Worst Zombie Movie of All Time

DannyDamage

New member
Aug 27, 2008
851
0
0
zombielifecoach post=18.69882.677000 said:
Dude! Don't put "dance-off" and "zombie" in the same sentence! You'll give some fruitcake an idea. Next thing you know, EVERYBODY is suffering through, 'DANCEZOMBIES: Requiem' starring Nick Cannon. Then we ALL lose, my friend. We all lose...
"Zombies! The Musical" - That actually sounds familiar, or sounds like something Trey Parker would do and do VERY well IMO.
 

zombielifecoach

New member
Feb 21, 2008
167
0
0
dannydamage post=18.69882.677028 said:
zombielifecoach post=18.69882.677000 said:
Dude! Don't put "dance-off" and "zombie" in the same sentence! You'll give some fruitcake an idea. Next thing you know, EVERYBODY is suffering through, 'DANCEZOMBIES: Requiem' starring Nick Cannon. Then we ALL lose, my friend. We all lose...
"Zombies! The Musical" - That actually sounds familiar, or sounds like something Trey Parker would do and do VERY well IMO.

"Zombies! Life and Times of a Legend" - Told through interpretive dance!
 

DannyDamage

New member
Aug 27, 2008
851
0
0
mercurio post=18.69882.677011 said:
I thought Revenant was just an old word for a ghost.
"Revenant" is from the Latin and French, 'revenir', "to return". As far as I know from folklore, it can mean something both corporal or non-corporal but it would be a better fitting name for some of the more lively zombies.
 

zombielifecoach

New member
Feb 21, 2008
167
0
0
imaroboturarobot post=18.69882.677043 said:
i would have to say i am legend was a horrible wana be zombie movie

Which raises a valid point. Someone with a large complex mind should come up with a solid name for 'zombie-esque' creatures. I mean, you COULD go 'infected'. But then you'ld get looks like, "Infected with WHAT? The sniffles?"
 

DannyDamage

New member
Aug 27, 2008
851
0
0
imaroboturarobot post=18.69882.677043 said:
i would have to say i am legend was a horrible wana be zombie movie
I haven't seen it. TBH I get put off with films thats trailer costs more money than most full length films. Usually means they're hiding something.......like the fact it'll be shit.
 

zombielifecoach

New member
Feb 21, 2008
167
0
0
dannydamage post=18.69882.677060 said:
imaroboturarobot post=18.69882.677043 said:
i would have to say i am legend was a horrible wana be zombie movie
I haven't seen it. TBH I get put off with films thats trailer costs more money than most full length films. Usually means they're hiding something.......like the fact it'll be shit.

It was ok. But If you watch that bad boy in HD, you get to see how awful the CG is for the creatures when you see them full light. My advice, should you watch it, once the "infected" start coming into full view. Squint your eyes.
 

uhluhtc

New member
Aug 29, 2008
1
0
0
I made an account just for this thread. I recently saw what I believe is the worst zombie movie ever.

I like to get bad movies. The ones that are so bad, their good. When I saw the movie "Dead Clowns" my heart skipped a beat. The plot is revenge driven zombie clowns. How could it go wrong? So simple, so beautiful. I didn't understand the horror of the movie. The whole thing is shot in cheap-o-cam I think. Not quite hand camera, but pretty bad. But that's fine, it's still got zombie clowns, how can it fail? By making them move slower than dirt! Dear weeping god, even fast forwarding they moved slow. They spent half an hour on "plot"! How much backstory do you need for "Pissed off zombie clowns"? This movie didn't have enough substance to drag out to hour and a half like a normal movie. Hence, everyone moved painfully slow, the zombie clowns couldn't catch a turtle and no one had the wisdom to use any weapon. People could have slowly walked away and escaped. Instead they hid, slowing the movie further. I watched the trailer afterwards. Everything was sped up in it to make it look cool. Then there was the "gore". It had good reviews from gore.com or some site like that. This consisted of crappy zombie clowns eating, very slowly, something that looked like spaghetti with too much sauce. It was supposed to be organs I guess. Okay, I've rambled but it is the most painful zombie movie I've ever seen. None can compare.
 

DannyDamage

New member
Aug 27, 2008
851
0
0
zombielifecoach post=18.69882.677066 said:
It was ok. But If you watch that bad boy in HD, you get to see how awful the CG is for the creatures when you see them full light. My advice, should you watch it, once the "infected" start coming into full view. Squint your eyes.
Not going to be a problem for me, but thanks for the heads up. I don't chose my films on quality/amount of CGI and I'm certainly not stupid enough to buy all this 'HD/Blue Ray is the new medium of the future' bollocks.

They're acting like they're rediscovered the upgrade between video cassettes and dvd. As far as I'm concerned, the pinnacle for Zombie/horror is the first Evil Dead, and that was filmed by a small group of friends that went and got drunk and stoned in a wood cabin.

That's all you need. No SFX team worth millions, no pointlessly expensive cameras (times 30), No Romero, No Tarrentino whoring his name on the box...............you get my point.

AND, they only need all that CGI and prosthetics because they aren't creative enough to film something where the viewer fills in the blanks with their own imagination. They HAVE to show you every detail now, which isn't really scary IMO. It's funny, like when you see something messed up and bloody in South Park. It doesn't upset you, just makes you chuckle.
 

Ares Tyr

New member
Aug 9, 2008
1,237
0
0
Fronken post=18.69882.676940 said:
Dawn of the Dead remake, seriously, a "true" zombie should NOT be able to run like a fucking athlete, it just made me laugh cause its so much crap, original is one of the best though.
While I agree with the "no-fast zombies" theory, I still enjoyed the movie.

But fast zombies is a bad bad thing. I could make it out alive with slow zombies. Fast zombies... no, nobody is making it out of there alive...
 

zombielifecoach

New member
Feb 21, 2008
167
0
0
dannydamage post=18.69882.677094 said:
zombielifecoach post=18.69882.677066 said:
It was ok. But If you watch that bad boy in HD, you get to see how awful the CG is for the creatures when you see them full light. My advice, should you watch it, once the "infected" start coming into full view. Squint your eyes.
Not going to be a problem for me, but thanks for the heads up. I don't chose my films on quality/amount of CGI and I'm certainly not stupid enough to buy all this 'HD/Blue Ray is the new medium of the future' bollocks.

They're acting like they're rediscovered the upgrade between video cassettes and dvd. As far as I'm concerned, the pinnacle for Zombie/horror is the first Evil Dead, and that was filmed by a small group of friends that went and got drunk and stoned in a wood cabin.

That's all you need. No SFX team worth millions, no pointlessly expensive cameras (times 30), No Romero, No Tarrentino whoring his name on the box...............you get my point.

AND, they only need all that CGI and prosthetics because they aren't creative enough to film something where the viewer fills in the blanks with their own imagination. They HAVE to show you every detail now, which isn't really scary IMO. It's funny, like when you see something messed up and bloody in South Park. It doesn't upset you, just makes you chuckle.

I don't know how it is where you are, but I feel like we(Americans) for the most part have become so fucking fixated on this disposible, name-dropping, flashy, computer enhanced movie craze. That substance has all but died, and been replaced by whatever makes the biggest, prettiest bang. Some of the greatest movies were ridiculously low budget, but you try and put that out now, you'll get labeled 'indie' and shuffled straight to DVD. Then forgotten. It's pathetic. Honestly that's why I dig this site. Most the people here seem to have avoided the assimilation into the idiots of the world, and alot of times you find lots of obscure movies and stuff, that's GREAT, that you might have otherwise never heard of.
 

zombielifecoach

New member
Feb 21, 2008
167
0
0
uhluhtc post=18.69882.677088 said:
I made an account just for this thread. I recently saw what I believe is the worst zombie movie ever.

I like to get bad movies. The ones that are so bad, their good. When I saw the movie "Dead Clowns" my heart skipped a beat. The plot is revenge driven zombie clowns. How could it go wrong? So simple, so beautiful. I didn't understand the horror of the movie. The whole thing is shot in cheap-o-cam I think. Not quite hand camera, but pretty bad. But that's fine, it's still got zombie clowns, how can it fail? By making them move slower than dirt! Dear weeping god, even fast forwarding they moved slow. They spent half an hour on "plot"! How much backstory do you need for "Pissed off zombie clowns"? This movie didn't have enough substance to drag out to hour and a half like a normal movie. Hence, everyone moved painfully slow, the zombie clowns couldn't catch a turtle and no one had the wisdom to use any weapon. People could have slowly walked away and escaped. Instead they hid, slowing the movie further. I watched the trailer afterwards. Everything was sped up in it to make it look cool. Then there was the "gore". It had good reviews from gore.com or some site like that. This consisted of crappy zombie clowns eating, very slowly, something that looked like spaghetti with too much sauce. It was supposed to be organs I guess. Okay, I've rambled but it is the most painful zombie movie I've ever seen. None can compare.

You mean to tell me that it wasn't even good enough to qualify as 'campy'? I'm not sure if you ever saw 'Killer Klowns from Outer Space'. That was terrible too! But in it's awfulness it had kind of a tongue-in-cheek sweetness about it. Cult classic stuff, ya'know?
 

DannyDamage

New member
Aug 27, 2008
851
0
0
zombielifecoach post=18.69882.677115 said:
I don't know how it is where you are, but I feel like we(Americans) for the most part have become so fucking fixated on this disposible, name-dropping, flashy, computer enhanced movie craze. That substance has all but died, and been replaced by whatever makes the biggest, prettiest bang. Some of the greatest movies were ridiculously low budget, but you try and put that out now, you'll get labeled 'indie' and shuffled straight to DVD. Then forgotten. It's pathetic. Honestly that's why I dig this site. Most the people here seem to have avoided the assimilation into the idiots of the world, and alot of times you find lots of obscure movies and stuff, that's GREAT, that you might have otherwise never heard of.
You've got it spot on dude. I'm from England, which may as well be classed as an American state, but a couple of years behind. Every trend you go through, we go through. Films are no exception. I honestly can't remember the last time I went to the cinema because it's all remakes, sequels to 20 year old films, (awful) conversions from games, comics or tv and like you say, all they do is blow the budget on getting some handsome but dumb looking fucker to lead, some lass with half her chest out to fuck him by the end and an endless amount of shiny colours and pretty SFX to keep your attention from the lack of plot.

It's like watching Marylin Manson or Slipknot live: "Look at all our shiny things so you don't pay attention to the lack of effort in you know, the music department."
 

zombielifecoach

New member
Feb 21, 2008
167
0
0
dannydamage post=18.69882.677148 said:
zombielifecoach post=18.69882.677115 said:
I don't know how it is where you are, but I feel like we(Americans) for the most part have become so fucking fixated on this disposible, name-dropping, flashy, computer enhanced movie craze. That substance has all but died, and been replaced by whatever makes the biggest, prettiest bang. Some of the greatest movies were ridiculously low budget, but you try and put that out now, you'll get labeled 'indie' and shuffled straight to DVD. Then forgotten. It's pathetic. Honestly that's why I dig this site. Most the people here seem to have avoided the assimilation into the idiots of the world, and alot of times you find lots of obscure movies and stuff, that's GREAT, that you might have otherwise never heard of.
You've got it spot on dude. I'm from England, which may as well be classed as an American state, but a couple of years behind. Every trend you go through, we go through. Films are no exception. I honestly can't remember the last time I went to the cinema because it's all remakes, sequels to 20 year old films, (awful) conversions from games, comics or tv and like you say, all they do is blow the budget on getting some handsome but dumb looking fucker to lead, some lass with half her chest out to fuck him by the end and an endless amount of shiny colours and pretty SFX to keep your attention from the lack of plot.

It's like watching Marylin Manson or Slipknot live: "Look at all our shiny things so you don't pay attention to the lack of effort in you know, the music department."

My friend, it has come to a point where I am simply unable to been in the local populace without wanting to strangle some f'ing twat. I can't go to the movies because A) 95% are terrible and B) Some jackoff with an IPhone is yacking away. Music is BS. Poppy-carbon-copy garbage. Ditched cable, because it is a "reality" wasteland. Even the internet Im down to like 3 maybe 4 sites I regularly visit. My only remaining bastion is gaming and DVDs. Not to quote 'Tool', but "I wish a flood would come and wash it all away" (Mass-media I mean). Let us start it all over from scratch, let the innovators shine again, ya'know.
 

Fronken

New member
May 10, 2008
1,120
0
0
Ares Tyr post=18.69882.677109 said:
Fronken post=18.69882.676940 said:
Dawn of the Dead remake, seriously, a "true" zombie should NOT be able to run like a fucking athlete, it just made me laugh cause its so much crap, original is one of the best though.
While I agree with the "no-fast zombies" theory, I still enjoyed the movie.

But fast zombies is a bad bad thing. I could make it out alive with slow zombies. Fast zombies... no, nobody is making it out of there alive...
yea, fast zombies do lower the chance of survival, but still, if you go by the lore of the original zombies from the tahitian (?) lore, they are corpses brought back to life by voodoo priests to be used as warriors against their enemies, meaning they are basicly walking corpses, decomposed and all, meaning their muscles would not be able to keep them running for more then a second or so before a leg fell off :p
 

Ares Tyr

New member
Aug 9, 2008
1,237
0
0
Fronken post=18.69882.677188 said:
Ares Tyr post=18.69882.677109 said:
Fronken post=18.69882.676940 said:
Dawn of the Dead remake, seriously, a "true" zombie should NOT be able to run like a fucking athlete, it just made me laugh cause its so much crap, original is one of the best though.
While I agree with the "no-fast zombies" theory, I still enjoyed the movie.

But fast zombies is a bad bad thing. I could make it out alive with slow zombies. Fast zombies... no, nobody is making it out of there alive...
yea, fast zombies do lower the chance of survival, but still, if you go by the lore of the original zombies from the tahitian (?) lore, they are corpses brought back to life by voodoo priests to be used as warriors against their enemies, meaning they are basicly walking corpses, decomposed and all, meaning their muscles would not be able to keep them running for more then a second or so before a leg fell off :p
Anatomically speaking, you're right. I'm cool with fast zombies if they are only fast for a few minutes at first, and then their muscle tissue breaks down after use and no regeneration. That would make fine sense. Even though if we go by the solanum (Max Brooks) zombie, their brains just lack the coordination to run, so they still shouldn't be able to run just because they have zero motor skills.
 

DannyDamage

New member
Aug 27, 2008
851
0
0
zombielifecoach post=18.69882.677175 said:
My friend, it has come to a point where I am simply unable to been in the local populace without wanting to strangle some f'ing twat. I can't go to the movies because A) 95% are terrible and B) Some jackoff with an IPhone is yacking away. Music is BS. Poppy-carbon-copy garbage. Ditched cable, because it is a "reality" wasteland. Even the internet Im down to like 3 maybe 4 sites I regularly visit. My only remaining bastion is gaming and DVDs. Not to quote 'Tool', but "I wish a flood would come and wash it all away" (Mass-media I mean). Let us start it all over from scratch, let the innovators shine again, ya'know.
What pisses me off the most about the movies is that you pay through the nose, go in, pay through the nose for snacks, watch their trailers for days and then come out feeling like you've just been mugged......afterwards, you get home and watch the TV that bombards you with the same shite ads.

THEN, the film industry takes this 'sale' as if you've enjoyed their piece of shit, and brag about it by saying how much the box office made over the first weekend. If I were Prime Minister (or Prez in your case) I'd FORCE cinemas to have a voting system when you leave so you can press a button from a choice of three.

- I LOVED IT
- IT WAS OK, BUT DON'T MAKE A SEQUEL
- GIVE ME BACK MY MONEY YOU ROBBING, TIME WASTING, UNTALENTED BASTARDS

Ok, so something not as offensive if kids visit but at least this way Spielberg might lose track whilst counting his millions and know that not everyone wants to fill his pockets with cash and spunk!
 

zombielifecoach

New member
Feb 21, 2008
167
0
0
You know. No matter HOW you like your zombies. No matter what cinematic feature involving zombies you love or hate, zombies do bring the world closer together. Kudos, zombies. Kudos.
 

Ares Tyr

New member
Aug 9, 2008
1,237
0
0
I've never liked zombies. It's how I would 'prefer' my zombies that makes the difference. I hate zombies, which is why I like to see them dispatched in film and literature.