|
Just making them fast zombies with animalistic instincts already destroys the feel of the slow moving zombies genre, which is imo what a real zombie in the zombie genre should be about.... x_x
|
On November 25 2012 11:55 BlackPaladin wrote: Just making them fast zombies with animalistic instincts already destroys the feel of the slow moving zombies genre, which is imo what a real zombie in the zombie genre should be about.... x_x
Yea, the only movie series i liked with fast zombies was the "28" (days/weeks) but i know a lot of people didn't like those themself.
|
Personally I felt that the book was more a story about modern society. It was a commentary on how we collectively deal with crisis.
The fact that the zombies were "slow" only served to highlight the point. They weren't actually threatening if you have the knowledge and organization to deal with them. Even the book mentions this and says that the fictional US Army's rank of "most dangerous" put the zombies at the bottom.
By making the zombies themselves more dangerous, the film undermines its ability to make the statement that our own incompetence will be our downfall. I'm still hopeful that the film will be enjoyable, but I doubt it will send the same kind of message that made the book so good.
|
On November 25 2012 08:43 xsnac wrote: i find the way the made zombies all pixels and very fast .. very very stupid and awkward . zombies are slow right ? RIGHT ?? I won't mind the zombies being fast. Slow zombies are a bit boring right now, the only dangerous point about them is the swarm number and unexpected locations. Looking at the tv drama, the walking dead, slow zombies are very easily containable. It's just hard to get food and supplies to keep it going.
28 days later had fast zombies and it was quite good. Dawn of the dead was really awesome for me but that's mostly because they were hiding inside a shopping mall
I don't get why zombies should be slow moving as well, I get it that their body is decaying and not everyone of them get good energy intake. But seeing how much and how high blood still can spill out, it's obvious they can pump blood and get those muscle moving. A mind filled with nothing but spreading disease and eating should run when they see food, unlike zombie ants where their mind is infested and is being controlled out of their will. their method of spreading the disease is different too
|
On November 12 2012 18:29 schaf wrote: I'm glad I didn't read the book, then :D
no seriously, this looks like an okay fast-paced zombie movie with brad pitt. Nothing wrong there for a little entertainment.
Go ahead and read the book, it's good and it wont ruin the movie for you.
People are going to complain about book-movie adaptations no matter what happens, trying to sell this movie based on the book-style of writing instead of the action-based side of the book would result in a total loss of revenue.
Nobody goes into zombie movies looking for deep insights into human behavior and social functionality.
|
lol Brad Pitt! of all the actors!
|
On November 25 2012 12:40 Talack wrote:Show nested quote +On November 12 2012 18:29 schaf wrote: I'm glad I didn't read the book, then :D
no seriously, this looks like an okay fast-paced zombie movie with brad pitt. Nothing wrong there for a little entertainment. Go ahead and read the book, it's good and it wont ruin the movie for you. People are going to complain about book-movie adaptations no matter what happens, trying to sell this movie based on the book-style of writing instead of the action-based side of the book would result in a total loss of revenue. Nobody goes into zombie movies looking for deep insights into human behavior and social functionality. Actually they do. Just look att the Walking Dead's thread and how much people complain that the series are not realistic enough, even though no one knows anything about "real" zombies.
|
On November 25 2012 12:50 Hoon wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2012 12:40 Talack wrote:On November 12 2012 18:29 schaf wrote: I'm glad I didn't read the book, then :D
no seriously, this looks like an okay fast-paced zombie movie with brad pitt. Nothing wrong there for a little entertainment. Go ahead and read the book, it's good and it wont ruin the movie for you. People are going to complain about book-movie adaptations no matter what happens, trying to sell this movie based on the book-style of writing instead of the action-based side of the book would result in a total loss of revenue. Nobody goes into zombie movies looking for deep insights into human behavior and social functionality. Actually they do. Just look att the Walking Dead's thread and how much people complain that the series are not realistic enough, even though no one knows anything about "real" zombies.
The thread is full of people arguing about lori making stupid decisions 24/7 and talking about inconsistencies in the zombies strength/ability. Realism is not a main discussion point in that thread, it's just "why the hell would they let Carl run around doing w/e the hell he wants all the time" or "so suddenly zombies are able to rip a person in half when they couldn't even get themselves out of the mud before?"
The difference between a tv show for character development and a movie is that you get x10-20 more hours of time to do it in, a movie has to be entertaining and marketed as such while still fitting into a 1.5-2.5 hour time frame.
|
On November 25 2012 09:19 mprs wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2012 21:40 Blacktion wrote: WHY. The whole thing that made WWZ good was its depth, you actually felt the human cost of the conflict, and it went into so much detail about how its spread, why all the modern military wasnt able to stop it, how people adapted and fought back. This is just HURR ZOMBIES RUN! I get that no one wants to sit and watch interviews for 2 hours, but there was so many possible flashback action scenes they could do, zombie in the transplant guys hospital, yonkers, indian breakers yard, berlin, russian decimations, pass in the rockies, battles as they fight back across NA, etc. All they would need is a director who actually understands pacing to get the right balance between action and story and it could be great. They should ditch the WWZ name, it clearly doesnt have anything to do with the book and that way it wouldnt raise copyright issues if someone wants to make a decent film out if it down the line. As someone mentioned, a HBO miniseries would be sick. Ah well. I love how you, and 90% of the posters here generalize this movie into a "hurr zombies run!" From a two minute trailer............ Not saying it isn't, but how could you possibly know? Because based on the 2minute trailer, the zombies run.
|
On November 25 2012 09:19 mprs wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2012 21:40 Blacktion wrote: WHY. The whole thing that made WWZ good was its depth, you actually felt the human cost of the conflict, and it went into so much detail about how its spread, why all the modern military wasnt able to stop it, how people adapted and fought back. This is just HURR ZOMBIES RUN! I get that no one wants to sit and watch interviews for 2 hours, but there was so many possible flashback action scenes they could do, zombie in the transplant guys hospital, yonkers, indian breakers yard, berlin, russian decimations, pass in the rockies, battles as they fight back across NA, etc. All they would need is a director who actually understands pacing to get the right balance between action and story and it could be great. They should ditch the WWZ name, it clearly doesnt have anything to do with the book and that way it wouldnt raise copyright issues if someone wants to make a decent film out if it down the line. As someone mentioned, a HBO miniseries would be sick. Ah well. I love how you, and 90% of the posters here generalize this movie into a "hurr zombies run!" From a two minute trailer............ Not saying it isn't, but how could you possibly know? Producers already said that they wanted a different style of zombies that follow "animal" instincts. They run around and move in a flock, like was shown in the trailer.
That's exactly what they wanted to show in the trailer and 90% of the people in this thread got it right.
|
On November 25 2012 12:27 titanicnewbie wrote: Personally I felt that the book was more a story about modern society. It was a commentary on how we collectively deal with crisis.
The fact that the zombies were "slow" only served to highlight the point. They weren't actually threatening if you have the knowledge and organization to deal with them. Even the book mentions this and says that the fictional US Army's rank of "most dangerous" put the zombies at the bottom.
By making the zombies themselves more dangerous, the film undermines its ability to make the statement that our own incompetence will be our downfall. I'm still hopeful that the film will be enjoyable, but I doubt it will send the same kind of message that made the book so good.
The thing is, it's a movie. It's 2 hours. What did you seriously expect ?
|
On November 25 2012 14:12 Sentenal wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2012 09:19 mprs wrote:On November 09 2012 21:40 Blacktion wrote: WHY. The whole thing that made WWZ good was its depth, you actually felt the human cost of the conflict, and it went into so much detail about how its spread, why all the modern military wasnt able to stop it, how people adapted and fought back. This is just HURR ZOMBIES RUN! I get that no one wants to sit and watch interviews for 2 hours, but there was so many possible flashback action scenes they could do, zombie in the transplant guys hospital, yonkers, indian breakers yard, berlin, russian decimations, pass in the rockies, battles as they fight back across NA, etc. All they would need is a director who actually understands pacing to get the right balance between action and story and it could be great. They should ditch the WWZ name, it clearly doesnt have anything to do with the book and that way it wouldnt raise copyright issues if someone wants to make a decent film out if it down the line. As someone mentioned, a HBO miniseries would be sick. Ah well. I love how you, and 90% of the posters here generalize this movie into a "hurr zombies run!" From a two minute trailer............ Not saying it isn't, but how could you possibly know? Because based on the 2minute trailer, the zombies run.
On November 25 2012 14:20 Hoon wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2012 09:19 mprs wrote:On November 09 2012 21:40 Blacktion wrote: WHY. The whole thing that made WWZ good was its depth, you actually felt the human cost of the conflict, and it went into so much detail about how its spread, why all the modern military wasnt able to stop it, how people adapted and fought back. This is just HURR ZOMBIES RUN! I get that no one wants to sit and watch interviews for 2 hours, but there was so many possible flashback action scenes they could do, zombie in the transplant guys hospital, yonkers, indian breakers yard, berlin, russian decimations, pass in the rockies, battles as they fight back across NA, etc. All they would need is a director who actually understands pacing to get the right balance between action and story and it could be great. They should ditch the WWZ name, it clearly doesnt have anything to do with the book and that way it wouldnt raise copyright issues if someone wants to make a decent film out if it down the line. As someone mentioned, a HBO miniseries would be sick. Ah well. I love how you, and 90% of the posters here generalize this movie into a "hurr zombies run!" From a two minute trailer............ Not saying it isn't, but how could you possibly know? Producers already said that they wanted a different style of zombies that follow "animal" instincts. They run around and move in a flock, like was shown in the trailer. That's exactly what they wanted to show in the trailer and 90% of the people in this thread got it right. Sigh. He isn't referring to the fact that the zombies can run.
|
On November 26 2012 03:18 Reason wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2012 14:12 Sentenal wrote:On November 25 2012 09:19 mprs wrote:On November 09 2012 21:40 Blacktion wrote: WHY. The whole thing that made WWZ good was its depth, you actually felt the human cost of the conflict, and it went into so much detail about how its spread, why all the modern military wasnt able to stop it, how people adapted and fought back. This is just HURR ZOMBIES RUN! I get that no one wants to sit and watch interviews for 2 hours, but there was so many possible flashback action scenes they could do, zombie in the transplant guys hospital, yonkers, indian breakers yard, berlin, russian decimations, pass in the rockies, battles as they fight back across NA, etc. All they would need is a director who actually understands pacing to get the right balance between action and story and it could be great. They should ditch the WWZ name, it clearly doesnt have anything to do with the book and that way it wouldnt raise copyright issues if someone wants to make a decent film out if it down the line. As someone mentioned, a HBO miniseries would be sick. Ah well. I love how you, and 90% of the posters here generalize this movie into a "hurr zombies run!" From a two minute trailer............ Not saying it isn't, but how could you possibly know? Because based on the 2minute trailer, the zombies run. Show nested quote +On November 25 2012 14:20 Hoon wrote:On November 25 2012 09:19 mprs wrote:On November 09 2012 21:40 Blacktion wrote: WHY. The whole thing that made WWZ good was its depth, you actually felt the human cost of the conflict, and it went into so much detail about how its spread, why all the modern military wasnt able to stop it, how people adapted and fought back. This is just HURR ZOMBIES RUN! I get that no one wants to sit and watch interviews for 2 hours, but there was so many possible flashback action scenes they could do, zombie in the transplant guys hospital, yonkers, indian breakers yard, berlin, russian decimations, pass in the rockies, battles as they fight back across NA, etc. All they would need is a director who actually understands pacing to get the right balance between action and story and it could be great. They should ditch the WWZ name, it clearly doesnt have anything to do with the book and that way it wouldnt raise copyright issues if someone wants to make a decent film out if it down the line. As someone mentioned, a HBO miniseries would be sick. Ah well. I love how you, and 90% of the posters here generalize this movie into a "hurr zombies run!" From a two minute trailer............ Not saying it isn't, but how could you possibly know? Producers already said that they wanted a different style of zombies that follow "animal" instincts. They run around and move in a flock, like was shown in the trailer. That's exactly what they wanted to show in the trailer and 90% of the people in this thread got it right. Sigh. He isn't referring to the fact that the zombies can run.
The problem is, you haven't seen the movie. What if making the zombies fast is what achieves the right pacing for the movie ?
|
On November 26 2012 03:25 Godwrath wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2012 03:18 Reason wrote:On November 25 2012 14:12 Sentenal wrote:On November 25 2012 09:19 mprs wrote:On November 09 2012 21:40 Blacktion wrote: WHY. The whole thing that made WWZ good was its depth, you actually felt the human cost of the conflict, and it went into so much detail about how its spread, why all the modern military wasnt able to stop it, how people adapted and fought back. This is just HURR ZOMBIES RUN! I get that no one wants to sit and watch interviews for 2 hours, but there was so many possible flashback action scenes they could do, zombie in the transplant guys hospital, yonkers, indian breakers yard, berlin, russian decimations, pass in the rockies, battles as they fight back across NA, etc. All they would need is a director who actually understands pacing to get the right balance between action and story and it could be great. They should ditch the WWZ name, it clearly doesnt have anything to do with the book and that way it wouldnt raise copyright issues if someone wants to make a decent film out if it down the line. As someone mentioned, a HBO miniseries would be sick. Ah well. I love how you, and 90% of the posters here generalize this movie into a "hurr zombies run!" From a two minute trailer............ Not saying it isn't, but how could you possibly know? Because based on the 2minute trailer, the zombies run. On November 25 2012 14:20 Hoon wrote:On November 25 2012 09:19 mprs wrote:On November 09 2012 21:40 Blacktion wrote: WHY. The whole thing that made WWZ good was its depth, you actually felt the human cost of the conflict, and it went into so much detail about how its spread, why all the modern military wasnt able to stop it, how people adapted and fought back. This is just HURR ZOMBIES RUN! I get that no one wants to sit and watch interviews for 2 hours, but there was so many possible flashback action scenes they could do, zombie in the transplant guys hospital, yonkers, indian breakers yard, berlin, russian decimations, pass in the rockies, battles as they fight back across NA, etc. All they would need is a director who actually understands pacing to get the right balance between action and story and it could be great. They should ditch the WWZ name, it clearly doesnt have anything to do with the book and that way it wouldnt raise copyright issues if someone wants to make a decent film out if it down the line. As someone mentioned, a HBO miniseries would be sick. Ah well. I love how you, and 90% of the posters here generalize this movie into a "hurr zombies run!" From a two minute trailer............ Not saying it isn't, but how could you possibly know? Producers already said that they wanted a different style of zombies that follow "animal" instincts. They run around and move in a flock, like was shown in the trailer. That's exactly what they wanted to show in the trailer and 90% of the people in this thread got it right. Sigh. He isn't referring to the fact that the zombies can run. The problem is, you haven't seen the movie. What if making the zombies fast is what achieves the right pacing for the movie ? Then they have made the wrong movie.
|
On November 26 2012 03:55 Leonite7 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2012 03:25 Godwrath wrote:On November 26 2012 03:18 Reason wrote:On November 25 2012 14:12 Sentenal wrote:On November 25 2012 09:19 mprs wrote:On November 09 2012 21:40 Blacktion wrote: WHY. The whole thing that made WWZ good was its depth, you actually felt the human cost of the conflict, and it went into so much detail about how its spread, why all the modern military wasnt able to stop it, how people adapted and fought back. This is just HURR ZOMBIES RUN! I get that no one wants to sit and watch interviews for 2 hours, but there was so many possible flashback action scenes they could do, zombie in the transplant guys hospital, yonkers, indian breakers yard, berlin, russian decimations, pass in the rockies, battles as they fight back across NA, etc. All they would need is a director who actually understands pacing to get the right balance between action and story and it could be great. They should ditch the WWZ name, it clearly doesnt have anything to do with the book and that way it wouldnt raise copyright issues if someone wants to make a decent film out if it down the line. As someone mentioned, a HBO miniseries would be sick. Ah well. I love how you, and 90% of the posters here generalize this movie into a "hurr zombies run!" From a two minute trailer............ Not saying it isn't, but how could you possibly know? Because based on the 2minute trailer, the zombies run. On November 25 2012 14:20 Hoon wrote:On November 25 2012 09:19 mprs wrote:On November 09 2012 21:40 Blacktion wrote: WHY. The whole thing that made WWZ good was its depth, you actually felt the human cost of the conflict, and it went into so much detail about how its spread, why all the modern military wasnt able to stop it, how people adapted and fought back. This is just HURR ZOMBIES RUN! I get that no one wants to sit and watch interviews for 2 hours, but there was so many possible flashback action scenes they could do, zombie in the transplant guys hospital, yonkers, indian breakers yard, berlin, russian decimations, pass in the rockies, battles as they fight back across NA, etc. All they would need is a director who actually understands pacing to get the right balance between action and story and it could be great. They should ditch the WWZ name, it clearly doesnt have anything to do with the book and that way it wouldnt raise copyright issues if someone wants to make a decent film out if it down the line. As someone mentioned, a HBO miniseries would be sick. Ah well. I love how you, and 90% of the posters here generalize this movie into a "hurr zombies run!" From a two minute trailer............ Not saying it isn't, but how could you possibly know? Producers already said that they wanted a different style of zombies that follow "animal" instincts. They run around and move in a flock, like was shown in the trailer. That's exactly what they wanted to show in the trailer and 90% of the people in this thread got it right. Sigh. He isn't referring to the fact that the zombies can run. The problem is, you haven't seen the movie. What if making the zombies fast is what achieves the right pacing for the movie ? Then they have made the wrong movie.
Right. + Show Spoiler +
|
On November 25 2012 12:40 ETisME wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2012 08:43 xsnac wrote: i find the way the made zombies all pixels and very fast .. very very stupid and awkward . zombies are slow right ? RIGHT ?? I won't mind the zombies being fast. Slow zombies are a bit boring right now, the only dangerous point about them is the swarm number and unexpected locations. Looking at the tv drama, the walking dead, slow zombies are very easily containable. It's just hard to get food and supplies to keep it going. 28 days later had fast zombies and it was quite good. Dawn of the dead was really awesome for me but that's mostly because they were hiding inside a shopping mall I don't get why zombies should be slow moving as well, I get it that their body is decaying and not everyone of them get good energy intake. But seeing how much and how high blood still can spill out, it's obvious they can pump blood and get those muscle moving. A mind filled with nothing but spreading disease and eating should run when they see food, unlike zombie ants where their mind is infested and is being controlled out of their will. their method of spreading the disease is different too
Its pointless to argue about the science behind zombies. Its supposed to be supernatural. Its okay for zombie/vampire movies not to explain anything behind them, since they are the unknown. Zombies dont move slow because they are corpses and have less muscle, then the logic would be they shouldnt be able to move at all, since well, they are DEAD.
They move slow because they represent the slow death we all face at some point. Its unavoidable. Its scary and horrorfying seeing the remnants of dead people slowly moving towards you with no fear, and no intention other then kill you. The fact that they swarm and slowly creeps up on you, shows how pointless living really is. No matter where you hide and how far you run, they will slowly catch up to you.
Its only in modern movies we see the fast moving zombies, and offcause people cant understand it, so they try to explain the "science" behind it. Like the Rage virus in 28 days later. For me its okay and perfectly fine that movies dont explain certain things. Stuff like vampires and zombies should never have a scientific explanation. To me its just so stupid...c'mon...rage virus..really?
Why cant it be something, dark, twisted and unnatural as zombies. Not some virus that somehow make them rise and angry.. Its an alternative way of making them, I agree. But its just not real zombies. Its the hollywood makeover. Anyways. just my thought on it.
|
On November 26 2012 04:37 TheRealArtemis wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2012 12:40 ETisME wrote:On November 25 2012 08:43 xsnac wrote: i find the way the made zombies all pixels and very fast .. very very stupid and awkward . zombies are slow right ? RIGHT ?? I won't mind the zombies being fast. Slow zombies are a bit boring right now, the only dangerous point about them is the swarm number and unexpected locations. Looking at the tv drama, the walking dead, slow zombies are very easily containable. It's just hard to get food and supplies to keep it going. 28 days later had fast zombies and it was quite good. Dawn of the dead was really awesome for me but that's mostly because they were hiding inside a shopping mall I don't get why zombies should be slow moving as well, I get it that their body is decaying and not everyone of them get good energy intake. But seeing how much and how high blood still can spill out, it's obvious they can pump blood and get those muscle moving. A mind filled with nothing but spreading disease and eating should run when they see food, unlike zombie ants where their mind is infested and is being controlled out of their will. their method of spreading the disease is different too Its pointless to argue about the science behind zombies. Its supposed to be supernatural. Its okay for zombie/vampire movies not to explain anything behind them, since they are the unknown. Zombies dont move slow because they are corpses and have less muscle, then the logic would be they shouldnt be able to move at all, since well, they are DEAD. They move slow because they represent the slow death we all face at some point. Its unavoidable. Its scary and horrorfying seeing the remnants of dead people slowly moving towards you with no fear, and no intention other then kill you. The fact that they swarm and slowly creeps up on you, shows how pointless living really is. No matter where you hide and how far you run, they will slowly catch up to you. Its only in modern movies we see the fast moving zombies, and offcause people cant understand it, so they try to explain the "science" behind it. Like the Rage virus in 28 days later. For me its okay and perfectly fine that movies dont explain certain things. Stuff like vampires and zombies should never have a scientific explanation. To me its just so stupid...c'mon...rage virus..really? Why cant it be something, dark, twisted and unnatural as zombies. Not some virus that somehow make them rise and angry.. Its an alternative way of making them, I agree. But its just not real zombies. Its the hollywood makeover. Anyways. just my thought on it. People want an explanation on why things are the way they are. It is back-story that brings you up to speed so that you can move along with the movie and know what the characters in the movie know.
I enjoy fast zombies more because there is a more immediate threat at any given time. To me, slow zombies arent much of a threat unless you are dumb and corner yourself inside of a building and can be attacked through walls.
|
On November 09 2012 11:57 McBrungus wrote: Jesus fucking Christ. How did they turn that book into that movie?!
my thoughts exactly
|
Only one man can save the world from hordes of fast moving zombies.. and that man is Brad Pitt. He alone will stop the onslaught and make the world beautifull again.
|
Brad Pitt fighting fast 28 Days Later type rage virus zombies on a global warfare scale?
That sounds like a recipe for either epic win or fail.
|
|
|
|