«

[Blood-Pigggy]

Originally posted by Chuck the plant@Nov 16 2005, 10:01 AM
And one more thing, Blood Pigggy: I don't think it's particularly witty when some snotty brat calls a grown man "boy"...

And I don't think it's very witty when someone mistakes that "boy" as a derogatory term, instead of a "Boy, that's nasty" or "Oh boy, I can't wait to see that movie".
And calling me snotty when nearly every single one of your posts seem to flame someone or something else, is highly hypocritical.

@Tulac: That's understandable, I can't get scared by films on my little TV, but it's different in the theaters, that is, if the film is very well produced.

[Evad]

That still doesn't mean that the majority is automatically right or that the majority's preferences are in any way "better".

I can agree with that statement, however, the fact that a movie is well recieved is a good indicator that it is at least probably a good movie. You never know till you watch it yourself, and as you have pointed out, everyone has unique tastes.\

or the record, I love zombie flics, I just don't find them scary. Aliens scared the poop out of me though.

[moogle]

Alright, I have come to a conclusion about this, and I must say I do support Chuck, no matter how "lamealicious" his posts may be (athough personally I think hos past couple have been just as bad as the ones I've mad).

The reason why most of you are saying alien is scarry is that your thinking of the chest scene right? Well yes, the chest scene was scarry, but thats not the entire movie, I mean, the rest of the movie was a lil scarry yes, it was suspensful and such, but no were near as creepy as NOTD when it first came out.

And another thing, probly the reason why people are voting for Alien is that NOTD is "corny". Well ya, by todays standards it is, but when you think about it when the movie first came out none of this had ever been done before, it was a new idea. Now if your gonna argue against that and such and say that "ohhh Alien is still scarry but NOTD isn't" then I have a response for that also. Are you seriously saying that if you were to watch Alien today, and knowing that the chest scene happens and such being as its been copied a couple of times, and almost everybody knows about it and tells you about it, could you honestly say it was scarry and suprising? I mean, which I first watched Alien I knew it was, coming, sure at first I was kinda scarred, but after it happened I found my self asking if that was all.

And sorry, but I have to argue with you about this too piggy...

Boy, put yourself in the position Chuck.
You might be shock at the stupid zombies walkin' at you first, but then you'll just get bored, I mean, poking things in the head does get old after awhile.

Are you honestly saying that after seeing almost everyone around you eaten alive, your town filled with shuffling shapes,you're trapped in a small town house with only one rifle, srrounded by people who are either too scarred to do anything, or they're too scared and mess up and acidentaly lock you out of the house. And not only this, but after watching the TV and having the authorities tell you to stay inside, which you do, and then turning on the TV later on and having the authorites say "Ooops, never mind, get to theese shelters as quick as you can." youd be "bored"? ...Wow.... And then, being trapped in the cellar with no way out and zombies bustling at the door you'de be BORED!?!?! Ok so, a single alien is scarryer than a single zombie ya, but there are more than a single zombie arn't there...

[Chuck the plant]

@ pigggy: There's a difference between "oh boy" and "You, boy". If you don't mean it, don't say it.

[Evad]

Wether either of these movies were scarier when they were released compared to now is really irrelevant. The question was which one was a better horror flic. I find the idea of an alien parasitically incubating in my lungs and slowly prepairing to tear its way out more horrifying then some slow-assed stupid zombie trying to eat my brains. that's just me though. Even if you weren't infected yet, imagine your flashlight going dim from low batteries, and the steady beep of your radar telling you a horde of aliens is on your sent. not just any alien, but an alien with natural armor, and acil spit that could melt your face off. not only this, but when it gets you and looks you in the face,waiting for you to piss yourself, and then opens its mouth and punches a hole through your head with another, smaller, head with razzar shap teeth. Freeks me out. A zombies nothing a shovel or pick axe wouldn't fix. A perfect test bed for my argument would be to put a zombie and an alien in a pit, and bet on who would win in the ensuing fight....any takers?

[JimmyJ]

Alien would win that fight, so I bet FIFTY MILLION DOLLARS!!!!!!!!!!!!

[moogle]

Ya I agree that Alien, in theory is scarry, but to me its more of a suspense film than a horror film.

And, zombies are supposed to fight/destroy in masive numbers, have you ever seen a zombie movie with just one zombie? A lone zombie vs a lone alien just wouldn't be fair.

[Evad]

touche

[Chuck the plant]

Evad: It is in NO way "irrelevant" how well a movie was done for the time it was made in and how it was perceived when it first came out. Otherwise anyone should just be going for the "newest and hottest sh*t" and forget about everything before. And by that logic, "Alien Resurection" would be a better movie than "Alien" because it looks better, is faster paced etc. But I bet you wouldn't agree with this.

Another thing to consider at least about Romero's zombie-movies:
They all incorporate a threat that is far more real and - at least to me - more frightening than any Alien or Zombie. In all of his movies, the zombies are never the real threat. What puts the characters in danger are "human" traits like greed, selfishness, inability to coorparate etc. The zombies on the other hand are just a (supossedly) "dark" mirror-image of mankind... reduced to a primal state, obeying to primal instinct: Hunger. However, it's most of the time not them who get people killed... it's the people themselves, because they mostly are "human" in the most negative sense of the way. That's also why his movies to me are more "desaster movies" than actual horror, because the zombies are just one imaginable threat that could put people in such desperate situations were they turn on each other despite working together would be their only chance.
And THAT to me is even more scary. Because it's true. And because it can be applied to any extreme situation one might happen to endure some time.

[Blood-Pigggy]

Originally posted by Chuck the plant@Nov 17 2005, 08:50 AM
Evad: It is in NO way "irrelevant" how well a movie was done for the time it was made in and how it was perceived when it first came out. Otherwise anyone should just be going for the "newest and hottest sh*t" and forget about everything before. And by that logic, "Alien Resurection" would be a better movie than "Alien" because it looks better, is faster paced etc. But I bet you wouldn't agree with this.

Another thing to consider at least about Romero's zombie-movies:
They all incorporate a threat that is far more real and - at least to me - more frightening than any Alien or Zombie. In all of his movies, the zombies are never the real threat. What puts the characters in danger are "human" traits like greed, selfishness, inability to coorparate etc. The zombies on the other hand are just a (supossedly) "dark" mirror-image of mankind... reduced to a primal state, obeying to primal instinct: Hunger. However, it's most of the time not them who get people killed... it's the people themselves, because they mostly are "human" in the most negative sense of the way. That's also why his movies to me are more "desaster movies" than actual horror, because the zombies are just one imaginable threat that could put people in such desperate situations were they turn on each other despite working together would be their only chance.
And THAT to me is even more scary. Because it's true. And because it can be applied to any extreme situation one might happen to endure some time.

It is irrelevant on Evad's case.
We can disregard things like special effects, and etc. but considering how good a movie actually is, doesn't depend on it's timeframe.

Stuff like Casablanca or Jason and The Argonaughts are all classics and still revered today because of their excellent pacing, good acting, well written scripts, and other such things like camera work and etc.

To Romero Theory: That isn't true, it's scarier to be eaten by a zombie than killed by someone else, , that's just a fact of life.