Disturbing Films

[Mr_Vindictive]

Whoa Ben, calm down.

Putting down someone just because they didn't like the same film you did is awfully childish.  

Chill man

[jmc]

I think we have this year's Johnny Blister or whatever his name was....

[ben rosson]

Sorry George, it just really irritates me when someone misses the big picture, yet sits back and criticizes. It is like writing a book review with only having read the Cliff's Notes. I know he is a good dude and all and I I realize he knows his horror pretty well, that;'s why I am giving this knucklehead a hard time. I love him dearly, as any true horror fan would.

[Brother Ragnarok]

The Faust thing definitely makes more sense now.  Unless you find silly comic book movies really disturbing, I guess.
As for 28 Days, I think Dawn's social commentary is quite a bit stronger.  Of course, I'm always in favor of putting down idiotic animal rights activists like 28 Days did.  Romero didn't rip much off from the Italians since Night of the Living Dead came before most of those were made, but yes, I know he had Argento on the set for Dawn, and Goblin did the original soundtrack.   I think there was actually a law passed that required any 70's horror film from Italy to have a soundtrack by Goblin.

Brother R

[ben rosson]

Ha ha good one about Goblin...........now, I keep hearing people speaking of 28 days and not seeming to get the point of the film. It wasn't about a virus, it wasn't about animal right activists, it wasn't about zombies. The social commentary of 28days is about us as a people. It is an artistic expression about society in the 21 century. the monkey is you and I. Does no one see any symbolism in the fact that at the beginning of the film the viewer is looking at screens filled with violence and when the camera finally pans back far enough we realize that we (the viewers) were looking at the tv screens from the monke's perspective. Does this in anyway relate to the media of our world today???? ofcourse it does. the film goes on to entertain thoughts and ideas of survival of an apocalypse, the fall of civilization as we know it, military and government roles etc, etc. Compared to Dawn which was primarily about consumerism and it's effects on society, I feel Dawn's commentary pales beside 28days.......what do you think????

[jmc]

Dawn's commentary seems too dated today, so yeah, 28 Days Later is a tad more relevant.  Don't get me wrong, I liked the premise and the first half of the movie was great, but it sank like a stone after they encountered the soldiers, and that's why I was so disappointed by it.  People complain about the movie ripping off Dawn of the Dead, but if that's all it did it would have been fine with me...my problem is that they picked Day of the Dead to emulate in the film's second half and it worked about as well as the original did, that is, not at all.  Too much talking, not enough Infected...and the scenes at the end just don't make up for it.

I think the Dawn remake blows 28 Days Later out of the water....it's the movie 28 Days Later attempted to be.  Commentary-wise, it's much better too....what can be more relavant today than the idea of a national disaster that takes out our society overnight, with the government being either unable or unwilling to do anything about it?  

In 1978 when shopping malls were still a relatively new phenomenon I guess making comparisons between shoppers and zombies seemed pretty fresh, but today there are bigger problems.

[Brother Ragnarok]

I think that if you look at just Dawn vs. 28 Days, 28 Days has a broader commentary, which in the end works well but is spread a little thinner.  Dawn only tackled the topic of consumerism, true, but as an overarching whole, Romero's Dead trilogy eventually covered most of the topics 28 Days did, (excepting the TV turning us into monkeys thing, because it hadn't really started to until Day of the Dead or a little after, and that film focused primarily on surviving an apocalypse and military roles in such an instance, so TV was of little concern) and since Romero had 3 films to cover his material in, his statements as a whole seem stronger because they didn't all have to be spread out over a single 120 minute run time.
So don't sweat it, brother.  You're not the only one who "got" 28 Days Later.  I just think that as far as social commentary goes, Romero did an overall better job than Danny Boyle did because he had the opportunity to tackle the material with 3 movies over the span of two decades so it seems more complete, if a bit dated.  Wherein lies 28 Days Later's biggest advantage; its commentary is up to date, making it seem more poignant, although Romero's must have seemed just as with the times when his films were originally released.
Both are excellent films, however, and I think in the end it just comes down to which one you liked better, which one entertained you better.  To put it in perspective, whose class are you going to like better and take more away from, a hip new professor fresh out of grad school with radical ideas who wants to change the world, or an older, wiser one who seems to pedantically repeat his point over and over again in hopes that someone will learn from the history he is trying to impart.  Myself, I would choose the older, wiser prof, and I imagine you would choose the younger, more radical one.
EDIT:  Last line removed, decided it sounded too gay :P



Post Edited (03-31-04 18:52)

[jmc]

I'll pick the older wise prof but only if he has an eyepatch.

[Brother Ragnarok]

I don't see how he could be without one!

Brother R

[Mr_Vindictive]

Perfect example Brother R!  Bravo!

I myself would choose the wiser professor as well.  Hell, how cool would it be to have Romero as a prof?

[Brother Ragnarok]

Speaking of having cool people as profs, the sister of one of my roommates had John Cleese and Kurt Vonnegut as writing profs, but I can't remember which college she was at.  Some big fancy one.

Brother R

[Mr_Vindictive]

Cleese as a teacher!?  Holy hell!  That would be awesome!

"Lancelot: We were in the nick of time. You were in great peril.
Sir Galahad: I don't think I was.
Lancelot: Yes, you were. You were in terrible peril.
Sir Galahad: Look, let me go back in there and face the peril.
Lancelot: No, it's too perilous.
Sir Galahad: Look, it's my duty as a knight to sample as much peril as I can.
Lancelot: No, we've got to find the Holy Grail. Come on.
Sir Galahad: Oh, let me have just a little bit of peril?
Lancelot: No. It's unhealthy.
Sir Galahad: I bet you're gay.
Lancelot: No, I'm not. "


Cleese is great.

[maria paula]

three films.
"necromantik" first part or second, if u show this to your friends for sure they will thimk u are a complete pervert, then u can show them an spanish  short film that its call " aftermath" directed by nacho cerda, its just a dr f**king a corpse in the morgue., then, your friends wont dubt it, but if u really want to lose their friendship u can show them "guinea pig", they woudlt want to b friends of a complete freak :).
sorry for the english, i know its bad, and hello from spain.
xxx

[maria paula]

i  think that its a really impressive film, im sure u can get it from  amazon, its a quite popular film, unless here in europe.

>

[maria paula]

oh, i forgot some more.
cannibal holocaust, i have seen this one, its really disturbing,  and theres the legend of this film, in the esighties it was said that this film was for real, now i u watch it u will realize that its not true,canival ferox, this one its horrid.