Day of the Dead remake...

[Shredmonkey]

Mmmmmmmm...exploitation....:drool::)

I do agree, it isn't being creative but, once again, we're used to see this all the time in the slasher sub-genre. American horror fans actually seem to prefer recycled concepts...they just dislike recycled concepts sporting a title they're familiar with.


That's a depressing truth it would seem. Not just American fans either, seems the same rings true over here in the UK too. Just because we're used to it doesn't mean I can't bitch about it though!


True. We most certainly are being exploited. *shrugs* It doesn't change the fact, for me anyhow, that I was able to kick back with my kid and enjoy myself. All exploitative tactics aside...entertainment should be first and foremost and, in my opinion, that doesn't appear to be good enough for some in this particular thread.


I'll probably enjoy it in much the same way. It wont make me lose sleep, I was just having my two penneth on the sad state of affairs this type of movie symbolises for me.


I understand how fans could get upset over the tactics this production company are using to cash-in on Romero's original work but when all is said and done...is it entertaining? Title aside...does it do the job it set out to do?

Personally, I felt it did. Fans that enjoyed flicks like Dead Men Walking and Severed will find this adequate. I wouldn't purchase this for my personal collection but I wouldn't walk out of a room if it was playing.

I know it's no consolation but using the title "Day of the Dead" or not...the original is still the original and it's still available. Fans shouldn't worry about Romero's good name being tarnished...he'll do his best to do that all on his own.

:lol:

My point has nothing to do with Romero's good name. I might enjoy most of his movies a lot but I still fail to worship the ground he walks on. For me this has to do with cynical crap normally associated with the majors, indie folks at least normally try to twist things up a little (maybe because they just can't afford to buy into a franchise too often?).

I think our discussion might be at crossed purposes if you think I'm being overly defensive of Romero (Apologies if I am WAY wide of the mark there). I just yearn for more. Is that so bad?

[The Blind Dead]

Ah...a man who seeks more from his entertainment! Not one damn thing wrong with that!

[ZombiesAteMyDog]

while its true that the cash in is nothing new and is an important part of hollywood and there have been some GREAT movies made as a cash in on something,

I would rather see someone make a remake because they were a fan of the original and of the genre, then do it because they think they can make a whole lot of money, I know you cant say anything with 100% certainty, but im willing to bet if you took someone who loves zombie movies, and loved day of the dead and gave him 5 million dollars to do a remake, then took another guy who doesnt really like or dislike zombie movies, they are just kinda there, and wasnt a die hard fan of the original ,but sees a chance to make a whole lot of money so decides to do a remake and give him 10 million dollars, the fan of the genre's 5 million dollar movie would be better then the 10 million "cash cow" movie. ( this naturaly assumes both guys are legit film makers and not just some putz living in thier parents basement )

im not entirely sure which catagory day of the dead looks liek it will fall into, but like ive said this movie doesnt look too bad at all to me, i definatly plan to enjoy it , and ving rhames is a bad mofo so im h appy either way :P

just my thinking on the subject

[The Blind Dead]

The "Ving Zombie" was pretty goshdang sweet too.

[corgi37]

Well, i can 100% say this wont get a Aussie cinema release (hell, Diary might not either) but i'll get it on dvd and burn it. Aint no copyright stuff worry me.

Does Christa Campbell get her lovely boobies out?

[The Blind Dead]

Well, i can 100% say this wont get a Aussie cinema release (hell, Diary might not either) but i'll get it on dvd and burn it. Aint no copyright stuff worry me.

:roll: That's fairly a-hole of you. Congrats for being a true genre fan.

[sirjacktorrance]

under 7 million??i saw the trailer and it gots explosions,action scenes and people burning .that´s not possible with 7 million dollars.there´s zombies that jump and relative named actors. i read somewhere that the budget was around 18 million dollars.but the look af the movie it´s like a sifi channel production.overall i didn´t like severed o dead men walking.very bad movies i hope day to be something better than that crap!

[The Blind Dead]

i saw the trailer and it gots explosions,action scenes and people burning .that´s not possible with 7 million dollars.
Really? How many movies have you made using explosions, action scenes and people burning?

By the way, the "people burning" is actually all done in CG.

overall i didn´t like severed o dead men walking.

...so...you want a cookie then? :lol:

[sirjacktorrance]

Really? How many movies have you made using explosions, action scenes and people burning?

By the way, the "people burning" is actually all done in CG.


...so...you want a cookie then? :lol:

i didn´make any movie but i watch a bunch of 7 milllion dollar movies and the action escenes was poor.i suppose the new day of the crap look like a 7 million dollar movie but i think it goy more budget that that.
yeah i want a cookie ,but the thing is that if the new day it´s like severed or deadmenwalking it´s gonna suck balls.

[jackskellington]

If memory serves me correctly Clive Barker made Hellraiser with a budget of only 1 million dollars. So it is VERY much possible to make a good looking low budget movie.

[Steve P]

If memory serves me correctly Clive Barker made Hellraiser with a budget of only 1 million dollars. So it is VERY much possible to make a good looking low budget movie.

Indeed, and the original Dawn of the Dead cost around that figure as well.

But, of course, they both had the additional element of imagination and real talent, without which the budget is largely immaterial.

[LordGenocyde]

Day of The Dead Wiki Article. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day_of_the_Dead_%282007_film%29)

Anyone post this one yet? If I've reposted it, sorry. Personally, I'm willing to give it a try. It can't be any worse than Vampyaz which really blew. I'm all for putting Vampires in the 'hood but at least do it right.

[The Blind Dead]

The Day of the Dead remake is a masterpiece in comparison to Vampiyaz and Zombiez.

[ZombiesAteMyDog]

dude watching a turd swirl around in the toilet looks like a magnum opus compared to vampiyaz or even zombiez :doh:

[MrShape666]

So, has this movie been banished to gather dust in some wherehous yet or what?

[corgi37]

NOT coming to a theatre near you. Or anyone else for that matter.

[The Blind Dead]

So, has this movie been banished to gather dust in some wherehous yet or what?
The film will be coming out, more than likely straight-to-DVD though. I'm sure well be seeing it soon enough.

[MrShape666]

under 7 million??i saw the trailer and it gots explosions,action scenes and people burning .that´s not possible with 7 million dollars.there´s zombies that jump and relative named actors.

Dude, Robert Rodriguez made Desperado for exactly that amount.

[UNDEAD FRED]

The film will be coming out, more than likely straight-to-DVD though. I'm sure well be seeing it soon enough.


I remember you saying that you saw it, and liked it. thats good enouf for me.

[The Blind Dead]

I remember you saying that you saw it, and liked it. thats good enouf for me.
Thanks! Honestly, if you're capable of setting aside the whole "Romero title" thing and just relax and watch, you'll find it wasn't all that bad and you may even enjoy it. If it was majorly bad, I'd say so. I'm rarely at a loss for insults when it comes to stupid films and people. :lol:

[Sadogoat]

According to Bloody-Disgusting.com (http://www.bloody-disgusting.com/news/10218) (via Christa Campbell), the Day Of The Dead remake is apparently scheduled for a theatrical release in February 2008. Presumably, this is only for the United States.

[A.M.]

I'm very interested to see how this turns out. I'm a big fan of Dawn Of The Dead (remake). Not a fan of Nick Cannon, but he might actually be able to pull off the part. Like Fergie in Planet Terror lol.

[MrShape666]

Considering that I'm watching Return Of The Living Dead: Rave From The Grave again right now, I'll probably go see this.

If what Blind Dead says is true, this'll be another one of those things that we'd like a whole lot more with a different title.

[The Blind Dead]

I'm very interested to see how this turns out. I'm a big fan of Dawn Of The Dead (remake). Not a fan of Nick Cannon, but he might actually be able to pull off the part. Like Fergie in Planet Terror lol.
Try to distance your appreciation of the Dawn remake with this Day remake because they're two different films; completely unreleated with very different production values.

Considering that I'm watching Return Of The Living Dead: Rave From The Grave again right now, I'll probably go see this.

If what Blind Dead says is true, this'll be another one of those things that we'd like a whole lot more with a different title.
If this film had come out through The Asylum and was called, TOWN OF THE LIVING DEAD, I can see fans bitchin' that the film wasn't amazing but deserved a better title lol

[corgi37]

Christa Campbell has mighty fine boobies!

[Kemper]

Yes, she doobie. Two of em

[MrShape666]

Christa Campbell has mighty fine boobies!
True, but unless she bares 'em, that's not enough in and of itself to save this film.

[retro zombie killer]

True, but unless she bares 'em, that's not enough in and of itself to save this film.


She'd better to save this Flop.:poo: Other wise yours truly won't see it in a theater or rent it.:clap:

[The Blind Dead]

There are no Christa Campbell breasts in this.

[UNDEAD FRED]

There are no Christa Campbell breasts in this.


That kind of sucks, but theres allways Linnea Quigley dancing naked on the grave in Return of the Living Dead.:lol:

[The Blind Dead]

I was a bit disappointed myself by Campbell's character doesn't really lend itself to flashing breasts. I was actually impressed she DIDN'T cave in to the lowest common denominator this time around.

[retro zombie killer]

So I take it The Blind Dead that you have seen this Movie. What did you think?

[The Blind Dead]

The version I saw hadn't yet received a final score and some of the visual effects hadn't been created yet but I watched it with my 10 year old and we both enjoyed it for what it was. I watch so much damn horror on a weekly basis that I find myself enjoying what I see less and less...in the case of this Day remake...it was mildly entertaining. I've seen far worse.

In comparison to films like Zombiez and Children of the Dead...this was genius. It comes nowhere close to the quality of the Dawn remake or the socio-political "importance" of Romero's original Day but I wasn't horribly disappointed.

[jackskellington]

So I take it The Blind Dead that you have seen this Movie. What did you think?

:lol:TBD sees pretty much EVERY movie before most of us! He may not be the first in the theaters, but if it's a limited release or direct to DVD then there's no chance you're gonna beat him to it.

[The Blind Dead]

I despise theaters lol Brian no likey theaters unless they're of the drive-in variety. :mrgreen:

[jackskellington]

I despise theaters lol Brian no likey theaters unless they're of the drive-in variety. :mrgreen:

We have a drive in just a few miles from us, but we've never been. Hell, I think the last time I went to one was back in 1990. Before that, I saw a boat load of grade B movies at the local drive in when I was growing up in the 70's. One in particular that I recall was a 3D sci-fi called "Metalstorm: The Destruction of Jared Sin". It had Bull from Night Court in it and it was playing before something else that I don't recall. That's really the best things about drive-in's...The double feature.

[The Blind Dead]

A Charles Band flick at a drive-in? You lucky dog!

Back to the topic of Day of the Dead (remake)...there's worse out there. Personally, the fact that it was titled "Day of the Dead" didn't bother me in the slightest bit as I don't worship Romero or canonize his work. He's no better or worse than Carpenter & Craven. Eventually, the entire genre's body of classics will be remade. It's an eventuality that we've all got to face as fans.

[ZombieFreeWorld]

i thought the Day of the dead remake was not to shabby. there was a couple of times i wanted to kick myself in the butt for watching the movie but overall i thought it was a decent movie and i would watch it again.

[retro zombie killer]

I don't much like theaters myself. Last time I was in a theater was for Romeo Must Die. Its good TBD has seen movies before us. He can tell us if they are worth seeing. Thanks TBD for giving your opinion Day Of The Dead remake. Speaking of kids watching horror. I watched NOLD '68 with my nephew the 9yr old. He had seen Resident Evil and I just couldn't let him judge horror by that movie so Uncle RZK had to take steps. He loved it. Except the part where the wee the little Girl takes a swipe at mommy. He didn't like that. Can't say I really blame him.

[The Blind Dead]

i thought the Day of the dead remake was not to shabby. there was a couple of times i wanted to kick myself in the butt for watching the movie but overall i thought it was a decent movie and i would watch it again.
I thought the zombies zipping along the walls and ceilings was a bit much but I have no idea what they've cut and reshot so there's always a possibility of those scenes hitting the cutting room floor before this sees the light of day.

Its good TBD has seen movies before us. He can tell us if they are worth seeing. Thanks TBD for giving your opinion Day Of The Dead remake. Speaking of kids watching horror. I watched NOLD '68 with my nephew the 9yr old. He had seen Resident Evil and I just couldn't let him judge horror by that movie so Uncle RZK had to take steps. He loved it. Except the part where the wee the little Girl takes a swipe at mommy. He didn't like that. Can't say I really blame him.
I think it's important for the growth and survival of the genre that we introduce small children to various horror classics and get them accustomed to vintage cinema. Too many youngin's are growing up without ever having seen Lon Chaney, Boris Karloff or Bela Lugosi. In my opinion, that's a shame. How can we expect to hold on to the REAL classics if our children are lead to believe the remakes and countless reimaginings are the classics?

I don't oppose remakes, like this Day remake, because I take satisfaction from the fact that I refuse to allow the originals to die by introducing them to my son.

[retro zombie killer]

Thats what I thought TBD. All he had seen was Resident Evil so I decided to introduce him the the movie that really started it all, NOLD 68. Too bad most of Lon Chaney's work is in the Silents. He's not ready for that. I could get him started though. My kid is way too young alas. She's only 2. Just being in the dark by herself is enough to scare her.

[MrShape666]

I think it's important for the growth and survival of the genre that we introduce small children to various horror classics and get them accustomed to vintage cinema. Too many youngin's are growing up without ever having seen Lon Chaney, Boris Karloff or Bela Lugosi. In my opinion, that's a shame. How can we expect to hold on to the REAL classics if our children are lead to believe the remakes and countless reimaginings are the classics?.

I had a bizzare revelation at my old job when I realized that NONE of my co workers knew who Boris Karloff, Bela Lugosi, or Peter Lorre were. Although they did recognize my imitation of Lorre's voice.

I just read an article in the UK Gorezone magazine on the Day remake where the article writer tried blame the negative reaction to the film on Land Of The Dead . . . weird.

Side note: Nice to see that cool Gorezone name resurrected after the old US one bit the dust oh so long ago . . . man I'm old.

[retro zombie killer]

MrShap66-I just read an article in the UK Gorezone magazine on the Day remake where the article writer tried blame the negative reaction to the film on Land Of The Dead . . . weird.

So gotta come up with a reason why a movie sucks so we'll just blame another movie. What a bunch of :poo: I hate when they do that its so cheap and makes the blamer look like a dumba**.

[The Blind Dead]

I just read an article in the UK Gorezone magazine on the Day remake where the article writer tried blame the negative reaction to the film on Land Of The Dead . . . weird.

*looks at Gorezone back issue*

...NOPE...not me. I wrote the article on The Rise and Fall of Theatrical Horror. :lol:

[MrShape666]

It just seemed strange to me. I mean, everything we've seen so far makes this film look like it's gonna be a forgettable gut muncher and no more. We've got very good reasons for thinking this film is gonna tank (Bud the vegetarian zombie comes to mind :x ). And none of them are connected to Land Of The Dead. I think people are sharpening their knives mainly because it looks pretty bad from all angles so far. The rest of it is just the usual bandwagon jumping: A couple people trash the film so loads of people who need to be "cool" jump on and trash the film too.

Hope springs eternal. Maybe we'll be pleasantly surprised. I have no problem with fast jumping wall crawling zombies. That sounds kinda cool. I'm not one of these people who will only stick with one kinda zombie. If everyone thought that way, zombies would still be like they were in White Zombie and I Walked With A Zombie and we'd never have the Romero variety in the first place.

[Sadogoat]

It's just been announced over at Fangoria.com (http://www.fangoria.com/news_article.php?id=5408)that the Day Of The Dead remake will be getting a limited theatrical release (500 screens), courtesy of distribution firm First Look. No release date is given, however.

[corgi37]

Well, here's a bit more info. Not much, but a bit. Appears they wasted their time on the reshoots.

http://joblo.com/arrow/index.php?id=10013

[MrShape666]

I will say the zombie make up look pretty good so far.

[BarnabusBlackoak]

Well, here's a bit more info. Not much, but a bit. Appears they wasted their time on the reshoots.

http://joblo.com/arrow/index.php?id=10013

I hope they didn't leave out this scene !

http://www.joblo.com/images_arrownews/menas.jpg

[The Blind Dead]

I'm sure you were making a funny but for those of you without senses of humor, that particular shot appears nowhere in the film. :mrgreen:

[BarnabusBlackoak]

I'm sure you were making a funny but for those of you without senses of humor, that particular shot appears nowhere in the film. :mrgreen:


Mena in a tiny bikini? why would I be kidding about that?

[The Blind Dead]

So, you were serious? You honestly thought a shot of Mena Suvari in a tiny bikini would be in a zombie film?

If you were serious...no, it isn't.

[MrShape666]

So, you were serious? You honestly thought a shot of Mena Suvari in a tiny bikini would be in a zombie film?

If you were serious...no, it isn't.

I don't think I'd complain too much if it was.

[Zomloch]

Here's my take...

As much as I love the zombie genre, there's only so many plot scenarios that can be put into play really. And those have all been covered already. We have small outbreaks and we have world-wide epidemics. We have our flawed heroes and tragic heroes shelled up in buildings or constantly on the move. The only thing left is to add small and almost insignificant twists into the plots, which really just end up being side-notes.

Let's not fool ourselves and pretend we like more in a zombie movie than what is presented in the first 30 minutes of most of them - the actual outbreak and the proceding collapse of society.

That being said, I don't care what they remake or reimagine or re-remake or rewrite or whatever. As long as a lot of money is being put into it to do a zombie movie justice, I am happy. Many a good story has surfaced in the past, but it was almost ruined for me when the damn zombies are people painted blue, and the victims are hamburger meat taped under a shirt.

So remake away, I say. Remake 'em all, and then remake 'em again.

[ZombiesAteMyDog]

I dont think its entirely true that every zombie scenario has been played out, infact id say theres alot that havent, the creative and fresh stories are out there, the problem is the movie buisness tends to punish fresh and creative thinking so people do the old tried and true shit that they know they can make money on, why take a risk and posibly lose a bunch of money when you can follow a formula and be almost gaurunteed some sort of profit, now I realize there are exceptions there always have been and there always will be folks willing to take risks but by and large most folks do it by the numbers - Romeros new movie is a good example of shaking it up a bit, and army of the dead and the world war z movies are also good examples, weve yet to see a true large scale all emcompassing war with the undead - and what about fido? thats quite posibly the most original zombie movie to come out in years.


oh and btw , love your sig zomloch ! thats one of my favorite george carlin lines when hes talking about angels ( I actualy say that about all his stuff )

""angels shit what about goblins? you never hear anything about goblins, unless its around halloween , and then its always negative shit too, and zombies ! where are all the god damn zombies, thats the trouble with zombies, thier unreliable, I say if your gonna buy the angel bullshit you might as well go for the goblin and zombie package as well""

[Countbad]

So is this an adaptation of the original "Day" script?

[MrShape666]

So is this an adaptation of the original "Day" script?

Not even close. The only resemblance to anything Romero is the title.

[RO3434]

Is it out on DVD yet?

[The Blind Dead]

No but it does have a tentative limited theatrical date though.

[DeadinWV]

Straight to DVD and with a revised title.

http://videoeta.com/movie/101576

[The Blind Dead]

Nice. I'll probably rent it to check out the final product.

[Kemper]

What a stupid title...Sci-Fi Channel?

[jackskellington]

I've got it in line on my wait list at Netflix. Can't say I'm very excited about it, but hopefully it'll be a fun couple of hours.

[chickenchop1]

DVD April 8th, 08. Day of the Dead: The Need to Feed. I'm glad they added that second part to it, so there's no trouble looking up Day of the Dead in a text list and wondering which one they're referring to. They should've considered just calling it "The Need to Feed", though that title gives it a comical, less serious vibe compared to "Day of the Dead".

[corgi37]

Some more info. Glad it's not getting a theatrical run.
http://www.dreadcentral.com/node/25730

[The Ghost of Cain]

After the success of DOTD 2004, I welcomed the idea of an updated Day of the Dead as it's my favourite of the trilogy simply because even by today's standards it looks good. I'll salute anything that stand the test of time and Day of the Dead is the one I watch more often than any other. That bunker scares me more than the zombies. A claustrophobe's worst nightmare.

Like the rest of you, I was gutted by the trailer for the remake but will still watch it when and if I get my hands on a copy of the DVD. As will most of us. Why? Because we cant help ourselves. That's probably why we all come here anyway.

[Eknytz]

too bad ving is in such a low class movie, hes gonna be a b list actor at least. i hope he at least got paid decently.

I could tell this was gonna end up like this because of the random sex scene in the trailer to reel in the sicko demographic.

[The Blind Dead]

I could tell this was gonna end up like this because of the random sex scene in the trailer to reel in the sicko demographic.
Hey, that's an incredibly mature outlook on sex. :clap:

[Eknytz]

what, you don't view that as vulgar?

-I'd rather be immature than be a pervert. >and i'm neither of the two.

[The Blind Dead]

No, I don't view sex as a vulgar thing nor do I consider horror films that feature sex to be perverted either. Human sexuality has been an integral part of the genre since the early beginnings of film. Slapping the words "sicko," "vulgar" & "pervert" to horror films, and fans of those horror films, that feature sexual situations for MATURE audiences does a great disservice to the genre as well as those fans. It's attitudes like the one you've shown that have kept horror playing in its own dirty diaper for so long instead of moving forward with its content and being considered serious cinema.

[Eknytz]

Yes but there are situations in films where you can tell that it has been placed there unnecessarily and it is clearly out of place.

When i watch scary movies i expect to entertained by scary things, I didn't pay to watch Adult film theater.

[The Blind Dead]

Yes but there are situations in films where you can tell that it has been placed there unnecessarily and it is clearly out of place.

When i watch scary movies i expect to entertained by scary things, I didn't pay to watch Adult film theater.
Exploitation and sex, sex and horror. All intertwined, all important parts of one another. The genre was built on spectacle, sexuality and exploitation. You're entitled to your opinion though. In mine, you're not entirely familiar, or comfortable with, sexuality in general for you to be so quick to label horror that features sex, even exploitative sex, as "vulgar" and "sick." Anybody with even a rudimentary understanding of the genre knows the distinct differences between "adult film theater" and sexually charged horror cinema. Without sex in horror there would be no Michael Myers, Freddy or Jason. There'd be no vampires or werewolves. Most of horror's greatest icons and concepts stem from our human fascination with sex.

Removing sex from horror, whether exploitative or not, is just another step closer to homogenizing the genre. Sex doesn't need to be removed from horror, horror fans just need to stop being so scared of, and uncomfortable with, their own sexuality.

By the way, I saw this flick and the "sicko" demographic will be disappointed because there's really nothing all that "perverted" on display. Some making out and breasts do not make for worthwhile "adult film theater" entertainment.

[Steve P]

Exploitation and sex, sex and horror. All intertwined, all important parts of one another.

And not just sex, of course; the genre has always been a effective allegorical vehicle. Romero alone has covered race, consumerism, vivisection, militarism, and class.

[ZombiesAteMyDog]

the way i see it, if a movie is a stinker the more sex / tits / ass there is the more bareable it becomes, ive sat through many a movie i was >< this close to turning off when out of the blue some decent looking girls funbags floped out and I thought, hey, maybe I should stick around til the end of this :lol:

I remember back in the good ol' days when Joe Bob's Drive in theater was still on the movie channel, he would always rate movies by giving a brief description, telling the number of deaths / car wrecks / explosions things like that, number of tits, and then rate it, something like " this movie is about a guy who stabs people to death with a bic pen, its got an eye gouging, a hospital exploding, and 4 1/2 tits, " then he would give his rating , and of course the more blood / gore / cheesy shit , and the more tits a movie had, the better the rating.


besides sex / nudity and horror movies go together like a hand and a glove, just think how much lower Jason's body count would be if it wasnt for all the unnecessary sex and or nudity in all the friday the 13th movies, and sex lover or sex hater, I think we can all agree a lower body count is always a truely hienous thing indeed :drinking:

[Simply Pimpalicious]

Well, I finally got around to checking out the trailer for this remake of Day of the Dead. I'm gonna reserve full judgment until I see the whole movie, but here's what I think from what I saw.

On it's own it could make for a decent zombie flick, but given that it's touted as a remake of a classic, it falls far short. Except for the military presence I saw nothing in common with the original. I can understand taking a few liberties here and there, but it looks like they're calling this Day of the Dead only to mooch off of GAR's success.

Like I said, I'm reserving judgment until I see the whole thing. I've seen plenty of movies where the trailer made you think it was the greatest thing since sliced bread, only for the movie to fail miserably. I've also seen movies that were actually really good but the trailers didn't do them justice. Them trailers are sneaky like that. ;)

[Souggy]

I am not going to expect much from the movie considering Miner's past films... However, I am hoping it will be better than the crappy films... and if it is crappy I hope it is cheese.

I don't even see a need to pick it apart even...

[ZombieFreeWorld]

So i heard a lot of hype and bad mouthing in a sense in a lot of different movie reviews about this movie. And seeing how i am a huge Zombie fan i thought i check out the trailer. I believe it does has some chance of being a decent movie. i will think it is kick ass cause it has zombies in it but for the most part i think it will hold up to the older version of it. I like how the are bringing back BUB....hope you know who im talking about lol

all and all im just gonna download it when i get my internet back and burn it and sell some copied 2 months before it comes out lol kidding ima wait for it to come out ethier on DVD or theaters don't matter non the less to me

[The Blind Dead]

This comes nowhere near the original. It's a completely different film aside from name similarities, a military presence and zombies.

[MrShape666]

the way i see it, if a movie is a stinker the more sex / tits / ass there is the more bareable it becomes, ive sat through many a movie i was >< this close to turning off when out of the blue some decent looking girls funbags floped out and I thought, hey, maybe I should stick around til the end of this :lol:

:drinking:

Sometimes even that can't save a bad film. It did keep me from clawing my eyes out during House Of The Dead and Cabin Fever.

[corgi37]

Friends, friends, friends.

If you dont view sex as vulgar...


...Then you aint doing it right!!!!!!!

[Steve P]

Friends, friends, friends.

If you dont view sex as vulgar...


...Then you aint doing it right!!!!!!!

Well, that is true. :-)

[BarnabusBlackoak]

Friends, friends, friends.

If you dont view sex as vulgar...


...Then you aint doing it right!!!!!!!


:clap::clap::clap::clap:

[UNDEAD FRED]

I will wind up buying the DVD. I have bought Day of the Dead 2 - Contagium, and Return of the Living Dead II, IV, and V so whats to stop me.:lol:

[jackskellington]

First Look Home Entertainment have officially announced the forthcoming release of the Day of the Dead remake for April 8, while also providing details on specs and cover art. DVD Active reports that the feature will run for 87 minutes in a widescreen aspect ratio with Dolby Digital 5.1 sound and optional subtitles in English SDH or Spanish. Extra feature will include: an Internet-only trailer, alternate ending, previews and a feature length commentary with Jeffrey Reddick, Steve Miner and other cast members (all subject to change).

http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b336/jackskellington70/Random/day010808.jpg

[The Blind Dead]

Nice. Stupid looking artwork but I'm anxious to see the improvements and changes they've made on this.

[UNDEAD FRED]

Day of the Dead - Need to Puke:lol: Showing a zombie barfing:puke:

[destroy the stairs]

Before you know it they'll be remaking Land of the Dead.

i laughed really really hard at that

[iamperfet]

God this movie seems like a train wreck....

:x I WISH HAD MORE GOD DAMN MONEY THEN I COULD BRING MY VISION TO YOU GUYS!!

Movies like this are bringing the zombie genre down. ****in ridiculous.

I'll keep tryin...

[The Blind Dead]

I wouldn't say it's a train wreck. Fact is there's no way this film is as bad as the large majority of shot-on-camcorder zombie "epics" out there.

[UNDEAD FRED]

I liked NOTLD 3D, so I think I will like this one. Sometimes horror is suppose to be cheesy. Just good cheesy fun.

[The Blind Dead]

I completely agree. Not everything can be big budget gloss.

[iamperfet]

I completely agree. Not everything can be big budget gloss.


Big budgets are not a problem.

It's all due to lack of story and weak characters.

[corgi37]

I cant think of any movie i am less interested in, but thats not to say i'll wont get the dvd.

[Zombie Survivor]

It doesn't look that bad, I'll just get the DVD :)

[The Blind Dead]

I'm anxious to see how the new ending, extra shots and CG turned out.

[chickenchop1]

Was the Day Remake set in an isolated zombie outbreak/quarantine, or is the entire world overtaken with zombies Day of the Dead Romero style from the info revealed so far? Might have missed it somewhere on this thread. I prefer the entire world overtaken.

[MrShape666]

Man, that is some really crappy box cover art.

[jackskellington]

Don't know if this is the same trailer posted somewhere else on this thread, but anyway...

http://www.bloody-disgusting.com/news/10909

Can Nick Cannon play a stereotypical black guy, or what?!!! :clap: :roll:

[UNDEAD FRED]

Yep Nick Cannon does play the annoying idiot.

[MrShape666]

Well that's more entertaining then the other trailer we saw. I might pick this one up . . . but . . . .

Horrible . . . DVD cover art . . . eyes ruined . . . loosing . . . conciousness.

[chickenchop1]

The box art and the title "Need to Feed" give it a "comedy" feel, rather than a serious end of the world scenario for the movie. The puke should've been red IMO rather than green.

This might be test/early box art. But if they're looking to catch the eye of gorehounds, this should work well enough I'd guess.

[corgi37]

I liked that trailer. I'll probably get it. Still dont like that Nick Cannon guy though.

[MrShape666]

Poster art . . . still terrible . . . loosing enthusiasm . . . don't . . . go . . . into . . .shock :x:puke:

Man, that crappy box cover art still gets to me.

[ZombiesAteMyDog]

does this clunker have a set release date yet?

[Rickgrimes]

Here is another review that sums up what most expected.



Vern sees the DAY OF THE DEAD remake. But he's not a role model. Don't make the same mistake he did.


Vern here...

Man, I try to be a nice guy. I try to be an optimist. I was ready to burn the DAWN OF THE DEAD remake at the stake, but then I saw it and it wasn't too bad. It's a hollow action movie version of the original, but it's a fun one, and it's pretty well executed. I'm not too much of a hardliner to admit that.

So if they already remade that and did okay I wasn't gonna be too up in arms about a DAY OF THE DEAD remake. And I was rooting for Steve Miner too. He's the director and I've seen people talk shit about him here, but I have a soft spot for him. He directed my two favorite FRIDAY THE 13THs (parts 2 and 3) which are fun and have a good energy to them. And he still had some of that spark when he did HALLOWEEN H20: H20 STANDS FOR HALLOWEEN TWENTY YEARS LATER. Nobody seems to like that movie, and to be honest the Michael Meyers mask looks terrible, but I think it's a pretty good movie. The ROCKY BALBOA of the HALLOWEEN series. And it has that great chase at the end, you gotta at least enjoy that. Ignore that bullshit in the next one about how Michael Meyers switched clothes with a paramedic. That's for conspiracy theorists. Anyway because of those three movies I figured if they had to do a fast running DAY OF THE DEAD then maybe Steve Miner wasn't a bad choice to do it.

Well, nope. I was wrong and the proof is called "DAY OF THE DEAD" and coming straight to DVD on a date which I will not specify because you should not watch it. And don't look it up, either. Just forget about it. The cover shows a zombie projectile vomiting a bunch of green slime and eyeballs into the air. This doesn't happen in the movie but is a good description of how you will feel watching the movie.

This movie has no good parts in it. It does not capture a single thing that's good about the original. It doesn't improve on a single weakness of the original. It doesn't add a single worthwhile new thing to the story or the genre. I'm not sure it even recycles anything good about the genre. I thought it was intended for theatrical release, but it's from DTV kings Millennium Films, and it doesn't look like many people on the set were fooling themselves. It feels DTV from beginning to end, complete with cheesy opening credits and plenty of avid farts. Every time it cuts to a new location they gotta FLASH and WHIZ and BANG and do that stupid metal-on-metal sound effect.

Listen to me: if you are a sound designer, and they ask you to do that shit, tell them to **** off. Or quit. I know you have a family to feed, but somebody's gotta take a stand. We'll all send you some canned food. The fact is there is no circumstance where the WHOOOSH and the SSSSSHHHHHHHUNK is gonna be a cool way to go into the next scene. Somebody has got to stop this style, and you are on the front lines. Why would anybody do it? Don't you have pride in what you do? Are you an artist or are you a ****ing button pusher? Are you trying to make a movie, or open a garage?

Thanks sound designers. Just my 2 cents.

The rest of you: This just isn't a good movie. It never clicks, it never pulls you in. An appreciation for the original DAY OF THE DEAD is not at all necessary to notice how much the remake fails. But it would be wrong not to acknowledge how bad these assholes blew it. Let's take a moment to remember some of the things that were great about the original, and then see how the remake, uh, re-imagines them.

A. THE OPENING. The original has a classic opening sort of like I AM LEGEND. The small band of heroes are scavenging in an abandoned city. There's an alligator crawling around. Money blows across the ground like garbage. Then they can hear an eerie moaning in the distance as a mob of zombies slowly approaches. So it immediately establishes a bleak, oppressive feeling of hopelessness, because it's a world that has been inherited by the zombies. They say there's a 400,000 to 1 ghoul-to-living ratio. It's their world, their era, that's why it's DAY OF THE DEAD. Civilization belongs to the dead. Humans are just a handful of survivors, scientists and soldiers hiding in an underground base, broadcasting messages on the CB but never getting a response.

The remake starts with teens ****ing in a cabin. Because that topic really hasn't been explored enough. There's no underground base. The world is not overrun by zombies, it's an infection that is just starting to spread in this small town. So it's not the Day of the Dead. And the movie mostly takes place at night.

B. RHODES played by Joe Pilato. To me the thing that keeps the original from being as good as its predecessors is that you get sick of all these military assholes always yelling, and there is alot of overacting going on. But Joe Pilato is so good at playing a prick, maybe one of the most hatable characters I've ever seen in a film, and you still want to puke when you see the zombies tear him in half and eat his guts. ("Choke on 'em!") He's obnoxious but he's a memorable character.

In the remake "Rhodes" is Ving Rhames in a glorified cameo just to trick people into thinking this has some connection to the DAWN OF THE DEAD remake. The story never focuses on him and he dies right away and only gets one scene as a zombie. The only thing he offers to the movie at all is that he pulls out his own eye and eats it.

3. ADULTS. Remember when movies were allowed to have adults in them? I guess we live in the Day of the Twentysomethings. The original was for and about adults. The remake stars AMERICAN PIE's Mena Suvari, Nickelodeon's Nick Cannon, a guy named Stark Sands who looks like a teenager and a guy playing Mena's little brother. I know Mena Suvari is almost 30, but in the movie she still lives with her mom. She's the lead and she makes a good effort, carrying herself well, but she's much too dainty and baby-faced to come off as a Ripley. And it's hard to be tough when you always gotta make sure your bangs are covering your giant forehead.

IV. BUB. Okay, you probaly heard about this one already, but it requires as much scorn as available. Anybody who's seen DAY OF THE DEAD loves Bub, played by a guy named Howard Sherman. Bub is a zombified soldier captured and experimented on by Dr. "Frankenstein" Logan. Through some combination of training and memory he has been somewhat domesticated. He's in a collar, chained to a wall, he remembers how to salute, how to hold a book (but upside down), and how to listen to a walkman. He can pick up a gun but not correctly, he looks at it like it's a rock or a stick. The makeup and the performance are incredible, easily the best and most believable zombie character ever. He seems more like a gorilla than a man, a guy who is obviously a living being but you can't tell how conscious he is. If the eyes are the window to the soul, his windows are filthy. But he represents a faint hope for humanity because he is evidence to support the doctor's theory that the zombies can be pacified.

In the remake they have none of that. They have "Bud" (Sands) who's one of the main characters, but then he gets turned into a zombie, but he's a vegetarian so he doesn't want to eat people, so they keep him on a leash in the back of the car and don't kill him. You can't call it retarded, because the mentally disabled are innocent, they wouldn't do that shit either.

4b. Speaking of DR. LOGAN, he was a great character in the original. He actually was crazy, and his zombie experiments did seem pretty depraved and REANIMATORish. On the other hand, he was brilliant, and maybe right, and definitely one of the few making an effort to find a solution to the zombie problem instead of just giving up on civilization and getting started building a Thunderdome.

In the remake "Dr. Logan" is just the name of some prick who claims to be a doctor. He seems modelled after the asshole yuppie character in DAWN OF THE DEAD REMAKE. Yeah, great, don't emulate the movie you're supposed to be remaking - emulate the worst character in somebody else's remake. Good idea, schmucks.

FIVE. ZOMBIE CATTLE. Since the scientists are experimenting on the zombies, trying to find a solution to the problem, they go out and corral them into a big mine. It's a great idea both because of how it further dehumanizes these things that used to be people and because of the threat it creates if the zombies were to escape or if the survivors had to travel through the mine (which of course they do). And it creates conflict as the good people are disgusted watching the assholes get off on tormenting the captive zombies.

The remake has none of that. Ironically, Romero's movie was hugely scaled down from his original script because he just didn't have the budget to pull off the armies of trained zombies he had planned. Now we have this remake that's on a much smaller scale than the scaled down original.

F. THE BEST ZOMBIE EFFECTS OF ALL TIME. I mean, Greg Nicotero and friends have done some cool stuff in the newer Romero movies, and I always love the blue face paint of DAWN OF THE DEAD, and lets not forget how cool those maggot-infested ****ers were in the Fulci ZOMBI series. But I don't think it's a stretch to say that Tom Savini's work on the original DAY OF THE DEAD is the best ever. So many great looking zombies and so many disgustingly realistic gore scenes. Those things really can munch on some guts. And since they used real cow guts for alot of that stuff it's even grosser after you find out how they did it.

The makeup and effects in the remake - well, no. I mean, you've seen worse, but nobody's gonna be high-fiving each other.

To be fair, this may not be the worst Romero remake so far. I was gonna try to review that NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD 3-D a while back, but after watching a little bit I realized it just wasn't worth it. I didn't get much further than the "COMING 4 U BARB" text message before I bailed. And I figured nobody's gonna watch that shitty home video anyway, because that type of 3-D is crap and who wants to watch "NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD 3-D: THE 2-D VERSION" (sold separately)?

But this stuff does kind of matter, because Romero's movies have longevity, they stick around, and have been introduced to multiple generations. And we don't want to have to explain this shit to innocent kids who are just trying to catch up on the classics. "Okay, NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD is great, but be sure not to get the 30th Anniversary edition, or the 3-D one, or the colorized one. The remake that's in color is okay, you can watch that, but only after you watch the original a bunch of times. DAWN OF THE DEAD go ahead and get any of the cuts, I like the theatrical but they're all good. The remake is fun but the original is required viewing. DAY OF THE DEAD, be sure not to get the one with the puking on the cover..." I mean, do we really have to further complicate this situation?

I'd have a hard time trying to think of something nice to say about this movie. I think there might've been one or two funny zombie gags. I did like when some of them were just running and crashing into a wall over and over again. Literally bouncing off the walls. But the footage was obviously sped up so it was a little zombie and a little Benny Hill. Kind of a problem.

But the main problem with this movie is that everything is bad and nothing is good. There's no scale, no originality, no good characters, no well constructed scenes, not even a good chase. Maybe it wasn't Michael Meyers who switched places with that paramedic, maybe it was Steve Miner. If that's true then the paramedic has alot to answer for. This movie is too ****ing bad. Remake it - fine. But not like this.

--Vern

source: http://www.aintitcool.com/node/35431

[Simply Pimpalicious]

Damn, I hate it when a critic holds back like that and doesn't tell us what they really think.

Seriously though, that is just about the greatest bad review I've ever read. I still probably rent the movie though, seeing as how I'm a glutton for punishment. :)

[ZombiesAteMyDog]

reading this review I was thinking to my self - yup,,,, this sounds like it turned out exactly how i had expected after seeing the first trailer.

I was really hoping it would be better then it looked, but every time I read this thread a little more opimism dies lol.

[Airborne]

Thanks for saving me the trouble.
Great review.

[Zombie Survivor]

I think I'll watch the movie for myself before I praise/curse it.

[Kemper]

If I can get past the ROTC feel...I might be able to enjoy this. It seems to have a lot of different locations and action...could be fun.

[MrShape666]

I'll probably need to watch this with my good friend Mr. Schmirnoff, who always makes bad movies good.

[Bad Zombie Night]

does this clunker have a set release date yet?

Straight to video April 8, 2008 http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y152/bzn123/Smileys/Characters/1bnz_smiley.gif

Bloody-Disgusting.com: 'Day of the Dead' Remake Arriving In April (http://www.bloody-disgusting.com/news/10787)

[cepopeye]

Ugghhhh, i'd never heard of this

[MrShape666]

Renting this will probably be something along the lines of, "Oh, THAT's out. Well . . . what the hell."

Which I guess is the same kinda thinking that makes someone bring home a Brazillian chick with big hands and an Adam's apple.

[corgi37]

It doesnt thrill me, but i'd sure get the dvd if it was cheap enough. Hearing the commentary should be hilarious with Miner trying to justify this crap.

[Flyboy]

"Based on the George A. Romero motion picture Day of the Dead"

Don't make me laugh. It took the title, that is all. The title. Something based on an original movie with be Snyder's 'Dawn'. From the shopping mall, to the chopper & BP truck nods, the cameos from the original cast members and the Foree's classic "When there's no more room in Hell..."

Vegetarian zombies? Screw this s**t. :roll:

[Shredmonkey]

I managed to borrow the screener from a friends DVD store, I'm going to wake him up double early so I can return it. Whilst Snyder's remake of Dawn might have been a superficial if fun action horror flick, this one is so bad it would make the baby Jesus cut himself.

Day Of The Dead? In title only, there are no connections to the origional bar a couple of character names. Please don't be fooled by people saying "Hey, it's not so bad. It's low budget, just enjoy it". It really is that bad, even with inflation the budget exceeds that of the origional film. Nothing I say will ever stop you renting this godawful waste of celluloid, but at least be warned.

Maybe if you just close your eyes during the titles and then watch the film you will only feel slightly cheated out of the rental money...maybe.

Right, I need a shower now. I gotta wash away the stench of Day 2008.

[voyager]

I watched this last night and come on. It was similar in title only. Maybe if it was just released as some random low budget zombie movie it would have been better, but to compare this to the original is just insult. I don't want to drop any spoilers but come on, whats with those zombies?? Once you see it you will know what I mean.

Remember give it a new title "The adventures of super mutated flu zombie like creatures" and watch it with the mentality of the director and casting director are doing this for a senior project. You expect problems and snafu's on something like that, but it might just make it possible to get a moment or two's enjoyment from it.

[DeadinWV]

The screener torrent is all over the net now.

[ZombiesAteMyDog]

I would download it but im not even sure its worth my bandwith to download this turd :puke::poo:

[Shredmonkey]

I would download it but im not even sure its worth my bandwith to download this turd :puke::poo:

It isn't. BUT! I normally dislike downloading movies (particularly non STUDIO BLOCKBUSTER MEGATITLES), but if d/l ing this saves you a couple of dollars rental...Let's be honest, you're gonna have to watch it one way or another.

I don't know what the quality of the download one is, but I doubt it could truly harm the viewing experience.

Just to put my opinion of this film in perspective I would like it noted that I can watch Zombie Creeping Flesh and enjoy it. That should give you an idea.

[ZombiesAteMyDog]

I dont like downloading movies either, technicly, it is stealing money from the folks involved with the movie...

that being said, isnt calling this steaming pile of dog vomit "day of the dead" hoping to cash in on a quick buck from romero fans ( esp with diary coming out and the recent success of the dawn remake ) sort of stealing in its own right?

I would rather download this piece of shit, and go buy 2 tickets to diary, or rent 2 copies of the original day, or even the dawn remake so the money goes somewhere its deserved not to some hack just trying to cash in.

all of that aside, I wont download it, I probaly will end up buying it when its released,,,, why would I buy it after I just bashed it for 3 whole paragraphs? well.... because it has zombies in it :x ( see the cash in worked ! ) but I have to suport the genre, the more money zombie movies make, the more zombie movies that get released, and amid the sea of mediocre turds coming out because zombie flicks are making good money is bound to be a few genuinly good, inovative , entertaining zombie movies.

[arayner]

Dam! i thought after DOTD2, they would have learnt:drool:. I guess unless films like this drop in my lap for free, they might not get watched:x

[pisshead]

i was rather smug that i had managed to get hold of a screener dvd, seeing it before my mates

its ****ING SHIT!!!!!

i'd rather sit through 2 hours of neighbours or home and away than offend my eyes with utter crap like this

fingers crossed george's flick satisfies the appetite

[MrShape666]

I've heard a few rumors that they actually want to make a DTV Day Of The Dead 3.

I really hope not.:x

[evilzombie20]

I've heard a few rumors that they actually want to make a DTV Day Of The Dead 3.

I really hope not.:x

WHAT!? WHERE!?

[Dead J]

I just watched this last night all i can say and i hope this doesnt spoil the movie for anybody but Nick Cannon couldnt have died soon enough god he was annoying and even tho shes eye candy Mena Suvari keeps her clothes on the whole movie :( And dont even get me started on the so called zombies with there supernatural abilities to climb on ceilings wtf?

[zmbvan]

I just watched this last night all i can say and i hope this doesnt spoil the movie for anybody but Nick Cannon couldnt have died soon enough god he was annoying and even tho shes eye candy Mena Suvari keeps her clothes on the whole movie :( And dont even get me started on the so called zombies with there supernatural abilities to climb on ceilings wtf?

Your talking about dairy of the dead, Right? This is the Day of the Dead thread...

I can see how you made the mistake though. Both threads are rather large.

[zombiekilling101]

sorry but diary of the dead zombies climb on ceilings?

[evilzombie20]

sorry but diary of the dead zombies climb on ceilings?

Uh no, they don't - he has the right film. In DAY the zombies DO crawl on the ceiling, and on walls too. They also seem to be quite sensitive to fire as their heads explode shortly after being lit up. Seriously - it happens - I SAW IT!

Oh yeah and they like burn up into ash too rather quickly but hey, they can leap out two story windows without so much as even as fracturing a single bone and defy the laws of gravity so who cares right????

[UNDEAD FRED]

Is the Day of the Dead remake out on dvd allready in Canada, or the UK. I havent seen it here in the US.

[evilzombie20]

Is the Day of the Dead remake out on dvd allready in Canada, or the UK. I havent seen it here in the US.

It will be out in April. I have a screener of it. That's how I saw it.

[Djrock]

I'm watching it right now, and well... It kinda sucks..

If only I had the money to make a zombie movie :cry:.

-Will

[DeadinWV]

I'm watching it right now, and well... It kinda sucks..

If only I had the money to make a zombie movie :cry:.

-Will

That doesn't stop anyone else.

[Djrock]

Well, I meant if I had the money to make a quality zombie movie.

Hehe.

-Will

[MrShape666]

So I guess they're a cross between the Dawn remake zombies and Spider-Man?

[goesaround]

Better that then zombies and Thor! I am not looking too foward to this. I want to see that Spanish zombie flick thats going American. It's one word and I want it.

[Crombie]

You know what this movie feels like? Someone saw Dawn 2004, and said, "Let's make the zombies more XTREME!!!1!11"

At least Day of the Dead: Contagium pretended to have a plot. This one just completely forgoes any sense of a plot whatsoever. It sullies the names of the original characters, and turns the zombies into a complete farce.

If someone wanted to fix this movie, all they would need to do is:

1) Remove all 'super' power zombies
2) Slow down the Benny Hill zombies
3) Remove the hokey zombie 'conversion' sequence

and finally

4) Add in a dash of a plot, and non-stupid ending and this might even have made it to theatres.

I mean, this thing has no storyline at all. It is just a mish mash of go here, do that, what, hey, what's going on? Oh wait, now we are here. Oops, movie over.

[goesaround]

There outa be a law

[pisshead]

You know what this movie feels like? Someone saw Dawn 2004, and said, "Let's make the zombies more XTREME!!!1!11"

At least Day of the Dead: Contagium pretended to have a plot. This one just completely forgoes any sense of a plot whatsoever. It sullies the names of the original characters, and turns the zombies into a complete farce.

If someone wanted to fix this movie, all they would need to do is:

1) Remove all 'super' power zombies
2) Slow down the Benny Hill zombies
3) Remove the hokey zombie 'conversion' sequence

and finally

4) Add in a dash of a plot, and non-stupid ending and this might even have made it to theatres.

I mean, this thing has no storyline at all. It is just a mish mash of go here, do that, what, hey, what's going on? Oh wait, now we are here. Oops, movie over.



also ditch the vegetarian zombie ffs whats that all about :loon:

[Crombie]

also ditch the vegetarian zombie ffs whats that all about :loon:

You know what? I am actually fine with that part. It goes towards some of the mythos that the zombies are retaining portions of themselves. It is just the cartoonish aspects that really ruined the movie for me. I am not a movie expert, but if they really wanted to 'speed up' the zombies there must be a better way than turning on the Benny Hill machine. :)

[MrShape666]

God help me, I actually want to see this.

[Dead J]

One thing I noticed is that we are calling these guys zombies but from what i remember these guys turned into flesh eating
maniacs because of a goverment experiment not because they died and came back to life. So this would be a remake of a classic zombie movie with not even real zombies as to say coming back from the dead?

[Subgenius]

I watched the trailer for Day of the Dead.

Day of the Dead (2008) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=axd1dC0DXig)

I am not bothered by differences in the zombies. Some people get too hung up on just what it is to be a zombie and what a zombie is allowed to do in a movie. I always say, "It's not about the zombies. It's a film made by the film industry. Whether you like it or not, George Romero is a filmmaker."

What I meant was that Romero, above all else, is an artist and a craftsman. He defined a genre, and he can redefine it as well. The zombies MUST be different with each new film incarnation, at least to some extent. Otherwise, Romero does a disservice to himself and the audiences.

IMO, there are no "right" ways or "wrong" ways to portray the zombies, except if the story, characters, and plot of the film itself really sucks. That seems to be what holds most really good zombie movies together. The original Dawn of the Dead had a killer story, it had Peter (I just loved that guy), and the plot moved along really well. The same for Day of the Dead.

[MrShape666]

You know, I would probably like the spider man zombies if this was called Bunker Of The Zombies or something.

[headless]

I watched it the other night. It wasnt horrible. Wasn't great either. Considering that right after that I tried to watch Deadlands, maybe that is coloring my perspective. Cause even BattleField Earth is better than Deadlands. And BattleField Earth is considered by myself and friends one of the worst pieces of garbage ever. And cmon, we get to see Nick Cannon die. Even if he is probaly the one character that has the most sense.

[Bad Zombie Night]

I watched it the other night. It wasnt horrible. Wasn't great either. Considering that right after that I tried to watch Deadlands, maybe that is coloring my perspective. Cause even BattleField Earth is better than Deadlands. And BattleField Earth is considered by myself and friends one of the worst pieces of garbage ever. And cmon, we get to see Nick Cannon die. Even if he is probaly the one character that has the most sense.

Thanks headless for not alerting us about the spoiler you tossed in there. http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y152/bzn123/Smileys/Angry%20and%20Sad/pissed.gif

[Zombob]

Today two unused theatrical posters were released for the remake of Day of the Dead, which arrives on DVD April 8. The original follows a group of scientists and military personnel holed up in an underground bunker because the world above is overrun with zombies. The lumbering flesheaters eventually find a way in and wreak havoc on the scientists who've been experimenting on their undead brethren.

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e302/bobbolink08/poster3.jpg

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e302/bobbolink08/poster2.jpg

[Godzilla_Rules]

those posters are cool zombob. i wonder if the movie sucks given its streight to dvd.

[Bad Zombie Night]

Thanks ZB, you beat me to it. http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y152/bzn123/Smileys/Characters/1bnz_smiley.gif :lol:


*Heads Up* http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y152/bzn123/Smileys/attention.gif

After this film is finally released April 8th on DVD, a new discussion will be created to replace this one. :)

[stonyman65]

Is this a good thing?

Pro- More zombies, could be a good movie

Con - Remake, GAR is not involved, those Directors aren't know for making good movies...

Well, I geuss we'll have to wait and find out. Worse comes to worse, it goes into the $5.99 bin a walmart a week after release.

one never knows, do one?

[jackskellington]

That first poster with the profile of the drooling zombie is outstanding!

[Zombie Buffet]

I've heard a lot of negative things about the film, and I admit that I wasn't thrilled when I saw the trailer, but I'm going to give it a chance and check it out anyway.

I do like the posters a lot though. :)

[Zombob]

I've heard a lot of pros and cons about it as well, the biggest thing is that it should have a different name.

[Bad Zombie Night]

Day of the Dead Remake New Clip (http://www.moviesonline.ca/movienews_14425.html) http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y152/bzn123/Smileys/Characters/1bnz_smiley.gif


TerrorFeed have a brand new exclusive clip for Day of the Dead 2008 (http://www.terrorfeed.com/index.php?id=dayofthedead2-outbreak). Go give it a watch and be warned it is completely NSFW. It is from one of the best scenes in the movie. The movie is a remake of George Romero's classic 3rd part of his zombie movies. The script was written by Jeffrey Reddick ("Final Destination"). Starring Ving Rhames, (http://www.moviesonline.ca/celeb-Ving-Rhames,.htm)Mena Suvari, Stark Sands and Christa Campbell (http://www.moviesonline.ca/celeb-Christa-Campbell.htm) the story is set inside a sunken military complex, where Army and medical staff, supposedly working on a solution to the zombie problem, are going crazy. -Movies Online


Watch clip here: Day of the Dead (2008) Exclusive OutBreak Clip (http://www.terrorfeed.com/index.php?id=dayofthedead2-outbreak) -terrorfeed.com

[RobDimension]

I saw this film a few weeks ago. I wasn't a big fan, I would gladdly take the original anyday. I agree with it needing a different name, calling it Day of the Dead and having Romero's name on the poster in big letters is very misleading.

[zombie butcher]

I am still curious about this movie. Does Bob have a reprising role in the film?
The original wasn't that great so my expectations are low.

[Firemane]

It really isn't a horrible movie by any stretch of the imagination but its one of those movies that would been seen as alot better with a different title. You can't go home again and I think that as fans of the genre we need to accept that and embrace it, yes there are going to be alot of crappy remakes and reinterpetations but at least they are being made to inspire the next generation.

That being said I would have loved to have seen what Romero could have done with the budget to do his own remake the way he wanted to, but that time is long gone and the man behind the original is 20 years ago.

[C J]

Okay please correct me if I'm wrong but isn't today the release date for this movie again? I just left blockbuster video and checked on Amazon.ca and nothing.

[Bad Zombie Night]

Okay please correct me if I'm wrong but isn't today the release date for this movie again? I just left blockbuster video and checked on Amazon.ca and nothing.
It's Today!... I just received mine in the mail this afternoon via Netflix. http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y152/bzn123/Smileys/mail-gotmail.gif :drinking:

[ZombiesAteMyDog]

just got done watching this, there are 2 ways to look at this movie, and as such Ill give my brief reviews for both...

as a remake of Day of the dead, terible, absolute complete and uder failure with absolutely no redeeming qualities, fails on every posible level

0 of 10. as a day of the dead remake

now, if you look at this movie as just another zombie movie ( which IMO you can because it has nothing to do with the original ) it is actualy a pretty enjoyable zombie flick, it has some decent set pieces, lots of gore and its fairly well done, the acting is meh but passable, one thing I have to say is Mena Suvari looked bloody amazing she was both cute and hot and I hated her in american pie so go figgure.

the zombies were terible, everything about them - , the way they act , the way they climb on the walls / cielings, the way they look was just terible they all looked like fredy krueger, zombies that havent been with in 100 yards of fire look like theyve been burned alive and the worst thing of all was the fact that everytime they showed them running or walking or moving they used some strange fast forward effect that makes it feel like your watching an old benny hill episode.

6 1/2 of 10. as just another zombie movie.

one other thing I would like to add which I am curious to see what other people think, but to me, especily in the final quarter of the movie, this almost felt like the original resident evil game, or I should say somewhat of a combination of resident evil 1 + 2 games, but yea for whatever reason I got that vibe from it.

[C J]

It's Today!... I just received mine in the mail this afternoon via Netflix. http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y152/bzn123/Smileys/mail-gotmail.gif :drinking:



How nice for you. I have nothing lol! Netflix maybe I'm going to check it out but, I would rather just own it.

[zombieuprising]

get me one!

[UNDEAD FRED]

I thought about getting it today, but I couldnt get past the cover art on the dvd. It has to be one of the worst covers I have ever seen. I will watch it on the net someday.

[zombiekilling101]

I'm going to give it a netflix go... but low priority.

[MrShape666]

Deep Discount DVD has two covers for this. I'm watching the regular version right now, but DDD lists something called "Version 2" with a different, much better cover. Anyone know what this one is? Is it an alternate version of the film or just a different cover? It wasn't at Best Buy. DVD Empire lists a copy of this alternate version as well.

Yes, I bought this film . . . behold my zombie nerdism.

http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/673/30848713wr2.jpg

[FreakenZombies]

I watched DOTD (remake) about 3 week ago on net.I thought it was okay, but I agree that the spiderman wannabe zombies was kinda weird. But for a zombie flick my 7 year old thought they were great.

[MrShape666]

Okay, I just finished watching this. As expected, there was little of Day Of The Dead in this, just the title and some of the names. All in all, it was actually a fun zombie pic, and I think I might have liked it more if it had been called Town Of The Dead, or Dead Virus, or Direct To DVD Of The Dead or something. I'm going to lay most of the blame on Jeffery Riddick's ridicules script. The whole idea of "Bud" was asinine.

Mena's "Sarah" was a major problem. Apparently Riddick was trying to make her a "strong woman" like Romero did, but rather then make her strong and competent, he made her obnoxious, controlling, and apparently frigid (When she finds her brother making out with his girlfriend, she acts like she caught them clubbing toddlers.). I guess we were supposed to care about her, but she came off like someone's bitchy ex wife. The way Mena played her, she also seemed to have just graduated high school. There's a peculiar slurry way she delivers her lines, at one point she calls Dr. Logan "Dr. Loogan".

The film tries so hard to be as intense as the Dawn remake but it's really too silly to make it. The wall crawling the zombies do could have been cool, but it just isn't handled very well. I loved all the zombie soldiers firing their guns aimlessly as they charged after the heros. The zombie mayhem is a lot of fun, and worth the price of rental, but I noticed that, like the Dawn redue, it's considerably dryer then the original Day. And dryer then Land for that matter.

And Nick Cannon really had to go. I groaned every time he opened his mouth.

Basically, I found myself enjoying it. But it doesn't come anywhere close to matching the original, or the Dawn remake. My advice? Watch Day Of The Dead 2: Contagion before you watch this: It'll make this one look like a masterwork.

[Cyber Bishop]

Ok, I was going to buy this yesterday but needed to ask this question..

Is this movie worth the $19.95 or should I wait for it to go to the bargain bin?

Also, is this a "stand alone movie" or is there ties to the Dawn remake?

[stegon66]

It's a stand alone movie, with no relationship to either the Dawn remake or any of Romero's films. Not bad as far as contemporary zombie flicks go, but as others have stated, it's lazily scripted and too silly in places. Really, zombies leapfrogging all over the place?

[Firemane]

Ok, I was going to buy this yesterday but needed to ask this question..

Is this movie worth the $19.95 or should I wait for it to go to the bargain bin?

Also, is this a "stand alone movie" or is there ties to the Dawn remake?

I'd wait for it to fall into the $9.95 -14.95 range unless you would just waste the extra on beer and smokes.

[MrShape666]

Ok, I was going to buy this yesterday but needed to ask this question..

Is this movie worth the $19.95 or should I wait for it to go to the bargain bin?

Also, is this a "stand alone movie" or is there ties to the Dawn remake?

I only paid $14.99 at Best Buy.

Still, does anyone know what that Version 2 disc is?:

http://www.deepdiscount.com/viewproduct.htm?productId=30848713

[zombie butcher]

Thanks for the input guys. I will be waiting to get this through other means or at least when it hits the $5.99 bin

[UNDEAD FRED]

I watched it tonight, and all I can say about it is,............

[max]

I thought it was ok but really liked the first half of the movie or the very beginning you could say. Like until everyone became zombies. Would of been great if some things were not done.

[Kemper]

This would have been a good Vampir movie

[erg80]

This movie was a let down to me. Id give it a 5 out of 10.

[Cyber Bishop]

Thanks for the replies! I think I will wait for this one.

Shame because the Dawn remake was so damn good...

[corgi37]

But what has that got to do with this?

[MrShape666]

It's kind of ironic how they re made a film that everyone hated when it originally came out.

Some of you younger fans won't remember this, but I remember back when Day came out back in 85 it was greeted with a similar near universal loatheing to what greeted Land recently.

Seriously, people HATED it! They wanted Romero's blood for making it and they wanted mine for liking it.

And now it's acknowleged as a zombie classic . . . how the times have changed (even horror snob Phil Hardy did an about face, in the early editions of his Overlock Encylcopedia Of Film: Horror, he panned the hell out of Day. By the time it was reprinted much, much later, he'd changed his tune and wrote a rave review.).

[BarnabusBlackoak]

watched it yesterday, and I liked it o.k., but it didn't feel like a zombie movie. If they had said they were mutated by the virus or whatever it was, it would have been a great movie.

Did not like:
fast zombies
Spider-Man zombie WTF??
How IMMEDIATELY upon death, the sick people's faces transformed into a Freddy
Kruegar look-a-like.

Other than that, it was good. It was more of an American version of the Rage virus from 28days to me.

Even though I do not like fast zombies, I liked the scene where,
Zombie in a store sees dinner outside, and runs smack thru the plateglass window without slowing down, that looked cool.

But I noticed one HUGE misstake. They show that fire makes them disintergrate. BUT the 2 zombies at the power station when they jumped the girl and fell onto that fence and they all got electrified (and they didn't stop eating, I did LOVE that) they then burst into flame and KEPT EATING. Those first 2 we saw catch fire did NOT disentergrate. How cum??

[UseYourHeadCutOffTheirs]

I also watched this yesterday and wasn't overly impressed. It wasn't the worst zombie film thats for sure.

I have to agree with e eryone on a few things. The spiderman/wall climbing zombies were horrible. Also I hated hot as soon as someone was turned their faces and such instantly deteriorated.....super terrible idea.



We all know how farfetched zombies are, but atleast try to make it a little realistic.




Over all rating: 4/10

[MrShape666]

yeah, that change didn't work for me either. It just seemed ridiculous they way they instantly decayed once they zombified. I have no problem with fast zombies (being a Return Of The Living Dead fan), but in their attempts to outdo the Dawn remake, they ramped them up way too much.

Still, ya gotta admit it was better then Contagion.

[DarthJoe8]

This movie should never had been called Day of the Dead! As a "remake" it's up there with one of the worse.

Over all I agree with Barnabus's take on the movie.:drinking:

[antiflagpunk13]

I personally can't wait to see this remake this is the first i heard about it. now i cant wait to add it to my collection.

[antiflagpunk13]

I personally can't wait to see this remake this is the first i heard about it. now i cant wait to add it to my collection.

[milliondollarbbw]

It's kind of ironic how they re made a film that everyone hated when it originally came out.

Some of you younger fans won't remember this, but I remember back when Day came out back in 85 it was greeted with a similar near universal loatheing to what greeted Land recently.

Seriously, people HATED it! They wanted Romero's blood for making it and they wanted mine for liking it.

And now it's acknowleged as a zombie classic . . . how the times have changed (even horror snob Phil Hardy did an about face, in the early editions of his Overlock Encylcopedia Of Film: Horror, he panned the hell out of Day. By the time it was reprinted much, much later, he'd changed his tune and wrote a rave review.).

I am sorry, but I LOVE LOVE LOVED Day of the Dead and I saw it when it first came out....way back when there were BETA tapes.

Day of the Dead is one of my favorite films as it was truly very scary to me.

[Zombob]

As far as cheesy zombie movies that seemed like they were made for the sci-fi channel, it wasn't all THAT bad...(it wasn't incredible, but far from the worst)

I think the biggest problem was the name; it shouldn't have been called 'Day of the Dead.'

[BarnabusBlackoak]

This movie should never had been called Day of the Dead! As a "remake" it's up there with one of the worse.

Over all I agree with Barnabus's take on the movie.:drinking:

You have very good judgement, I salute you.... :greet:

[DarthJoe8]

You have very good judgement, I salute you.... :greet:


:drinking:And i you.:drinking:

[MrShape666]

Like I said, as a zombie movie, its alright. Although the spastic zombies on speed kinda take it down a few notches. Despite their efforts, it never reaches the deliriously adrenaline charged mayhem of the Dawn remake, but the zombie carnage is a lot of fun to watch (I still like the zombies leaping out of that third story window).

I think this would have been a better movie without the Day title.

I don't know if I missed it, but was there a "Steel" character in there anywhere?

[MrShape666]

I am sorry, but I LOVE LOVE LOVED Day of the Dead and I saw it when it first came out....way back when there were BETA tapes.

Day of the Dead is one of my favorite films as it was truly very scary to me.

So did I, but there were like twenty of us at the time. Everyone else was howling for Romero's blood and unfairly declaring him a washed up hack of a directer. They were all livid that it wasn't like Dawn (without noticing how different Dawn was to Night, I was only seven when Dawn came out, anyone remember if people griped?) and people didn't give Day the chance it deserved until video. So I find it ironic that they'd go and make a pseudo sequel AND a remake of the film in short order when you consider how many people wanted to toss it in the trash back in 85.

[ZOMBILVR]

Like I said, as a zombie movie, its alright. Although the spastic zombies on speed kinda take it down a few notches. Despite their efforts, it never reaches the deliriously adrenaline charged mayhem of the Dawn remake, but the zombie carnage is a lot of fun to watch (I still like the zombies leaping out of that third story window).

I think this would have been a better movie without the Day title.

I don't know if I missed it, but was there a "Steel" character in there anywhere?

I just finished watching Day of the Dead "remake". And I must say that this movie, which I knew, was very disappointing to me. Come on, zombies dodging bullets and crawling on walls and ceilings, and leaping into the air like they have springs for legs.:x And, get this, the main zombie in the original film BUB, turns out to be a vegan on this remake, get the hell out of here with that shit...LOL.... But it's sad that they remade this movie, and put George's name way on the bottom of the dvd cover. I guess for the passerbys in the video store can say, "oooh look George A. Romero remade his movie". And to answer your question about was there a "Steel" character, I didn't hear anyone in the movie refer to anyone else with his name! Oh by the way I love your signature, it rocks.

[Zombie Buffet]

I finally got to see the remake and I must say that I was pretty disappointed. I had a lot of "get the hell out of here" moments: super zombies driving, shooting guns, "faking dead", dodging bullets?!? That was just too much for me....:x

The CGI was killing it for me too, and I was sick of the slow-motion action sequences. :puke:

This film really didn't need to have the name, Day of the Dead....it is just misleading (besides the fact that the bulk of the film takes place at night)....:doh:

[MrShape666]

I didn't mind the guns so much since it was like they were holding them when they died and they were just grabbing the triggor when they ran, not knowing what they were doing.

On the other hand, the zombie playing dead didn't work.

[goesaround]

Well I just rented this and besides the over the top cover of guy puking eye balls was glad to finally see this. I expected it to be on the lines of "Day of the Dead Contagion" I was pleasantly surprised.It was miles above that zombie jerk off fest. I liked this movie a whole lot. I did not watch it with any refrence to the brilliant Day of the dead original. I just watched it as Sci-Fi channel type Zombie movie and like it very much. I remember the 'Vegan Bub' issue and for me it worked great and I got angry, and even sad when his head was ripped off by the scientist. I dont like running zombies but I bought in to it. I liked the characters, the jive dude WAS funny I liked when he said 'By the power of Greystone!'
It was a fun ride it was better to me then so many I've seen lately..Forget it as remake of 'anything' it was a enjoyable 'infected zombieish fun ride with likeable characters' Yeahhh Boyeee a surprising thumbs up.

[MrShape666]

Yeah, like I said, it was fun to watch, but it would have been even more fun with a different title. Poor Steve Minor, apparently he thought he was making as big a hit as the Dawn remake.

And yeah, Contagion makes this film look like a masterwork.

[Zombob]

Day of the Dead remake worse than DOTD: Contagium?

That's a tough call...

[Darth Erroneous]

...but it would have been even more fun with a different title.

I agree. Other than the character names used there was no reason or point for it to be considered a remake of Day. A revision maybe, but even that is a long shot. Definately better than Contagium. I won't even buy that piece for my collection. Can't wait for Diary to come out.

[zombiekilling101]

well Im almost done with it and its a terrible movie. I turned off the "its a remake" button and tried watching it as a stand alone.

The only thing I liked about it was how the zombies where in the survivors faces like a feeding frenzy.

Things I learned:

-They dont issue the soldiers full gear in Colorado
-Communications dont get guns even though their out in the dangerous field
-Pistols sound silenced when shot
-Zombies heads explode when lit on fire
-Zombies get infected with the spiderman virus
-colorado didnt get the new uniforms
-Zombies faces rot as soon as the infection takes hold... but not their hands.

Terrible remake, terrible movie.
1/10

[Zombob]

Contagium. I won't even buy that piece for my collection.

I got it for free and still paid too much!! :)

[zombiekilling101]

day of the dead 2 is loads better then the DAY remake.

[MrShape666]

day of the dead 2 is loads better then the DAY remake.


Umm . . . we're gonna have to just agree to disagree there.

[Kemper]

I enjoyed both of them...I probably liked the Day Remake because of production values a little better, but they were both ok for me dog.

[Subgenius]

Well, I now own Day of the Dead, the remake with Ving Rhames. I liked it. I won't say that it was great. But, I liked it more than most other zombie films out there, except for all of the GAR films and the remakes of Night and Dawn. Did you guys watch the alternate ending on the DVD? It's not all that different. But, maybe take a look, if you rent the DVD.

I see Dawn of the Dead and Day of the Dead, the remakes, as alternate universe adaptations of the Romero films. They are so different that Romero could easily remake his own films and still produce a very different product. I gave Day of the Dead some high marks for production values, make-up and SFX, and for some of the opening scenes; especially the outbreak scenario at the hospital.

For any video game lovers of Zombie Panic Source on Half-Life 2, Day of the Dead was a movie for YOU! The zombies acted like they do in ZPS and the movie revolved around a lot of barricading rooms and climbing through vents much like ZPS.

[goesaround]

I built uo over a year expecting to hate this and boom I liked it a whole lot. Ving is never bad as Spoiler Alert
a half eaten zombie crawking after them was quite good. The way he decides to crawl around the whole was really good.
I was expecting the zombies to be running down the outside walls of the hospital. What they did do was in keeping with what they had become. Some of the makeup was very good, the head kills by the African American dude were fun and he really was funny and was even a drop beyond stereotype. The two endings were good Spoiler Alert
I liked that he lived in the alternative version but it had more depth with his loss.
What is with B horror movies? They have to bring a monster back and have him growl in your face??? It is so insulting to the movie. As if to say oh forget the plot;here is some CHEESE WHIZ!!

[MrShape666]

Also, they way the eyes faded over white instantaneously, kinda gave me bad flashback to Night Of The Living Dead 3D.

Oh, well. It was a lot of fun to watch, and you could do worse with a zombie film. Now I just hope that that rumor I heard that they want to make Day Of The Dead 3 turns out to be just that.

So how long before they remake Diary Of The Dead?

[Sadogoat]

I watched it last week and thought it was vaguely entertaining - although obviously it doesn't merit the use of the 'Day Of The Dead' name. Scant Romero ties aside, as a goofy zombie movie, it wasn't too bad - even if it's yet another film to jump on the 'running zombie' bandwagon (and jumping, and walking on ceilings, and stashing bodies in closets....).

At any rate, I found it alot more watchable than Contagium. However, I was kinda bemused/amused when I more recently watched Aliens Vs Predator: Requiem and realised how similar the films were to each other (except, obviously, one has aliens and one has zombies) :P

[zombiekilling101]

IAtrecently watched Aliens Vs Predator: Requiem and realised how similar the films were to each other (except, obviously, one has aliens and one has zombies) :P

wow your right... damn. conspiracy:scare:

[MrShape666]

Mystery solved, by the way: That "Version 2" print of the remake was just an alternate DVD cover. Otherwise, it's the same, without the fancy wraparound cover. Why it costs the same as the fancy version I don't know. I do like that cover a lot better then "puking" zombie version I've got.

I'd heard they did reshoots so I thought maybe it was a 'directer's version' but its the same film as the other version.

[jackskellington]

I got the Day remake a couple of days ago from Netflix and popped it in last night. I have to say that it wasn't good, but it certainly wasn't the worst thing I've seen lately. Granted, the story was too simple and had almost no connection to the original movie other than character names and a couple of instances of the "learning zombies" thing, but it had some decent gore and a nice fast pace that held my interest. I BADLY wanted everyone to die and got a few laughs from all the stereotypical phrases from Nick Cannon, and I was incredibly confused by the zombies that could climb walls and crawl across ceilings, but you certainly can't blame the makers for at least trying something new in an otherwise stale genre.

[Zombie Buffet]

I'll give them credit for wanting to do something "different", but at points it just seemed like too much, you know. Driving, shooting guns, and crawling on the ceiling just had me rolling my eyes way too much to count. Outside of the character names and the compound, it really didn't need to have the name "Day of the Dead" at all. I understand wanting to bring in the fans who would be looking to compare the old with the new, but it really should just be viewed as a stand alone film. I'm sure that this "new" take on zombies will bring in some fans for the genre.

[MrShape666]

Like I said, just wait five years or so and someone'll probably remake this remake. Right after they remake Land and Diary and make a remake of Night Of The Living Dead 3D.

Hey, Prom Night proved that a film doesn't actually have to be GOOD for someone to remake it.

[Zombie Buffet]

That is just how Hollywood is.....unfortunately. :-(They are going to run good cinema into the ground remaking the hell out of everything. :x Good, bad, so-so, doesn't matter. It's as if they are just trying to give the illusion that they are actually producing "something". Besides, it's kind of a never-ending cycle. They make the remake, we pay good money to see the remake, and they don't care one way or another if we actually liked it or not. :poo: They got their money and that is all that matters. I would say, well, don't see the remake then. Since we all know that that is NOT going to happen, the films will still make some kind of money (whether it be box office or DVD sales). All in all, that just puts us back to square one, with the crappy remakes, originality out the window, dissatisfied movie-goers, and movie execs that don't have a clue about quality anymore, they just want the money. :x

[C J]

Today, I received my copy and thanks alot of negative comments my expectations were low.
Mena acted well I thought and I guess the only way I could take her seriously was cause I saw a news report a while back with a hot soldier that kind of reminded me of her.
About the zombies physical abilities I thought this pushed the envelope a bit too far this time.
The whole part about Bud being on the diet and about how they retain certain thoughts was interesting.
Overall, I was able to get past the comparison to the old and even the wall crawlers and I enjoyed it and will definitely watch it again.

Question

Did Mena's character ever say why she does not carry a loaded gun? I may have missed this part.

.

[MrShape666]

Today, I received my copy and thanks alot of negative comments my expectations were low.
Mena acted well I thought and I guess the only way I could take her seriously was cause I saw a news report a while back with a hot soldier that kind of reminded me of her.
About the zombies physical abilities I thought this pushed the envelope a bit too far this time.
The whole part about Bud being on the diet and about how they retain certain thoughts was interesting.
Overall, I was able to get past the comparison to the old and even the wall crawlers and I enjoyed it and will definitely watch it again.

Question

Did Mena's character ever say why she does not carry a loaded gun? I may have missed this part.

.

Mena being hot had nothing to do with why I found the character unbelievable. Plenty of confidant and competant women are hotties. She just came off as too immature for the role. Add to that the fact that Reddick's idea of empowering her is to make her a flaming bitch (very common with writers no adays, I've got news for them, I strong woman and fridgid manhater are two entirely different things), and it just doesn't work for me. I still think that bit was rediculous where she flew off the handle because she found her brother gettin jiggy with his girlfriend. It kind of reminded me of the ludicrist scene in Contagion where they think two (adult) patients might be sneaking off to have sex somewhere and they put the whole plance into lockdown and do a room by room check to stop them (Are we really this afraid of sex in this country?).

She never said why shed didn't carry bullets, she just said it was complicated. Another asanine plot point.

Now, don't get me wrong, I don't 100% hate this movie. I'm perfectly happy to have in my video colletion 'cause it is a hell of a lot of fun to watch. I'll watch this over and over again before I try to sit through Zombies Gone Wild again (try being the opperative word, ZGW is the only zombie movie I ever turned off and never finished, and I sat through every masochistically dull moment of Oasis Of The Zombies, but I digress). It just could have been a whole lot better, and with the Day Of The Dead title, it had a lot to live up to, both Romero's original and Zack Snyder's Dawn remake, and it failed to do so.

And there's enought cool zombie mayhem to make it worthwhile for me, so it is sitting there on my shelf (right next to Night 3D, behold my zombie nerdism). I probably would have liked it more with a different title. I also probably would have liked it more if Mena had gotten naked at some point, but that's just a personal guy thing (I wouldn't have objected to a Lori Cardille shower scene in original, either).

Edit: Did anyone else notice that the remake's Bud when he was alive seemed stupider then the original's Bub who was dead?

[BelowTheMorgue]

When is the Day remake set to arrive on shelves? It hasn't hit theaters here yet or anything does anyone know?

[jackskellington]

When is the Day remake set to arrive on shelves? It hasn't hit theaters here yet or anything does anyone know?

It came out on DVD a couple of weeks ago. Didn't have a theatrical run.

[JFAK075]

What I don't get is why they tried to push this movie in April (which never happened). The smart thing to do is give it an October release. People want to see zombie based movies around Halloween.
Either way this looked like crap.

[ZombiesAteMyDog]

What I don't get is why they tried to push this movie in April (which never happened). The smart thing to do is give it an October release. People want to see zombie based movies around Halloween.
Either way this looked like crap.

$$$$$$$

that pretty much sums it up :lol:

[lavel]

$$$$$$$

that pretty much sums it up :lol:


Yeah, but you'll make more $$$$ around Halloween. Think people think!:x

[PrincessGore]

I quite liked the remake to be honest. Plenty of gore, though not a strong plot. Alot of action is always a bonus, though. The only downside was Bud's death. But the way they portrayed him "turning" was excellent, as it really tugged my heart strings as he was sat alone in the van all tied up. I think I actually shed a tear! haha. I really felt for the character, as he was really nervous and jittery, so th director has done that really well. I was really impressed by Starks Sands (Bud) performance. Overall, good film. It had basically everything. Guts, pretty girl, a bit of romance...all sorts. I've seen it 5 times now and I never seem to bore of it.

[Subgenius]

I hate to admit it, but I did enjoy the Day of the Dead remake.

It's not as cool or well thought out as the original.

It's a different story with the same character names.

But, if you divorce it from the Romero legacy and let it stand alone...

Then, it does have some cool stuff to offer.

I loved the hospital outbreak scenes and parking lot scenes.

I loved Bud. He's no "Bub" but he'll do.

Over all: 6.5/10

[Lefty44709]

Watching it right now, so far so bad, but the outbreak is just ahppening...

lol, I think a zombie just crawled along the ceiling, not sure, the directing/editing is pretty bad...

it's so bad, it's entertaining...

[dead and loving it]

I give it 3 out of 5. There are some great scenes of mayhem, especially at the hospital. I didn't really care for any of the characters that much but i didn't hate them either.

[Lefty44709]

After finishing this movie, I have to say I enjoyed it. I wasn't in love with the way the zombies were presented (super human, crawling around, and the way they sped up the video on certain scenes annoyed me...) but the movie itself was enjoyable for the most part.

I'd say it was above average in terms of most of the zombie films out there...

[DoorstopIdol]

I watched this movie a month or so ago. I really didn't care for it too much at all. Being called Day of the Dead was an insult to what I already consider the weakest of Romero's "original three". It was just a typical, direct-to-dvd waste that was mostly disposable. It had some interesting moments I suppose, and the zombies at least looked good...but that was pretty much it. Aside from the bits in the radio station I didn't really care that much for the movie. Attempting an explanation was a nice touch but it was a lame explanation so...

And of course giving the zombies super powers was freaking ridiculous. Climbing the walls (especially the sheer walls of the lab) was so dumb it almost seemed like it had to be a joke...but it wasn't. The movie took itself way too seriously while pushing the zombie genre to absurdity.

So, while I guess this probably sounds pretty harsh I guess I should also mention that it was in no way the worst zombie movie I've ever seen. Sadly it's probably on par if not slightly better than the vast majority that get released. And I really wish that was an exaggeration.

1/2*/****

[SkullOrchard]

I thought it was watchable, but not memorable. If this movie wasn't posing as a Day of the Dead remake, I might have been a bit more forgiving of it's shortcomings. I was hoping it would be as good a remake as 'Dawn 2004', but it didn't even come close. It wasn't awful, but it wasn't very good either. Having said that, I don't think it was nearly as bad as Romero's Diary of the Dead.

[MillenniumMan]

I just finished watching Day of the Dead 2008, kinda slow getting there I know.
There were some real "WTF?" moments for me in this one


Improvements the zeds have made:

They can run on ceilings. (MAJOR WTF?)
Run much faster than when they were alive.
Have feelings (zombies got a cruuuuuuush:') I liked that part)
Use tools more efficiently, like banging on ceilings and grates with poles and broomsticks.
Can shoot guns (They did that in DOTD'85, but they've been getting target practice)
Can drive a car? (WTF?) Well at least their license expires after they do.
Remembers directions and letters to the radio station in town.(didn't know they could read)
Retain more of what they were.(very useful in a Fido situation)
Can climb(OH $#!T)

Disimprovements:
When the living succumb, they automaticly decompose as opposed to wear down over time.
A zombie disintegrates instantly when exposed to fire or open flames (unlike previous zeds).
Turn on themselves (Could be an improvement to help thin the herd of zeds)

I don't even like to think the new and improved zombies can do half of those things, it makes me
think there's less of a chance for survival now than with the older 2004 DOTD

Another thing that sticks out in my mind is the platoon C.O. After he died and came back, just
before giving chase, he ate his own eye, just because it was hanging in front of his face. And
he chewed on it then tried to gulp it down but it was still hanging out of the socket and into his
mouth via the optic nerve bundle...

Any other (WTFs?) related to this DOTD or any other movies that change your views of zeds?

[alpineashes]

I couldn't stand this movie. Doesn't even compare to Romero's although that's no surprise, but they're obviously just trying to cash in on the name.

[Greek Zombie]

ok the remake wasnt so good.
i think it didnt have any connection to the original film.

but it had some good things, like:

a vegeterian zombie
the super extremely fast zombies
some gore scenes
and Mena Suvari (:lol:)

[Souldrinker]

Worst zombie film ever.

EVER.

[Ziggy455]

I loved the old day of the dead but i want the remake to be made by The big man himself or zack snyder they are the only ones i think could pull of a remake...

[DarthJoe8]

Worst zombie film ever.

EVER.


:lol: you obviously haven't seen ZombieZ, vampires vs zombies, or Zombie Nation to name a few. :lol:


:drinking:

[detpat]

this film was an utter turd.

[ZombieJohn]

I loved the old day of the dead but i want the remake to be made by The big man himself or zack snyder they are the only ones i think could pull of a remake...

Maybe Snyder... Personally I think The Mighty R has lost his touch.

[Souldrinker]

:lol: you obviously haven't seen ZombieZ, vampires vs zombies, or Zombie Nation to name a few. :lol:


:drinking:

Well, not as yet, but as of now I am looking for them.

Cheers!

[DarthJoe8]

Well, not as yet, but as of now I am looking for them.

Cheers!

:lol:Please try to borrow them, if you buy these horrible movies it will only encourage them to make more shit.:roll:

:drinking:

[Flyboy]

Maybe Snyder... Personally I think The Mighty R has lost his touch.
Absolutely. I've no faith in what's coming next after how bad 'Diary' was. As for Snyder, here's hoping something comes of his 'Army' treatment.

As for the remake of 'Day'... anything with wall-crawlers and veggie-zombies is a no-no for me. I won't even bother.

[mk2]

In my opinion , It was an ok decent decent flick (setting aside the fast zombies) up to the part where they destroyed the movie with the zombie love pet angle(bud the love sick zombie :roll:) ...that was soooo ridicoulous and it just brought the movie down completely.

[Souldrinker]

:lol:Please try to borrow them, if you buy these horrible movies it will only encourage them to make more shit.:roll:

:drinking:

Haha, will do, then. I have a mate who has a ridiculously extensive collection of zombie films and so I'll see if he has the misfortune of having purchased them...

[UNDEAD FRED]

I think its watchable, not my first choice, but after a few bonghits why not. The Spiderman zombies are very lame, allmost as bad as Big Daddy in LOTD.

[nilskidoo]

It was horrible. For the whole town to all simultaneously "zed out" was bullshit.
And the immediate scarification on the newbies, directly contradicting however it was they actually died.
Crappola galore.

Had the writers ever even SEEN a zombie flick before?

[Zombie Slayer]

Yep, I had such high hopes for this one...after seeing it though, my high hopes went six feet under. I can deal with the fast movers...but the wall and ceiling crawlers? Didn't know Spider-man was one of the undead.:roll:

[LawgSkrak]

I liked it. Found it quite entertaining, in fact.

As a remake of the original Day, however, it failed.

I don't mind zombies who can do different things, like crawl on walls, etc. Who says all zombies have to be the same?

[senyorcitoninja]

Well, I WAS going to buy it, but Netflix is my friend, and...

this film was an utter turd.

Indeed.

[DarthJoe8]

:x I just watched this movie again last night. My god, this movie is sooo awful, what was the director smoking? Ahh crap, forget the director what about the writer? This guy should never write another thing EVER AGAIN. Not even his Fing name. :poo:

Wow, nothing about this movie was good. Freakin zombies dodging bullets....:loon:

:puke:I should demand my money back.

:drinking:

[UNDEAD FRED]

Yes its not very good, but worth at least 1 viewing so you can post in this thread how bad it is.

[DarthJoe8]

Yes its not very good, but worth at least 1 viewing so you can post in this thread how bad it is.

I've seen this 2 1/2 times. :lol: The 1/2comes from having it on as background noise.

:doh:I can't believe that I watched it more than once.

Me and my sense of fairness.:lol:

:drinking:

[secretcog]

[Scratches forehead with right hand while an uneasy twist of the lips form]

[Uncomfortable chuckle]

"I kinda liked the remake!"