Great concept, good in parts, but here's its bad points
-
koomy — 18 years ago(November 09, 2007 05:56 AM)
I found it very disappointing. I think the main problem is that you never really see that many people acting crazy and so have no sense of danger or threat. I found it pretty boring.
'The Andromeda Strain' does the science-against-disease plot much better and '28 Days Later' takes this idea in the direction Romero should have taken it. He should stick to Zombie films. -
JessePomeroy — 18 years ago(March 03, 2008 08:09 PM)
This is an awful movie. One of Romero's worst, up there with SEASON OF THE WITCH. Too much bad dialog, poor characters too.
And where the hell are all THE CRAZIES? You have one nut job that burns his house. It should be called THE CRAZY.
When Romero is good, he's great- MARTIN, NOLD, DAWN, DAY, CREEPSHOW
When he's bad, he stinks like a rotten carp- CRAZIES, BRUISER, LAND, DIARY.
HIs last really good flick was DAY OF THE DEAD. 1985wow over 20 years since he made magic. What a shame.Go die.>>>
-
heywoodfloyd — 17 years ago(July 03, 2008 10:21 PM)
You guys really have no taste and don't know what you're talking about. Whether or not you like the acting or find the plot plausible is up to you.
But George A. Romero himself was the editor on this film, like he was on the Dead trilogy and all of his other films. He is probably one of the best editors in the business and it is truly amazing he is able wear so many hats on his movies. He is a true auteur and one of the best filmmakers of the 20th century.
The pacing of this film is extemely well done. Its exciting to watch and a lot of that magic comes from the editing of George Romero.
By the way, GET beep -
Hands_of_Fate — 17 years ago(February 23, 2009 03:57 PM)
I think Romero is a brilliant editor and a pretty damn good director, but thats doesn't mean you have to like everything he does. I love the Dead series, Martin, and Creepshow. The Crazies however, is almost undeniably his weakest effort. Its a good idea but it loses steam very quickly due to the inept abilities of the actors. The music sucked too. Come to think of it, the dialog was also very poor.
"GARBAGE DAY!!!"-Eric Freeman -
mausklicker — 16 years ago(June 16, 2009 10:14 AM)
yes its sad but true- this is a bad romerofilm. i liked it as a kid, but 20 years later i watched it again, yesterday night. i was prepared for my usual movie session with 2 hash jollys (oh yeah baby). very soon, maybe 10 minutes into the film i realized: it was boring and just bad filmmaking most of the time there are bad actors, shouting bad lines to each other or into a phone. not enough focus on our "hero" and his group. not enough focus on the crazies neither. only in the last 15 minutes romero manages to show us what this movie SHOULD have been
i admire romeros films, especially the first 2 zombiefilms and creepshow- but this one is just a failure imho. -
jamescastle — 16 years ago(January 01, 2010 04:28 AM)
I don't understand why there is so much hate towards the acting. I think all of Romero's movies could be be accused of having bad acting. There are parts of Night Of The Living Dead where the acting is over the top and bad. It's all in how the viewer reacts. Also some of the actors from The Crazies were also in Dawn Of The Dead, among other Romero films, and once again you could make the case that Dawn of The Dead or Day of The Dead has bad acting if you wanted to.
Confess To The Holy Consumption
http://www.theholyconsumption.com/ -
mobocracy — 17 years ago(August 18, 2008 01:22 PM)
I couldn't agree more. I found the plot compelling enough to keep watching the first hour, but when I had to stop it for some interruption, the bad acting prevented me from going back and finishing it.
The whole thing struck me as vaguely a rip off of Andromeda Strain, but in many respects it seemed like a practice session for Dawn Of the Dead.
I was really surprised to see a remake planned for a 2010 release. Maybe with a budget and some professional actors it will turn out a little better, although I'm worried that the plot will just turn on a series of idiotic mistakes. -
Harmon30 — 14 years ago(October 13, 2011 07:02 PM)
Everyone is so right. Yes, NOLTD and DOTD were cheap but they had acting and some redeeming qualities. This was just bad, bad. The only reason I watched this was I saw the remake and loved it. Where do I begin?
- Yes the two main male actors are butt ugly and just had no acting ability. I never identified or felt for either one of them.
- Where are the crazies? Well said by a previous poster. The guy burning down his house was a good start. Thenpretty much nothing. Ok we see some people shooting at the soldiersso what?
- The laughable scene with the guy who was Dr. Frankenstein (from DOTD) when he hung himself. It looked like he had brown shoepolish on his face. What the hell was that?
- Did anyone get tired of seeing the guys in the masks? It just got annoying. And the military soldiers acted so stupid and inept, it was tough to take seriously.
-
LightningLad — 14 years ago(December 10, 2011 02:00 PM)
I thought the acting was quite good. I actually thought the scientist guy very convincing. I've been in the presence of guys who acted just like that - pushy, loudmouthed, self-righteous know-it-alls. Maybe they are faking it, maybe they're faking their way through life, I don't know. I just took him as real. I actually think the acting in this movie is quite natural, some parts seem documentary style, much better than Cloverfield. And I like the jumpy edits, it went well with the theme. For instance, jumping from the one guy banging things to the incest scene.
But not saying I don't like the post, I always like well thought out imdb posts that aren't just "it sucks" or whatever.
Reason is a pursuit, not a conclusion. -
ElectricWarlock — 13 years ago(November 20, 2012 09:09 AM)
This isn't the best film Romero made, but it definitely isn't the worst either. I have seen it twice now and it is more enjoyable the second time around. I think this film works mostly because it feels like something that could really happen in real life. With all of the panic that the Swine Flu caused, if something like this were to really happen, it would cause widespread panic just like the movie. I was fascinated by this movie because I wanted to see whether or not the characters lived and if a cure would be found for the disease. I didn't think the acting was that bad. Lynn Lowry's performance was great. It was because of her performance in this movie that I decided to watch I Drink Your Blood, Cat People, and Shivers. I wouldn't have discovered those films if it weren't for seeing her performance in this movie and enjoying it so I am glad I watched it.
Come, fly the teeth of the wind. Share my wings.