This movie sucks
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Day of the Dead
bob578 — 14 years ago(September 23, 2011 04:15 AM)
Yes, it is my opinion, but I don't see anything redeeming about this movie other than the good (for the time) makeup. The whole movie is overacted and the characters are just stupid. Rhodes' soldiers act like a bunch of 5th grade punks. The "research" that was conducted by the team was a joke.
I'm sorry, the best zombie film is Dawn of the Dead 2004, it's not perfect but at least it does a fair amount of things right. -
viking_traveler — 14 years ago(September 23, 2011 10:09 AM)
The way the soldiers and scientists acted was not weird at all.
At that point in the Romero timeline, the world had pretty much been consumed by the dead, and while the characters tried to find a solution to the problem, they pretty knew that nothing could be done.
Combine that with the fact that they were forced to stay underground for most of the time. Even the most mentally stable person would get scars from that.
The soldiers had clearly lost it, and instead of breaking down, they tried to see the whole situation as a fun ride.
That is not unrealistic at all. In fact, many people react like this if they are scared/traumatized enough.
You could see that Rhodes himself was breaking down in desperation.
The research was not SUPPOSED to make any sense. That was the whole deal in the movie. The characters were creating an illusion that everything could return back to normal.
Did you not listen to John's speech? -
Horror-Joe — 14 years ago(October 21, 2011 07:19 PM)
You're right. That is your opinion. Albeit, it is founded poorly.
Tom Savini's effects in Day of the Dead are some of the best practical gore effects ever done. I believe he even won awards for them. Not only that, but Greg Nicotero and Howard Berger both learned how to do special effects on that film, and they are both now two of the biggest effects artists in the industry.
I'm willing to bet that since you think the Dawn of the Dead remake is the best zombie movie that you probably didn't even see Day of the Dead until just recently, and probably only just one viewing. You need to find a better appreciation for the movies that inspire people these days to remake them to begin with. -
Balthazar Bee — 14 years ago(November 05, 2011 11:37 AM)
Yeah, I loved the whole 'Let's leave the one safe place in the world into which we happened to fall bassackwards so we can go to some theoretical island' development. It's an enjoyable movie, and the first fifteen minutes or so are excellent, but to compare it to Day or the original DawnI just can't do it.
-
model101 — 14 years ago(November 19, 2011 10:29 PM)
Leaving the mall was a smart choice. The mall was a death trap. Who knows how much longer they could have survived in there.
It was only a matter of time before food and water ran out, its not like the mall in Dawn 78 which had a grocery store a big one at that. All this one had that we say is a food court. Which means the food there won't last. They even hint at it when Ty Burrell's character complains that they are out of Lemon gin or something to that effect (it's been a while since I watched Dawn 04)
The zombies could break in at any moment, just because they are shatter proof from hitting then doesn't mean the weight of the horde won't eventually make the doors give. It's was just a matter of time before the inevitable happened.
Their biggest mistake was not planning a way out from day 1. They should have been doing that after they took control from C.J. -
Balthazar Bee — 14 years ago(November 20, 2011 08:52 AM)
I still don't see it.
The mall is relatively secure.
And, aside from the lack of "that lemon stuff", I don't remember a lack of food or water having
anything
to do with their decision; it was a matter of "I don't want to die here," and "waiting to die is worse than death". We can speculate about these matters, but it's not really supported by the film. Yes,
eventually
food must run out, but we have no way of knowing how long they've got.
The zombies could break in at any moment,
Then why don't they? And again, the "shatter-proof" comment is all we've got to go on really. No, I say. If the enormous multitude outside the mall can't get in, I wager that a few hundred more isn't going to dramatically change the situation. Once more, this is not a reason put forth by any of the characters either.
The extent of the zombie problem (the parkling lot is standing room only), combined with their speed, makes almost any attempt at escape at that moment a death sentence. It's not like the original Dawn, when the ambling corpses could be outrun with ease.
Steve, like Cooper in NOTLD, may be a jerk, but he's correct; his amused-cum-flabbergasted reaction to the suggestion that they try to make it across town on the chance that the boat is sea-worthy and the chance that they'll find an island and the chance that that island will (a) have supplies, (b) have a secure location, have fewer zombies is suicidal lunacy. -
digitalboy72 — 14 years ago(February 22, 2012 07:51 PM)
good (for the time) makeup
You can of course have your opinion on the quality of the film but I take issue with this ^^^.
Virtually every effect in this film holds up against anything done today, especially the bite effects, Savini's "chunks O' flesh" bury the hatchet and breaks the handle off the cheap CGI blood and gore we get today.
"Candy CANES?? Are you mocking me?"- Dr. Gregory House
-
thelostmachine — 14 years ago(February 27, 2012 08:43 PM)
this movie has character development, it's just hard to top these kind of movies in cinema now a days (well it's not actually cinema anymore) I mean "video"
I believe George does have atleast one of his movies down in the National Archives being stored in D.C.
{the media sells it and you live the role} -Ozzy Osbourne -
thelostmachine — 14 years ago(February 27, 2012 08:49 PM)
the movie was shot on 35mm film, each image frame is a "picture"
I think that costs quite a bit now a days, Spielberg thru a fit about digital the weak hollow lifeless attempts at cinema and super cheesy plots and actors where everything happens magically.
most all new movies suck! there are some still I do enjoy but they are getting further in between.
{the media sells it and you live the role} -Ozzy Osbourne -
thelostmachine — 14 years ago(February 27, 2012 08:59 PM)
oh and 35mm film is a unique substance our best digital cameras are not near the accuracy and detail and balance as ancient films such as this. It it how we still get high definition from the negatives ect. 35MM high definition across a high definition monitor has a different depth and warmth to the image, it's much more natural and easier to work with when editing a single image for something like enlarging a photo from a single frame.
{the media sells it and you live the role} -Ozzy Osbourne -
Redux006 — 12 years ago(July 16, 2013 09:07 PM)
The acting was pretty terrible, way over the top. I hate when movies do these insane hysterical villains, The Crow, Romper Stomper, Karate Kid. It severely degrades the quality of any film that resorts to these awful tropes. Although, at least Karate Kid and this movie sort of redeem themselves in the end. In Karate Kid the main bad guy is crying and hands the trophy to Daniel telling him he deserves it, and in Day of the Dead, Steel cries when he has to execute his friend, and the Commander is emotional and horrified when he sees what the scientists have been doing to his old commander. Villains need to have a little bit of humanity otherwise it seems unrealistic and takes you right out of the story. For too much of the movie the soldiers were just too over the top, way too maniacal, terribly one dimensional racist villains. Left me feeling bored as hell. Everything else was fantastic though, great scary zombie atmosphere. I wish I had seen this movie as a kid first, it would have wrecked me for life I think.