Sunday, October 11, 2009

Holy crap, guess what? I haven't died.

What have I been doing? You probably don't want to know. Or rather, I don't want to tell you. My recent activities make posting pros and cons of 1980's slasher films sound hip by comparison, and I don't think I can deal with the ridicule.

Zombieland? Nope haven't seen it. Will I? It's possible. I am a bit of a snob though, and wonder how good this thing can possibly be. Woody Harrelson is awesome, but being that zombies are "cool" right now (and not in a Fulci kind of way) I have to question the merits of this one. Call me jaded of call me elitist, I don't care. People at work who know I'm into horror crap have attempted to crawl into my little world by talking about this movie with me and these are people who've only seen 28 Days Later and the new Dawn of the Dead. That said, I'll probably end up seeing it this week while I'm on vacation.

You know what's really awesome though? The Creepy and Eerie Magazine reprints I've been reading.

No one even reads this! After 6 months, can I blame them?

2 comments:

  1. F off, I read this thing all time!

    Zombieland was decent but I wouldn't call it a serious zombie movie at all. It was like a Judd Apatow movie that had some zombies casually strolling by.

    ReplyDelete
  2. That's what I was assuming. With your mainstreamized indie-hipster wannabe kid actor and the chick from Superbad. Ever since 28 days and it's sequel, along with the Dawn of the Dead remake and some other stuff, zombies are a major commodity, but not "real" zombie movies. I talk to some of these kids who say they want to get together with friends and watch "zombie movies" and nothing they mention is more than 6 years old. Apparently "City of the Living Dead" is too low brow for them, not that they've seen it of course. I've seriously talked to people who turn their nose up to older movies. Good. More gore for me.

    ReplyDelete

About Me

My photo
21st century rocker with a multi-track mind.

Followers

tear off your face(book)