Printable View
I heard from my friend the movie is ok and it's kinda like "28 days later", i didn't really liked "28 days later", but i hope "dawn of the dead" would be good, i wanna go and watch it.
If any of you guys watch it, can you tell if its good. :lol:
yup jus got back from the movies its good and dont walk away when the credits start there more video
28-days later was the weakest movie ever made, it was the first try at a big foriegn film, but they had to use and base it off other movies, exclusivly the original Dawn Of The Dead, and Resident Evil. i hope what ever british company who copied those other zombie movies goes under.
I liked DOTD.
It's weird to say it but DOTD (remake) seems to have taken elements of 28 Days Later and the Resident Evil videogame.
Examples:
Possible SPOILERS
28 Days Later
1. Zombies now move fast.....and I mean reaaaally fast like track stars.
2. Just simply dying isn't all there is to it. It is an infection that "kills" you then turns you ino the undead.
3. People can turn rather quickly.
Resident Evil videogame
1. The gun shop
2. The scene above the sewer a night.
3. The cop Ving Rhames looks alot like the cop from the new online Resident Evil Outbreak game.
btw before people start saying shit, I do know that these movies got their overall idea from the original DOTD. I'm just saying this movie took some of the newer elements introduced in the more previous films.
My post from Jan 26.
Quote:
5. If I'm not mistaken there is a scene where in this new Dawn Of The Dead, the folks are trapped in the mall. While on the roof they notice a gun shop across the sea of zombies. There is a person on the roof with a sign asking for FOOD. The folks in mall need guns n' ammo. In the movie it is revealed that the zombies won't go after animals. Some type of way the mall folks lower a dog into the sea of zombies with food tied around it. The dog goes across the way and delivers the food then comes back bringing ammo.
Ever? Obviously you haven't seen some of the more dire zombie movies that have been made, that aussie nonsense The Undead and Zombie Nightmare spring to mind.Quote:
28-days later was the weakest movie ever made
Wrong (again), this film was made on a tiny budget compared to even a modest Hollywood film. And believe it or not us foriegners have made films before.Quote:
it was the first try at a big foriegn film
How can you base a movie exclusively off two other movies? :blink: Of course, being a zombie movie (though in the strictest sense it isn't) it will be compared to Romero's films but it's borrowing from them is done with respect and not in the usual cheap/shock horror of some horror films.Quote:
, , but they had to use and base it off other movies, exclusivly the original Dawn Of The Dead, and Resident Evil.
It's also interesting to note that Dawn of the Dead and a lot of films of this genre were in fact actually inspired (though not exclusively!) by Richard Matheson's novelI Am Legend
Well the film was funded by The British lottery and Fox so I'm sure they're both shaking in their collective boots. And the production companis of Alex Garland (writer of The Beach) and Danny Boyle (Trainspotting and Life Less Ordinary) will probably be sleeping soundly tonight as well).Quote:
i hope what ever british company who copied those other zombie movies goes under.
I have to say I was dissappointed by 28 Days Later, but I do feel it added something new and, in a way, has brought a genre of film back to life. (Ha-Ha).
I'm looking forward to the Dawn of the Dead remake (1st sequel ever to be remade?) it looks like, as Busyman points out, that they have taken something from 28 Days Later into the mix which might make for a good film.
What's this shit about 28 Days Later?
I don't remember any zombies in it - the infected aren't dead, in fact they die because they can't eat.
If you want to compare 28 Days Later to previous works, let's not forget Day Of The Triffids the imagery of which I thought was even more closely mirrored.
I watched it and was hugely entertained.
I thought the original DOTD was a good laugh (and the best of a bad bunch) but all those zombie B-movies suffered from such bad scripting, direction, acting and plot that it wouldn't be too hard to improve on any of them.
@Pitbull: When you reach your teens, let us know and we'll take you a little more seriously, but for now you seem to have no idea about film heritage outside of recent Hollywood so we'll be bearing that in mind.
@28 Days Later was always going to draw comparisons with zombie films particuarly Romero's works, the infected where as close to zombies as you can get and not be zombies. To me, they were a more plausible version of a zombie.Quote:
Originally posted by Chewie UK@20 March 2004 - 12:01
What's this shit about 28 Days Later?
I don't remember any zombies in it - the infected aren't dead, in fact they die because they can't eat.
If you want to compare 28 Days Later to previous works, let's not forget Day Of The Triffids the imagery of which I thought was even more closely mirrored.
I watched it and was hugely entertained.
I thought the original DOTD was a good laugh (and the best of a bad bunch) but all those zombie B-movies suffered from such bad scripting, direction, acting and plot that it wouldn't be too hard to improve on any of them.
@Pitbull: When you reach your teens, let us know and we'll take you a little more seriously, but for now you seem to have no idea about film heritage outside of recent Hollywood so we'll be bearing that in mind.
(It's intersting to note that the infected could run around and stuff because they weren't technically dead whereas in the remake of DOTD shouldn't they zombies be suffering from rigor mortis, I mean that's were we get the vision of the shambling zombie from...?)
Interesting point about Day of the Triffids, though I haven't seen that since I was a wee bairn, perhaps I'll try and find a copy to check it out.
Interesting point about Day of the Triffids, though I haven't seen that since I was a wee bairn, perhaps I'll try and find a copy to check it out.[/b][/quote]Quote:
Originally posted by Withcheese+20 March 2004 - 14:23--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Withcheese @ 20 March 2004 - 14:23)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-Chewie UK@20 March 2004 - 12:01
If you want to compare 28 Days Later to previous works, let's not forget Day Of The Triffids the imagery of which I thought was even more closely mirrored.
I was thinking more of Wyndham's book, really, as there've been so many TV/film/TVfilm adaptations.
Guy in hospital after eye surgery misses the shower that blinds everyone else... completely deserted streets of London... avoiding murderous vegetables (:D)... ending at a house in the countryside, that sort of thing.
I wasn't joking, I really enjoyed the film, much as I did the Vinnie remake of Mean Machine even with the exact same ball-in-the-balls scene as the Burt Reynolds original I'd enjoyed 20-odd years previously.
Don't go and see Dawn of the Dead stoned...That shit was the scariest thing i'd seen in a long time, felt like I had had about 6 heart attacks, lol it was pretty stupid in places espeically with the dog bit I mean come on
Who gives a shit about a dog? B)
IMO, this movie was'nt all bad. The remake had more action and less gore than the orignal, but still a good movie.