George
A Romero has established the need for a gimmick when it comes to zombie
flicks, but it is hard to say that he had done a unique one after his
first two "Night of the Living Dead" and "Dawn of the Dead". "Day of the Dead" upped the gore and explained what was going on with the apocalypse, but was nothing more than that. "Land of the Dead" was
a clever story about the struggles between the have and the have nots
(being living or undead), but played out like any other action flick.
Romero realized that he had to close the book on his first set of films,
and that he has never had directorial success without them, so in 2007
Romero took a new approach and perhaps even found a new political
message with "Diary of the Dead".
Nine Pitt film students and their professor are filming a mummy flick
based around all of the old cliches when they first hear reports of the
dead coming back to life. Some are skeptical, and who wouldn't be with
the mainstream news media and the Internet amateur video telling
different stories.
Regardless of what is going on, they have decided that they have to try
making it to their homes, so they all reluctantly load up in a Winnebago
except for the movie's director who cannot help but document the events
that have fallen into his lap. Trying to convince his colleagues that
it is the right thing to do is as much of a challenge as surviving the
threats of the undead.
Diary of the Dead is the best example of the charm that Romero can offer since Night of the Living Dead.
The film has to be done on the cheap because of the necessity to make
it look like a student film, but this also forces the director to make
every shot worthwhile so that it doesn't end up being as boring as a
stereotypical student documentary.
People who find the drama that takes place between the protagonists in other Romero films, namely NotLD,
to be boring will be pleased that there is almost a lack of drama. Good
documentaries can't script drama, so Romero avoids having too many
interactions between the characters. This may leave them as seemingly
shallow, but also allows them to be caricatures which are the best
things to have in a horror flick. Everything then becomes tongue and
cheek, so the audience can sit back, enjoy the ride, and not care
whether a person lives or dies as long as the demise is fun.
The demises in Diary are
fun, but do not offer the same visceral pleasure they once had. A lot
of the effects are dependent on computers and the transition from video
game to Savini has yet to be mastered. That is even true in "Zombieland".
All the exploding heads are shot from wide angles or are only implied.
Fortunately, Romero's violence is still clever enough that we can
overlook how we got to the corn syrup, just as long as we get to it.
If there is one thing that did not go over well with Diary of the Dead,
it is the need to incorporate footage from outside the main story. It
is important to have some, but the overuse of stock footage makes it
overly preachy. The message of the confusion created by mass media is
easily understood, so the viewer would rather focus on the film-making
concept instead of the grand picture.
Diary of the Dead might be the most important zombie flick since "28 Days Later".
It understands that zombies are for political messages and graphic
violence, and it delivers on both. George A. Romero has finally
recaptured what he had accomplished 30 years ago, and hopefully he will
continue this with this year's release "Survival of the Dead."
 |
| www.imdb.com |
No comments:
Post a Comment