Rate the last movie you watched (NO SPOILERS)

[snappahead]

Originally Posted by Bullseye

Not in the traditional sense.

Or any sense. It's a horror movie. A really good one, but not a zombie flick. The attackers are neither dead nor being controlled by voodoo. Just saying.

[DSET]

Originally Posted by snappahead

You're probably still not. 28 Days wasn't a zombie movie.

to be honest I'm not, but my point was
after I saw 28days later I looked up all the zombie films I hadn't seen.
Before that I really didn't give zombie movies any merit.

In the end I just like the Walking Dead Comics and TV

[snappahead]

Originally Posted by DSET

to be honest I'm not, but my point was
after I saw 28days later I looked up all the zombie films I hadn't seen

In the end I just like the Walking Dead Comics and TV

I hear you. 28Days definitely has a lot in common with zombie flicks. WD is great ain't it!

[DSET]

Originally Posted by snappahead

I hear you. 28Days definitely has a lot in common with zombie flicks. WD is great ain't it!

WD has been a game changer for Comics and TV, its a beautiful thing!

[Hellboy]

Originally Posted by snappahead

28 Days wasn't a zombie movie.

I guess everyone has their interpretation of what is or isn't a zombie movie. I remember reading an article about this very subject a while back and was able to find it. I happen to agree with the author as to where 28 days fits in. Here are a couple quotes from the article as well as a link if you'd like to read the whole thing.

http://www.denofgeek.com/movies/9315...after_all.html

Up against all of the prior invention that has characterised the short history of Western zombie stories comes 28 Days Later and the remake of Dawn of the Dead, both of which so many people seem unwilling to describe as “zombie movies”, or which are the subject of bizarre criticism about zombies that run. So the victims of the ‘Rage’ virus didn’t die before “turning”. So what? Really – so what? It just isn’t significant. My responses to complaints about running zombies are equally glib. We’ve had plenty of films in which zombies moved at varying speeds from shuffling and shambling to an average walking pace, and sometimes even a fairly rapid amble – but apparently jogging or sprinting just isn’t convincing. Rotten muscles just don’t work like that, yeah?

In every other way these films, and others which have similarly been singled out for spurious rejection from the loose zombie canon, are clearly drawing upon the Western zombie tradition, and clearly they’re utilising the same open attitude to reinvention that has been a consistent feature of the tradition from its inception.

With all this in mind it is missing the point to moan a bit because some zombies run, or because – shock! – they’re not dead yet. Such gripes might have a single, wobbling, fractured leg to stand on were it not for that folkloric origin, or the fact that plenty of other zombie “characteristics” have been violated or ignored in the past, or even the common zombie need to feed (a habit dead things aren’t generally noted for, no matter how much we might try to nurse deceased pets back to life).

[snappahead]

To me, a zombie is dead or undead unless we're talking about the voodoo kind. Semantics perhaps, but a distinction in my eyes. An infected person is just that..a living infected person. If were talking same genre, sure why not, but I disagree when a film like 28 Days is called a "zombie flick" What about the Crazies? Is that a zombie flick? Not to me it's not.

[Bullseye]

Yeah but those infected people did not show that they retained mental capacity and acted similar to Zombies in other movies. Mindless.

[snappahead]

Originally Posted by Bullseye

Yeah but those infected people did not show that they retained mental capacity and acted similar to Zombies in other movies. Mindless.

We could do this ALL day brother.

[Bullseye]

Not really. I'm off to have my Tikka Masala and Naan bread

[Nidgit]

Originally Posted by Hellboy

No question that was the start of the deluge of zombie films but all 3 of those came out 2-3 years after Danny Boyle's 28 Days Later. That film put the genre back on the map and proved it could be taken seriously. As you know Zack Snyder's Dawn remake was heavily influenced by Boyle's pic as he went against type using rabid fast moving zombies as opposed to the lumbering walking dead spawned by Romero.

How are you mate

I've really enjoyed the resurgence of the zombie flick and I think Resident Evil played a big part as well. It was released in 2002 and was hugely successful. Not without it flaws but it did get alot of cinema goers interested in zombies again.

As far as 28 Days, I've always categorized it as a zombie flick even if it's not really about zombies. Even Boyle himself once said "I don't see 28 Days Later as part of some zombie lineage"

BTW. Really enjoyed The Dead. Great flick