| "Where will you be when the end begins?” |
| |||||
Diary of the Dead
DVD/APPROX. 95 MINS/2007/USA MA15+
DVD/APPROX. 95 MINS/2007/USA MA15+
6.5
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
George A. Romero returns yet again to the sub-genre that brought him worldwide attention and acclaim, this time told from the perspective of an
over-zealous filmmaker and his disgruntled crew at the turn of the apocalypse, where the dead, yet again, spring back to life to unleash Hell upon
the earth.
What elevates and differentiates Romero’s work from other directors, particularly in the horror genre, is that he underpins his flesh-eating
narratives with his own shrewd critique on society and its values. He’s primarily concerned about how people, who are primarily characterised by
how they function and interact within capitalist societies, are unconsciously aware of the fact that society itself, and its trappings, is consuming us;
the consumers. There’s a profound irony in all of his movies, and some are more heavy-handed than others, but nevertheless, it is this
acknowledgement, and this artistry that has made Romero and his zombie flicks the finest you’ll ever see.
I’ve seen all of Romero’s “Dead” films - except of course his latest, so-to-be-released offering, Survival of the Dead - and this is the one I like least.
That’s not to say that his message has diminished, or that his visual or storytelling prowess is becoming as depleted as the sub-genre itself. Most
of his narratives are structured around a single idea or premise, and that’s another reason why his films work, because they’re simple, and
maintain an almost ‘classic’ air to them.
Romero’s fascination with crisis, particularly within a group, is also noteworthy and pervasive throughout his films, and it’s definitely found its place
in Diary of the Dead. He exemplifies this idea by, naturally, constructing the worst case scenario – that being, death to the world by zombies –
and dropping his characters in the middle. In his previous films, he paid greater attention to the characters, that is, he developed them more
carefully. Here, the characters just annoy the Hell out of you, and while you’re not expected to sympathise with any characters in a horror film, you
are in a Romero film, because ultimately, his films are MORE than just zombie films.
I must be frank, although the concept for Diary of the Dead seemed like a winner, I found it’s execution quite languorous, and while I love and
appreciate Romero’s films for their artistic merit, I’m also a gore-hound at heart, and I found this film nowhere near as gory as his previous
offerings, and another thing that I’m rather unhappy about, which again is discernible throughout Land of the Dead – a criminally underrated
Romero film - is the shift away from makeup and prosthetics to the substandard aesthetics of CGI. Bring back Savini, dammit!!!
Because Romero harbours a strong opinion against consumerism and the adverse effects it has on our society, he exploits the use and nature of
technology in Diary of the Dead, and he does to great success. Aesthetically, he utilises security cameras, camera phones, video cameras, etc, etc,
and while all of these lend a new perspective to the narrative, they service a greater thematic need, which presupposes a fundamental
technological overload that must, whether sooner or later, have designated consequences.
Romero’s Diary of the Dead is a mixed bag. Superficially, it’s nowhere near as good as the others, and it’s not as bloodthirsty, either. Thematically,
all of Romero’s chief concerns are intact, but the ending, which is indeed a profound and startling observation about the nature of human existence
in this post- September 11 world, feels stuck on, and not deftly explored.
Either way, this is certainly not a bad film. I just had problems with it because ever since he made Dawn of the Dead back in 1978, he proved that
a horror picture could be infinitely more than just a blood-fest. That said, Dawn of the Dead has proven to be a blessing and a curse for Romero
because a) he demonstrated that a zombie flick could be deemed worthy of art, and b) by doing so, he created an expectation for all his
subsequent films, that if they failed to meet this expectation, they were automatically recognized as vastly inferior products, and Diary of the
Dead, unfortunately, falls into the latter category.
over-zealous filmmaker and his disgruntled crew at the turn of the apocalypse, where the dead, yet again, spring back to life to unleash Hell upon
the earth.
What elevates and differentiates Romero’s work from other directors, particularly in the horror genre, is that he underpins his flesh-eating
narratives with his own shrewd critique on society and its values. He’s primarily concerned about how people, who are primarily characterised by
how they function and interact within capitalist societies, are unconsciously aware of the fact that society itself, and its trappings, is consuming us;
the consumers. There’s a profound irony in all of his movies, and some are more heavy-handed than others, but nevertheless, it is this
acknowledgement, and this artistry that has made Romero and his zombie flicks the finest you’ll ever see.
I’ve seen all of Romero’s “Dead” films - except of course his latest, so-to-be-released offering, Survival of the Dead - and this is the one I like least.
That’s not to say that his message has diminished, or that his visual or storytelling prowess is becoming as depleted as the sub-genre itself. Most
of his narratives are structured around a single idea or premise, and that’s another reason why his films work, because they’re simple, and
maintain an almost ‘classic’ air to them.
Romero’s fascination with crisis, particularly within a group, is also noteworthy and pervasive throughout his films, and it’s definitely found its place
in Diary of the Dead. He exemplifies this idea by, naturally, constructing the worst case scenario – that being, death to the world by zombies –
and dropping his characters in the middle. In his previous films, he paid greater attention to the characters, that is, he developed them more
carefully. Here, the characters just annoy the Hell out of you, and while you’re not expected to sympathise with any characters in a horror film, you
are in a Romero film, because ultimately, his films are MORE than just zombie films.
I must be frank, although the concept for Diary of the Dead seemed like a winner, I found it’s execution quite languorous, and while I love and
appreciate Romero’s films for their artistic merit, I’m also a gore-hound at heart, and I found this film nowhere near as gory as his previous
offerings, and another thing that I’m rather unhappy about, which again is discernible throughout Land of the Dead – a criminally underrated
Romero film - is the shift away from makeup and prosthetics to the substandard aesthetics of CGI. Bring back Savini, dammit!!!
Because Romero harbours a strong opinion against consumerism and the adverse effects it has on our society, he exploits the use and nature of
technology in Diary of the Dead, and he does to great success. Aesthetically, he utilises security cameras, camera phones, video cameras, etc, etc,
and while all of these lend a new perspective to the narrative, they service a greater thematic need, which presupposes a fundamental
technological overload that must, whether sooner or later, have designated consequences.
Romero’s Diary of the Dead is a mixed bag. Superficially, it’s nowhere near as good as the others, and it’s not as bloodthirsty, either. Thematically,
all of Romero’s chief concerns are intact, but the ending, which is indeed a profound and startling observation about the nature of human existence
in this post- September 11 world, feels stuck on, and not deftly explored.
Either way, this is certainly not a bad film. I just had problems with it because ever since he made Dawn of the Dead back in 1978, he proved that
a horror picture could be infinitely more than just a blood-fest. That said, Dawn of the Dead has proven to be a blessing and a curse for Romero
because a) he demonstrated that a zombie flick could be deemed worthy of art, and b) by doing so, he created an expectation for all his
subsequent films, that if they failed to meet this expectation, they were automatically recognized as vastly inferior products, and Diary of the
Dead, unfortunately, falls into the latter category.
| BUY DVD @ MADMAN.COM.AU |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||
| Search Review Database: |
| All written material is © from 2006 to Present at DVD Resurrections. This website is for informational and entertainment purposes only. The opinions which are expressed within these pages are solely those of DVD Resurrections. No copyright infringement is intended or implied. |