|
|
Post by nigel on May 14, 2005 7:09:22 GMT -5
Tell you the truth I only heard of LUCIO FULCI yesturday lol, think i'll have to stick will George.
|
|
|
|
Post by JetAwesome on May 15, 2005 9:54:06 GMT -5
Ohhhh! thats a hard one. Well, Im gonna says George. Most people would simply compare Zombi2 with Dawn. The argument I hear is that the zombies in Z2 look fantastic whereas the ones in dawn are just people with waters colors on them. Of course this doesn't hold up because Dawn has like, five times as many zombie then Zombi2.
But, I've seen a few other of Fulci's films and they just arnt as good as George's, and that is excluding his 'Dead' films.
|
|
|
|
Post by rjschwarz on May 18, 2005 16:15:58 GMT -5
Thing is the zombies in dawn were more or less freshly dead. Couple of days perhaps weeks. They had no oxygen in their blood so they were blue. They were probably pretty accurate even if uninspiring.
By Day of the Dead the decay was even worse. Again it worked for the script. Don't know if this was luck, more money and skill invovled for successive pictures but it worked pretty well.
Fulci's zombies had been buried in the ground for who knows how long. Assuming there would be anything left at all the makeup really conveyed a sense of decay that really worked. At least in Zombi2 (or Zombie 1 I dont' remember which was the renamed Dawn and which wasn't).
|
|
|
|
Post by JetAwesome on May 20, 2005 20:01:57 GMT -5
Holy crap! I never even thought of it that way, but now it makes sooo much sense, thank you for opening my eyes!  |
|
