|
Post by tannerboyle on Aug 8, 2008 9:50:44 GMT -5
I remember that douche bag, too.
When the board switched to another program a couple of years ago, he sucked so much GAR cock that they made him a moderator there.
Well...that and because he was British.
Anything GAR shits out that guy is all over....whether he's actually seen it and/or liked it or not. If you're in any way critical of GAR's work, you're not a "true fan" to this guy. And, if it's in any way connected to the genre without being a GAR outing, he feels the need to blast it to justify his opinion of GAR's shit.
He's the epitome of what I call a "blow-job artist".
|
|
|
Post by blackknight273 on Aug 11, 2008 6:29:52 GMT -5
Sounds like the guy could write for Fangoria then lol
|
|
|
Post by Flesh Eater on Aug 12, 2008 1:31:02 GMT -5
Sadly, I've never read a Fangoria mag. They are somewhat hard to find down here.
|
|
|
Post by tannerboyle on Aug 12, 2008 1:32:54 GMT -5
Are you serious?
I live in Fort Myers.
Suncoast Video has them. So does just about every book store.
And...if that fails, go online and subscribe. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Flesh Eater on Aug 12, 2008 1:34:18 GMT -5
Suncoast Video is kaput up here. I purchased a few flicks from them back in the day. I think Barnes & Noble might have them, have to check.
|
|
|
Post by blackknight273 on Aug 12, 2008 3:12:19 GMT -5
I gave up on Fangoria in the 80s. In the beginning they were great but as the mid and late 80s came around they just became fanboys. Try and get them to ever say anything critical about directors Romero, or Argento.
|
|
|
Post by tannerboyle on Aug 12, 2008 9:06:34 GMT -5
I noticed that myself.
When Diary came out, they acted like it was the Second Coming 'n shit.
In one of the interviews, GAR admitted, in his own words, to ripping-off Matheson for NOTLD. The guy interviewing him didn't give a shit.
If some other director said something like that, they'd eat his balls.
And, not in the good way. ;D
|
|
|
Post by rogueslayer on Aug 12, 2008 16:44:41 GMT -5
he sucked so much GAR cock that they made him a moderator there. Well...that and because he was British. Anything GAR shits out that guy is all over....whether he's actually seen it and/or liked it or not. If you're in any way critical of GAR's work, you're not a "true fan" to this guy. And, if it's in any way connected to the genre without being a GAR outing, he feels the need to blast it to justify his opinion of GAR's shit. Yep and he still is. Yeah here to there are always one here and there but, mostly its rare to even find one here.
|
|
|
Post by Demon-Sixx on Aug 23, 2008 10:43:14 GMT -5
This was a good action film but shouldnt have had the "dawn" name. as a film on its own it's awesome but when viewing it as a remake it sucks!
Not enough Character development takes place for my liking and characters are easily forgettable. The little love scene was terrible as lets be honest, in that situation you wouldnt be willing to fall in love with a random stranger after you've seen your husband have his throat ripped out beforehand.
CHEESY!!!!
The Cameo's were pretty cool though and the effects were top notch in my opinion.
so as an action movie 7/10 and as a Dawn of the dead remake 1/10
|
|
|
Post by tannerboyle on Aug 23, 2008 14:44:51 GMT -5
Two questions:
1. If it had closely followed the original, would you have blasted it for being unoriginal on its own?
2. You're blasting it for "lack of character development". Do you feel that the characters from the original were highly developed?
|
|
|
Post by rogueslayer on Aug 23, 2008 14:59:28 GMT -5
1. If it had closely followed the original, would you have blasted it for being unoriginal on its own? The Psycho remake proves shot for shot remakes don't work. 2. You're blasting it for "lack of character development". Do you feel that the characters from the original were highly developed? I haven't seen either Dawns in months so I can't answer this. But I think I agree with everyone that the characters in the original were more memorable. I can easily remember everybodys names in the original......Peter, Fran, Stephen, Roger, Blades, ......While the remake was great don't get me wrong...alot of the characters seemed there just for more bloodshed then anything else. Characters I liked: CJ Kenneth Andy Steve Micheal
|
|
|
Post by tannerboyle on Aug 23, 2008 15:19:54 GMT -5
True dat.
But...what if it wasn't a shot for shot remake? What I was actually thinking is what if it was a remake like NOTLD 90?
I think that the fanboys would blast it for being unoriginal. Unless, of course, GAR was involved...then they'd praise it.
The characters in the original were probably more memorable because there were fewer of them. I see that you remember Blades by name--you learned that later, probably online. I don't believe that his name is ever mentioned in the flick itself. Plus, the original has been around for 30 years, and there's alot more material out there about it.
I agree that some of the secondary characters seemed like zombie chow in the remake, but not all. Not by far.
In the original, however, the entire biker raid was there for nothing more than getting the zombies back into the mall, and giving them food to eat. Period.
;D
|
|
|
Post by The Dead Walk! on Aug 23, 2008 15:59:00 GMT -5
Question, Tanner...
Do you believe that there are actual fans of the original who love the film for what it is, that AREN'T fanboys?
|
|
|
Post by tannerboyle on Aug 23, 2008 16:19:46 GMT -5
Sure there are. I'm one of them. I think that the original is a great flick. But, I can love a movie and yet accept it's shortcomings and limitations. Most fanboys don't understand that. You can enjoy a movie without it being great. A movie can mean something to YOU, and to others, without it being "good" on a technical level. In praising the original Dawn, I can say that it's a kooky, gory, fun flick--in alot of ways a Wild West Show set in a Mall, and with zombies and bikers to boot....without praising it for character development (which is little or non-existant), or plot development (ditto). One of the main differences between a fan and a fanboy is that I don't have to lie, or to make the flick out to be something it's not, to be able to enjoy it...for what it is. I don't have to justify my love with bullshit...nor do I feel the need to blast somebody else's shit, just to front for other fans. Something like that. PS--I'm still waiting for your response about Dawn's social commentary, Tony.
|
|
|
Post by The Dead Walk! on Aug 23, 2008 16:30:19 GMT -5
Great response, Tanner. I feel the exact same way. I just wanted to know your stance on the issue.
Oh and I know you're waiting for my response man. Honestly though, I really don't feel like doing it, and not because I can't. I just know that no matter what I say, you'll likely be there to try and dismantle it bit by bit, and I don't feel like investing time into something I'll inevitably have to defend against you. It's really nothing personal against you, but I honestly just don't feel like justifying anything to anyone right now.
|
|