Now......most of my friends know that I am a huge George A. Romero fan (director of classic flesh eating zombie movies like "Night of the Living Dead" and "Dawn of the Dead"). So, a couple of years ago, when we had this surprising resurgence of the zombie genre, I was a happy little camper, even though the only one I really liked was the remake of "Dawn of the Dead". I'm still inclined to think that they just don't make 'em like they did in the 70s (although the "Dawn of the Dead" remake was pretty damn good). I even liked (what is considered a rather forgettable zombie flick)
"Children Shouldn't Play with Dead Things", simply because the atmosphere is chilling and dark - and although it takes awhile to get going, the last 30 minutes are (for me) the most ghoulishly frightening half hour of zombie mayhem.
So then I hear about the new Romero zombie flick. Oh My God! Never in a million years did I think Romero was ever going to do another one. Before the recent onslaught of horror flicks, I thought the zombie genre was dead (no pun intended). So I was so excited to see it and I counted the days. I was in the theater and had tingles up and down my spine. I mean....this is a NEW Romero zombie flick!. After the rather promising opening, my excitement gradually turned to indifference. Honestly I just don't know what to make of it. It has some trademark Romero qualities. But the big budget gloss and production and the rudimentary script bothered me. Dialogue full of cliches and. The score tended to overwhelm any kind of subtlety. Everything screamed big budget. No exciting plot twists. Virtually no real suspense. Dennis Hopper was shockingly subdued. John Leguizamo was doing a sterotype he's done many times before. Asia Argento, on the other hand, was raw and captivating- couldn't take my eyes off her. Honestly, I would have rather not seen any "big name" actors in the movie (something I loved about the initial trilogy). I was floored by the graphic gore, which was meticulously done - but it had nothing to fall back on, otherwise. It made me value "Day of the Dead" even more (given that it's generally considered the weakest of the initial trilogy). I can't help but think that he would have made a better movie, if only he had less money - which would have demanded more imagination.
By the way.......Let's make this perfectly clear. Tom Cruise is an asshole. He says that Psychiatry is a "pseudo-science". Not that Scientology could ever fit that category......
http://tcruiseko.ytmnd.com/ However, I still liked "War of the Worlds". But don't you think a "superior" alien intelligence would have done some atmospheric testing before they sent their martians to Earth. I think it had a rather weak ending. Who wants to see alien invaders meet their demise due to the common cold? But everything leading up to it was top notch special effects. And rather realistic.
