On Oct 26, 1:14 am, Duggy  wrote:   
   > I think that ... ["Shaun of the Dead"]'s mostly a "already likes Zombie   
   films" thing.   
   >   
   > I don't think you have to, but it's better if you do.   
   I'm not so sure.  I generally dislike zombie movies,  which tend to be   
   formulaic to the point of idiocy.  I thought the original "Night of   
   the Living Dead" had a raw immediacy that Romero never recaptured, and   
   I only watched the first color remake (of what seem to have been 50)   
   because Pat Tallman was in it.  Even then I only watched it once.   
   But "Sean of the Dead" was just fun - a comedy first, and a "zombie   
   movie" only incidentally.   
   I suppose you get more out of it if you're already familiar with the   
   tropes of the genre, but like I said, you only have to have watched   
   one or two zombie films the know all of those.   
   "Blazing Saddles" and "Young Frankenstein" also work better if you've   
   seen a lot of westerns or all of the Universal monster films, but both   
   of these genres have penetrated so deeply into the popular culture   
   through references, parodies and homages that you can get most of the   
   gags in the Brooks films without ever having sat through an entire   
   western movie or seen more than a few clips from the Universal   
   horrors.  And much of the humor in both films comes from character   
   moments or set-piece jokes-for-their-own-sake, so even someone with   
   little exposure to horse opera and Karloff will get a chuckle out of   
   them.  Zombie movies aren't quite that ubiquitous, but most people   
   have had enough exposure to them to enjoy "Sean of the Dead" in the   
   same way someone who would never sit through "Stagecoach" or "The   
   Searchers" can enjoy "Blazing Saddles".   
   Regards,   
   Joe   
   --- SBBSecho 2.12-Win32   
    * Origin: Time Warp of the Future BBS - Home of League 10 (1:14/400)