Just got back from a screening of Zombieland and I don’t have too much to say about it. It’s a solid zom-com thought it is far from the best. The film drags early on and takes its sweet time getting to its actual point but it does have its share of highlights.
First, the opening credit sequence is pretty solid. And by solid I mean really freaking good. It will easily rank as one of the better opening credit sequences of the year and that includes Watchmen. No matter how much I see it, slow-motion plus people running from zombies always seems to work, and Zombieland makes sure to show you things you’d never thought you’d see in a zombie film.
Second, while the film drags for much of its second of four acts it really picks up its game when it introduces an absolute monster of a cameo in the third act. Epic in both the scale of the person involved and what they bring to the film. The cameo elevates the entire film and even when it ends it has built up enough momentum to power the film through a solid 4th act. This performance alone begs the film to be rewatched, and possibly even owned. Its that freaking good.
Third, at around 80 minutes the film doesn’t overstay its welcome, which is good because it feels a hell of a lot longer then 80 minutes. The film has its fare share of pacing issues, but once it finally gets to the meat of its story the film doesn’t fail to produce an entertaining and funny film.
Fourth, the audience I saw this with sucked. Their are few things I hate more then people who try and laugh louder than everyone in the theatre and this screening was full of them. yes, we get it. You know this is a comedy so you want to make sure that everyone knows how funny you think it is. So funny, in fact, that you will laugh at things that are not even supposed to be funny. That way, every one in attendance will know that you, and only you, truly “get” this movie.
So to sum up, Zombieland is a solid and entertaining film that should please pretty much any fan of the genre, even when douchebags in the audience try and ruin the film for everyone but themselves.
Zombieland opens at any theatre worth a damn on Friday, October 2nd.
It has taken some time, but finally the Canadian Zombie but not Zombie film Pontypool will make its theatrical debut here in the Twin Cities at none other then the Oak Street Cinema as part of their Late Night Horror series. The film will play on September 24-26th at 9:30 pm each night.
Minnesota Film Arts is also promising that this will be the first in what they claim will be a weekly horror series. As much as I hope this is true, I’m sure most members of the Twin Cities film community knows better then to get their hopes up when it comes to the Oak Street, and I’m no different. But even though I am unconvinced at the idea of the Oak Street pulling off a horror series, I will still make sure to head over there to watch Pontypool in all its 35mm glory and I hope you do as well.
Of course, once you finally do watch the film be sure to check out my rather long winded essay on the film. It might actually make sense to you then.
Warning! The follow editorial does contain spoilers. Proceed with caution!
Being born in 1976 I have missed most, if not all, of what I would consider the major tide changes in horror film making here in the United States. The two closest to my heart, and in my opinion the two most important films, being Night of the Living Dead and The Texas Chainsaw Massacre. Some might say that I was able to witness a similar precedent with The Blair Witch Project, which is a fair point to make. But I think that over the course of time since The Blair Witch Project was released has proven the film to be far more influential in the marketing of films, and specifically the rise of viral marketing, then it has influenced the horror genre.
But while The Blair Witch Project certainly was influential, Night of the Living Dead and The Texas Chainsaw Massacre were revolutionary by comparison. Both were low budget shock fests that relied far more on mood and atmosphere to set the table for the scares they were about to serve the audience then most of the other low budget fare of their time. Night of the Living Dead was serious whereas other horror films of the day were campy. And The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, despite its reputation, isn’t bathing in gore as many of its contemporaries were, but rather is a subtle and subdued fright fest. Neither are particularly scary by today’s standards and styles, with The Texas Chainsaw Massacre relying on an general level of creepiness rarely matched in any other film, and Night of the Living Dead almost suffocating the viewer with tension. And while these two might not be the best horror films ever made, particularly in the case of Night of the Living Dead where most people, myself included, view its sequel Dawn of the Dead to be the superior film, but these two films introduced audiences to new concepts and styles in horror, with The Texas Chainsaw Massacre masterfully manipulating audiences with its “based on actual events” premise. As much as I would like to discuss The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, the lack of zombies in the film make it a bit difficult to directly correlate to the film that made me want to write this piece in the first place. But Night of the Living Dead on the other hand, brought about a whole new and terrifying meaning to the word zombie, which is quite relevant to what I wish to discuss.
Before the walking, brain-eating living dead zombies that flood current pop culture ever existed, the zombie was a vastly different monster. The concept of the zombie originated in the Caribbean where the belief is held that a certain kind of puffer fish is poisonous enough to cause people to slip into a death like coma for several days and the inevitable result of this being that people are often buried alive. It is believed that this technique had been co-opted by various criminal elements, and through their employment of Voodoo sorcerer’s (called bokors), that they can control these beings once they are revived from their horrific slumber. The region’s strong religious beliefs have led to the notion that anyone this happens to is at the mercy of the bokor that revives them. This practice was of course showcased in the fantastic film The Serpent and the Rainbow as well as the totally unappreciated, yet equally fantastic, Weekend at Bernie’s II. And while these films are now modern day exceptions to the norm, up until the release of Night of the Living Dead the basic premise of the zombie was someone who was powerless to resist the mind control of another person. But then Night of the Living Dead changed everything.
Since the release of Night of the Living Dead and its revolutionary seminal take on zombies, this has become a relatively stale sub-genre. There are still plenty of good zombie films being made, but there have been few innovations on the zombie concept in the decades since. Fast moving zombies, considered revolutionary by the uneducated when they appeared in Zach Snyder’s remake of Dawn of the Dead, had already been implemented in 1985’s Return of the Living Dead. The idea of worms or parasites controlling a host body, used most recently in the film Slither, was used earlier in the 1987 film Night of the Creeps, and even then it was clearly an homage to the iconic 1957 horror film Invasion of the Body Snatchers. 28 Days Later showed perhaps the most innovation of this group by changing from living dead zombies to a viral hate plague, but even it relied on a blood born pathogen for transmission and used what would soon become the cinematic standard of using fast moving ghouls. Even the Spanish horror film [Rec] showed further innovation by sequestering the victims in the same building as the zombies rather then have them hiding in a building with the menace outside. [Rec]2 looks to increase the claustrophobia even more by using first-person camera angles to draw the viewer directly into the film. All of these are welcomed additions to the sub-genre, and when used well can make for a unique and enjoyable viewing experience, but by no means has the sub-genre done much more then implement minor tweaks on a premise that has existed relatively undisturbed for fifty years. That is, until Pontypool came along and changed everything.
“One day you are in your boat and you get attacked by zombie fish.”
Back when I worked at American Express I had a colleague who was as fascinated with zombies as I was. Much like Derek he was deathly afraid of the very concept of zombies and as such we would have deep philosophical discussions on the nature of the undead.
When we first heard that George Romero was making a new zombie film for the first time in twenty years we were quite excited at the prospect. I took it upon myself to track down a copy of the script and printed a copy out for the two of us to read, and within its pages came about a concept that afforded us hours of time wasting discussion.
The film, at the time still untitled but soon to be known as Land of the Dead, had an interesting, if somewhat throwaway scene that was to lead off the third act of the film. With zombies encroaching upon the city, an unknowing loan man on patrol stops for a quick smoke break under a bridge. As he stands there something stirs in the darkness. Soon it seems as if the entire underside of the bridge is shifting and as the man looks up a horde of zombie rats drop down upon him and quickly devour him whole.
It has been awhile since I watched a zombie film so I thought it was time to throw another one in the DVD player and enjoy the ride. This time the zombies are attacking a small Australian town called Berkley after a meteor shower, as an extra added bonus it seems aliens are invading as well. With a plot like that how Undead could possibly be anything less then awesome is beyond me.
Just got back from a screening of Zombieland and I don’t have too much to say about it. It’s a solid zom-com thought it is far from the best. The film drags early on and takes its sweet time getting to its actual point but it does have its share of highlights.
Entries (RSS)