Cool News
Weresmurf Interviews Jeff Reddick, Screenwriter Of FINAL DESTINATION And The DAY OF THE DEAD Remake!
Hey, everyone. ”Moriarty” here.
Weresmurf’s one of our regular chatters. When that promo reel for the DAY OF THE DEAD remake leaked recently, he was as harsh about it as anyone else, and he’s a horror nut, so I think it really pained him. A week or so later, he mentioned to me that he had somehow stumbled across a contact address for Jeff Reddick, who wrote it, and that he’d started talking to him. He asked me if I wanted an interview with the guy.
Was it on my list of things to do? No, not really.
But I’m always interested in giving someone their day in court, especially a guy who was so recently ravaged in our talkbacks. So here it is, a fairly dense and chatty conversation, all things considered, and one that might just make you like the guy:
It's been a long time people, you probably don't remember me, I reviewed the Batman Begins script for AICN-Downunder a few years back. Well, I've been upgraded from script reviews to actually talking to people. Recently I was lucky enough to trade emails with Mr Jeffrey Reddick of Final Destination and Day of the Dead 2007 fame. After a few emails back and forth, I bring you this!
Weresmurf: Remakes seem to be a dime a dozen these days, what specifically drew you to a remake of Day of the Dead?
Jeff: The biggest reason was Steve Miner. I really like him as a director and he’s done some of my favorite movies, “Friday The 13th Part 2,” “House,” “Warlock” and “Halloween H20.”
I also knew that they were going to make this film whether I wrote it or not. They’d hired a director and already slotted a time to start production. The producers originally wanted to hire a non-union writer to crank out a script in 2 weeks. But I met with Steve and he liked my work. So he pushed for them to hire me and fought to give us time to work on the script.
I knew there would be fan backlash. But I had to weigh that against working with a director I admire and writing a movie that I knew was going to get made. I’m also a genre fan and I knew if I didn’t do it, they would have hired someone on the cheap to bang out a script quickly.
Weresmurf: Do you feel, like is voiced by a lot of viewers of cinema, that Hollywood is potentially becoming lazy or less imaginative with all the remakes that have been hitting our cinema in the last few years?
Jeff: It’s not that Hollywood has less imagination, it’s that the studios are all about the bottom line. They think that if they remake a movie that’s got name recognition, there’s a better chance to recoup their investment. And unfortunately, the box office keeps bearing this out.
Look, I’m sick of remakes too. But the writer’s and directors aren’t going to the studios saying, “Hey, let’s do a remake.” We all want to do something original. That’s why it’s great when movies like “The Blair Witch” and “Saw” come along. But these movies all have one thing in common…. the people who made them raised the money themselves and produced the movies on their own. Then when one of these movies is a hit…there’s a glut of copy cat films.
“Final Destination” is a prime example of this. We had such a hard time selling the project, because everyone was convinced you couldn’t make a horror movie with Death as the killer. They kept saying, “You have to have a physical villain that the heroes can fight.” In my original draft of the script, the studio had me personify Death in the final showdown as “The Angel of Death.” Fortunately, James Wong and Glen Morgan were very firm in that they didn’t want to show “Death.” They crafted a great movie and when it was a success, the people who had doubts about “Final Destination” were all saying, “ Bring us something else like “Final Destination.”
The truth is that most people who get involved in the movie business, do it because they love films. I’ve been watching horror films and reading “Fangoria” since I was 13. But you learn that the movie business is a “business” and the people who control the money and distribution are only concerned about making a profit. I’ve written numerous original scripts that are collecting dust, because the studios are afraid to take a chance on them. Most of my writer friends are in the same boat.
This past year saw the release of “The Descent,” “Slither,” “Feast” among other original genre films. But they didn’t make the money that the glut of remakes and sequels did.
I didn’t mean to go on so long on this subject, but again, the creative people behind the scenes are just as much a victim of this as the fans. At least the fans don’t have to see the remakes and can take solace in the original film. But if you’re a writer or director who’s doing this for a living, it comes down to survival. Even after the huge success of “Final Destination 1 and 3” Wong and Morgan made remakes of “Willard” and “Black Christmas.” If the studios are only producing and financing horror remakes and sequels, you follow the work. And you hope that once you build some collateral in Hollywood, you’ll be able to do more original material.
It’s the same with actors. Some of them do the occasional blockbuster, so they can then get their independent passion projects off the ground.
Weresmurf: When I was in AICN chat last, an interesting topic came up. We were discussing the 'great circle' of things to put it cheesily. We were discussing how horror had gone from big studio business in the 50s/60s to almost a trashy sub genre thing in the 70's/80's (Of course there were a few exceptions...) back to a big business venture in the 90's and early 2000's with the 'reinventing' of horror thanks to Scream and its dozens of imitators. How do you feel horror is heading these days, do you think it's likelier to get back to its low budget 70s 80s roots or do you think its becoming bigger and bigger business for major studios and this glut of Tween horror movies will never end?
Jeff: I think there’s a lot hope for smarter, original films because there are so many smaller production companies popping up that focus on genre films. Also, with the booming DVD business, there are a lot of opportunities for new films to find an audience. I saw some great films at Screamfest this year. Two of my faves were “Behind the Mask: The Rise of Leslie Vernon” and “Automaton Transfusion.” “Behind The Mask” was a smart, horror movie that turned the slasher genre on its head. And “Automaton Transfusion” was a kick ass zombie film that was shot for $10,000 Dollars. The fans need to go out of their way to support these type of films if they want to see more of them.
Weresmurf: What steps are you and the others taking to make sure Day of the Dead doesn’t fall into the “craptacular" category other recent releases seem to have sunk into?
Jeff: On the writing front, I really just strived to write the best movie possible. One thing we didn’t want to do was try and copy Romero’s film with a bigger budget. Romero is one of a kind and it would be arrogant to try to out-Romero him. I was fortunate in that Steve Miner was very clear about what he wanted to do. So he fought to make sure that we got the time and budget to do the movie right.
My original take on the DOTD remake was a lot closer to the original film. About 75% of the movie took place in the bunker and many of the key characters, and their relationships, were similar. We updated the story so that it fit with the current world climate. With our new war on terror, the political climate is a lot different than it was 20 odd years ago. So I wanted to take George Romero’s themes and explore them in the context of the world we live in now. However, there were a lot of restrictions. Because of the rights, the movie could only be a remake of DOTD. It couldn’t be connected to “Night” or “Dawn.” It couldn’t be a sequel to the “Dawn” remake, as those rights are owned by another studio. We also didn’t have the rights to Romero’s unproduced script, so using that material wasn’t possible.
But during the develop process, the story ended up focusing more on the military and civilians fighting this zombie outbreak in a small town. I was able to keep the bunker. But now it plays a key role in the 3rd act…and isn’t the focal point. Several other similarities were also striped away. Do I wish they were still there… absolutely. But when I was hired, I was contractually obligated to deliver a script that satisfied everyone. So while it’s not as close to Romero’s film as I had originally hoped, it’s still a strong zombie film and I’m proud of it.
I took some solace in the fact that the “Dawn” remake…which I enjoyed…was only similar to the original in that it took place in a mall. The rest of the film was different.
Weresmurf: Of late, in various talkbacks on various sites, a few people seem to have some sort of vitriol against the cast that's been assembled, particularly comments about Mena Suvari as one of the characters, whilst I don‘t share their opinion personally, (va va va voom Mena!!!) what do you have to say about this?
Jeff: I think the cast has done a great job. Actors act, and if they’re given a chance to play against type they often shine. Actors get pigeon holed by studios and audiences. Daniel Craig has been reviled for playing Bond. People initially scoffed at Charlize Theron in Monster. I have a theatre background, so I usually give actors the benefit of the doubt. There’s nothing worse than seeing a vapid, beautiful actress trying to play a scientist or military person. But Mena is extremely smart and tough in person and she’s believable as Sarah. We’re so used to seeing the movie “tough gal type” kicking ass, but my sis is in the reserves and I’ve met most of her friends. She and her friends are very attractive. But they can still kick a guys butt when push comes to shove.
As for the characters, we thought it would be more interesting dramatically, to see how unseasoned military personnel dealt with a zombie outbreak. There have been so many movies, including “Resident Evil” and “Doom”, where hardened military badasses fight zombies or monsters. We wanted to do something different. I wrote Sarah, Salazar and Bud as late 20’s and early 30’s. Captian Rhodes was in his 40’s and Dr. Logan was in his 50’s. Mena, Nick and Stark are 27, 26 and 29, so they’re certainly not high schoolers. Actually considering the make up of the armed services today, they’re middle aged.
Overall, I found the DOTD cast dedicated, down to earth and hard working. None of them thought they were lowering themselves to be in a horror movie.
Weresmurf: When some footage was released online recently, it was quickly criticized by people and put down. The people pointed out things like the lighting, the look of the zombies etc. Is it true the footage was unfinished and released before the director was happy with it, and again, your personal thoughts on the reaction towards it from the public at large?
Jeff: The “trailer” that showed up online was actually something that Steve Miner cut in Bulgaria for the cast and crew wrap party. It’s not even cut like a trailer, it’s more like a presentation reel. It was taken from an avid output, so the color, quality and sound were all temp. I was surprised when it appeared on the web. I called the producers and told them that they should have someone cut a real trailer because people were going to think that was the real one. But they’re waiting to do an actual trailer until the movie is finished. Oh, and that line, “It’s a bad day to be a zombie”… was adlibbed.
Weresmurf: I think we all want to know... what the hell is Ving Rhames like in real life. The man just exudes cool in any movie he's starring in. He even made MI:2 watchable!
Jeff: I got nothing. Ving wasn’t in Bulgaria when I was on set. I was beyond bummed, but everyone said he was really cool and professional.
Weresmurf: Your experience on writing Day of the Deads remake, how was it compared to your past efforts on the Final Destination series? (Your most well known credits amongst us movie fans.)
Jeff: I worked at New Line Cinema for 11 years and they’re the studio that produced “Final Destination.” I credit Bob Shaye (New Line Cinema’s founder) and his assistant, Joy Mann for my career. Bob inspired me when I was a young kid who wrote him when I was a 14 year old horror fan living in Eastern Kentucky…and Joy got me an internship at New Line when I was 19.
New Line bought my treatment and hired me to write the script. When they went out to directors, I was a big fan of James Wong and Glen Morgan’s work and was really excited when they were attached to the project. They had their own ideas for the story, but Bob kept me in loop and sent me every draft of the script and asked for my input. This was incredibly respectful, because once a script is sold, the original writer is often kicked to the curb.
The biggest difference is that “Final Destination” was a big studio film, based on something original I wrote, so I had a lot of creative leeway. With the “Day of The Dead” remake, I was a hired writer there were more constraints.
Weresmurf: Have you seen anything filmed on Day of the dead, that you can tell us about that you were particularly proud of?
Jeff: I’ve seen a rough cut of the film and thought it was a fast and furious zombie film. Once all of the gore FX’s and the final music and sound are incorporated, it’s gonna be great. I wanted to balance the action and scares with real human drama and I think those moments are the best. All of my favorite moments involve spoilers, but I really like the character, and arc, of Bud. I know there’s been some complaints about the creative direction we took, but I think it works.
Weresmurf: How was it being a Zombie on the set of Day of the dead?
Jeff: The geek in me loved every minute of it. It took them 3 hours to do the zombie make up…and I was as giddy as a schoolgirl on prom night. A manly schoolgirl…
Weresmurf: Did you end up having a gory demise or partaking in someone’s demise?
Jeff: I was bummed because I didn’t get to chomp on anyone. I have a small role scene as a deputy, who gets attacked…but the carnage is off-screen. But I did get zombified and break in to the bunker when it’s over run by zombies at the end.
Weresmurf: Stark Sands, who plays Bud in the remake, (Bub's re-envisioned character for anyone who doesn't know.) has been unfairly copping a lot of flak on the message boards as of late for the changes made to Bub's original characterization. Personally I again, don't share their opinions, I find some of them outright silly, what was your reasoning for changing Bub to Bud and having him as a soldier?
Jeff: From the beginning, Steve and I knew that Bub had to be in the film. And the essence of the character—a ghoul who retains some instincts from when he was alive—is the same. This theme was explored by Romero in his original “Dead” films. In “Dawn” the people who congregated at the mall when they were living, returned there as zombies.
But the story is different. The remake of DOTD takes place in 24 hours…it’s a literal day of the dead. So we had to find a natural way to show this. For instance, people who were in the military before turning into zombies retain some of their knowledge about shooting guns…even though they’re impaired by the fact that they’re, you know, dead. Stark Sands, who plays Bud, was fresh off “Flags of Our Fathers.” He’s a great actor and he studied the work of Sherman Howard from the 1985 film. You’ll see a lot of that in “zombie Bud.” And yes, the character’s name is now “Bud.” The change was intentional, because “Bub” is commonly used as a dismissive term. That fit with the Romero film, since the characters saw him as just another undead creature. But he’s more than that in the new film; he’s a pivotal character who’s got a connection with the others. And yes, one of his traits before he turns is that he’s a vegetarian—but that’s a small part of who the character is and what he becomes. There are several larger traits that play into his character and role in the film.
.
Weresmurf: How often do movie makers REALLY look at places like IMDB.com and weigh up advice from posters there?
Jeff: I can only speak for myself. I go on there more than I should. I’ve always loved movies, so I like to keep up with what’s happening out in the world. For me, it’s also a matter of trying to grow as a writer. But I know a lot of writers and directors who don’t read any press on themselves though.
I’m not sure how much impact the stuff online has on finished films. I think it depends on the producers, director and writers. I knew with DOTD the fans expected certain things. And I tried to incorporate as much as I could. But a lot of the stuff I wanted to include didn’t make it into the final film.
Personally, I think it’s a mistake to try to create a movie based solely on other people’s opinions. They tried that with “Snakes on a Plane” and it didn’t work. And with a forum as huge as the web, there’s no way you can please everyone. Also, with any movie you’ve already got half a dozen studio executives and producers giving their input. Add to that a director and the actors and you’ve got way too many chefs in the kitchen already.
I enjoy the intelligent, thoughtful discussions. It’s cool to see the fans passion for a project. But you have to wade through a lot of shit to find it. So many of the talkbacks are people either bashing the hosts of the site, the reviewers, or each other.
Weresmurf: The thing that really pisses me off personally is when I see people on a movie board, or people in real life who condemn a movie to hell before seeing anything about it. (Ok I’m guilty of trashing Uwe Bolls movies personally, but isn’t that justifiable???) Currently the hatred against Transformers is perplexing me. No ones seen a damn thing about it asides a few still concept shots and a few toys, not to mention a script that's possibly been heavily altered, yet apparently it's 'the worst thing' ever. I noticed on the boards of various sites, that the same type of hatred towards Day of the Dead? How does this affect the people making the movie? What effects does it have on you on a personal level?
Jeff: Again, you learn to roll with the punches. It’s a tough business. And it’s human nature for people to build others up and rip them down. Before I worked in Hollywood, I thought making movies was simple…you write a good script, someone throws a little money your way and you get to make a great movie. But the people who control the purse strings are often only concerned with making a profit. Many of them don’t care about movies or creativity. They’re operating from a place of fear, so they’ll only finance movies that have the best shot at making money…i.e. safe films. This is true of any genre. These people don’t care about the hatred online as long as the box office numbers are high.
I met a writer who worked on a highly popular comic adaptation. He had to take a bodyguard to convention appearances because he got death threats. When the hatred gets to that level, I think it’s ridiculous and petty.
I know some writers who have been crippled by criticism, others that ignore it and some who try to grow from it. I hope to fall in the latter category. I’ve always taken constructive criticism well, but if I feel that someone’s just being bitchy, it’s water off a ducks back with me.
But the toughest thing is trying to separate your script from the finished film. I’ve had scripts changed by people who have never written before. I wrote an MOW that was literally dumbed down because an executive thought the dialogue and plot were “too clever” for their audience. I’ve had scripts stripped down to the bare minimum because of budget and scheduling cuts. So that criticism is frustrating, because it’s often about problems that weren’t in your original script.
Weresmurf: What's up next for Jeffrey Reddick, what does your future hold?
Jeff: I just sold a horror pitch, which I’m currently writing. There will be an announcement soon, but it’s a high concept idea and more importantly, it’s an original, so I’m really excited about it. I’m also working on getting the financing together for a horror project that I plan to direct. That’s the only way, as a writer, to insure that your vision ends up on screen. Then, succeed or fail, you know you’ve given it your best shot.
Weresmurf: Thank you so much for your time Jeff, we appreciate you answering these for us!
Jeff: My pleasure. J
*** Just a footnote to this interview, which has been added after the emails went back and forth. I have to say that Jeff came across as a great guy, willing to do an interview for someone he just met. All thanks to Jeff and I hope his movie does well and his career flourishes. We need more open and honest people like this out there people, so if you do or don’t support Day of the Dead, at least get out there and start supporting independent horrors like Automaton Transfusion and any others you can find. It’s the only way we can get the quality increased or we’ll be subjected to ‘When a stranger calls’ quality ‘horror’ for a long time to come!
Look for Day of the Dead in cinemas in 2007 people.
This has been a Weresmurf production.
-
+ Expand All
-
nice.. nice...
-
Damn you Michael Bay
-
I knew a Michael Bay quote would work its way in there somewhere.
FYI, Moriarty is right and I never made it a secret to Mr Reddick, that I was less than impressed with the footage that I saw. However, I also kept in mind, that there was some stuff I actually liked as well. I won't go into the whole thing, but needless to say, no punches were pulled in either interview or response, Jeff has been nothing but totally gracious and honest and that's what made this interview so fun for me and hopefully him. Thanks for reading people! -
I've really got to create an account with my other name. Sorry ppl, this is Weresmurf incase it wasn't bleedingly obvious.
-
Yes, it wasn't a huge Box Office hit, but because of the R-Rating re-shoots, we got a great b-movie, that will be BIG on DVD!!!
-
MCMLXXVI IS A FUCKING CUNT. Get a job.
-
...comment 'worked its way' into there, is because MCMLXXVI writes that same moronic thing in every talkback, because he is a cunt. He certainly didn't read the article, because these days he sits at home waiting to nab the 'first' slot. If he had bothered to read it, he would have realised that the interview actually talks about wankers such as him, ripping into something they know NOTHING about. And, unfortunately, MCMLXXVI doesn't even read the posts which come after his own, so he never gets to hear what a wanker he is, and how much everyone hates him. Like I said, fuckbreath, get a job.
-
its tough being a writer and having your script only appear in 50% of the movie.
-
Seconded!
-
Why can't we all just get along.... Lets not call each other wankers :)
-
A great interview - enjoyed reading it - he comes across as a very thoughtful guy. Well done sir - We need more of this sort of work on the site.
-
"...“Friday The 13th Part 2,” “House,” “Warlock” and “Halloween H20.”..." And that's were I stopped reading.
Oh, and MCMLXXVI is NOT a wanker. He lacks the hand-eye coordination to actually grasp his own dick. He's just a very stupid person and I hope that Micheal Bay rapes his childhood in the ass. That's right: in the ASS!
-
Seriously. I think people like "1976" should be rewarded with a leading role in a movie... BUT: It should be a movie directed by Uwe Boll. In MCMLXXVI's case, he should star in a Transformers version directed and written by Uwe Boll. He should also be forced to appear in all the interviews, behind-the-scenes footage and DVD extra stuff as the person who has to tell everybody how cool the movie is and what great of a director Boll was. After that, he should be taking that movie and present it to Transformers fans at the next Comicon. If he is breathing after that, he should get a life and shut the fuck up.
-
I still think DOTD remake will be shit though.
-
"I also knew that they were going to make this film whether I wrote it or not.... I knew if I didn’t do it, they would have hired someone on the cheap to bang out a script quickly.... Look, I’m sick of remakes too."
==
"I also knew they were going to butcher these orphans whether I participated or not. I knew if I didn't murder these orphans, they would have hired someone on the cheap to slaughter these orphans quickly. Look, I'm sick of orphan evisceration too."
You're the problem! Look in the mirror, you hack... YOU ARE WHY HOLLYWOOD SUCKS. -
MCMLXXVI rules
-
I will elaborate on my slam above. It's clear from this guy's defensive tone that he knows he's part of the problem. Sorry to get on my high horse, but as a screenwriter who's seen his own work butchered, yes, it sucks, but that's why you pick projects carefully or go indie. You know, making automotive detailing websites or being a boxing promoter or delivering pizza is not as glamorous as contributing to blockbuster movies, but if you actually care about good film and good writing, a clear conscience is worth it... reject the bullshit machine and do the right thing! I have no sympathy for people like this dude who go into a lame project KNOWING it's a lame project and then whine about how little of their material made it to screen, how it was re-written by illiterate execs, etc. as if it was a surprise or some new unfair thing. I stand by my earlier assertions, and I'm paying my dues every day in the working world with no regrets.
-
I think MCMLXXVI's little lone-man campaign is hilarious, and all the more hilarious because he/she never responds to people like you--just carries on with the crusade.
What I can't understand is why it makes you so freakin' angry. Don't like his posts? Skip 'em. How is it any skin off your back? -
Don't be a labial flap. You can't compare this to Nazi concentration camps or anything else. He is right - this film IS going to get made. If he involves himself with it, there's a chance it might be reasonable. And Hollywood makes remakes because people buy tickets for them. If they didn't, they wouldn't. Simple as that. Why is that so hard to understand?
-
...it just does. ok.
-
...i know im not alone - MCMLXXVI is a WANKER - Do you agree?
-
I gotta say, I agree with Daddylonglegs and CaptainMal on this one. MCMLXXVI used to annoy me, but I now find his perseverance amusing. Plus Michael Bay does suck. And I also like the MichaelBay poster who's started saying "Damn you MCMLXXVI!"
-
Thanks for the compliment, very heartening. This was my first interview for the site, hopefully not the last, I'd love to get a little picture down the bottom of myself like Capone and Mori and Quint have lol.
Living in Australia as I do, and not being as immersed as say, Latauro, in the industry, I don't think my involvement will be as heavy obviously. Ironic my first interview was an american no? lol.
Anyhow to those bashing the man, he's made it clear to me over emails, with things he's said, that he's no hack who's never seen a Romero movie and just been brought aboard. I fully believe that he's doing this for the right reasons. Do I think this movie could still blow chunks? Yes. Definitely. Did I believe Dawn 2004 could blow chunks? Yes I was very vocal about Dawn 2004 in a negative way until I was blown away by it. I've since learnt to stop judging on the surface and wait til we get the whole thing as a package.
I'm much more interested in a script writer, than most of the other cast, on a personal level, because I like to know what the thought process is behind someone remaking a movie, I like to see what the driving idea is versus the final product we get. I'm well aware his script may have been butchered or may not have been and I understand the point in a round about way that some of you have made, that he may be biased towards his own work. It's completely possible. But then, he might also be correct in saying that the temp track, lighting and colour on the footage released made it look crap and the final version might look better.
Remember, theres going to be major changes, such as the 24 hour period, due to the fact that they cannot source original Romero material or be seen to be doing so due to copyright infringement.
What I'm trying to say is, the wise man waits and judges the final product upon release, only a fool would run in guns blazing damning it to hell before they've seen or know anything. I'm not saying I'll love it, I could very well hate it, and I've told the man I'm going to be very honest about that fact if per chance I do. But I'm giving it a chance to either impress or disappoint me. Either way, its more Zombies! -
In light of the interview, it's possible that this might be an ok addition to the 'zombie dvd' shelf... but I stand by what I said before; It's a shame they stole the name 'Day of the Dead' for a movie that is essentially a completely different story altogether. Romero's original vision for a truly epic and earth-shattering zombie film is looking further and further away from happening now...
-
Praise you, MCMLXXVI
-
Sorry, but the original Day of the Dead is one of my favorite movies of all time...of any genre. I have all the love in the world for Dawn of the Dead (original) and still consider it the best horror movie ever made... but Day was the first movie that truly scared the shit out of me. The actors all did a great job, the theme was dark and horrific, and the entire world seemed like a nightmare. Also, it was incredibly gory... I've had people throw up when they've seen it. But going back, the characters were awesome. The music was awesome, the backdrop was awesome...the original STILL stands up. Just re-release it as is, and it'll make this remake look like a sad mistake...
-
Go back and do your homework, you fucking hack.
-
But not as annoiying as all these horror remakes. Damnnit Hollywood.
-
I agree with "kuguy3000"'s comments 3 posts above. The original 'Day' is one of my favourite movies ever, and that's saying something because most of the rest of my collection is much more what you might term 'high-brow' cinema, as opposed to horror b-movies. But something about the original 'Day of the Dead' tapped into the apocalyptic survival madness very well, and very realistically. Even the over-the-top acting by Joe Pilato ("Captain Rhodes") is actually quite believable given the circumstances the characters find themselves in. I'd even go so far as to say that the over-the-top hysterical acting of most of the characters in the original "Day of the Dead" is possibly THE only time ever in horror movie history where the film truly represents the way real people would act when thrust into such a bizarre, macabre survival situation: i.e. completely nuts, and for the most part, totally selfish. It's an underrated classic.
-
I think you've completely hit the nail on the head. It's a perfect performance by Pilato in the sense that it's a world completely fucked up and turned around and he's doing his best to keep hold whilst it slips away, one strand at a time...
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- AVENGERS enemy revealed as pink boardgame pieces... You might suffer some form of elation... SPOILERS!!! -- 151 total posts 140 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 128 total posts 94 posts
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 92 total posts 91 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 474 total posts 70 posts
- Here's The Red Band Trailer For Drafthouse Films' THE FP! -- 64 total posts 64 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 51 total posts 51 posts
- Friday Brings SWEEPS DAY NINE!! Gab Here About Tonight’s FRINGE!! Plus Einstein on TIM, Wiig On PORTLANDIA, MAHER, CLONE, GIFTED, GRIMM, SPARTACUS, SUPERNATURAL, GOLD RUSH And More!! -- 116 total posts 41 posts
- Wanna smell like the Hulk? What about Cap? Consider yourself a Thunder God or a unisex God of Mischief? -- 71 total posts 40 posts
- HANNA's Saoirse Ronan to boss around seven little people -- 35 total posts 35 posts
- Does ‘SNL’ Rhyme With ‘Deschanel’?? Learn Which SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE Vet Hosts After Sexy Zooey!! -- 35 total posts 34 posts