Comments on: [REC]

By: Loudabagel

Loudabagel — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 06:46:21 +0000

Jst watched Paranormal Activity. Meh. It was the one with the original ending too wild for for theaters. AKA-The boring, 8 minute shot of basically, nothing.

By: Rico Fardan

Rico Fardan — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 11:55:50 +0000

Yo Vern, with this one you sound a bit like a killjoy. I hated Blar Witch, found it simply boring as hell and that documentary style is always questionable, but I found REC a really damn good, one of the best horror flicks in recent times.

By: rewrite

rewrite — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 10:03:35 +0000

Not sure which one you saw, but the one I saw was pretty disappointing too. It was a ghost hunters episode made at home and the cops got involved so they had to shut it down. Horrible ending. But if its as good as they say, then I might have to rewatch it again just to see what would happened had it not been canceled.

By: ChopperSullivan

ChopperSullivan — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 08:08:39 +0000

PARANORMAL ACTIVITY is the most fucking boring horror film I’ve ever seen. A thousand times worse than BLAIR WITCH. Let’s talk, have some footage of nothing while we sleep, then wake up and talk about it again. The only suspense is waiting for something to fucking happen. Broad had big cans though.

By: Mickey

Mickey — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 02:03:37 +0000

In my opinion dionaea-house.com is better than House of Leaves.

By: Jareth Cutestory

Jareth Cutestory — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 01:50:40 +0000

Zombies with personalities: I like when the remnants of a personality are slipping away from the zombie, when the manual skills and ability to reason are getting clumsy and less human. I think there’s a kind of small tragedy in that.

But for full-blown zombie personality, I guess I prefer Bub to the DEAD HEAT guys. I’m having difficulty thinking of other examples.

By: dan

dan — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 21:55:51 +0000

Mothman had Richard Gere, so i didn’t like it.
can’t back Paranormal Activity enough though. everyone should check it out (the screener version online, theatrical has a lame-o hollywood ending).

By: rewrite

rewrite — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 21:25:51 +0000

In my opinion, I think the fast and slow theory can be explained by what kind of zombie disease they have. The zombie plague usually starts from some rare disease, but who is to say that this disease isn’t mixed up with some other types of forms?

In recent movies and remakes you have the zombie disease and AIDS (These zombies have symptoms that start to show with rotting, but are still active just enough to spread their disease). The zombies in the 28 days/weeks movies may not have full blown AIDS, but are definitely HIV positive along with a severe case of pink eye (Symptoms of the aids don’t occur, but are still sick in someway and can spread the disease just the same). In the movies of old, you have a combination of zombies having both AIDS and cancer (These zombies look more like corpses and are too weak to even run, despite their urges). In I Am Legend, you have zombie cancer but with hopes of a cure (along with a rare case of vitiligo).

I’m not sure if this was mentioned before during the slow vs fast zombies discussion (which I missed a few years back) but what are your guys’ thoughts about zombies having personality?

For me, I’ve got nothing against it. Though theres something about Land of the Dead that bugged me for some reason that can’t be explained but might be because of that reason. I still do look forward to watching movies like Fido, the Revenant, and the previously mentioned Dead Heat. Maybe its just different in movies, but having one zombie with personality seems ok as compared to a whole group of protesting ones in my opinion. But you know, we’d have to be talkin’ about one charming motherfuckin’ zombie. I mean he’d have to be ten times more charmin’ than that Bub from Day of the Dead.

Bub being witness to a porno movie gone bad sure sounds like a great idea. I don’t know how he’d get there, but if in some way that were possible I hope he makes it the filming of Pornormal Activititties. The guy does know how to shoot though thats for sure, who knows he might even be the next barry sonnenfield when it comes to zombie porn.

By: Sorry512

Sorry512 — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 17:45:32 +0000

Damn that’s a long talkback! Ok Vern, I think what happened was you saw this too close to District 9, and it was fakumentary overload. I saw it just last night and I thought it was really good. Maybe speking spanish helped? I don’t know it just had a lot of awesome scares for me and the whole group I saw it with loved it. District 9, I don’t know, I kinda liked it but I kept thinking of Michael Scott when you hate the character the most, that can’t help. I think the style worked much better here (on Rec). I think you should really see the 08 British horror film The Children, i thought it would stink, turned out to be a lot of scary gross fun. Kids are fucked up. Between this and Rec i’m not having any. So I really recommend you see that one. No handycams in that one. Also Trick ‘R Treat is really good, just not scary at all. Also I’m rambling. If any of my points were made before in this talkback sorry, I didn’t read any of all that, I grew old just scrolling down.

By: Bad Seed

Bad Seed — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 17:42:10 +0000

Typing from my phone, so I gotta make it brief. Glad you liked the story Jareth. It was written by a Hollywood screenwriter, and the story goes that he kept on going until he got a movie deal. Once that got locked in he stopped, and that’s why the story fizzles at the end.

On the fast vs. slow zombies is always wondered if you could use rigor Mortis to explain it; wiki answers says it takes 3 to 12 hours to set in, so maybe the fresh kills comeback pretty much as limber as they were prechomp, and slowly lock up.

Of course, wikianswers also says that rigor Mortis disappears after 72 hours. Which means they should loosen up again, which doesn’t seem right. Anyone else out there know much on this subject?

Mr. S, I can’t get into the whole metaphysics of the argument now, but wanted to say that I agree with your assessment. However, when you look at it that way, it’s less supernatural and more science fiction. In other words, you’re really discovering a new phenomenon using the scientific method, which has all kinds of implications when talking about demons.

Oh, and “Demons”=awesome. Part 2 is good too.