28 April 2009

DAY OF THE DEAD (2008) IS NOT A REMAKE OF THE GEORGE A. ROMERO CLASSIC

I just felt the need to write something about this so called remake of George Romero’s 1985 true zombie classic Day of the Dead (yes, I stand by that statement, and I also felt Land of the Dead was a great Zombie movie and there will be posts on those films in time) . There is absolutely no connection between the two films whatsoever. Not to anyone who has not abused LSD within the last twenty years anyway. The closest connection would be that the film makers blatantly say “Based on the motion picture DOTD by George A. Romero” on the poster and assign co-writing credits to Romero during the credits. Another remote connection is the link between the sympathetic zombie Bud in this film and Bub in the original. But the similarity seems to be in the first two letters of their names and not much more.

I love a good zombie film and always have, but the subgenre also has spawned some of the worst movies ever made. Some are of such a bad quality that I just cannot enjoy them at all, though I love a good bad movie. This film is not that terribly bad that is not worth a look but I just do not understand how these guys can have the audacity to call this a remake of the original movie. Since the credits included Ving Rhames I jumped to the conclusion that this was another decent remake in the same vain as 2004’s well done Dawn of the dead by Zack Snyder. That delusion was shattered in the first couple minutes really when the scenes open up with stock teenagers making out in a deserted old building somewhere in the wilderness of Colorado. The movie only descends into more inanity and never tries to pull it self out. It is like a drowning man who starts gulping water to end it all. The cast is led by Mena Suvari (who had Kevin Spacey spanking his monkey in American Beauty) but she really does not have the acting power to rescue this bomb. I will tell you, I am a reasonable man. I know that when I watch a film like this I am not reading Wittgenstein and I basically want lots of action and gore and zombies blasted through the cranium and brains being evacuated against the wall behind them. But still, can we all agree, there must be standards to adhere to. If not we are lost as a species.
.
The fact they use the name of one of the greatest zombies films of all time means they are expected to deliver us something above the average gut eating fare. If they had called the film Teenage Zombie Freak Out or The Night the Dead Rose and Got Really Pissed I would not have a problem. But if you remake Apocalyspe Now you expect some Viet Cong and a boat of Americans at least, right? There should be obvious thread that shows it is in fact a remake. The story is simply lame and has so many gaps I cannot undertake the task of describing them here. I will simply focus on one criticism and then let this stinking corpse rest. There is a big debate on the net amongst zombie fans about which is better, fast zombies or slow zombies. Personally I am fan of both. And for the record fast zombies are not something new that came into being with Snyder’s Dawn of the Dead or Danny Boyle’s 28 Days Later. Dan O’Bannon had running, manic zombies galore back in 1985’s Return of the Living Dead. I feel that when a person initially changes into a flesh eating zombie they could be fast and furious but would slow down in time as rigamortis and rot set in. Now, I feel they can be fast and strong, but no faster and no stronger than when the person was while still alive. Here they bounding through the air like an old kung fu movie and even scampering on the ceiling via ceiling tiles and crawling across walls like Spiderman. One even jumps through the undamaged windshield of a Hummvee and that just cannot happen unless the thing is super human, and why would a virus that kills you revive you in a super human state?
Of course this is a zombie move and I understand suspension of disbelief. I do not believe in UFOs or Psychic powers or demonic possession but I watch this stuff all the time and enjoy it typically. Yet there has to be some base line of believability unless the film is a spoof, like the more enjoyable Fido was. There is even another “remake” or sequel of the movie out there called Day of the Dead: Contagion, but I did not fall for that one. I was had this time and I just want to give any discerning zombie hound out there fair warning: this has nada to do with the original film and the film makers should all be bitten by rage infected monkeys and set loose on one another in a dungeon. Is nothing sacred anymore?


1 comment:

  1. A real waste of time. I could have done something productive instead of watching this one, like cleaning the bread crumbs from out of the bottom of the toaster. Thanks for the visit.

    Bill

    ReplyDelete