Comments on: Fantastic Fest Review: Survival of the Dead

By: Hammer

Hammer — Sat, 26 Dec 2009 06:15:48 +0000

“Land of the dead” was just plain weak compared to the remake of “dawn of the dead”. The pace was too slow, and too few hungry killer zombies – 6 billion people on earth, mostly dead, and we see just a handful of the same ones? The social/political plot line was boring, too much time spent on the class distinctions not enough on the essence of zombie operas – the struggle for personal and “wolf pack” survival against overwhelming odds. What happened to chewing up zombie guts with mini-guns, flamethrowers, and cannons shooting steel frisbees? The final insults were the pseudo-hero not drilling “smarter zombie's” head into a bloody stump and happy face survivors driving off into hopeful future celebrating with fireworks – total crap!
Survival of the dead better be twice the movie “land of the dead” could have been or Romero is done. In the end there is no possibility of hope only the resignation that you MAY have another day, and probably not. No one gets out of here alive in any case – fantasy or reality.

By: Dustin

Dustin — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 11:52:00 +0000

Yeah, there the army but there still human beings in the middle of a zombie apocalypse. Their not answering to a higher command, so they use their army status as a way to take advantage of the scientist's. I think anyone would start acting that way after being underground for that amount of time while dead bodies are swarming the earth, army or not. It's a fucking movie for godsake.

By: Dustin

Dustin — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 05:52:00 +0000

By: Aleric

Aleric — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 17:18:53 +0000

I have to agree with Robert. Romero looks upon the military as a bunch of criminals who were drafted and they are always the worst sort. If he doesn't have the fall back of the military he normally has half the group that are “survivors” being scum bags. Remember the security guards in Land of the Dead? It's always the elite who are the corrupted and the few good people have to struggle to get greedy people to work with them to survive. Never mind that they have a slobbering horde of undead behind them trying to eat their body parts.

By: RobertFure

RobertFure — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 01:28:23 +0000

I liked Diary of the Dead more than most people. The anti-technology message was pretty good. That all said, Romero has been living off of the original "Dead" movies since they came out. He's by all rights a pretty cool dude, but his movies aren't that good. I'd also say anyone under 25 who goes and watches his original movies will have one question - What's the big deal?

"Night of the Living Dead" is a classic and to this day is still a fantastic movie. "Dawn of the Dead" does not resonant with a modern audience. I find it to be over-rated. "Day of the Dead" is the weakest of those three. "Land of the Dead" was average to middling. "Diary" had its problems.

One thing that does bother me about Romero's films, mostly starting with Day, the army is shown to be a bunch of foolhardy assholes who are among the first to become criminals or murderers or sadists. Romero writes the military like someone who has no idea who or what the military is, which is probably true.

That said, zombies are awesome.