Comments on: DUMB ZOMBIES VS. GLITTERY VAMPIRES

By: wunami

wunami — Sat, 18 Sep 2010 01:01:25 +0000

I kind of feel that RE doesn’t try to represent the zombies as classic zombies. And perhaps is more survival horror. On the other hand, Twilight feels like it is trying to be like “these are vampires”. (Disclaimer: I have refused to read the books or watch the movies, so all I know is from the distorted lens of the internet.)

Additionally, the fans are different. RE fans aren’t fanatically pushing it on people like some evangelical preacher. They also don’t act all crazy like. I don’t think they have dreams that some virus will be released and they will be turned into some crazy fighting machine like Alice or whatever. I don’t really know how you would fantasize about it. It’s not like they are trying to have a relationship with the zombies in the RE movies.

In the end, RE is just some fun, not-so-serious entertainment. Twilight has become something crazy and the fans take it way too seriously. So they aren’t really analogies for their genres (or whatever you call zombie and vampire movies).

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: Joshua

Joshua — Fri, 17 Sep 2010 17:01:13 +0000

The main threat to zombies is animals, not humans. Not even mentioning the numerous birds that would swarm upon them, you have canines of all varity–from house hold dogs to wolves–bears, cats–both wild and domesticated–and the bugs. Oh, god, the bugs! They would be constantly on them. Not that a swarm of bugs would stop them, granted,but why has no movie director taken advantage of this notion? How much more disturbing would a zombie be if, not only were they a mass of rotting flesh, but a humanoid shape essentially amassed by insects?

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: Tom

Tom — Fri, 17 Sep 2010 04:20:35 +0000

I don’t think a zombie’s physical constitution is the threat. It’s their strength in numbers that movie protagonists fear.

A locust by itself isn’t a big deal. Easy to incapacitate and relatively vulnerable. But a thousand locusts swarming around you at one time? Totally different story.

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: Joshua

Joshua — Thu, 16 Sep 2010 12:09:06 +0000

As my wife pointed out Monday when we drove passed a graveyard, zombie movies don’t make sense. The zombie has too many natural predators. Scavengers would have a field day with them. Not to mention the environmental dangers they would face, considering their open wounds and frequent lack of skin.

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: Urn

Urn — Wed, 15 Sep 2010 03:50:40 +0000

I like this franchise for what it is; pure popcorn fun. This series speaks to zombie/ horror fans in the same way that Dolph Lundgren speaks to dedicated action movie fans. You know it’s not A-grade material, but it’s an amazing drunken movie night pick. So I’ll probably rent it when it comes out on DVD.

I do agree with the comic in the sense that it may be cheesy, but at least they stay true to the essence of the genre. Which is a huge thing when it comes to these movies.

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: The 45

The 45 — Tue, 14 Sep 2010 23:01:45 +0000

IMO, 3D is overrated at best. Maybe when I was a tot it was a marvel, but now? I don’t think 3D will ever work quite proper until we have theatres that accomodate for peripheral vision.
That said, I will see RE:A in 3D because its the only option in my area.
For those interested, here’s a great trailer for Albert Brooks “Real Life” that pokes fun at the 3D fad last time around…

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: Steve

Steve — Tue, 14 Sep 2010 17:02:21 +0000

Can’t wait for the 3D fad to go away again. That’s right, it’s been kicked out of theaters already… twice! Who cares if technology is better, it’s still a fad, and I still don’t want to watch movies in 3D. Haha, and when I say “still”, I don’t mean I was around in the 50s to not watch 3D movies then either.

Hey, hang on a second. I got a good idea for a TH strip. I would love to see Tom have a fun crack at movie goers seeing a 3D film in the 50s. Then perhaps another in the 80s, then today with Tom and Jared. It could be a failing history of 3D trilogy!! I suppose I thought of it because every now and then Tom does a strip to test out a different comic style.
Bwana Devil! A lion in your lap, a lover in your arms!

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: Jesse Kiefer

Jesse Kiefer — Tue, 14 Sep 2010 00:30:41 +0000

I also saw RE:A and you know what my main beef was? 3-D. The bullet time was ridiculous. I was waiting to see Milla J. eat her meal in bullet time. If there was a weapon that could come at the audience sideways it did. This was another example of 3-D done for the sake of 3-D.

As far as the plot went I’m with Kira. It’s dumb zombie action fun. It’s like a guilty pleasure. I feel silly spending money on it but with a group of friends it’s a fun, and unintentionally funny view.

What isn’t fun and unintentionally funny is that I had to pay an additional $3 because it was in 3-D. The 3-D craze was gratuitous before… so is it redundant yet?

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: Jackson

Jackson — Mon, 13 Sep 2010 23:12:39 +0000

If you’re not satisfied with the execution on this strip, why not do a follow-up strip next week to further explore Jared’s convictions on the matter? I’d be all for it.

Then again, you may not want to spend too much time on RE:A when there are other, more newer movies coming out this weekend. I dunno.

Like or Dislike: 0 0

By: Kira

Kira — Mon, 13 Sep 2010 15:25:07 +0000

I saw RE:Afterlife on Saturday. While it is a total bastardization of the zombie genre, you have to take it for what it’s worth: an hour and a half of Milla Jovovich in tight clothes, stupidly over the top fight scenes and zombie/Uroboros target practice. I would hope that no one is taking these seriously. At least in this one they bothered to include Jill, Wesker and Chris Redfield beside his adoring sister Claire. Beyond that, the first one was actually ok (minus Michelle Rodriguez and her bad acting).

I love the game franchise. They perfected (aside from the Left for Dead games) the zombie game franchise. So I will always find things to pick apart (Wesker needed to be taller, Chris needed to be a bigger guy, Wenworth Miller went a little too dark and brooding for Chris etc) but overall the movies aren’t total eye rape. It could be worse.

Extinction was actually worse from my point of view basically because after how long and we still aren’t shooting zombies in the head?! Hell even Shaun and Ed figured that one out in minutes.

But again, you have to take it at face value: zombies are gonna die and we’re gonna make Milla look cool while doing so. I will say they did ABUSE (and I mean ABUSE) slow motion fight scenes in this one for the 3D aspect (which at least this 3D presentation was better than Avatar’s). However, seeing them actually use Wesker’s little teleport and dodge technique was a nice touch.

Again, are they the greatest movies? Of course not. Are they gonna win Oscars, or even MTV awards? Ok well maybe MTV, but they are just supposed to be zombie shooting fun. Run with it.

Like or Dislike: 0 0