Land of the Dead (2005)

2.5 stars out of 4

The Bottom Line:

Though zombie fans might consider it a point of honor to watch this film, everyone else should probably look elsewhere; Land of the Dead is by no means a bad movie, but it lacks the flair that characterized Night/Dawn/Day. December 18, 2008

Worth the price of admission

Overall, I thought this was a good film. The writing was good, it had a decent plot, lots of scares, and an interesting twist on the genera. So, it's good entertainment. But from the social commentary standpoint, I think Romero is slipping.

The zombies in this film are compared - by Romero himself - to Islamic terrorists. George Romero tried to make this utterly twisted comparison between people behaving badly and the zombies. The profundity at the end, where they claim that the zombies need to find a place of their own in the world, is just staggeringly bizzare. Zombies control the entire world at this point. They eat people. There is no making "friends" or creating some lasting peace by simply letting the zombies be.

It's just plain loony.

The character played by Dennis Hopper is supposed to be Dick Chaney. Aside from a haircut that looks something like what Chaney would wear, there is no personality comparison between the two individuals, save only from the superficial mindset of a modern-day liberal. It just doesn't play.

It's clear that what Romero professes to achieve in his grand social commentary in the film, fails when executed on the big screen. And it's probably just as well. Had it been less "subtle", the film would have undoubtedly been unwatchable. November 3, 2008

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. September 14, 2008

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 September 8, 2008

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!
July 27, 2008

More reviews at Amazon.com ...