pretty much turned out a gem.
My other close bud Brad mentioned that a good litmus test for figuring out which film to go see is to check rottentomatoes.com . . . apparently, they read over 100 reviews on a film and give a percentage on a scale of 100 percent, the 100 being the best.
Films that drop below 25 are most always bona-fide stinkers.
In the case of Eternal Sunshine, it's supposedly in the high nineties, which is rare for a film to receive that many wonderful reviews.
If it's the case when I see it, hopefully it will strike a major blow for the cerebral film lovers.
orion and i have decided to give up seeing 'dawn' and see 'eternal' instead. probably be a better use of our money. plus on the 16th kill bill 2 comes out and we MUST see it as well. no if's and's or but's about that one.
did you see kill bill 1?
Yes. I loved it. I thought it was well worth the wait.
The beauty of Tarantino is his instinctual eye for the camera. He knows how to make his films work wonderful magic on the audience.
People may pigeon-hole him as a weak producer/writer/fluke director, but he possesses a flair with the camera that no other director seems to have. He is the man who knows too much. All of that time spent working in a video store paid off for him . . . his cult film love translates into great resurgence when he makes his amalgoms shine in his special style.
In fact, I would like to hail him a better long-term success than John Woo. After his early work, Woo looked like the next big action film-maker . . . and then, he's flopped. Tarantino laid low at times, but Kill Bill Vol. 1 had all of the magic of his older works.
In fact, the story itself is quite far-fetched and b-movie in quality. However, for it to be so well-directed . . . his imagery and action makes you forget all about the basic screenplay.
That's quality. I'm looking forward to Kill Bill Vol. 2 as well. :D
i went to the cineramadome once, and it was good once for the experience, but DAMN. i could have just bought the dvd for that much money. this whole capitalism thing just doesn't work for me.
I know capitalism, and boy does it work for a lot of people.
Hopefully, people like us will not only grab mad cash income, but we'll use it wisely and in a manner befitting people with conscience, morals, ethics, and the like.
Being a Pittsburgh native(i grew up about 10 minutes away from the mall where the original was filmed) and the fact that George Romero is one of my idols i have absolutely no desire to see this new version of Dawn Of The Dead. From what you have described about this new version sauce it sounds like that they have completely ruined it. I just got done watching the original again (for about the 70th time) and i can say that no other horror movie will ever top it. You just cant remake a movie like that. Its just too classic. Im glad for the fact that George Romero has always stayed fiercely independent and has never buckled to the studio bigwigs and im glad that he wanted nothing to do with this remake. He has always kept his integrity and you just have to respect that. Here's to the next George Romero film, may it be as grand as all of his other films.
Romero's a master of horror.
Plus, he adds interesting subplots to his films. They have depth, and the plot's pretty tight in comparison to the other offerings in the genre.
I fell in love with Night of the Living Dead. I've watched that film probably over 30-50 times, and I'd say it's probably my favorite of his films.
I also liked Martin very much.
Sadly, Criterion Collection has not released one of his films in their series. Criterion, to me, is like a Hall of Fame of films. Every film worth its salt should be released in Criterion. I'd love to own a copy of Romero's original 3 Dead films in a Criterion format.