Land of the Dead (2005)

George Romero returns to the genre he had perfected with his "dead" trilogy (Night of, Dawn of, and Day of), with a fourth installment, LAND OF THE DEAD. Fans of the first three films will no doubt be lining up in droves to see this film regardless of what the critics say. Regardless, die hard zombie fans and critics alike should be pleasantly surprised. The sneak peak I saw had fans hooting and hollering and received a standing ovation at the end of the film. The film, while not perfect, is still a achievement in bringing a once dead genre back to life. And who better to do it than the master himself, George A ROmero. Land of the Dead, most closely resembles the dark comedy of Day of the Dead than the other two films, and manages to blend the classic elements of Dawn of the Dead with the modern expectations of films like 28 days Later. Romero fans will love it, and modern horror seekers should hopefully be exposed to a great time. Great special effects, plenty of gore, and great performances all around especially from John Legiozomo, Dennis Hopper, and Asia Argento. Do yourself a favor, and GO SEE THIS MOVIE on the big screen!

Fmovies: I was able to catch an advance screening with friends last night, and maybe it was just the mood we were in, but we had a blast. It took me a few minutes to get the direction George was going with this one, but once I did, it cranked on almost every cylinder.

The first thing to note is this is not a serious, somber, scare you out of your pants zombie movie. What it actually plays out as instead is a social commentary on class, politics, and stereo types, while having a good time doing it. Think more Evil Dead meets Mad Max meets Night of the Living Dead, and you'll get a clearer picture of the movie George has made here.

Yes, it is very violent, and yes, there are plenty of "feedings." Highly recommended for those whose take zombie movies as seriously as they should.

Simon Baker leads in this film as a mercenary who wants to head up North. Maybe the undead do not like the cold. He find himself trapped between various warring factions, including a ruthless CEO (Dennis Hopper) who offers safety to the wealthy while allowing the unwashed masses to fend for themselves, a fellow mercenary (John Leguizamo) who will sacrifice anyone to advance his own agenda, and hordes of zombies who are starting to take steps up the evolutionary ladder. They actually used a gun in this film. First time I've seen a zombie do more than eat. They even went in the water. Apes don't do that! Lots of blood, but there was less action than I've seen and more talking.

I love John Leguizamo, and that made it worth my time. Seeing Asia Argento (xXx) wasn't bad either.

Land of the Dead fmovies. With the exception of only seeing parts of the original Day of the Dead, I've seen all of Romero's Dead movies, and just got done watching Land of the Dead. In this day and age of fast moving and suspense packed zombie movies (including the not-actually-zombies 28 Days Later), Land seems like a dinosaur. Like a sci-fi movie using matte paintings and spaceships held up by strings.

First, there are the plot holes that are covered in depth in other reviews. Why is money still valuable? Do they not realize it means nothing without the full faith and credit of the US government? And how does Hopper's character maintain control? He has one valet type person, then the rest of his goons apparently know full well they're stuck in, pardon the pun, dead end jobs. The whole simplistic, he's just evil, greedy, and powerful character treatment might have worked 20-30 years ago, but I expect a bit more explanation and motivation in today's stories.

The characters themselves are cardboard cutouts. We've got a loner hero that seemingly welcomes other team members without question. A heroine that switches from zombie-kicking action star to squealing helplessly when the hero starts slipping off the front end of the big rig. A short guy who isn't around long enough for us to figure out if he's some underworld kingpin or not. And an equally short changed revolutionary leader with sick son that makes you wonder if there was a story line there, but Romero thought he'd confuse people by introducing more than one plot point at a time.

Then there's the action. I think I sort of jumped once or twice at something unexpected. Every other "scary" moment, I saw coming a mile away. George, the "guy hears something, looks one way, only to then look behind him to see zombie about to snack on his brains" got old several decades ago. Using it multiple times in this movie makes it even more predictable. And yes, people have intestines that are apparently quite tasty to zombies and fun to pull out. While the film is quite gory, by the climax, I was actually bored of seeing all the blood and guts. It wasn't "oh gross!" but "another shot of someone's intestines being pulled out?" This movie would be great 20 or 30 years ago. Today, it just seems hopelessly dated in the face of other movies that actually evolved from the genre that Romero helped establish.

Zombies have taken over the world in Land of the Dead, the remaining survivors live within a walled city to keep the dead out. A revolution is brewing in a plan to overthrow the city. but outside the walls the zombies are developing their intelligence.

The plot kind of sounds a bit lame, but it really does work well and this is a zombie flick that can be taken quite seriously. Romero has again created something great on a tight budget, and he has done well to make it look good, with some great make up effects. The cast are all pretty good, there are some good characters and the dialogue is effective.

Overall Land of the Dead delivers all out zombie action that's great for fans of the genre, good work George.

8/10

Land of the Dead - The 4th part of George A. Romero's zombie quadrillogy. It's been decades since the dead began to walk the Earth, and now they practically own it (except for Canada for some reason). There is one last little mega-city that is surrounded by electric fences, armed patrols and barbed wire on one side, and nothing but water on all other four sides, because the dead supposedly don't like water. Despite the fact that the surrounding lands are rife with zombies, this metropolis is incredibly corrupt. All thanks to evil bureaucrat Kaufman (Dennis Hooper, who I had a ball watching) who makes all but a select few rich folks (who have never seen or fought a real zombie) live in slums. There you can get your picture taken with zombies, or watch zombie fights (they fight over animals and the occasional human). There are a few mercenaries paid to make runs in a giant tank truck for precious commodities in the outside world.

Now I like George and could thank him endlessly for starting the zombie franchise, but he has always favored gore just a little more over character development, and has always liked his zombies just a LOT more than his humans. Heck in this movie, the zombies are practically the good-guys! They're just like you and me, except they rip people's arms in two (and I do mean length-wise) and tear belly button rings out of people. They are actually pretty intelligent and moderately fast at walking. By far the biggest threats in Romero's movies (most notably "Big Daddy" (Eugene Clark). For the most part though, it works, and it's good gory fun. Except the character development thingy. While I don't begrudge Romero for having fun with his zombies, I wasn't too sympathetic to Riley (Simon Baker) or Slack (Asia Argento). Riley, like Romero it seems, is just tired of character development as he has Riley say "I'm fed up with back-stories". But Riley dear boy, that's how the audience grows to care about you. Slack almost kills several of her fellow team-mates and does not grow at all, but that's the script's fault. Both of these characters, however are played well for what the actors are given.

Surprisingly the secondary characters are far more endearing. Cholo (John Leguizamo) was not only believable as a merc, but I was quite sympathetic to him as he realized that he was a pon. "Pilsbury" (Pedro Miguel Arce) and Charlie (Robert Joy) are endearing and funny.

So the effects are good. The story is iffy. The acting is good. The character development is iffy. The ending is really lame. This gets an overall B