MovieChat Forums > Colin (2011) Discussion > So what did people think of it?

So what did people think of it?

posted 14 years ago by laura03232
21 replies | jump to latest

For everyone who has seen this film, what did they think of it?

Personally I thought it was great. It was touching, and fairly original, and not what you would expect from the zombie genre in general. Yes the effects weren't great, but for £45 they were fantastic.

My main critism (and I saw this from someone else on another board) is that some scenes are too long and have little to do with the plot progression.

I would definately recomend it, but not if you are expecting some flashy, high action film. Yes, there are some gore moments, but it isn't what I would call 'scary'.

World's Gayest Ninja

[–] stephencray 14 years ago

I thought that most of it was re-hash, but then again, all zombie movies are re-hash to a certain extent. It was well done, though there were scenes where the budget showed terribly (the 'fight' sequences where the camera moved to the point of nausea, and the pot guy in the fight sequence). I was more or less 'meh' about it until the last 15 minutes. That was some great stuff, wonderfully done.

PAX...

[–] jimis-1 14 years ago

Re-hash of what?

Having completed the nineties, I am now attempting the next level....

[–] stephencray 14 years ago

Re-hash of all other zombie films.

PAX...

[–] Island_Of_Ireland 14 years ago

Quite boring, nothing special... meh...

[–] Ennder 14 years ago

It was pretty original, the lack of a budget really got in the way. Some of the scenes just didn't really fit in very well with the overall film either. The guy in the middle of the big zombie battle using a slingshot was just too silly for words too, heh.

I gave it a 5 for effort and originality.

[–] Nullster 14 years ago

I'm a zombie fan be it book or movie, it had all the promise of being a smart zombie movie but the half I watched was just banal.

I got fed up with seeing yet another 2x year old wrestle a bloody mouthed 2x year old - the world consists of a really wide demographic... maybe the zombie virus or whatever it was only left the student types alive...

[–] Xcalat3 14 years ago

I liked it

a very interesting take on "the Zombie"

not great but entertaining

I give it a 6

When there's no more room in hell, The dead will walk the earth...

[–] pavlic 14 years ago

IMO it`s one big mess of a movie. Almost unwatchable and über boring.

Colin act more like some confused emo kid then like a zombie.

I really wish I didn`t saw it.

[–] philipknowles1 14 years ago

I was really disapointed. It wasn't the lack of a budget that bothered me, it was the lack of a story.

You had a short little set-up scene and then the next forty minutes was just aimless wandering. I was actually thinking about turning it off, and I genuinely can't remember the last time I stopped a film half way through just because it was so boring.

The second half picked up a bit but not nearly enough to make up for the first half. There were a couple of good bits I'm sure, but I am struggling to remember them (so not that good). All of the ideas that were in there could easily have fitted in to a one hour film. As it is, it's way to long.

Good luck to the guy, because just getting a movie made and putting it out there is a great achievement, and obviously a lot of people liked it.

Some people will say that you have to look beyond the cheap effects and see the story. I would say that if this film was made by an established director with decent effects, everyone would be saying what a poor film it was.

[–] Mysteryname 14 years ago

i rented it with an open mind and as a fan of the zombie genre but switched it off half way through. In a word, it was boring. After 45 minutes of watching some zombie shuffle around aimlessly and no sign that a plot would begin to develop any time soon i threw in the towl.

Other low budget zombie movies have done it better i.e. Night of the Living Dead - i know Romero had a little more than '£45' (although i doubt this to be the true cost of Colin's production), but surely the team behind Colin could've saved up a little bit of money to spend on the film whilst they rewrite the script to feature some kind of plotline. Maybe they could've bought a better camera or a couple of lights.

[–] kenneth_s_gibson 14 years ago

I was very disappointed. Nothing to do with budget, effects or shaky cam, its was the complete and utter lack of any plot. It was depressing and inspiring at the same time.

If this can get a major release, and a showing in Cannes if I'm not mistaken, then there is hope yet.

I really did want this to be entertaining, I can find good in many films, but not this.

[–] jonbeckett 14 years ago

Well, I seem to be in a small minority here, but I thought it was brilliant. Far too much time has been spent on this board discussing how much it cost, just a clever marketing campaign IMO.
The film itself was an unusual, intelligent little film. However much it cost, I think we can all agree that it was shot on a very low budget, but scenes such as the zombie attack on the 'refuge' and the nightmarish scene in the cellar belied its budgtary limitations. The latter scene in my opinion rivalled the horror of any scene in a film as great as REC. It was a stroke of genius to show the world through our protagonist's dead eyes, as thewy acted as a sort of mirror into the uinsane battlefield the world had become. Also Colin himself, had a real story to tell, very skillfully handled by Marc Price. The acting on the whole wasn't up to much, but Alistair Kirton was brilliant in the title role.
Good special effects too. A triumph all round

Wake me up before you Monster A Go Go

[–] ilon 13 years ago

"a stroke of genius to show the world through our protagonist's dead eyes"

Really? And the more than 30 minutes without our "protagonist" on screen?

This is a short. The last 15 minutes. Then the director says "I'm going to make a movie about what happens next", and then nothing happens for 80 minutes to have the short of the begining at the end.

While I was watching the film I was thinking that the end of the movie would be the reason to be picked at Cannes... and yes, when I got to the end... I saw that this film student kind of movie was made that way trying to be what it isn't.

I don't like when a movie try to be pedantic to fill the gaps in his abilities. When you hold a shoot, it has to be to increase its power. In this case... it's not working...

And I'm sorry for my english.

[–] h_k_zombie 14 years ago

I thought it was fantastic. Can't say a bad thing about it. One of my favourite movies to be honest. Truly original!

[–] fatpie42 14 years ago

<<<<My main critism is that some scenes are too long and have little to do with the plot progression. >>>>

"Some"? Don't you mean "most"?

<<<< it isn't what I would call 'scary'. >>>>

Lol, this probably sums up why it fails. If the whole point of scenes with horrible gore and endless disturbing screaming was not to scare us, then what was the point? The actual effect seemed to be both to bore me and make me highly uncomfortable while I waited (in vain) for something to actually happen which advances the narrative. The likelihood seems to be that the director didn't know what they wanted the audience to be feeling during those moments. This is a movie where the majority of the run-time is filler.

[–] sillyspaghetti 13 years ago

I thought it was a good premise but found the film to be really boring I'm afraid.

"Hey! Ladies! That was fun!"

[–] Guamley 13 years ago

Total disjointed dreck.
Sorry, but shaky-cam does not make-up for lack of budget.
If the goal of the filmmaker was to have the audience empathize with Colin, it was an utter fail.
Also, the uninfected did not act in a way that rang true. They seemed to put themselves in easily avoidable situations.

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]