Search
Search results
Kevin Phillipson (9912 KP) rated Creepshow (1982) in Movies
Feb 15, 2019
Raul Castillo recommended Night of the Living Dead (1968) in Movies (curated)
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Night of the Living Dead (1968) in Movies
Oct 22, 2021
All these years later, and Night of the Living Dead still stands up so well. It has wonderful cinematography for a start. Multiple shots really stuck in my head when I was a kid, and still get me now. This is also down to the films horror. NOTLD is raw horror through and through. The half eaten face at the top of the stairs still incites such a visceral reaction in me. It's gives me unpleasant tingles every time it hits the screen. I hate it (and love it). The death-by-trowel scene is still unpleasant and uncomfortable to watch. Tom and Judy in the exploding truck is still gut wrenching. The ending is so depressingly nihilistic. The film itself may be dated, sure, but these moments and more are examples of pure horror, and are a huge part of why Night is such a pillar of the genre. It still makes me feel the same terror that I felt as a kid, and that's really something.
All of this is bolstered by a fantastic lead performance from Duane Jones, taking charge of a small cast of well written characters, backed up by a rousing music score.
Night of the Living Dead is an all timer, that saw George Romero lay the ground rules and set the tone for one of the most popular horror sub genres of all time. Long live the king.
All of this is bolstered by a fantastic lead performance from Duane Jones, taking charge of a small cast of well written characters, backed up by a rousing music score.
Night of the Living Dead is an all timer, that saw George Romero lay the ground rules and set the tone for one of the most popular horror sub genres of all time. Long live the king.
Gareth von Kallenbach (962 KP) rated The Crazies (2010) in Movies
Aug 8, 2019
In the farming community of Ogden Marsh, a small town in middle America where everyone knows their neighbor, unspeakable horror is about to happen.
During a game of baseball local Farmer Rory Hamill arrives interrupting the game with shotgun in tow. This odd incident soon leads to more and shows that that something definitely isn’t right as the locals begin losing their minds.
In the new film “The Crazies”, a remake of the classic original film by horror legend George Romero, the audience is taken on a bizarre trip as a an ideal small community becomes the setting of unimagined terror and chaos.
Before the movie, I researched the original and read a comic series in order to get a better grasp on the source material.
Sadly the final product did not live up to my expectations as the film plays out in a very stale manner and it seems that Director Breck Eisner was unsure what direction he wanted to the film to take.
I felt like I was watching a re-packaged “28 Days later” with a little bit of “Quarantine” mixed in, Honestly the movie was so boring to me that I found myself trying to find anything in it that could keep my attention.
Thankfully the film does have some great special FX which for me is the saving grace of the film. While I had expected a bit more form the source material which was rife with possibilities, “The Crazies” plays out as a rather mundane horror film that offers very little that is new and fresh.
During a game of baseball local Farmer Rory Hamill arrives interrupting the game with shotgun in tow. This odd incident soon leads to more and shows that that something definitely isn’t right as the locals begin losing their minds.
In the new film “The Crazies”, a remake of the classic original film by horror legend George Romero, the audience is taken on a bizarre trip as a an ideal small community becomes the setting of unimagined terror and chaos.
Before the movie, I researched the original and read a comic series in order to get a better grasp on the source material.
Sadly the final product did not live up to my expectations as the film plays out in a very stale manner and it seems that Director Breck Eisner was unsure what direction he wanted to the film to take.
I felt like I was watching a re-packaged “28 Days later” with a little bit of “Quarantine” mixed in, Honestly the movie was so boring to me that I found myself trying to find anything in it that could keep my attention.
Thankfully the film does have some great special FX which for me is the saving grace of the film. While I had expected a bit more form the source material which was rife with possibilities, “The Crazies” plays out as a rather mundane horror film that offers very little that is new and fresh.
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated Day of the Dead: Bloodline (2018) in Movies
Jul 7, 2020 (Updated Oct 26, 2020)
This Re-Imagining A Romero Classic Fails To Rise Above Average
Contains spoilers, click to show
Even copying or borrowing from George A. Romero's unique concept couldn't make this film better than an average zombie film. I was excited to see their interpretation of the smarter or more capable than average zombie in this movie and their origin story for him was quite unique and interesting. He was an obsessive stalker and attempted rapist whose body has a high amounts of antibodies. Five years after the main character Zoe escapes Whittendale University she gets the military to go back for medical supplies and Max is still there except a zombie but more. He finds her and sneaks back to their base "Cape Fear" style and then sneaks into the base. I found that a little unbelievable that he was able to sneak onto and into the base so easily but also kind of believable since it's been 5 years without any incidents as far as the audience knows. I also think that the movie was kind of inconsistent with what he's able to do or how much he can reason. He's smart enough to sneak into the base, and through vents but gets caught when he attacks Zoe and is captured. They order her to come up with a vaccine in 48 hours or Max will be killed regardless but then don't put an armed guard to watch over him. That was also a little to convenient to me. He manages to steal the handcuff keys form a soldier during a scuffle too which I thought was rather brilliant. Some good stuff in this movie but some stuff I thought could have been better done or different. As I mentioned some of the actors could have done a better job or the dialogue, story wasn't that original but overall a decent average zombie movie. Worth watching if your looking for a zombie movie to watch but nothing to wow you out of your seat. I give this movie a 5/10.
https://youtu.be/KTtNIIL3NXw
https://youtu.be/KTtNIIL3NXw
Gareth von Kallenbach (962 KP) rated Land of the Dead (2005) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
Twenty years after his last installment of the classic “Dead” zombie genre, landmark Horror writer/director George Romero has returned to the delight of fans worldwide.
After years of various horror projects, and remakes of his previous “Dead” films, fans had begun to wonder if they had seen the last of Romero’s Zombie films and had to content themselves with the remakes and rumored offshoots and sequels from such.
Thankfully, with Land of the Dead Romero has returned to his basics and has crafted a Zombie thriller that is not only better than 85’s disappointing “Day of the Dead”, but on par with the ground breaking “Dawn of the Dead and the classic Original “Night of the Living Dead.”
For those who are not familiar with the series, the dead have arisen and now walk the earth looking for humans to feed upon. Gone is any memory of their former selves, only the insatiable desire to feed remains. How this event happened is never explained in the films viewers simply have to accept that it is happening and that those who are bitten by zombies are destined to join the ranks of the undead.
Like the previous films, the story follows a group of humans who are attempting to survive against the zombie hordes and who seek shelter and a way to stave off the zombie masses.
In Land of the Dead, a group of survivors have taken refuge in a fortified city where the common folks live in the streets while the affluent live in pristine high rise complex with many of the luxuries of their past lives.
One such survivor is Riley (Simon Baker), who spends his time venturing beyond the walls of the city with his team as they attempt to locate food, medicines, and other needed items in cities that have been abandoned due to zombie infestation.
As the film opens, Riley is completing his last run as he plans to venture north to find a cold and desolated area that is devoid of zombies and huddled masses.
His second in command Cholo, (John Leguizamo), is anxious to take over, as he sees the expeditions as a chance to obtain valuable items such as cigars and whiskey, which he can in turn sell to those who live in luxury. This desire causes much friction between Riley and Cholo but with the pending departure of Riley, Cholo realizes he may be able to finally purchase a home of his own in the luxury high rise.
Things do not go as planned for Cholo as when he tells his boss, Kaufman (Dennis Hopper), about his plans to move into the new complex, he is shocked to learn that Riley’s prediction of class exclusions in the building apply to him as well.
Furious over being used and cheated of his dreams and money, and an attempt upon his life, Cholo decides to hijack a well-armed armored vehicle that defends the city in an effort to extort his payment from Kaufman.
At the same time, Riley has learned that he has be swindled from his car, and soon finds himself working with Kaufman in an attempt to recover the armored vehicle from Cholo before he unleashes a hail of rockets upon the city. In short order, Riley and his support team are forced to enter the zombie infested streets to save the day.
Of course with “Land” being a Zombie film, the city will soon find itself overrun with all manner of ghouls and there will be plenty of flesh splitting, blood spattering, gore spewing scenes that will delight fans of the genre and elicit more than a few shrieks and cheers from the audience.
It is learned that the zombies have started to evolve and as such, now communicate with each other in a basic way, which makes their attacks even more dangerous as they are organized and starting to use tools and weapons.
What this all ads up to is a thrilling romp that will delight fans of the genre. Sure the story and characters are not the deepest, but as horror films go, there is a complexity to them. Hopper does great work as Kaufman as his malicious and selfish nature provides the perfect focal point to the films numerous commentaries on topics ranging from social class, to politics and well fare as well as the plight of the inner cities.
The genius of Romero is that he can insert so many topics into the film without it every seeming heavy-handed or over the top. The use of social commentary adds strength to the story as while the characters are in a very unrealistic situation, their base desires, motivations and behaviors are easily identifiable and strong.
Some may see Land of the Dead as just another blood and guts film with a basic story that lacks depth. To those who are fans of the genre and series, “Land” will likely be seen as a triumphant return to the genre he made his own by Romero and will enjoy the ride.
After years of various horror projects, and remakes of his previous “Dead” films, fans had begun to wonder if they had seen the last of Romero’s Zombie films and had to content themselves with the remakes and rumored offshoots and sequels from such.
Thankfully, with Land of the Dead Romero has returned to his basics and has crafted a Zombie thriller that is not only better than 85’s disappointing “Day of the Dead”, but on par with the ground breaking “Dawn of the Dead and the classic Original “Night of the Living Dead.”
For those who are not familiar with the series, the dead have arisen and now walk the earth looking for humans to feed upon. Gone is any memory of their former selves, only the insatiable desire to feed remains. How this event happened is never explained in the films viewers simply have to accept that it is happening and that those who are bitten by zombies are destined to join the ranks of the undead.
Like the previous films, the story follows a group of humans who are attempting to survive against the zombie hordes and who seek shelter and a way to stave off the zombie masses.
In Land of the Dead, a group of survivors have taken refuge in a fortified city where the common folks live in the streets while the affluent live in pristine high rise complex with many of the luxuries of their past lives.
One such survivor is Riley (Simon Baker), who spends his time venturing beyond the walls of the city with his team as they attempt to locate food, medicines, and other needed items in cities that have been abandoned due to zombie infestation.
As the film opens, Riley is completing his last run as he plans to venture north to find a cold and desolated area that is devoid of zombies and huddled masses.
His second in command Cholo, (John Leguizamo), is anxious to take over, as he sees the expeditions as a chance to obtain valuable items such as cigars and whiskey, which he can in turn sell to those who live in luxury. This desire causes much friction between Riley and Cholo but with the pending departure of Riley, Cholo realizes he may be able to finally purchase a home of his own in the luxury high rise.
Things do not go as planned for Cholo as when he tells his boss, Kaufman (Dennis Hopper), about his plans to move into the new complex, he is shocked to learn that Riley’s prediction of class exclusions in the building apply to him as well.
Furious over being used and cheated of his dreams and money, and an attempt upon his life, Cholo decides to hijack a well-armed armored vehicle that defends the city in an effort to extort his payment from Kaufman.
At the same time, Riley has learned that he has be swindled from his car, and soon finds himself working with Kaufman in an attempt to recover the armored vehicle from Cholo before he unleashes a hail of rockets upon the city. In short order, Riley and his support team are forced to enter the zombie infested streets to save the day.
Of course with “Land” being a Zombie film, the city will soon find itself overrun with all manner of ghouls and there will be plenty of flesh splitting, blood spattering, gore spewing scenes that will delight fans of the genre and elicit more than a few shrieks and cheers from the audience.
It is learned that the zombies have started to evolve and as such, now communicate with each other in a basic way, which makes their attacks even more dangerous as they are organized and starting to use tools and weapons.
What this all ads up to is a thrilling romp that will delight fans of the genre. Sure the story and characters are not the deepest, but as horror films go, there is a complexity to them. Hopper does great work as Kaufman as his malicious and selfish nature provides the perfect focal point to the films numerous commentaries on topics ranging from social class, to politics and well fare as well as the plight of the inner cities.
The genius of Romero is that he can insert so many topics into the film without it every seeming heavy-handed or over the top. The use of social commentary adds strength to the story as while the characters are in a very unrealistic situation, their base desires, motivations and behaviors are easily identifiable and strong.
Some may see Land of the Dead as just another blood and guts film with a basic story that lacks depth. To those who are fans of the genre and series, “Land” will likely be seen as a triumphant return to the genre he made his own by Romero and will enjoy the ride.
RəX Regent (349 KP) rated Night of the Living Dead (1968) in Movies
Feb 19, 2019
Iconic, influential and ground-breaking. All words to describe George A. Romero’s inaugural zombie horror, but what sets this apart from its contemporaries and the endless variations in the genre in which this Indie movie helped spawn?
Well to begin with, this is far from a simple zombie thriller. The real villains here are the collection of damaged human characters who all find themselves trapped together in an old farmhouse, barricaded within its fragile wooden walls, fighting not only the onslaught of zombie without, but the angst and fear from within.
At times they work together but unlike most films like this, the group rarely work at all, with conflicted views on how to survive, blinding them to the fact that if they only worked together they may just do so.
Instead, they all end up dead, with our leading man, a strong, smart black character, which at the time was a bold choice, being murdered by the redneck police posse, who mistake him for a zombie. But the metaphor, though hard to ignore, of a black man being gunned down without the white men bothering to ensure that he was zombie, may just be a coincidence, but the irony that he, Ben (Duane Jones) manages to survive until the end only be to gunned down in the final moments, is a tragedy that sums up this film’s tone.
With a killer child, a nude female zombie, a dysfunctional couple and the first named victim displaying a complacent contempt for God and the church, this group are real, though the acting standards are variable, the writing and direction are constantly very good, with a sense or gritty realism permeating throughout. Maintained by good pacing and gruesome cannibalistic action, this raised the bar of the genre, both now and then.
Even the zombies get a reasonable, yet none definitive explanation, as told through the radio and TV news. Radiation bringing the dead back to life, well, it may be the trope of 1960’s sci fi but it was well explained and the news reports were well composed, feeling more realistic than most movie news broadcasts.
Romero may have gone on to milk this franchise for all it is worth in the decades since but this opening low budget gem is a real piece of work; A complex moral drama set on one chaotic night in which the dead become living again.
Well to begin with, this is far from a simple zombie thriller. The real villains here are the collection of damaged human characters who all find themselves trapped together in an old farmhouse, barricaded within its fragile wooden walls, fighting not only the onslaught of zombie without, but the angst and fear from within.
At times they work together but unlike most films like this, the group rarely work at all, with conflicted views on how to survive, blinding them to the fact that if they only worked together they may just do so.
Instead, they all end up dead, with our leading man, a strong, smart black character, which at the time was a bold choice, being murdered by the redneck police posse, who mistake him for a zombie. But the metaphor, though hard to ignore, of a black man being gunned down without the white men bothering to ensure that he was zombie, may just be a coincidence, but the irony that he, Ben (Duane Jones) manages to survive until the end only be to gunned down in the final moments, is a tragedy that sums up this film’s tone.
With a killer child, a nude female zombie, a dysfunctional couple and the first named victim displaying a complacent contempt for God and the church, this group are real, though the acting standards are variable, the writing and direction are constantly very good, with a sense or gritty realism permeating throughout. Maintained by good pacing and gruesome cannibalistic action, this raised the bar of the genre, both now and then.
Even the zombies get a reasonable, yet none definitive explanation, as told through the radio and TV news. Radiation bringing the dead back to life, well, it may be the trope of 1960’s sci fi but it was well explained and the news reports were well composed, feeling more realistic than most movie news broadcasts.
Romero may have gone on to milk this franchise for all it is worth in the decades since but this opening low budget gem is a real piece of work; A complex moral drama set on one chaotic night in which the dead become living again.
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Resident Evil (2002) in Movies
Oct 28, 2020
Let's just brush aside for a moment that this adaption of Resident Evil bares little resemblance to the video game it's based upon and instead take a look at it as its own film, how it's comes off as a horror, and what visionary director Paul WS Anderson has to offer to the zombie genre...
...it's a terrible film, it's a shitty horror, and Anderson should just keep away from beloved franchises forever. I actually actively hate most of his films (have I mentioned this before?).
The big gaping issue with Resident Evil is it's characters and screenplay. The characters are a collection of edgy shitbags who spout one liners every two seconds and are just ripped straight from the "cliché action bastard handbook". It's difficult to care about any of them. I understand that Alice (Milla Jovovich) goes on to lead the entire franchise, but in the first entry, she hardly does or says anything, and as such, the audience doesn't get much of a chance to bond with her before the credits roll.
The script is just eye rollingly cringey. Every single line is either a "witty" quip, or lazy exposition and it becomes tiresome very quickly.
Some of the effects are ok - the zombie dogs look pretty gnarly, but The Licker (one of the only concrete connections to the game series) is brought to life with some of the worst CGI I've ever seen. To say it's aged badly would be an understatement, as I remember it looking dodgy AF back in 2002 when I was a humble 14 year old. Other than that, the whole film has that awful early 2000s aesthetic (The Matrix truly has a lot to answer for) and the inclusion of obnoxious breakbeat music cues that everyone was obsessed with at the time is the cherry on the mouldy cake. Ugh.
It's not all terrible... There are a couple of memorable set pieces, and the film manages to be somewhat entertaining here and there, but overall, Resident Evil is another garbage pile video game adaption, and the fact that George Romero wrote an unused screenplay that was much closer to the first game (and was poised to direct!) just rubs salt in this horrible festering wound left behind by Paul WS Anderson's Resident Evil. Hate it.
...it's a terrible film, it's a shitty horror, and Anderson should just keep away from beloved franchises forever. I actually actively hate most of his films (have I mentioned this before?).
The big gaping issue with Resident Evil is it's characters and screenplay. The characters are a collection of edgy shitbags who spout one liners every two seconds and are just ripped straight from the "cliché action bastard handbook". It's difficult to care about any of them. I understand that Alice (Milla Jovovich) goes on to lead the entire franchise, but in the first entry, she hardly does or says anything, and as such, the audience doesn't get much of a chance to bond with her before the credits roll.
The script is just eye rollingly cringey. Every single line is either a "witty" quip, or lazy exposition and it becomes tiresome very quickly.
Some of the effects are ok - the zombie dogs look pretty gnarly, but The Licker (one of the only concrete connections to the game series) is brought to life with some of the worst CGI I've ever seen. To say it's aged badly would be an understatement, as I remember it looking dodgy AF back in 2002 when I was a humble 14 year old. Other than that, the whole film has that awful early 2000s aesthetic (The Matrix truly has a lot to answer for) and the inclusion of obnoxious breakbeat music cues that everyone was obsessed with at the time is the cherry on the mouldy cake. Ugh.
It's not all terrible... There are a couple of memorable set pieces, and the film manages to be somewhat entertaining here and there, but overall, Resident Evil is another garbage pile video game adaption, and the fact that George Romero wrote an unused screenplay that was much closer to the first game (and was poised to direct!) just rubs salt in this horrible festering wound left behind by Paul WS Anderson's Resident Evil. Hate it.
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Dawn of the Dead (1978) in Movies
Oct 27, 2020
Dawn of the Dead is considered by many to be the cream of the crop when it comes to zombie movies.
George Romero upped the ante with his second entry into the Living Dead series - bigger set pieces, more gore, more zombies (this time in colour!)
The true star of Dawn is the setting for a couple of reasons. The shopping mall is a fun and striking place to set a zombie film in, and plays a huge part in this films classic status, but most importantly, it's the epicenter of commentary running through the narrative, pointing fingers at capitalism and consumerism. A friend of mine (who deeply loves this movie) rightly pointed out that there's more to it than that, with the opening dealing with classism, and ultimately leading to discontent after the characters are comfortable in their situation, and have all they need. They're left with nothing left to do, nowhere to go, and it's genuinely quite bleak in that respect.
One of the greatest things for me about Dawn is the screenplay. It's pretty much air tight, it's clever, and has a handful of all time great lines. It also has some fine performances from the main cast, in particular Ken Foree. That dude is great in pretty much anything.
Also, the practical effects on display are fantastic (the zombie walking under the helicopter blades is a highlight) and is another example at Tom Savini's prowess.
However, despite all the positives, I just LIKE Dawn of the Dead, but I don't LOVE it. The main thing that turns me off is how goofy it is in parts. It verges on comedy at times (which I get, this being a semi-satire after all) but the silly music is a bit much for me. The film drags a fair bit during the mid section, and although I like all the actors, I find the characters they play hard to care about. I just don't think it's aged particularly well (although the message it carries is still as relevant as ever) and it's my least favourite of the original trilogy.
Although I have reservations, I still recognise how seminal Dawn of the Dead is. Without it, so many great movies wouldn't exist today, and it's easy to see why it was so groundbreaking at the time. I'm thankful it's exists, but it's ultimately a mixed bag for me (and I desperately hope my aformentioned friend doesn't hate me forever for feeling this way!)
George Romero upped the ante with his second entry into the Living Dead series - bigger set pieces, more gore, more zombies (this time in colour!)
The true star of Dawn is the setting for a couple of reasons. The shopping mall is a fun and striking place to set a zombie film in, and plays a huge part in this films classic status, but most importantly, it's the epicenter of commentary running through the narrative, pointing fingers at capitalism and consumerism. A friend of mine (who deeply loves this movie) rightly pointed out that there's more to it than that, with the opening dealing with classism, and ultimately leading to discontent after the characters are comfortable in their situation, and have all they need. They're left with nothing left to do, nowhere to go, and it's genuinely quite bleak in that respect.
One of the greatest things for me about Dawn is the screenplay. It's pretty much air tight, it's clever, and has a handful of all time great lines. It also has some fine performances from the main cast, in particular Ken Foree. That dude is great in pretty much anything.
Also, the practical effects on display are fantastic (the zombie walking under the helicopter blades is a highlight) and is another example at Tom Savini's prowess.
However, despite all the positives, I just LIKE Dawn of the Dead, but I don't LOVE it. The main thing that turns me off is how goofy it is in parts. It verges on comedy at times (which I get, this being a semi-satire after all) but the silly music is a bit much for me. The film drags a fair bit during the mid section, and although I like all the actors, I find the characters they play hard to care about. I just don't think it's aged particularly well (although the message it carries is still as relevant as ever) and it's my least favourite of the original trilogy.
Although I have reservations, I still recognise how seminal Dawn of the Dead is. Without it, so many great movies wouldn't exist today, and it's easy to see why it was so groundbreaking at the time. I'm thankful it's exists, but it's ultimately a mixed bag for me (and I desperately hope my aformentioned friend doesn't hate me forever for feeling this way!)
