Post by Quorthon on Oct 26, 2005 13:12:19 GMT -5
Land of the Dead
Zombie Horror
2005
Color
Universal Studios
MPAA Rating: R (Review pertains to Unrated Director's Cut)
Directed by: George Romero
USA
I'm a huge George Romero and zombie fan. So, of course, I'm a huge fan of Romero's "Dead" films. So imagine the pain I went through when I couldn't see this film in the theater due to severe financial restraints. So when it came out on DVD--I bought it. Lack of money, never seeing it, not knowing what I was in for--I bought it. I bought the Unrated Director's Cut. This is one of the only--possibly the only film I have ever watched twice in one day--and neither time was with the Director's Commentary!
This film, of course, is the continuing story of Humanity's decline as the world is gradually over-run by walking, eating, decaying corpses. Dennis Hopper (what a guy!) is basically the leader of a city stronghold protected on all sides by water--which the dead don't much care for. Apparently, when you're a rotting corpse, bathing loses all meaning. Anyway, in typical, classic Romero fashion, a normally working and reasonably impenatrable stronghold becomes breached and--as usual--by foolish human behavior. Then come the zombies, and what a feast is had!
Here’s the breakdown:
The Good:
--Firstly, I'm going to put Romero's written-in, relating observation to modern, post-9/11 America in here. The *ahem* land of the dead now has people living in relative comfortable and normal ways again--as if there were no zombies. So much so, they behave as if the zombies simply aren't a problem anymore. Much like modern Americans behave--everything's back to normal; we're shopping again, we're arguing again, we're bitching about the government again, and we have an underlying feeling that "all is well" again. But, like the movie, all is not well: Like LotD, the threat still exists, and occasionally still emerges to remind us so. Of course, the theat in our world is terrorism, not zombies. I think I'd prefer zombies. Romero's note that even after a catastrophe, people will always return their root behaviors--and greed--is also present.
--The gore is fantastic--every bit as good as Day of the Dead's gore, if not better. But I don't really think it's better.
--Creative new gore--face peeled off, innards pulled out via a mouth, body and head seperated by gunfire, etc.
--Generally, pretty good acting.
--About the best atmosphere Romero has ever had in one of his zombie films--it's thick and dark, and incredible--the best since the original in 1968.
--Romero continued his plot element from the previous film that the zombies have the capacity to learn--and this film's lead black character (as there's one in every Dead film) becomes the "leader" of the zombies.
--These are perhaps the strongest and most interesting and believable characters of any of the Dead films. Only time, however, will tell if any of them are as memorable as old favorites.
--Excellent action sequences.
Didn’t Hurt It, Didn’t Help:
--Occasionally, the dialog dips in quality or is rather cheesy.
--Some acting/actors aren't as good as they could be. I got the feeling that Asia Argento could've been better.
--Generally pretty good music--it has to be to help the atmosphere be as good as it is. My only problem was the fact that Hip Hop (bleagh!) finally stuffed it's obnoxiousness into a George Romero film. Personally, I've always felt that Hip Hop (Rap/Pop) have no place in the world of horror movies--it just doesn't fit. Luckily, there's not very much of it--and it's easily forgotten.
--While the writing is generally pretty strong and well done, there's also some cheesiness to the script. But, if you're a George Romero fan, you've come to love and even expect a little cheesiness now and then. Romero takes his work seriously, which is really good--but not so seriously as to remove the cheesiness that makes his films fun as well as gory and scary. Just look at the original "Dawn of the Dead" or "Creepshow."
The Bad:
--This movie didn't appear to do as well as a lot of the recently Nationally/Internationally released zombie films have done: 28 Days Later, Dawn of the Dead remake, etc. Which is a terrible, terrible shame--because it's so much better than all every zombie film released theatrically in the past decade. Perhaps, the best in the last two decades. In fact, I'm quite sure of it.
--Occasionally, the CG gore doesn't look as good as the real thing. Of course. One otherwise brilliant scene had a zombie fling his nearly decapitated head to a potential meal--and it just didn't look all that great. A similar scene exists in Terminator 3--and that one also looked pretty bad. Perhaps hanging, nearly decapitated heads are something that just can't be done really well yet.
The Ugly:
--Unfortunately, a lot of people, younger people or those with no real knowledge of past, often much better zombie films no doubt have a problem with Romero sticking with his trademark sluggish, retarded, meandering corpses. Some of these young, ignorant whelps will no doubt think the movie is less scary because of the lack of ultra-fast running zombies. But those people don't matter. Whelps.
Memorable Scene:
--Well, of course, all that gore is pretty memorable. Who doesn't love that, right? So instead of a gory scene, I'm going to fondly remember when Pilsbury, the gigantic Somoan, is talking about hot-wiring cars and the reason he's so knowledgable about it. Very amusing.
Surprises to Look For:
--Tom Savini reprising his role as the bad-ass biker from "Dawn of the Dead."
--Look for Simon Pegg's (Shaun and co-writer from "Shaun of the Dead") and Edgar Wright's (co-writer and director of "Shaun of the Dead") cameos as zombies!
Acting: 8/10
Story: 9/10
Atmosphere: 10/10
Cinematography: 9/10
Character Development: 8/10
Special Effects/Make-up: 9/10 (would've been a 10 if not for the occasional dip in CG quality)
Nudity/Sexuality: 1/10
Violence/Gore: 10/10 (Best gore of any theatrically released film--even if this is the director's cut.)
Sets/Backgrounds: 10/10
Dialogue: 8/10
Music: 9/10
Writing: 9/10
Direction: 9/10
Cheesiness: 2/10
Crappiness: 0/10
Overall: 9/10
It's really up to debate which of Romero's Dead films is the best. Sure, this is easily the best zombie film to be given the big-budget, big-studio, major release treatment in probably twenty years--but set against his other films, well, it's tough to say. For me, I love them all pretty much equally, with Day being a little higher while the original Night will always have a special place in my heart as one of the films on which I was raised--and the first one I saw. Since each film comes from a different decade, with a different style, and a different look, and a different story, and a different feel--picking a favorite relates more to your age! I guess I'll just say that it's every bit as good as his other zombie classics.
Recommended to ALL horror fans, Romero fans and Stephen King fans (because we all know that they're good buddies). And, especially, recommended to anyone naive enough to think only running zombies are scary--you need to learn what a real zombie movie is like!
Zombie Horror
2005
Color
Universal Studios
MPAA Rating: R (Review pertains to Unrated Director's Cut)
Directed by: George Romero
USA
I'm a huge George Romero and zombie fan. So, of course, I'm a huge fan of Romero's "Dead" films. So imagine the pain I went through when I couldn't see this film in the theater due to severe financial restraints. So when it came out on DVD--I bought it. Lack of money, never seeing it, not knowing what I was in for--I bought it. I bought the Unrated Director's Cut. This is one of the only--possibly the only film I have ever watched twice in one day--and neither time was with the Director's Commentary!
This film, of course, is the continuing story of Humanity's decline as the world is gradually over-run by walking, eating, decaying corpses. Dennis Hopper (what a guy!) is basically the leader of a city stronghold protected on all sides by water--which the dead don't much care for. Apparently, when you're a rotting corpse, bathing loses all meaning. Anyway, in typical, classic Romero fashion, a normally working and reasonably impenatrable stronghold becomes breached and--as usual--by foolish human behavior. Then come the zombies, and what a feast is had!
Here’s the breakdown:
The Good:
--Firstly, I'm going to put Romero's written-in, relating observation to modern, post-9/11 America in here. The *ahem* land of the dead now has people living in relative comfortable and normal ways again--as if there were no zombies. So much so, they behave as if the zombies simply aren't a problem anymore. Much like modern Americans behave--everything's back to normal; we're shopping again, we're arguing again, we're bitching about the government again, and we have an underlying feeling that "all is well" again. But, like the movie, all is not well: Like LotD, the threat still exists, and occasionally still emerges to remind us so. Of course, the theat in our world is terrorism, not zombies. I think I'd prefer zombies. Romero's note that even after a catastrophe, people will always return their root behaviors--and greed--is also present.
--The gore is fantastic--every bit as good as Day of the Dead's gore, if not better. But I don't really think it's better.
--Creative new gore--face peeled off, innards pulled out via a mouth, body and head seperated by gunfire, etc.
--Generally, pretty good acting.
--About the best atmosphere Romero has ever had in one of his zombie films--it's thick and dark, and incredible--the best since the original in 1968.
--Romero continued his plot element from the previous film that the zombies have the capacity to learn--and this film's lead black character (as there's one in every Dead film) becomes the "leader" of the zombies.
--These are perhaps the strongest and most interesting and believable characters of any of the Dead films. Only time, however, will tell if any of them are as memorable as old favorites.
--Excellent action sequences.
Didn’t Hurt It, Didn’t Help:
--Occasionally, the dialog dips in quality or is rather cheesy.
--Some acting/actors aren't as good as they could be. I got the feeling that Asia Argento could've been better.
--Generally pretty good music--it has to be to help the atmosphere be as good as it is. My only problem was the fact that Hip Hop (bleagh!) finally stuffed it's obnoxiousness into a George Romero film. Personally, I've always felt that Hip Hop (Rap/Pop) have no place in the world of horror movies--it just doesn't fit. Luckily, there's not very much of it--and it's easily forgotten.
--While the writing is generally pretty strong and well done, there's also some cheesiness to the script. But, if you're a George Romero fan, you've come to love and even expect a little cheesiness now and then. Romero takes his work seriously, which is really good--but not so seriously as to remove the cheesiness that makes his films fun as well as gory and scary. Just look at the original "Dawn of the Dead" or "Creepshow."
The Bad:
--This movie didn't appear to do as well as a lot of the recently Nationally/Internationally released zombie films have done: 28 Days Later, Dawn of the Dead remake, etc. Which is a terrible, terrible shame--because it's so much better than all every zombie film released theatrically in the past decade. Perhaps, the best in the last two decades. In fact, I'm quite sure of it.
--Occasionally, the CG gore doesn't look as good as the real thing. Of course. One otherwise brilliant scene had a zombie fling his nearly decapitated head to a potential meal--and it just didn't look all that great. A similar scene exists in Terminator 3--and that one also looked pretty bad. Perhaps hanging, nearly decapitated heads are something that just can't be done really well yet.
The Ugly:
--Unfortunately, a lot of people, younger people or those with no real knowledge of past, often much better zombie films no doubt have a problem with Romero sticking with his trademark sluggish, retarded, meandering corpses. Some of these young, ignorant whelps will no doubt think the movie is less scary because of the lack of ultra-fast running zombies. But those people don't matter. Whelps.
Memorable Scene:
--Well, of course, all that gore is pretty memorable. Who doesn't love that, right? So instead of a gory scene, I'm going to fondly remember when Pilsbury, the gigantic Somoan, is talking about hot-wiring cars and the reason he's so knowledgable about it. Very amusing.
Surprises to Look For:
--Tom Savini reprising his role as the bad-ass biker from "Dawn of the Dead."
--Look for Simon Pegg's (Shaun and co-writer from "Shaun of the Dead") and Edgar Wright's (co-writer and director of "Shaun of the Dead") cameos as zombies!
Acting: 8/10
Story: 9/10
Atmosphere: 10/10
Cinematography: 9/10
Character Development: 8/10
Special Effects/Make-up: 9/10 (would've been a 10 if not for the occasional dip in CG quality)
Nudity/Sexuality: 1/10
Violence/Gore: 10/10 (Best gore of any theatrically released film--even if this is the director's cut.)
Sets/Backgrounds: 10/10
Dialogue: 8/10
Music: 9/10
Writing: 9/10
Direction: 9/10
Cheesiness: 2/10
Crappiness: 0/10
Overall: 9/10
It's really up to debate which of Romero's Dead films is the best. Sure, this is easily the best zombie film to be given the big-budget, big-studio, major release treatment in probably twenty years--but set against his other films, well, it's tough to say. For me, I love them all pretty much equally, with Day being a little higher while the original Night will always have a special place in my heart as one of the films on which I was raised--and the first one I saw. Since each film comes from a different decade, with a different style, and a different look, and a different story, and a different feel--picking a favorite relates more to your age! I guess I'll just say that it's every bit as good as his other zombie classics.
Recommended to ALL horror fans, Romero fans and Stephen King fans (because we all know that they're good buddies). And, especially, recommended to anyone naive enough to think only running zombies are scary--you need to learn what a real zombie movie is like!
