zombiehorror wrote:
I don't think the level of gore would be anyone's answer of attracting a teen market, if they wanted to attract teens they would have thrown this into a modern setting and obviously cast it with a bunch of teens (actually 20-30 somethings that they pass off as teens).

Anyone that comes out of the theater only discussing the level of blood and guts is only there for blood and guts. People that go to see a good horror film, drama, good acting, great sets, atmosphere, etc. will (at least they should) come out talking about those things regardless of the gore level. A classic can exist with or without gore but without those other things, it'll never be a classic. I personally want to see all of those things and I want to see the blood, guts, bowels, bones, ripped flesh, etc.

I bet Rick never thought there'd be controversy over showing to much gore in a horror film, well maybe from censors but not from horror buffs!

I agree but I also say bring on the gore, but at a degree that is exceptable and not over the top or outrageous.



I also think keeping this movie at a 'R' rating is the wisest choice to take, I want a balls-to-wall, all out monster flick, not a monster thats going to be a puppy and PG-13 crap. True you may reach a wider audience but I'm tired of seeing horror films where they are lame or cut back into pre-teen flicks. I'm not a teen, I want my horror, I want too see the 'good' stuff, I want to jump from seat, I want to come out of that theatre and be blown away or just entertained. I want to have that movie as part of horror movie collection, when it comes out on DVD. I want it to a successful movie.