Plantiana Yawn. Poorly Filmed Snooze Fest.

Platicsco Good story, Not enough for a whole film

Voxitype Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

Francene Odetta It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.

Leofwine_draca After countless zombie rip-offs, spin-offs and comedy, the man who single-handedly invented the genre returns with the long-awaited fourth 'dead' film. Sadly, LAND OF THE DEAD is separated from Romero's trilogy not just by the long years that have passed since 1985's DAY OF THE DEAD. LAND OF THE DEAD is content to offer a straightforward action-flick and in this instance, it plays a lot like the previous year's DAWN OF THE DEAD remake. Scenes of atmospheric horror are thrown aside in place of gore, and indeed the bloodshed is what this film focuses on; there's more grue and gut-ripping here than in the first three films put together, and Romero positively wallows in the violence and carnage.The story is wafer-thin, and things haven't really progressed on the planet since DAWN OF THE DEAD happened. Humans are walled up inside a compound, zombies rule the street, and a massive armoured vehicle (just like the one in the DAWN OF THE DEAD remake) figures in the proceedings quite predominantly. Scenes of plot exposition are countered by lots of shooting and subsequent images of zombies being splattered; it's a veritable bloodbath here, and extra gravitas is brought about by Greg Nicotero's special effects; they're more realistic, and bloodier, than ever. The zombie make-up is spot on, with each zombie looking particularly individualised now, although I could have done without some of the CGI effects that ruin the authenticity a little bit.Romero's casting, however, is spot on, aside from his bizarre choice for lead role; Simon Baker, an Australian unknown, is far too vanilla and clear-cut as the hero, and totally uninteresting as a result (his boring character in the script doesn't help much either). Better are the supporting players, including John Leguizamo in one of the biggest and best acting performances I've seen him give, and the ever-sexy Asia Argento as the kick-ass heroine – Argento does this sort of thing in her sleep, and should have been cast in the RESIDENT EVIL movies in my opinion; she would have been ten times better than that talentless Milla Jovovich. Elsewhere, Dennis Hopper chews the scenery with aplomb, and seems to be having a great time as always; his enthusiasm kind of rubs off. Best of all is Robert Joy as a sniper sporting horrific burns injuries, and subsequently looking even weirder than usual. The big black zombie guy is also great.

DamianThorn While George Romero has become famous for his Living Dead series and the way it transformed the horror genre, he's also become famous for something else. The argument over whether or not he ever intended politics, let alone race politics to be part of his earlier films. At times he's insisted he didn't, at times he's somewhat coyly suggested he did. Either way, the politics in his earlier films were subdued and if any message could ultimately be taken from them it's that human beings must work together to survive. Personally I despise all the conjecture and "reading into" these or any movies at all but at times it's just impossible to avoid.Land of the Dead quickly became one of those political snafu's. Romero blamed the studio, the studio blamed Romero, ultimately who the hell knows what really happened. Either way it led Romero to swear off big studio backing for any future entries into the Living Dead series. So what's the big deal you wonder? Will it ruin the movie for you? Read on.The core of this film comes down to the rich taking advantage of the poor, that's not the problem. A sub plot is the desire of some of the poor to move up into the world of the rich and the desire of others to just get the hell away from the whole argument and live their lives in peace. That's not the problem either. The problem boils down to, believe it or not one annoying as hell and constantly used zombie. All the shots with this zombie who becomes the "leader" of an oddly intelligent bunch of fellow zombies were added in post production. The whole purpose was to add in an extra hint of race politics. If you watch the movie, you will instantly understand why this became a big deal. It adds an element of unbelievably cheesy stupidity to the film. It's just ridiculous.Romero has said that he was entirely opposed to the post production changes but was given an ultimatum, do it or the studio would scrap the movie. The studio has said there was never any such argument, it was all Romero's idea and when the movie wasn't as well received as he had hoped he looked for a scapegoat, it's ironic really because it's exactly the sort of tit for tat arguing that goes on in Romero's earlier movies when the zombie outbreak is beginning. To be honest the added scenes are so annoying that I've often considered re cutting the movie myself and for quite awhile there was a "fan" cut floating around that removed those scenes. Either way, ultimately the movie is what it is. Politics aside, silly added scenes aside it's really a very good movie with some really great acting. The writing is there, the story the direction and everything is all really top notch. Dennis Hopper plays your "greedy old rich bugger" quite well and John Leguizamo does a great job as does the rest of the cast. There's some really fantastic zombie gore to be had for all you gore hounds out there like me and that's thanks to Tom Savini. He really is a master of traditional special effects. On another note, die hard horror fans will love seeing Asia Argento in this movie as well.All in all, Romero has done better but this is really an enjoyable film and I think pretty much anyone should have a good time watching it. Provided your a horror fan, if your not then you really should get as far away from this movie as possible. You'll either throw up or have nightmares for the rest of your life...or both.

wes-connors The dead run amok during the opening credits for filmmaker George Romero's fourth flesh-eating zombie adventure. That was some time ago. Today, the city of Pittsburg is practically crawling with hungry zombies. The rich and privileged are safe and secure in a luxurious area known as "Fiddler's Green". It is surrounded by water and electrified fencing. From there, workers are sent out for supplies - like cigars, antibiotics and fine wine. Blond hero Simon Baker (as Riley Denbo) and his "Dead Reckoning" vehicle lead the group. They work for wickedly powerful Dennis Hopper (as Paul Kaufman). Working for Mr. Baker are disfigured sure-shot Robert Joy (as Charlie Houk) and ex-hooker Asia Argento (as Slack). Baker has saved both their lives. The more self-centered and muscle-showing John Leguizamo (as Cholo DeMora) gets the better part, and walks off with the film..."Land of the Dead" is gory, but not scary; nothing approaches what happened in the basement during "Night of the Living Dead" (1968). Newer zombies are more cuddly. We aren't told what makes them tick. Because there are so many, we assume most of them only like to take only one bite of a victim; most of the walking dead appear relatively whole. The story is, however, interesting in other ways. The dead have begun to think, to reason. They play musical instruments and show emotions. Some appear to be in relationships. The sympathetic zombie leader, gas station attendant Eugene Clark (as Big Daddy), is someone you admire. In the past, Mr. Romero has denied racial subtext in his work - perhaps it's class he's addressing - whatever, the socio-economical slant strengthens the story. Humor is also used well, and the crew's hard work is clearly evident.****** Land of the Dead (6/18/05) George A. Romero ~ Simon Baker, John Leguizamo, Dennis Hopper, Robert Joy

geminiredblue Everyone was surprised that after 20 years George Romero announced he'd be making another sequel in his DEAD series. Personally, I wondered how it would be in comparison to his original trilogy. It was opening night, the theater was packed, the lights went out, and the movie began. Now the story: Some time has passed since the zombie plague started. The country has been decimated and large groups have banded together into cities. In one city, the looks mysteriously like Pittsburgh, the rich, headed by Kaufman (Dennis Hopper,) have taken over a high-rise called Fiddler's Green. The poor are left on the streets with gambling, vices and filth. Every so often, a roving band of raiders goes out to collect supplies. As the film opens, we meet the raiders as they attempt to raid a small town. The raiders, headed by Riley Denbo (Simon Baker,) have discovered that the zombies are learning to be human again. They can grunt to each other to communicate and have started learning how to use tools, weapons and strategy. To make a long story short, tragedy befalls the raiders. Back in the city, one of the raiders named Cholo (John Leguizamo) has been secretly working for Kaufman. When Kaufman betrays their deal, Cholo decides to seek his revenge by stealing an armored truck, threatening to bomb the city unless Kaufman pays him $5 million. So Riley is sent out, along with some friends, to stop Cholo and get back the truck. Meanwhile, a large horde of zombies is slowly moving towards the city... And yes fellow gorehounds, there is a big bloody finale! Overall, I was pleased with the results. The tone, while horrific has a wicked humor streak. This is perhaps the only Romero film where the zombies are viewed as sympathetic and not just flesh-crazed monsters. The special effects and make-up are top-notch. Acting by all is superb. While some have questioned Romero's credibility as a horror director from this point on, I still say the man hasn't lost one iota of his talent. Case in point: I dare anyone to watch the scene where a man is eaten alive by three zombie clowns. So go ahead, I dare you to watch this movie!