Export thread
Zombieland (spoilers, of course)
#1
ThatNickGuy
ThatNickGuy
This movie should be ashamed to call itself a zombie movie. Sure, it was a fun action/buddy/roadtrip movie, but man, Shaun of the Dead still holds up as the best zombie/comedy movie. Let's run through the list.
1) For a post-apocalyptic zombie-filled world...where the hell were they for most of the movie? Even in big cities like LOS FUCKING ANGELES, there were less than half a dozen seen. They should've been up to their eyeballs in zombies. I swear, the movie had maybe, MAYBE a dozen zombies throughout the movie until the finale.
2) The moron girls trashed their only way of escape? How the hell did they survive this long before? I'll forgive that they turned on all the rides, because you know, that's exactly what any survivor would do. But then they escape to a ride that goes up and down, up and down?
3) What was the point of the funhouse part? The only zombies following him were all behind him. Why not, I don't know, do THE EXACT SAME RUNNING GAG AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MOVIE?!
4) The movie was padded so fucking much with roadtrips and Bill Murray (no matter how funny those parts were). I kept thinking "Where are the fucking zombies in this fucking zombie movie!?"
5) Nothing like an American movie to have the one and only place that's majorly trashed...be a Native American shop. Wow. That's about as American as you can get, aside from the giant roadtrip across America. Or the constant product placements. Or, and this was the big one to me:
6) RUNNING. FUCKING. ZOMBIES. Soon as I saw the first one running, I thought "COME ON!" Which, of course, added next to nothing in the finale, because you had Harleson locked in a cage and the girls in a glorified zombie dunk tank.
7) Too much Michael Cera and the typical "awkward teenager around girls" crap.
Don't get me wrong. I still thought it was one hilarious movie. The rules were hilarious and in my opinion, not used enough, especially through the middle part of the movie. I liked how they kept popping up in not-so-subtle ways, like the dumb American audience needed reminding.
Unfortunately, Shaun of the Dead still reigns supreme as both a great zombie comedy and a great zombie movie in general. It had actual SUBTLETY. Like, Shaun's friend listing their plans, such as a Bloody Mary, and sure enough, that's the exact sequence of the whole movie. Or "Ash" being sick that day.
But that's a good example of British vs. American movies. Smart and subtle vs. big, loud, obnoxious and in your face. God bless America. :usa2::finger:
1) For a post-apocalyptic zombie-filled world...where the hell were they for most of the movie? Even in big cities like LOS FUCKING ANGELES, there were less than half a dozen seen. They should've been up to their eyeballs in zombies. I swear, the movie had maybe, MAYBE a dozen zombies throughout the movie until the finale.
2) The moron girls trashed their only way of escape? How the hell did they survive this long before? I'll forgive that they turned on all the rides, because you know, that's exactly what any survivor would do. But then they escape to a ride that goes up and down, up and down?
3) What was the point of the funhouse part? The only zombies following him were all behind him. Why not, I don't know, do THE EXACT SAME RUNNING GAG AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MOVIE?!
4) The movie was padded so fucking much with roadtrips and Bill Murray (no matter how funny those parts were). I kept thinking "Where are the fucking zombies in this fucking zombie movie!?"
5) Nothing like an American movie to have the one and only place that's majorly trashed...be a Native American shop. Wow. That's about as American as you can get, aside from the giant roadtrip across America. Or the constant product placements. Or, and this was the big one to me:
6) RUNNING. FUCKING. ZOMBIES. Soon as I saw the first one running, I thought "COME ON!" Which, of course, added next to nothing in the finale, because you had Harleson locked in a cage and the girls in a glorified zombie dunk tank.
7) Too much Michael Cera and the typical "awkward teenager around girls" crap.
Don't get me wrong. I still thought it was one hilarious movie. The rules were hilarious and in my opinion, not used enough, especially through the middle part of the movie. I liked how they kept popping up in not-so-subtle ways, like the dumb American audience needed reminding.
Unfortunately, Shaun of the Dead still reigns supreme as both a great zombie comedy and a great zombie movie in general. It had actual SUBTLETY. Like, Shaun's friend listing their plans, such as a Bloody Mary, and sure enough, that's the exact sequence of the whole movie. Or "Ash" being sick that day.
But that's a good example of British vs. American movies. Smart and subtle vs. big, loud, obnoxious and in your face. God bless America. :usa2::finger:
#2
Shawn
Shawn
Michael Cera was in this movie?
Nothing wrong with running zombies. Far scarier than the "I can walk around them with my eyes closed" kind. I agree that it's not much of a "zombie" film though. There is quite a lack of actual zombies. Shaun of the Dead is still superior as far as zombies and levels of comedy are concerned but Zombieland did entertain and I walked out knowing I'd have to get that one on DVD.
Nothing wrong with running zombies. Far scarier than the "I can walk around them with my eyes closed" kind. I agree that it's not much of a "zombie" film though. There is quite a lack of actual zombies. Shaun of the Dead is still superior as far as zombies and levels of comedy are concerned but Zombieland did entertain and I walked out knowing I'd have to get that one on DVD.
#3
Shannow
Shannow
Fuck you, it was great through and through. I hate the running zombie argument.This movie should be ashamed to call itself a zombie movie. Sure, it was a fun action/buddy/roadtrip movie, but man, Shaun of the Dead still holds up as the best zombie/comedy movie. Let's run through the list.
1) For a post-apocalyptic zombie-filled world...where the hell were they for most of the movie? Even in big cities like LOS FUCKING ANGELES, there were less than half a dozen seen. They should've been up to their eyeballs in zombies. I swear, the movie had maybe, MAYBE a dozen zombies throughout the movie until the finale.
2) The moron girls trashed their only way of escape? How the hell did they survive this long before? I'll forgive that they turned on all the rides, because you know, that's exactly what any survivor would do. But then they escape to a ride that goes up and down, up and down?
3) What was the point of the funhouse part? The only zombies following him were all behind him. Why not, I don't know, do THE EXACT SAME RUNNING GAG AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MOVIE?!
4) The movie was padded so fucking much with roadtrips and Bill Murray (no matter how funny those parts were). I kept thinking "Where are the fucking zombies in this fucking zombie movie!?"
5) Nothing like an American movie to have the one and only place that's majorly trashed...be a Native American shop. Wow. That's about as American as you can get, aside from the giant roadtrip across America. Or the constant product placements. Or, and this was the big one to me:
6) RUNNING. FUCKING. ZOMBIES. Soon as I saw the first one running, I thought "COME ON!" Which, of course, added next to nothing in the finale, because you had Harleson locked in a cage and the girls in a glorified zombie dunk tank.
7) Too much Michael Cera and the typical "awkward teenager around girls" crap.
Don't get me wrong. I still thought it was one hilarious movie. The rules were hilarious and in my opinion, not used enough, especially through the middle part of the movie. I liked how they kept popping up in not-so-subtle ways, like the dumb American audience needed reminding.
Unfortunately, Shaun of the Dead still reigns supreme as both a great zombie comedy and a great zombie movie in general. It had actual SUBTLETY. Like, Shaun's friend listing their plans, such as a Bloody Mary, and sure enough, that's the exact sequence of the whole movie. Or "Ash" being sick that day.
But that's a good example of British vs. American movies. Smart and subtle vs. big, loud, obnoxious and in your face. God bless America. :usa2::finger:
#4
Frankie Williamson
Frankie Williamson
Yeah, I really couldn't disagree more with you TNG. The movie wasn't about the God damn zombies. It was supposed to be more about the relationships between different people. It was also supposed to be funny as all fuck and if I had one nitpick about the flick it would be that the movie did not do a good job getting us to take any of the serious shit seriously. For example:
I just didn't really care. Other than that, the type in motion during the opening credits and throughout the movie gave the failed designer in me a boner to go along with how hard I was laughing.
Tallahasse's dog turning out to be his son.
I just didn't really care. Other than that, the type in motion during the opening credits and throughout the movie gave the failed designer in me a boner to go along with how hard I was laughing.
#5
Shannow
Shannow
Sorry about the reply, the anti-running zombie is a pet peeve for me.
#6
Singularity.EXE
Singularity.EXE
That... wasn't Michael Cera at all.
?????
?????
#7
ThatNickGuy
ThatNickGuy
The hell? It wasn't? *checks IMDB* Huh, then I swear, they cloned him or something because the guy was basically the exact same.
And I'm sorry, but there is no need for running zombies. They're NOT scarier, especially when all you need to do is, say, get fifty to a hundred more extras (or thousands if it's in a city area) and bam. It's not what one zombie can do, it's what sheer numbers of them can do. Fuck running zombies.
Like I said, I was still entertained by the movie, but it's got no right to call itself a zombie movie. Shaun of the Dead is still VASTLY superior.
And I'm sorry, but there is no need for running zombies. They're NOT scarier, especially when all you need to do is, say, get fifty to a hundred more extras (or thousands if it's in a city area) and bam. It's not what one zombie can do, it's what sheer numbers of them can do. Fuck running zombies.
Like I said, I was still entertained by the movie, but it's got no right to call itself a zombie movie. Shaun of the Dead is still VASTLY superior.
#8
Singularity.EXE
Singularity.EXE
I would also like to make mention that you have missed the entire point about this movie. You were so invested in the zombies that you missed a pretty good film about people.
#9
ThatNickGuy
ThatNickGuy
The movie was called ZOMBIEland, not Peopleland or RoadTripLand or BillMurrayLand. I expect to see zombies in a movie called Zombieland.
Like I said, though, I still enjoyed the movie.
Like I said, though, I still enjoyed the movie.
#10
Singularity.EXE
Singularity.EXE
So you would prefer it as a run-of-the-mill, zombie movie as opposed to the character-driven piece the movie turned out to be? What's this about American movies lacking subtlety? Dude, you *missed* the subtlety.The movie was called ZOMBIEland, not Peopleland or RoadTripLand or BillMurrayLand. I expect to see zombies in a movie called Zombieland.
Like I said, though, I still enjoyed the movie.
#11
Shannow
Shhhhhhhh, he wants to be:
so let him.
Shannow
So you would prefer it as a run-of-the-mill, zombie movie as opposed to the character-driven piece the movie turned out to be? What's this about American movies lacking subtlety? Dude, you *missed* the subtlety.[/QUOTE]The movie was called ZOMBIEland, not Peopleland or RoadTripLand or BillMurrayLand. I expect to see zombies in a movie called Zombieland.
Like I said, though, I still enjoyed the movie.
Shhhhhhhh, he wants to be:
so let him.
#12
ThatNickGuy
ThatNickGuy
What subtlety? That it was a very character driven action movie with barely any zombies in it until the end? There's nothing subtle about that, it's exactly what it is: a character driven action movie. The only subtle part about it was a group of Americans destroying something Native American.
I'm not saying that it wasn't a good movie or that the characters or story weren't entertaining, but cripes, you can't call it a zombie movie with only a dozen zombies filtered throughout the movie. I swear, there was at least a half hour gone by at points where there wasn't even one in it. Why not, say, have hundreds of them surrounding the gates of Murray's mansion? Have them moaning and groaning outside while all this paper-thin character development is going on?
---------- Post added at 03:43 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:40 PM ----------
No, Shannow, that would be if I was calling it the worst zombie movie ever or worst movie ever or something. That prize belongs to the Day of the Dead remake.
This is being critical of a movie that people have been gushing about and calling it the best zombie movie ever when it's anything but.
I'm not saying that it wasn't a good movie or that the characters or story weren't entertaining, but cripes, you can't call it a zombie movie with only a dozen zombies filtered throughout the movie. I swear, there was at least a half hour gone by at points where there wasn't even one in it. Why not, say, have hundreds of them surrounding the gates of Murray's mansion? Have them moaning and groaning outside while all this paper-thin character development is going on?
---------- Post added at 03:43 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:40 PM ----------
No, Shannow, that would be if I was calling it the worst zombie movie ever or worst movie ever or something. That prize belongs to the Day of the Dead remake.
This is being critical of a movie that people have been gushing about and calling it the best zombie movie ever when it's anything but.
#13
Shannow
Shannow
Who has said it was the best zombie movie ever?
And fuck, sorry it didnt have zombies everywhere for you. jesus. it didnt need it. As was saidf, that was the fucking point. Characters given the fucking backdrop of zombie apocolypse.
And, for the record, i find fast zombie much "scarier" than slow ones. Not to say i do not like the latter, but at this point, watching slow ones, I see it as a "shit, fuck it, how the fuck these things take over again. this only serves to fuel a survialist fantasy where the targets are easy."
And fuck, sorry it didnt have zombies everywhere for you. jesus. it didnt need it. As was saidf, that was the fucking point. Characters given the fucking backdrop of zombie apocolypse.
And, for the record, i find fast zombie much "scarier" than slow ones. Not to say i do not like the latter, but at this point, watching slow ones, I see it as a "shit, fuck it, how the fuck these things take over again. this only serves to fuel a survialist fantasy where the targets are easy."
#14
ThatNickGuy
ThatNickGuy
Dunno, but I've been hearing people say it's better than Shaun of the Dead and wow, that's just wrong on so many levels.
They take over for one simple reason, one that World War Z points out perfectly:
Sheer. Fucking. Numbers. Every single person that's killed comes back, so we might take out some of them, but anybody WE lose becomes one of them.
They don't stop coming and they're everywhere. That's the point of zombies. Not what one can do but what sheer numbers of them can do. Sure, you can outrun them or even just walk fast around them, but it doesn't matter because there will be others in your way somewhere else. Eventually, you'll get tired because you still need to stop to rest or eat or sleep and they don't. Sure, you can shoot a couple in the head, but you'll run out of bullets. Sure, you can kill them with a sword or an axe, but eventually, your arms will get tired. Sure, you can try driving away, but soon, you'll run out of gas.
The entire world is overpopulated with them so you can't escape them, no matter where you go. If you find somewhere that has only a few, then by the nighttime, you're overwhelmed, anyway, because the loud noises or smells with attract others. And again, sure, you can barricade yourself in somewhere, but while your food supply runs out, they'll keep coming.
So, to reiterate: how fast they move is irrelevant because they keep going, anyway, while you will eventually grow exhausted.
They take over for one simple reason, one that World War Z points out perfectly:
Sheer. Fucking. Numbers. Every single person that's killed comes back, so we might take out some of them, but anybody WE lose becomes one of them.
They don't stop coming and they're everywhere. That's the point of zombies. Not what one can do but what sheer numbers of them can do. Sure, you can outrun them or even just walk fast around them, but it doesn't matter because there will be others in your way somewhere else. Eventually, you'll get tired because you still need to stop to rest or eat or sleep and they don't. Sure, you can shoot a couple in the head, but you'll run out of bullets. Sure, you can kill them with a sword or an axe, but eventually, your arms will get tired. Sure, you can try driving away, but soon, you'll run out of gas.
The entire world is overpopulated with them so you can't escape them, no matter where you go. If you find somewhere that has only a few, then by the nighttime, you're overwhelmed, anyway, because the loud noises or smells with attract others. And again, sure, you can barricade yourself in somewhere, but while your food supply runs out, they'll keep coming.
So, to reiterate: how fast they move is irrelevant because they keep going, anyway, while you will eventually grow exhausted.
#15
Singularity.EXE
Alright, here we go. The reason that the movie didn't have many zombies in it is the same reason why we only saw five survivors. Isolation. Sure, you could have mobs of zombies moaning outside Bill Murray's mansion, but what's the point? Just to make the environment meshes with your concept of zombie movies? Or maybe make a point about how each of these characters are removed from the world?
Secondly, their names as the places they were going. Brilliant. I could go with the obvious point of furthering their isolation, but its more about goal fulfillment. It embodies the ideal that none of them are content in their current station, and are striving to improving it.
But no, you're right. There shouldn't be any innovation or difference in zombie movies. They should all have hordes of slow zombies, everyone should have a zombie plans, and every survivor should just find a place to bunker down into. Because that's what zombie movies are really about.
Singularity.EXE
What subtlety? That it was a very character driven action movie with barely any zombies in it until the end? There's nothing subtle about that, it's exactly what it is: a character driven action movie. The only subtle part about it was a group of Americans destroying something Native American.
I'm not saying that it wasn't a good movie or that the characters or story weren't entertaining, but cripes, you can't call it a zombie movie with only a dozen zombies filtered throughout the movie. I swear, there was at least a half hour gone by at points where there wasn't even one in it. Why not, say, have hundreds of them surrounding the gates of Murray's mansion? Have them moaning and groaning outside while all this paper-thin character development is going on?
Alright, here we go. The reason that the movie didn't have many zombies in it is the same reason why we only saw five survivors. Isolation. Sure, you could have mobs of zombies moaning outside Bill Murray's mansion, but what's the point? Just to make the environment meshes with your concept of zombie movies? Or maybe make a point about how each of these characters are removed from the world?
Secondly, their names as the places they were going. Brilliant. I could go with the obvious point of furthering their isolation, but its more about goal fulfillment. It embodies the ideal that none of them are content in their current station, and are striving to improving it.
But no, you're right. There shouldn't be any innovation or difference in zombie movies. They should all have hordes of slow zombies, everyone should have a zombie plans, and every survivor should just find a place to bunker down into. Because that's what zombie movies are really about.
#16
Shannow
Shannow
Eh, and yes, i have read that damn book, and listened to it on audio too (DO THAT, holy shit, all the actors in it are awesome! real ones too, Like Heny Rollins, Mark Hamill, and a shit ton more)
And really, yes,the inevitable tide, etc..but again, watching it for horror, once more, comes down to "Meh, not that bad." And it really isnt, after initial part. So, again...meh.
A part that really sums that up was the remake of Night of the living dead in the 90s. When the final survior jsut leaves. Crying, hysterical, she walks out, and gets away jsut dodging the dead. that simple.
But this silly debate is pointless.
And really, yes,the inevitable tide, etc..but again, watching it for horror, once more, comes down to "Meh, not that bad." And it really isnt, after initial part. So, again...meh.
A part that really sums that up was the remake of Night of the living dead in the 90s. When the final survior jsut leaves. Crying, hysterical, she walks out, and gets away jsut dodging the dead. that simple.
But this silly debate is pointless.
#17
fade
fade
I haven't seen it, but I can say the trailer looked pretty stupid. And yes, I find running zombies annoying. It just takes definition away from them. The plodding is so much scarier to me. Just inevitable onslaught of death. Even evasion of straggling slow ones is part of the symbolism of death. Making them fast takes the death and, well, the zombieness away from them. It worked perfectly for 28 Days Later, because it was a disease. They were still alive. But with zombies, they just don't feel dead. Why bother with diseasy make-up? Why not just make them indistinguishable until they're right up on you? Might make for a jump-scare, but it wouldn't be a zombie.
#18
Shannow
Shannow
Opinions differ on this topic, I know. More i think on it, and every time its argued, I realize the argument is essentially pointless, as its not based on anything at all but taste and opinion from either side.
#19
ThatNickGuy
ThatNickGuy
Honestly, running zombies to me makes about as much sense as vampires that sparkle in the daytime.
#20
The Lovely Boehner
The Lovely Boehner
Zombies are a metaphor for change and fear, in the 1960s it was the slow creep of Communism across the world. Now they're metaphors for terrorism and fear of violent radical change, deal with it, or keep jerking off to Max Brooks' books.
The movie was really funny, the REVEAL was way out of tone with the rest of the movie. It was also completely forgettable and I doubt I'll ever even think of watching it again.
The movie was really funny, the REVEAL was way out of tone with the rest of the movie. It was also completely forgettable and I doubt I'll ever even think of watching it again.
#21
ThatNickGuy
ThatNickGuy
Actually, Romero's zombies, at least as far as Dawn of the Dead is concerned, had more to do with consumerism and how we're all zombies to it. And our unending need to consume. Hence the mall setting.
Sure, you can interpret today's running zombies as how society needs things faster and faster. Hell, that could be a continuing metaphor for how our voracious appetite to consume is growing, to the point that we need things now now NOW. Which I could buy into, if that was the point of the Dawn of the Dead remake. But it wasn't. It was just the director thinking slow zombies aren't scary.
Sure, you can interpret today's running zombies as how society needs things faster and faster. Hell, that could be a continuing metaphor for how our voracious appetite to consume is growing, to the point that we need things now now NOW. Which I could buy into, if that was the point of the Dawn of the Dead remake. But it wasn't. It was just the director thinking slow zombies aren't scary.
#22
Shannow
Shannow
You are right. The dead walking makes complete sense otherwise.Honestly, running zombies to me makes about as much sense as vampires that sparkle in the daytime.
#23
@Li3n
If they couldn't run then how would they get my groceries back on time?! - your creepy local witch doctor...
@Li3n
Honestly, running zombies to me makes about as much sense as vampires that sparkle in the daytime.
If they couldn't run then how would they get my groceries back on time?! - your creepy local witch doctor...
#24
Chippy
Chippy
One of your major complaints is that they trashed a Native American shop?
#25
Cajungal
Cajungal
I don't care about the running/walking thing as much as some would like me to. I thought it made for a lot of good gags in the movie. For example, the first example of why cardio is important. I loved when the kid had to circle the parking lot to get back to his keys. I think that either kind of zombie can work. I think I've preferred more books/movies with slow ones, but that didn't ruin the movie for me at all.
And yeah, it's called Zombieland because that's what the kid named if after he ended up alone and had to come up with survival guidelines. It's not called "buddyland" or whatever else because that wouldn't have made sense in his situation. He finds himself surrounded by zombie-like people and renames his home. A title doesn't have to be so transparent.
I liked it a lot. I don't really care to compare it to other zombie movies.
And yeah, it's called Zombieland because that's what the kid named if after he ended up alone and had to come up with survival guidelines. It's not called "buddyland" or whatever else because that wouldn't have made sense in his situation. He finds himself surrounded by zombie-like people and renames his home. A title doesn't have to be so transparent.
I liked it a lot. I don't really care to compare it to other zombie movies.
#26
HowDroll
The best thing about slow zombies is that--theoretically at least--anyone has a chance for survival. Fast zombies? I'm fucked immediately. I've never been a particularly fast runner, even when I was in great shape. But surviving slow zombies is all about strategy, man.
I liked Zombieland overall; I'd give it at least a 7/10. That being said, there were a few things that really, really bothered me about it as well:
1) TNG is absoutely right about there not being enough zombies in the middle of the movie. Worse, though, is that the characters seemed to barely be afraid of them a good deal of the time. A two-minute scene in which they boarded up Bill Murray's house would have proved to the audience that they weren't a group of morons. Seriously, any zombie could have just wandered in there. And on that tangent...
2) What the fuck are they doing getting drunk/high in an unfortified house? I would think that if the risk of zombies showing up at any time was present and your life depended on your ability to nail them in the skull with a gun, you would avoid getting inebriated unless you were ABSOLUTELY SURE a group of undead would not be crashing your party.
3) How the hell did those girls last as long as they did if they're retarded enough to turn on the lights at an amusement park? Seriously, you might as well go and tap the zombies on the shoulder to politely ask them to eat your face off.
But the thing that bothered me most is...
WHY OH GOD WHY DID THEY NOT WEAR ZOMBIE MAKEUP AFTER TALKING TO BILL MURRAY?!?!? That right there almost ruined the whole movie for me. If some simple costume makeup makes the zombies leave you alone, why the FUCK did they not immediately go raid their nearest Walgreens?
Did I like the movie? Yep. Did I wonder how the hell these people managed to survive when pretty much everyone else had died? Hell yes. Is Shaun of the Dead a vastly superior movie? Absolutely.
HowDroll
Well said.Dunno, but I've been hearing people say it's better than Shaun of the Dead and wow, that's just wrong on so many levels.
They take over for one simple reason, one that World War Z points out perfectly:
Sheer. Fucking. Numbers. Every single person that's killed comes back, so we might take out some of them, but anybody WE lose becomes one of them.
They don't stop coming and they're everywhere. That's the point of zombies. Not what one can do but what sheer numbers of them can do. Sure, you can outrun them or even just walk fast around them, but it doesn't matter because there will be others in your way somewhere else. Eventually, you'll get tired because you still need to stop to rest or eat or sleep and they don't. Sure, you can shoot a couple in the head, but you'll run out of bullets. Sure, you can kill them with a sword or an axe, but eventually, your arms will get tired. Sure, you can try driving away, but soon, you'll run out of gas.
The entire world is overpopulated with them so you can't escape them, no matter where you go. If you find somewhere that has only a few, then by the nighttime, you're overwhelmed, anyway, because the loud noises or smells with attract others. And again, sure, you can barricade yourself in somewhere, but while your food supply runs out, they'll keep coming.
So, to reiterate: how fast they move is irrelevant because they keep going, anyway, while you will eventually grow exhausted.
The best thing about slow zombies is that--theoretically at least--anyone has a chance for survival. Fast zombies? I'm fucked immediately. I've never been a particularly fast runner, even when I was in great shape. But surviving slow zombies is all about strategy, man.
I liked Zombieland overall; I'd give it at least a 7/10. That being said, there were a few things that really, really bothered me about it as well:
1) TNG is absoutely right about there not being enough zombies in the middle of the movie. Worse, though, is that the characters seemed to barely be afraid of them a good deal of the time. A two-minute scene in which they boarded up Bill Murray's house would have proved to the audience that they weren't a group of morons. Seriously, any zombie could have just wandered in there. And on that tangent...
2) What the fuck are they doing getting drunk/high in an unfortified house? I would think that if the risk of zombies showing up at any time was present and your life depended on your ability to nail them in the skull with a gun, you would avoid getting inebriated unless you were ABSOLUTELY SURE a group of undead would not be crashing your party.
3) How the hell did those girls last as long as they did if they're retarded enough to turn on the lights at an amusement park? Seriously, you might as well go and tap the zombies on the shoulder to politely ask them to eat your face off.
But the thing that bothered me most is...
WHY OH GOD WHY DID THEY NOT WEAR ZOMBIE MAKEUP AFTER TALKING TO BILL MURRAY?!?!? That right there almost ruined the whole movie for me. If some simple costume makeup makes the zombies leave you alone, why the FUCK did they not immediately go raid their nearest Walgreens?
Did I like the movie? Yep. Did I wonder how the hell these people managed to survive when pretty much everyone else had died? Hell yes. Is Shaun of the Dead a vastly superior movie? Absolutely.
#27
The Lovely Boehner
The Lovely Boehner
and you people say I nitpick movies
#28
Frankie Williamson
Frankie Williamson
The anger over not following 50 year old zombie tropes is mystifying.
#29
ThatNickGuy
But besides that, if the world is going to be called Zombieland, then they should be up to their eyeballs in the undead. That's driving through cities, on the highways, surrounding Bill Murray's place. Of course they're going to get drunk and high when you don't even SEE a zombie during that entire period in the movie.
ThatNickGuy
Yep. Because if that isn't symbolism to how Americans have treated Native Americans (not only trashing the shop, but all the jokes poking fun at them), then I don't know what is.One of your major complaints is that they trashed a Native American shop?
But besides that, if the world is going to be called Zombieland, then they should be up to their eyeballs in the undead. That's driving through cities, on the highways, surrounding Bill Murray's place. Of course they're going to get drunk and high when you don't even SEE a zombie during that entire period in the movie.
#30
Fun Size
Fun Size
Meh. Fast. Slow. Whatever. I really think saying that them moving fast somehow ruins the idea of dead people getting up and eating other people sort of fails to notice that the story involved dead people getting up and eating other people. Similarly I don't give a damn if they make movies about sparkling vampires. Vampires witten by Ann Rice differ from those written by Bram Stoker, which differ from those written by Joss Whedon. At the end of the day, it's still a made up monster, and I figure the writers can adjust the beasts to their tales as they see fit. So long as the story is entertaining, I think we might be stressing details a smidge too much and forgetting we're there to have fun for an hour or so. I understand if the story didn't move you the way it should have, but it seems a shame to let something like that get to you.
Perhaps I'll feel differently in two years when I actually see it, as I'm still a little behind in my movie watching. Should that be the case, I will dutifully retract.
My $.02.
Perhaps I'll feel differently in two years when I actually see it, as I'm still a little behind in my movie watching. Should that be the case, I will dutifully retract.
My $.02.
#31
Frankie Williamson
Frankie Williamson
They got high because that scene was meant to be a 5 second gag while in BM's house. That's all it was.
#32
Enresshou
"What!? Zombies are NOT caused by radioactive fallout/viruses/mysterious causes, they're the reanimated servants of witch doctors! How dare he rip off "I Am Legend!" You can't have thousands of zombies! You can't kill a zombie by shooting it through the head, they're indestructible! That's the whole point of having a reanimated servant!"
That being said, I loved the movie: and yes, it replaced Shaun of the Dead as my favorite zombie movie. I rarely laugh out loud at movies, but Zombieland had me in stitches the whole time, and I thought it was a nice touch that they included why Tallahassee was so gung-ho about slaughtering zombies.
Enresshou
Exactly. Any time I see someone ranting about fast zombies (I don't mind if you don't like them, but outright raging about them), I imagine their arguments transplanted back into the 1960's when George A Romero changed the zombie paradigm.The anger over not following 50 year old zombie tropes is mystifying.
"What!? Zombies are NOT caused by radioactive fallout/viruses/mysterious causes, they're the reanimated servants of witch doctors! How dare he rip off "I Am Legend!" You can't have thousands of zombies! You can't kill a zombie by shooting it through the head, they're indestructible! That's the whole point of having a reanimated servant!"
That being said, I loved the movie: and yes, it replaced Shaun of the Dead as my favorite zombie movie. I rarely laugh out loud at movies, but Zombieland had me in stitches the whole time, and I thought it was a nice touch that they included why Tallahassee was so gung-ho about slaughtering zombies.
#33
fade
fade
Part of the problem is that the writers are relying on your collective knowledge of the concept of zombie as established over the past 40 years, but then they proceed to change it. If you're trying to fit into a mythos, and you're relying on the mythos to help tell your story for you, it doesn't pay to break the rules for little reason. If you were making an end of days film, you could make Jesus come back as a 70s disco dancer, and though you may be avant garde, the breaking of the image would set your film back in most people's eyes.
For the record, I haven't seen anyone here angry or raving about it.
For the record, I haven't seen anyone here angry or raving about it.
#34
Chippy
Chippy
Yep. Because if that isn't symbolism to how Americans have treated Native Americans (not only trashing the shop, but all the jokes poking fun at them), then I don't know what is.[/QUOTE]One of your major complaints is that they trashed a Native American shop?
#35
Shawn
Shawn
I've always felt that running zombies make more sense in a medical sense anyway. If there has ever been a consistent factor in zombie movies it's that they can tear flesh with a single bite, or rip a person to bits simply by grabbing an appendage and pulling. If you have to explain this scientifically you might theorize that zombies have an overactive adrenaline system that allow them to perform feats of superhuman strength. As your ability to run is based on the strength in your legs it makes sense to assume that zombies who can tear you apart can probably run after you too.
#36
ElJuski
ElJuski
In this thread: people getting butthurt over absofuckinglutely nothing.
Despite its plot holes, Zombieland was hillarious. And testament that zombie movies can and should cater to people other than those that breathe with their mouths, but rather, those that can enjoy some fetishized zombie catharsis.
"I'm not good at goodbye, so.........that'll do, pig."
Despite its plot holes, Zombieland was hillarious. And testament that zombie movies can and should cater to people other than those that breathe with their mouths, but rather, those that can enjoy some fetishized zombie catharsis.
"I'm not good at goodbye, so.........that'll do, pig."
#37
Enresshou
Enresshou
High five to the man with the glowing car.In this thread: people getting butthurt over absofuckinglutely nothing.
Despite its plot holes, Zombieland was hillarious. And testament that zombie movies can and should cater to people other than those that breathe with their mouths, but rather, those that can enjoy some fetishized zombie catharsis.
"I'm not good at goodbye, so.........that'll do, pig."
#38
HowDroll
HowDroll
Zombie movies are srs business.In this thread: people getting butthurt over absofuckinglutely nothing.
#39
ElJuski
ElJuski
By the way, to those that are interested:
http://www.avclub.com/articles/woody-harrelson-and-jesse-eisenberg,33580/
http://www.avclub.com/articles/woody-harrelson-and-jesse-eisenberg,33580/
#40
Chippy
Chippy
Is it bad that I read it as "Gonna do that pig"?
Also, you're all prejudice against Native Americans.
Also, you're all prejudice against Native Americans.
#41
drawn_inward
drawn_inward
I thought it was completely hilarious. A fun ride the whole way through. Though, to me, it's not really a "zombie movie." I'd say it's a dark comedy.
To be a zombie movie there needs to be a few things this one was lacking:
1. Moar zombies
2. Some decent peril
3. Some scary scenes
4. Better drama
5. A main character getting zombified
That said, this was the best movie I've seen since Star Trek (I didn't care for District 9).
To be a zombie movie there needs to be a few things this one was lacking:
1. Moar zombies
2. Some decent peril
3. Some scary scenes
4. Better drama
5. A main character getting zombified
That said, this was the best movie I've seen since Star Trek (I didn't care for District 9).
#42
Cajungal
Cajungal
I loved that scene, but not because I don't like Native Americans. It's because, after going on several road trips, I've come to dislike those tacky gift shops. I've always wanted to do that, really... or even just go in a gas station and knock over the 5$ sunglasses and postcards.Is it bad that I read it as "Gonna do that pig"?
Also, you're all prejudice against Native Americans.
#43
drawn_inward
True. Stuff sold around here (Oklahoma) is ridiculous plastic, gaudy garbage. It's not authentic, artisan stuff. It's tacky tourist fodder. It wasn't anti-Native American. I'd say those shops are anti-Native American.
drawn_inward
I loved that scene, but not because I don't like Native Americans. It's because, after going on several road trips, I've come to dislike those tacky gift shops. I've always wanted to do that, really... or even just go in a gas station and knock over the 5$ sunglasses and postcards.[/QUOTE]Is it bad that I read it as "Gonna do that pig"?
Also, you're all prejudice against Native Americans.
True. Stuff sold around here (Oklahoma) is ridiculous plastic, gaudy garbage. It's not authentic, artisan stuff. It's tacky tourist fodder. It wasn't anti-Native American. I'd say those shops are anti-Native American.
#44
Cajungal
Cajungal
RIGHT! Plus a lot of is is purchased by psuedospiritual weirdos who hang dreamcatchers on anything that will hold them and listen to Pure Moods.
#45
Philosopher B.
Philosopher B.
I thought Zombieland was rad. The bits where they beat on/trashed stuff was awesome. And even though there were large sections of the movies with few zombies in, they didn't skimp on the gore. Woody Harrelson was bleedin' awesome. I'd love to see a sequel with the same characters.
#46
Chippy
True. Stuff sold around here (Oklahoma) is ridiculous plastic, gaudy garbage. It's not authentic, artisan stuff. It's tacky tourist fodder. It wasn't anti-Native American. I'd say those shops are anti-Native American.[/QUOTE]
You know, I wish I had the ability to put my views into writing like that. Instead, I just posted a picture of a crying Native American to mock him.
....I am so witty.
Chippy
I loved that scene, but not because I don't like Native Americans. It's because, after going on several road trips, I've come to dislike those tacky gift shops. I've always wanted to do that, really... or even just go in a gas station and knock over the 5$ sunglasses and postcards.[/QUOTE]Is it bad that I read it as "Gonna do that pig"?
Also, you're all prejudice against Native Americans.
True. Stuff sold around here (Oklahoma) is ridiculous plastic, gaudy garbage. It's not authentic, artisan stuff. It's tacky tourist fodder. It wasn't anti-Native American. I'd say those shops are anti-Native American.[/QUOTE]
You know, I wish I had the ability to put my views into writing like that. Instead, I just posted a picture of a crying Native American to mock him.
....I am so witty.
#47
ElJuski
ElJuski
I bought a hat with a rattle snake on it that said "Arizona Guard Dog" in one of those shops.
It's obvious that scene isn't anti-native-American. TNG was just grasping for straws to call out a movie that wasn't to his exact zombie specifications.
---------- Post added at 07:40 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:40 PM ----------
I bought a hat with a rattle snake on it that said "Arizona Guard Dog" in one of those shops.
It's obvious that scene isn't anti-native-American. TNG was just grasping for straws to call out a movie that wasn't to his exact zombie specifications.
It's obvious that scene isn't anti-native-American. TNG was just grasping for straws to call out a movie that wasn't to his exact zombie specifications.
---------- Post added at 07:40 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:40 PM ----------
I bought a hat with a rattle snake on it that said "Arizona Guard Dog" in one of those shops.
It's obvious that scene isn't anti-native-American. TNG was just grasping for straws to call out a movie that wasn't to his exact zombie specifications.
#48
Chibibar
Chibibar
also it has been a while (I think it was couple of months now?) after the initial zombie attack. This movie seems to be that the zombie "migrate" to where food is (or run after) after a while, they just run after the next target.
If people follow the "Zombie survival guide" then most people probably left the big cities and follow the food. This is my personal reason why there isn't that many zombie. Of course zombies are not smart and "get lost" so some are still around.
Also I notice that some of the zombie are rummaging a garbage can? this means that some retain some human nature of foraging (which is weird for me but kinda funny)
If people follow the "Zombie survival guide" then most people probably left the big cities and follow the food. This is my personal reason why there isn't that many zombie. Of course zombies are not smart and "get lost" so some are still around.
Also I notice that some of the zombie are rummaging a garbage can? this means that some retain some human nature of foraging (which is weird for me but kinda funny)
#49
fade
fade
If you follow the strict Romero rules, how many zombies would there be, anyway? Only the bitten would become zombies. Those mobbed are devoured. There's nothing left to zombify.
In reality, WWZ gets it wrong: the regular army, not being idiotic, wouldn't do the Yonkers thing. They'd figure it out, adapt, and pick off zombies very quickly. I imagine the status quo would be restored fairly quickly.
In reality, WWZ gets it wrong: the regular army, not being idiotic, wouldn't do the Yonkers thing. They'd figure it out, adapt, and pick off zombies very quickly. I imagine the status quo would be restored fairly quickly.
#50
ThatNickGuy
ThatNickGuy
I'm going to give up on the Native American argument. It never occured to me that there were gaudy shops that sold that stuff in the first place. So, I apologize for that one.
As for Romero's movies, Fade, you also have to take into consideration that not only the bitten would become zombies but ANYONE that dies. So, graves, morgues, hospitals, etc would all be emptied. Anyone that's dead at all come back. Basically, if there's a dead body, then it's walking.
I don't think WWZ handled it under that situation, but I know Romero's movies and The Walking Dead comic did.
As for Romero's movies, Fade, you also have to take into consideration that not only the bitten would become zombies but ANYONE that dies. So, graves, morgues, hospitals, etc would all be emptied. Anyone that's dead at all come back. Basically, if there's a dead body, then it's walking.
I don't think WWZ handled it under that situation, but I know Romero's movies and The Walking Dead comic did.
#51
ElJuski
ElJuski
Sucks for all those bodies buried six feet in the ground under a thick slab of stone.
"H-hello?"
(and yes, the PBF comes to mind)
"H-hello?"
(and yes, the PBF comes to mind)
#52
LittleSin
LittleSin
I thought in the movie they weren't quite dead?
Wasn't it explained that it was an infectious disease that caused a fever that caused swelling in the brain that induced rage and primal hunger?
Wasn't it explained that it was an infectious disease that caused a fever that caused swelling in the brain that induced rage and primal hunger?
#53
CynicismKills
It was a good movie, I thought. I didn't have any major problems with it. I doubt it's something I'd go out and buy on DVD, but it was worth my 10 bucks.
Also, every main character survives, so obviously it's more of a dark comedy with zombies than a full-on zombie movie.
CynicismKills
Yup. Columbus' neighbor was never bitten.I thought in the movie they weren't quite dead?
Wasn't it explained that it was an infectious disease that caused a fever that caused swelling in the brain that induced rage and primal hunger?
It was a good movie, I thought. I didn't have any major problems with it. I doubt it's something I'd go out and buy on DVD, but it was worth my 10 bucks.
Also, every main character survives, so obviously it's more of a dark comedy with zombies than a full-on zombie movie.
#54
Shawn
It was a good movie, I thought. I didn't have any major problems with it. I doubt it's something I'd go out and buy on DVD, but it was worth my 10 bucks.
Also, every main character survives, so obviously it's more of a dark comedy with zombies than a full-on zombie movie.[/QUOTE]
There never seems to be evidence suggesting that people could just get the disease through the air. Being bit seemed to be the way to get it. Columbus' neighbor did say someone tried to bite her. Maybe she got bit and she just didn't want to say anything. Or she may have ventured back out while Columbus was sleeping, was bit, then found her way back to Columbus' apartment just as he woke up.
Shawn
Yup. Columbus' neighbor was never bitten.I thought in the movie they weren't quite dead?
Wasn't it explained that it was an infectious disease that caused a fever that caused swelling in the brain that induced rage and primal hunger?
It was a good movie, I thought. I didn't have any major problems with it. I doubt it's something I'd go out and buy on DVD, but it was worth my 10 bucks.
Also, every main character survives, so obviously it's more of a dark comedy with zombies than a full-on zombie movie.[/QUOTE]
There never seems to be evidence suggesting that people could just get the disease through the air. Being bit seemed to be the way to get it. Columbus' neighbor did say someone tried to bite her. Maybe she got bit and she just didn't want to say anything. Or she may have ventured back out while Columbus was sleeping, was bit, then found her way back to Columbus' apartment just as he woke up.
#55
ElJuski
It was a good movie, I thought. I didn't have any major problems with it. I doubt it's something I'd go out and buy on DVD, but it was worth my 10 bucks.
Also, every main character survives, so obviously it's more of a dark comedy with zombies than a full-on zombie movie.[/QUOTE]
Specifically Woody Harrelson, who totally did the "martyr" thing, didn't bite it. Which I figured he wouldn't considering the tone of the film, although I had an inkling he would, and then be a twinkie eating zombie.
ElJuski
Yup. Columbus' neighbor was never bitten.I thought in the movie they weren't quite dead?
Wasn't it explained that it was an infectious disease that caused a fever that caused swelling in the brain that induced rage and primal hunger?
It was a good movie, I thought. I didn't have any major problems with it. I doubt it's something I'd go out and buy on DVD, but it was worth my 10 bucks.
Also, every main character survives, so obviously it's more of a dark comedy with zombies than a full-on zombie movie.[/QUOTE]
Specifically Woody Harrelson, who totally did the "martyr" thing, didn't bite it. Which I figured he wouldn't considering the tone of the film, although I had an inkling he would, and then be a twinkie eating zombie.
#56
Shegokigo
Shegokigo
Why is Nick bashing on "Shaun of the Dead pt2: In America" ? Especially when he loved Shaun pt1 so much? :bush:
#57
ThatNickGuy
ThatNickGuy
Because Zombieland =/= Shaun of the Dead. But as I've said every single time, I was still VERY entertained by the the movie. It was great, clever, a lot of fun and I enjoyed it a lot.
#58
fade
fade
Ah, you're right about that. My bad. Still, even the Romero movies had the dead completely devouring their victims for the most part. That was more my issue.As for Romero's movies, Fade, you also have to take into consideration that not only the bitten would become zombies but ANYONE that dies. So, graves, morgues, hospitals, etc would all be emptied. Anyone that's dead at all come back. Basically, if there's a dead body, then it's walking.
.
#59
sixpackshaker
sixpackshaker
Thank Cod they did not stick to the formula. I hate when every movie HAS to follow certain plot points. Like the 80's you have teen sex, you are going to die a horrible death...
As to the lack of Zombies, it is some time after the apocalypse. The carnage was done and the surviving humans are running from the surviving Zombies.
The makeup, well a hell of a lot of good it did Bill Murray.
I found this to be a funnier movie than Shaun of the Dead. But I feel SotD was a better overall movie.
One thing that did impress me was, it was the first time I've ever seen an accurate depiction of what East Texas looks like.
As to the lack of Zombies, it is some time after the apocalypse. The carnage was done and the surviving humans are running from the surviving Zombies.
The makeup, well a hell of a lot of good it did Bill Murray.
I found this to be a funnier movie than Shaun of the Dead. But I feel SotD was a better overall movie.
One thing that did impress me was, it was the first time I've ever seen an accurate depiction of what East Texas looks like.
#60
ElJuski
ElJuski
It's not just 80's horror movies, it's the slasher genre. Certain tenants include:
-if you do something sexual, prepare to die. Also, it's usually by being impaled. OH GOD THE SYMBOLISM
-Up is salvation; Down is damnation.
- The male killer / female prey, scraping by not by ingenuity or bravery, but by luck.
-if you do something sexual, prepare to die. Also, it's usually by being impaled. OH GOD THE SYMBOLISM
-Up is salvation; Down is damnation.
- The male killer / female prey, scraping by not by ingenuity or bravery, but by luck.
#61
Singularity.EXE
Singularity.EXE
I just watched the movie again last night and I'm wondering if the lack of zombies is simply because they all starved to death. They're still basically human, just with a virus. So once the food starts running out they start dying off?As to the lack of Zombies, it is some time after the apocalypse. The carnage was done and the surviving humans are running from the surviving Zombies.
#62
Steve
Steve
I really enjoyed this movie. It was funny and I loved the rules. Regarding the fast zombies I thought they said it wasn't the dead being reanimated it was a virus similar to mad cow that made people crazy. Unless I missed something else in the film it would explain why they are fast. They are still living creatures driven by their hunger.
I did wonder why they didn't dress up like zombies to blend in after they were told that it worked great. The only thing I felt would have made this movie better is at the end when Columbus' rule "Don't be a hero" came into play that he would have jumped in a car and left the group to die instead of playing hero. Very funny movie, though.
I did wonder why they didn't dress up like zombies to blend in after they were told that it worked great. The only thing I felt would have made this movie better is at the end when Columbus' rule "Don't be a hero" came into play that he would have jumped in a car and left the group to die instead of playing hero. Very funny movie, though.
#63
checkeredhat
It was a good movie, I thought. I didn't have any major problems with it. I doubt it's something I'd go out and buy on DVD, but it was worth my 10 bucks.
Also, every main character survives, so obviously it's more of a dark comedy with zombies than a full-on zombie movie.[/QUOTE]
There never seems to be evidence suggesting that people could just get the disease through the air. Being bit seemed to be the way to get it. Columbus' neighbor did say someone tried to bite her. Maybe she got bit and she just didn't want to say anything. Or she may have ventured back out while Columbus was sleeping, was bit, then found her way back to Columbus' apartment just as he woke up.[/QUOTE]
No, but patient zero contracted it from a bad truck stop sandwich.
This movie was great. I ignore the gaping plot holes in the light of glorious comedy and sweet sweet zombie bashing action. Actually saw it twice in theatres.
On a side note, I hate that firefox tries to tell me words like theatre, centre, colour and humour are spelled wrong.
checkeredhat
Yup. Columbus' neighbor was never bitten.I thought in the movie they weren't quite dead?
Wasn't it explained that it was an infectious disease that caused a fever that caused swelling in the brain that induced rage and primal hunger?
It was a good movie, I thought. I didn't have any major problems with it. I doubt it's something I'd go out and buy on DVD, but it was worth my 10 bucks.
Also, every main character survives, so obviously it's more of a dark comedy with zombies than a full-on zombie movie.[/QUOTE]
There never seems to be evidence suggesting that people could just get the disease through the air. Being bit seemed to be the way to get it. Columbus' neighbor did say someone tried to bite her. Maybe she got bit and she just didn't want to say anything. Or she may have ventured back out while Columbus was sleeping, was bit, then found her way back to Columbus' apartment just as he woke up.[/QUOTE]
No, but patient zero contracted it from a bad truck stop sandwich.
This movie was great. I ignore the gaping plot holes in the light of glorious comedy and sweet sweet zombie bashing action. Actually saw it twice in theatres.
On a side note, I hate that firefox tries to tell me words like theatre, centre, colour and humour are spelled wrong.
#64
CynicismKills
CynicismKills
Yeah, I wasn't under the impression these were even full-on dead zombies, just more of a 28 Days Later kind of deal, with the 'zerker rage and gnaw on anything available.