Two things. First, the zombies. Zombies are pure fun -- unlike folklore and voodoo zombies, the pop-culture variety are completely made up. They exist solely for our amusement. And second, Woody Harrelson. Again, pure fun.
I don't think zombies like me. Twice I commented/asked "why?" but it didn't show up. Thank goodness Lucy asked, too! :-) And I agree re Woody Harrelson. He looks especially good in/for this!
Lucy, yeah, in a vague NOTLD way -- never seen the whole thing, but the many parts I've seen (which maybe add up to the entirety!) have been great!
Keera, you better come up with a zombie contingency plan -- if they don't like you, you'll be the first to go in a Zombie Apocalypse!!! ;-) Yay for Woody H!
(ps. in the aforementioned zombie apocalypse, we've all agreed that I'll definitely be one of the first to go, since I'll be distracted by my efforts to take photos of the zombies, which will give the zombies all the opportunity they'll need...)
Lucy, are you thinking of From Dusk Till Dawn? If so, it's vampires. I'm not much of a buff though, as horror (and Tarantino) movies aren't really my genre. I'm more of a classic drama/comedy/documentary kinda person. I can tolerate a bit of violence, but the more cartoon-like it is, the better. The first thing that comes to my mind when I think of zombies is Thriller -- I am of an age, I suppose.
I don't mind horror, but zombies and vampires per se have never held any attraction for me. Zombies are one reason I don't like the video for "Thriller".
But I am happy to finally know of one other person who doesn't care for Tarantino! I feel vindicated! Thanks, Alice!
I am with you both on Tarantino. Someone once said he makes the movie equivalent of fast food - maybe Anthony Lane in the New Yorker? He goes on to say something along the lines that they are easily accessible, and enjoyable but ultimately devoid of real substance. I am not sure I find them all that enjoyable but he is referring to the glossy visuals, hip music and snappy dialogue. He doe shave skill as a movie maker I will grant him that.
Anyway, I was absolutely traumatized by Reservoir Dogs (seriously!). I went to see it with a friend when it frst came out - it had rave reviews, but somehow I missed that it was ULTRA violent. I was literally shaking when I left the theater. I have not been able to sit through a whole Tarantino movie since then. Including the vampire one. And yes, that was what I was thinking of.
Thanks, Lucy! Maybe that's why I could never sit through an entire movie (when they show up on TV). I'd patiently slog through the first half hour or so and then wonder where it was all going and was it worth the violence to get there. Answer is no. Oddly, I find that I would rather read the story. Tarantino's details are the kind that make me think that his storytelling would be far more enjoyable in print.
Tarantino is a sore spot for me. I want to be a fan of his movies (I admire the dialog in some of them) and I have liked a few (Kill Bill, Pulp Fiction) -- albeit while watching through my fingers -- and can appreciate some others (Reservoir Dogs), but the bottom line is they're just too violent for me to enjoy them. This is not relaxing fare, and usually when I'm in the mood for a movie, it's because I want to kick back and chill out. Not cling to my seat while becoming agitated and anxious.
Keera, that's a good point about him maybe being better in print -- there, I can enjoy the dialog without being subjected to the graphic violence. :::Nodding::: Yes, I think I'd like to read some Tarantino.
16 comments:
I can't fucking wait for this movie. I've been so excited for it.
OK - just wondering what about this movie has you all so worked up?
Two things. First, the zombies. Zombies are pure fun -- unlike folklore and voodoo zombies, the pop-culture variety are completely made up. They exist solely for our amusement. And second, Woody Harrelson. Again, pure fun.
Can't wait!!
OK - Makes some sense...are you NOTLD fans as well?
I don't think zombies like me. Twice I commented/asked "why?" but it didn't show up. Thank goodness Lucy asked, too! :-) And I agree re Woody Harrelson. He looks especially good in/for this!
Newscoma, see you there!!
Lucy, yeah, in a vague NOTLD way -- never seen the whole thing, but the many parts I've seen (which maybe add up to the entirety!) have been great!
Keera, you better come up with a zombie contingency plan -- if they don't like you, you'll be the first to go in a Zombie Apocalypse!!! ;-) Yay for Woody H!
(ps. in the aforementioned zombie apocalypse, we've all agreed that I'll definitely be one of the first to go, since I'll be distracted by my efforts to take photos of the zombies, which will give the zombies all the opportunity they'll need...)
My contingency plan will be to hide behind the photographer. ;-)
NOTLD is the actually the only Zombie movie I have ever seen. It's a classic and worth watching all the way through but don't bother with the sequel.
I think some zombies showed up in a Tarantino movie but I did not watch it all the way through. Or were those vampires?
LOL, Keera!
Lucy, are you thinking of From Dusk Till Dawn? If so, it's vampires. I'm not much of a buff though, as horror (and Tarantino) movies aren't really my genre. I'm more of a classic drama/comedy/documentary kinda person. I can tolerate a bit of violence, but the more cartoon-like it is, the better. The first thing that comes to my mind when I think of zombies is Thriller -- I am of an age, I suppose.
I was surprised to discover how many zombie movies are out there -- it's all relatively recent stuff, too!
I don't mind horror, but zombies and vampires per se have never held any attraction for me. Zombies are one reason I don't like the video for "Thriller".
But I am happy to finally know of one other person who doesn't care for Tarantino! I feel vindicated! Thanks, Alice!
I am with you both on Tarantino. Someone once said he makes the movie equivalent of fast food - maybe Anthony Lane in the New Yorker? He goes on to say something along the lines that they are easily accessible, and enjoyable but ultimately devoid of real substance. I am not sure I find them all that enjoyable but he is referring to the glossy visuals, hip music and snappy dialogue. He doe shave skill as a movie maker I will grant him that.
Anyway, I was absolutely traumatized by Reservoir Dogs (seriously!). I went to see it with a friend when it frst came out - it had rave reviews, but somehow I missed that it was ULTRA violent. I was literally shaking when I left the theater. I have not been able to sit through a whole Tarantino movie since then. Including the vampire one. And yes, that was what I was thinking of.
Thanks, Lucy! Maybe that's why I could never sit through an entire movie (when they show up on TV). I'd patiently slog through the first half hour or so and then wonder where it was all going and was it worth the violence to get there. Answer is no. Oddly, I find that I would rather read the story. Tarantino's details are the kind that make me think that his storytelling would be far more enjoyable in print.
"You guys want some Purell?"
OMFG!
:::passes out from laughing:::
LOL, Julie!
Tarantino is a sore spot for me. I want to be a fan of his movies (I admire the dialog in some of them) and I have liked a few (Kill Bill, Pulp Fiction) -- albeit while watching through my fingers -- and can appreciate some others (Reservoir Dogs), but the bottom line is they're just too violent for me to enjoy them. This is not relaxing fare, and usually when I'm in the mood for a movie, it's because I want to kick back and chill out. Not cling to my seat while becoming agitated and anxious.
Keera, that's a good point about him maybe being better in print -- there, I can enjoy the dialog without being subjected to the graphic violence. :::Nodding::: Yes, I think I'd like to read some Tarantino.
Exactly. Reading a fight scene isn't the same as seeing it, and we'd still get to enjoy the dialog. :-)
Post a Comment