Real Review - DIARY OF THE DEAD

George A. Romero is the guy who invented an entire horror genre, as well as a horror icon in the form of “the zombie”…Well, western stereotypes about African spiritual practices had a big hand in that too, but I digress…

Being a survivalist horror fan, from way back, I’ve seen all of Romero’s zombie movies. I’d place this one between Dawn and Day on the quality scale. And oh boy, this one gets points from me for taking the “filmed by a guy involved with the happenings” formula and keeping the camera still enough to not cause nausea.

It does feel as cheap as it is, but not necessarily to it’s intentional detriment. Those folks Romero directed this film for, should be pleased with it. This whole flick is done purposely so, with a *wink-nod* to those fans.

Every zombie film Romero has done is a statement about western society’s ills. From Night’s astute examination of the casual brutality of man-against-man to Dawn’s on the consumer “zombies” that we first-worlders are.

In my review of Black Blook, I mentioned Verhoeven’s habit of putting profound statements about society in delightfully, cheesy, movies. Well, Romero’s another one for doing that. This time, however, I think there was little delight, to be had. An Amish character who appears all too briefly, was one of the few bright notes on that front.

This go ’round, it’s all about a relatively new “zombifying” force in our midst, that of the internet, in all of it’s immediately uploadable, streaming video, glory. The internet has made it easier to be the voyeur zombies, we are now. The character behind the camera is as driven to film, as the zombies are driven to lurch and cannibalize. I did love that juxtaposition.

There’s also an encounter with a minority-run town, that attempts to go in an interestingly unexpected direction. That seemed like it could be in whole other movie, one that I think would have been much more interesting, than the one I saw.

What I didn’t love were the horror movie clichés. Though intentionally heavy on that front, the film would’ve been more likely to have that fright-factor that has been severely lacking in Romero’s recent zombie outings. If only the characters had not been written to be so horror-movie stupid.

Late in the film, a dangerous zombie that could be easily killed, is allowed to live, simply to propel the paper-thin plot along. That kind of lazy writing just annoys that heck out of me and takes me right out of the movie.

What Romero doesn’t seem to care about is the real reason why the Dawn remake did so well. It wasn’t fast zombies, people. It was real scares and taleneted actors embodying people you actually care about, for the most part. You can make a movie with all the broad statements about social ills, you want and still make a damn scary, viscerally-violent, fun, fright-fest, which this was not. Romero needs to takes less time with the statement and more with the frame for it.

Lately, Romero’s films have been more funny, lame, and just plain bad, than scary. Despite some entertaining elements, a movie for the big screen, especially one with as much horror clout behind it as Romero has, should not feel like a cheap direct-to-video offer. Not even his much cheaper-but-groundbreaking original did that.

I’m thinking he may need to study Night of the Living Dead some more, before he tries (and fails) again to reinstate his “zombie master” status.

Despite the interesting underlying statements he’s making, this gets a from me for forgetting why I go to zombie movies in the first place…It’s not just for the exploding heads, it’s for interesting characters and plot, and it’s to get scared, dammit! Heck, even the comedic brilliance that was Shawn of the Dead did that.

…Yes, I know fans will go, regardless.

PARENTS: There is very brief female frontal nudity and some creatively explicit zombie “deaths”. I’d say weirdo horror tween-fans and up.

Source: DCGirl@TheMovies

Net News Publisher

Rate this:

2.5