Personally, I thought the movie was horrible, and I say that about very few movies. HOWEVER, I will say this in the movie's favor. My issue was never with the actors themselves, it was with the zombies, and every single aspect to them. I said several times during the movie "This would be a really good movie without the zombies".
The issue with changing zombies is this: There are certain things we expect from zombies, and this isn't it. This goes beyond Dawn of the Dead's 'fast zombies', or The Living Dead's 'smart zombies', these were super zombies. They were faster than they were when they were alive, able to cling to walls and ceilings, able to jump out of three story windows without injury and keep running. And apparently the 'first' zombie was in fact Neo, because he dodged bullets like in the matrix. These are traits I could see in a vampire movie, but not a zombie movie. Also, the whole 'Freeze for twenty seconds, then instantly rot and eat the person next to you' was horrifically stupid.
But you know what? I go on the boards all the time and bitch out people who do nothing but criticize a movie because they didn't like it, or worse, because they expected to not like it, and saw it for the sole purpose of leaving early. So if you genuinely enjoy this movie, I'm happy for you. And I'm glad that people can still enjoy a movie, regardless of how many other people (myself included), think it sucked.
But in all honesty, if they had billed this as a vampire movie, it would've made a lot more sense. Like I said, people have expectations. For example, if they made a movie about Batman, where he went around in a bright orange costume gunning down criminals with an M16 in broad daylight, people would hate it. It'd be a good punisher movie, but a lousy Batman movie. You see what I'm saying? I think the movie's flaw was its choice of monster, and how they presented it. Also, the whole thing about the vegetarian zombie who won't eat people was possibly the stupidest thing I've ever heard
reply
share