Submit Comment

Comments for George A. Romero's Land of the Dead (Unrated Director's Cut)

• Posted on 2008-09-14
  Ok
  
  While speed zombies have become the rage, in such films as the recent remake of Dawn Of The Dead and 28 Days, in Land Of The Dead- the fourth of what is now a tetralogy of original Dead films by George Romero- we are back to the slow moving ghouls of old, although they are showing signs of evolving intelligence, if not fleetness. That said, it is clear that Romero has run out of ideas, and his attempts at social commentary in the original Night Of The Living Dead and original Dawn Of The Dead (both have been remade) have gone pallid. Those two original films were unique, in that they rose above their horror genre and zombie subgenre to become great films, much in the way Alien and Aliens transcended the horror-sci fi ghetto and the first two Terminator films did the same for cyborg-time travel flicks. But, there must be some sort of rule that allows only the first two films of such genres to become classics, for the last original zombie film from Romero, 1985's Day Of The Dead, was horrible, and this film, while a little better, is still nowhere near passable. Romero, in fact, has seen subsequent generations of zombie enthusiasts pass him by.... The film is the most impressive of his zombie quartet, due to CGI, but the actual dead look the least scary of all the zombies. The DVD comes with a number of featurettes, but the Romero-led commentary track talks of mainly minor film details, in an in-jokey way, and little of the mythos, so is rather banal, which recapitulates the almost generic feel that this film has, as if Romero was told some backers wanted a fourth film, gave him lots of money to make it, and then he was stuck with figuring everything else out, especially a script, so took the money and ran, and merely stole from his earlier films.
  Score: 2
• Posted on 2008-09-08
  Romero at his worst is still leagues above every other director who takes a stab at the zombie genre.
  
  Not the best of the series, But still a Romero flick. Romero at his worst is still leagues above every other director who takes a stab at the zombie genre.
  
  Great gore, great action, and an awesome continuation to the "Zombies are learning" plotline from "Day of the Dead."
  
  Plus, I mean, Asia Argento isnt someone i'd throw out of bed for eating cookies.
  
  7/10
  Score: 4
• Posted on 2008-07-27
  Another Romero Triumph!
  
  Following the events of George Romero's beloved Living Dead films, "Night of the Living Dead", "Dawn of the Dead", and "Day of the Dead", in which the bodies of the recently deceased returned to life and began feeding on the living and increasing in number, "Land of the Dead" takes us to a walled-off community where a society of human survivors live as two distinct social classes: the wealthy, who live in a luxurious building called Fiddler's Green, and the poor, who live everywhere else. The big man who runs it all is the dangerously powerful Kaufman, and the film itself focuses on the group of marauders who work for him, particularly reluctant hero Riley and wannabe social-climber Cholo. Their job is to lead teams who travel outside the city on raids to collect goods from abandoned towns. Riley, however, is sick of the life within Kaufman's city and has made plans to get a car and head north, but his plans are interrupted when his former partner Cholo takes possession of Dead Reckoning, Kaufman's heavily armed, zombie proof raiding vehicle. Riley, his sidekick Charlie, and new friend Slack suddenly find themselves coerced into a mission to retrieve the vehicle from Cholo just as a large collection of intellectually evolving zombies are working their way into the city itself.
  
  "Land of the Dead" is a film Romero fans and zombie fans in general had been awaiting for a LONG time. When we finally got it, many of us were thrown for a loop by the concept of zombies learning (or is it remembering?) to tote guns and feel emotion, despite tastes of this from the previous film, "Day of the Dead". Ya gotta love how so-called fans who didn't like this film are trying to tell George A. Romero how his living dead are SUPPOSED to act; creatures that he himself invented. At first, I didn't love the concept of zombies becoming thinking creatures either, but given time, I've accepted that this direction was coming. How many times can you ask George to make movies about surviving the same basic situation? Okay, I could watch a million new ones, but still, it's understandable. And yet this is the main gripe people seem to have about this film. Oh well, you can't please everyone. Putting that aside, the film itself is a great ride! Another example of why Romero zombie films are the top of the heap. The characters in the film are wonderfully written and played. Simon Baker, John Leguizamo, Asia Argento, and Robert Joy were just wonderful. Dennis Hopper is fantastic as the despicable Kaufman, and while there's nothing likable about zombie leader Big Daddy (sorry, the only good zombie is a completely dead zombie), he's an unforgettable presence. The effects are fantastic, the story is exciting and engaging. The only things I could possibly nit-pick about are one moment of CGI that is a bit too CGI, and the overall concept of money still having value (not impossible, but unlikely). Still, these things are forgivable in such a cool movie loaded with awesome scenes! Definitely a worthy addition to the Romero zombie saga, and just loads of horrific fun!
  
  The great looking widescreen, unrated, director's cut DVD features some great extras (though no theatrical trailer for some reason). There's a great director commentary, some excellent featurettes (including a fun day on the set with John Leguizamo and a look at Simon Pegg and Edgar Wright's experience doing a cameo in the film), and even deleted scenes! It is unquestionably a must-have for any horror DVD collection, as are all the Romero zombie flicks!
  
  Score: 5
• Posted on 2008-07-25
  George Romero had no chance here
  
  Poor George had to face 20 years of unrealistic expectations, and had a hard time telling the story he wanted to tell. There's no possible way he could have pleased everyone, and "Land Of The Dead" has an unnecessarily bad rep among genre fans.
  
  It's fun - from the old-style Universal Logo to the opening credits montage all the way to the end. The world has suffered from the living dead plague for years, and what few human survivors remain live in a walled off enclave. Within this group, a lucky few live in high rise luxury while most live on the streets a mere few blocks away from the zombie hordes.
  
  It's implied that there are other city-state survivors, and for whatever reason a paper money economy has survived. The survivors loot abandoned towns for supplies and a few luxuries. One of the career looters has notions of joining the elite class, but is rebuffed; in revenge, he steals an armored truck and threatens the safety of the rich few. Our hero is dispatched to retrieve the truck, and naturally the living dead are let in the city to wreak havoc.
  
  The plot is outlandish, but presented seriously and supported by reasonably good acting (Robert Joy's Charlie stands out). Dennis Hopper is over-the-top, but goes back and forth from being an executive and a thug with ease.
  
  Of course it's gory, and it has a Romero-esque message (presented a little too "on the nose") and all the trappings of a great zombie flick. Yes, the zombies evolve, and that has always been part of the Romero zombie arc. (If you prefer "Dawn Of The Dead", watch that instead).
  
  "Land" stands on its own, and like "Day Of The Dead" it will become more accessible and respected in time.
  Score: 5
• Posted on 2008-07-20
  NOT THE BEST ZOMBIE MOVIE EVER, BUT IT'S GOOD 8.5 OUT OF 10
  
  Zombie films have always had a rich history. What most people don't know is that the true origin of zombie films began not in 1968 with Night of the Living Dead, but in 1937 with Revolt of the Zombies. There are reasons however why people don't know this, and it is because Revolt of the Zombies was a terribly boring and convoluted movie. When George A. Romero's Night of the Living Dead hit in 1968, it was groundbreaking and a true horror masterpiece, and a few zombie movies spawned from it in the '70s. But, in 1978, zombie horror truly hit its stride with the sublime Dawn of the Dead by George A. Romero. The film changed the face of horror films forever, and spawned a series of George A. Romero spinoffs (Return of the Living Dead 1, 2, and 3, Day of the Dead 1 & 2), some good ripoffs (Evil Dead 1 & 2, Zombi 2, and Cannibal Apocalypse) and some not-well-received movies. Zombie films went into a deep coma sometime during the late '80s and remained there for several years. Then, in 2002, the Resident Evil film put zombie horror back on the map and returned with a triumphant bang, which over the years has seen two other Resident Evil films, 28 Days Later, 28 Weeks Later, House of the Dead 1 & 2, the Dawn of the Dead remake and many more. Land of the Dead came around sometime in the summer of 2005, it's most certainly not Romero's best work, but as a zombie horror fan I loved it. It was gory, it was more story-focused, and it was action-packed.
  WHAT IT'S ABOUT: It's a post-apocalyptic world, there are zombies everywhere. The only place to live is a s***hole called Fiddler's Green... well at least for poor people it's a s***hole. The rich are greedy and rule over it along with the military. For everyone else it's nothing but a place of gambling, cheating, and prostitutes. The story is focused on a survivor named Riley, his friend Charlie, and a few other survivors. The story also wraps itself around the zombies because the zombies in this film are rather smart, and can communicate with each other, work together, and form a rather terrifying army of the dead. So when the dead learn to get smarter and use weapons they slowly travel to Fiddler's Green to feed on the living.
  STORY: It's nice to see that zombie films are actually trying to make use of story that actually makes sense. No surprise considering when Resident Evil came out it put all zombie films to shame when it came to story, even to this day. The story is not without its share of problems mostly over the fact it gives no explanation as to how exactly did the zombies come to be. Am I still supposed to assume they came from Hell?
  GORE: This film really shines in the gore department. Limbs being ripped off, internal organs being ripped out, eyes being ripped out, arterial spray, people being torn in half, my personal favorite when a zombie grabs the upper lip of a victim and then rips the skin off of his face, and so much more.
  MUSIC: Sets the eerie mood, but more could have been done with it. It definitely can't compare to the music of Resident Evil.
  SCARE: If you don't watch horror films often, you might get scared. I didn't, almost nothing scares me these days, especially considering the fact I watch almost nothing but R-rated films.
  ENTERTAINMENT: If you're someone like me or my Amazon friend J-Train, and you can almost never hate a zombie movie, you'll love this one. It provides plenty of gory fun and it actually has a story that feels like it means something.
  OVERALL: You must watch this if you love zombie films, it's not the best one ever, but it will keep you interested. If you like George A. Romero, chances are you will like this film.
  THE GOOD: Good gory fun, a story that means something.
  THE BAD: Story has problems, music has problems, and it is not the best work of George A. Romero.
  Score: 4