Romero's 'Dead' Series - Part 2 (2005-2009)

Though the reception was more or less luke warm, I happen to think Land of the Dead (2005) is as good a Dead story a 21^st Century Romero could have given us. Twenty years since Day, the effects are sublime, the characters are likable and well developed. It’s actually quite hard to fault. The story is interesting enough if slightly basic, but I like nothing more than a miniature fascist state in a post apocalyptic setting being taken down by a group of do-gooding rebels. Dennis Hopper’s charismatic baddie is a real winner. Perhaps the best thing for the film for me was that it was a real sequel to the first three films, set in the same timeline. It was interesting to be shown a wider scope of the effects of outbreak, as opposed to just a mall, or a bunker. However, I’m not convinced about the whole ‘zombies can think like us now’ vibe… 7/10

Deciding that he wanted to make a change in form, and perhaps connect the series with a new generation of zombie fans, Romero decided to take on the hot 'new' filming style of the time, and do a first person camera horror, a la Blair Witch, Cloverfield etc, the result was Diary of the Dead (2007). While the change adds a certain interesting edge in terms of character development (being allowed to talk to the camera, and the viewer directly), it makes for some pretty stilted viewing, dodgy metaphors (a character asks another to put him out of his misery by pleading ‘shoot me’, while ‘shooting’ him with the camera – err, slick) and a social commentary that doesn’t really work. Despite some entertaining scenes, this reboot to the series was a disappointment and, frankly, lacked the intelligence of previous instalments. 6/10

Survival of the Dead (2009) was possibly one of the worst films its year. Even a few minutes in, I was wondering if I was watching a spoof, or maybe the camera would suddenly pan back actually show the characters from the film watching a spoof, as a nice little joke. But the camera never panned back. This is a terrible film in terms of character, plot, substance, effects… It really has nothing going for it. The deaths are gimmicky, the effects are lame, and the script is borderline retarded. A zombie riding a horse? Farmers feuding on an island? Who cares? Survival is dross that once and for all confirms Romero has lost it. Never mind George, it was a good run of genius while it lasted. 3/10

In all, the series has had some incredible highs, but there appears to be no chance of a resurgence. It’s time for the series be firmly put in the past, and... well... DIE.

SAW 3D (2010)

Horror Movies and 3D have a long and varied history, going back to the third instalment of the Friday the 13th franchise, and more recently 2008's "My Bloody Valentine 3D". Being all about atmosphere and scares, does this overused tool have a place in this genre? let's take a look and see with SAW VI director Kevin Greutert's final instalment in the most successful horror franchise of all time.

The story begins by recapping the events of the film just previous, telling us the fate of Jigsaw's Apprentice, and revealing that he survived the predicament he was left in at the end of VI. The secondary plot-line running throughout the film is the current player, supposed Jigsaw trap "Survivor" Bobby Dagen (Sean Patrick Flanery) who has released a self help book about his escape, providing inspiration to the masses. The film slowly works it's way through a weak "Cat & Mouse" chase of Jigsaw's apprentice and Internal affairs officer Matt GIbson (Chad Donella) and the Self help author learning his lesson about lies, deceit and how the people around you, knowing you're doing wrong, and yet do nothing are just as much to blame. The film wraps up in the most APT ending to the SAW franchise, a total mind-fuck with an extremely familiar face making an EPIC return to the franchise (if not a little on the chubby side, but then again, look who's talking).

Conclusion: First thing's first, this film SO did not need to be in 3D, although having cost $17 million to make, (the most expensive film in the franchise, but still not a scratch on most of the Hollywood blockbusters this year) I can see why Lionsgate made that move. I resented paying extra for the ticket, as the film felt a tad showy for my liking, also there were some TERRIBLE performances, overacting and hammy delivery a-plenty (though Linkin Park frontman Chester Bennington does a very respectible, though short, job of it), also toward the end someone winds up in a trap I truly doubt deserved to be there. The films plot and connections to previous film's were to be commended though, with a truly "big finish" for the franchise I've followed for the past 7 years. this one actually managed to make me CRINGE with it's traps (fish hook... you'll know when you see it) something the previous instalments had rare success with, the whole thing was just a lot of fun to watch, when taken with a big pinch of salt. 7/10

To end my Saw-a-thon, It took a long time to get here, while V and VI felt the most contrived, the series was by no means BAD, while they could (and probably SHOULD) have stopped the series earlier, it has been this generations shining star in the genre, Michael Myers, Leatherface, Freddy Krueger and Jason all tried to resurface, but their time was done, and the 2000's belonged to Jigsaw. Epic finale to a franchise that's amazing to watch this time of year, it made us think, made us Cringe, and opened up a new door for low budget ULTRA shock/gore films (A-la Hostel and The Collector). So, in the words of Jigsaw all the way back from SAW (2004) "You are still alive. Most people are so ungrateful to be alive. But not you. Not anymore. " GAME OVER.

SAW V (2008)

You know the Dealio here, t'was another Halloween (my Birthday actually) and another outing for Liongate's longest running franchise. With the fourth instalment ending like it did, things had to get much more complicated in order to continue (as our main Villain died 2 films ago).

We start off by seeing a man strapped to a table with a giant bladed pendulum swinging above him, unlike most SAW traps before it though, after crushing his hands (as per Billy the puppet's instructions) he is not released from his restraints, and goes on to be cut into 2. Cut to Agent Straum EXACTLY where we left him in IV, as he winds up in a trap himself shortly after (if my review sounds rushed, it's only because I'm describing literally how the movie played out) we then get to see more flashbacks inter-cut with the current players, 5 seemingly unconnected people being told to work together to overcome their predicament. Instead of focusing on Jigsaw's motivation this time around (as that was well covered last time) we're shown the journey his assistant took to get to this point, (don't worry, this isn't a SPOILER blog). These three premise's inter-wind and culminate at the very end (with the signature twist franchise fans have come to expect)

Now...ABOUT that twist. I remember the tag line in the Trailers at the time being "you won't believe how it ends" so i was expecting my reaction to be "HOLY MUNCHKIN MIDGET FUCK! where has my brain gone?" but instead it was more akin to "oh.. I get it". There was a lot of set up in this film for an extremely weak pay off, also with an ever increasing budget per film (and the franchises third director David Hackl) it's much more clean feel is drastically changing the aesthetic of the original premise (dark, dirty and deadly) and what the FUCK is it with the CG blood? how much do blood squibs possibly cost?

Conclusion:IV writers Patrick Melton and Marcus Dunstan definitely deliver us the series' weak point, some of the traps were kind of cool but the 5 people in the main game are utterly one dimensional and only communicate when the audience needs to be told something, also, too many jumps between past and present gets annoying AND confusing. the film doesn't succeed as a SAW film or a Horror/Thriller, purely as gore. 3/10

SAW III (2006)

Third time's a charm? we'll see about that.
Another October brought us yet another SAW film, this film was released with a guaranteed fourth, which left some of the suspension a bit moot, however the actual story is probably as creative as the first.

Jigsaw (reprised by Tobin Bell) is sick, and so he must apprehend Doctor Lynn (Bahar Soomekh) A woman who is seemingly unappreciative of her husband and family, but as ever, there's more reason to her being here. While Jigsaw is being treated by the good doctor, we're flung between the current "player" Jeff (Angus Macfadyen), who is unable to move on from his son's death, causing him to pay no attention to his wife and daughter, Jigsaw pit's him against various people involved in and around his son's tragic "hit and run" passing. the film concludes with a bigger twist than II, but not a scratch on the original, again giving us the dilema of choice, with the moral being "Let go".

Series creators (and executive producers) James Wan and Leigh Whannell return to co-write with Director Darren Lynn Bousman. Creative and devilishly clever in places, there are some people in these traps featured in III that have little to no control over their fate, something that seems to go against the point of Jigsaw's motivation, the film in the end becomes partly a tale of loss and the breakdown of a family unit, hitting some emotional highs while bringing it all together in the final act.

Conclusion: The clever plot is brought down only by some of the shaky performances and seemingly unmotivated actions of some of the characters, it does it's job, and ties into it's successor beautifully. 7/10

Romero's 'Dead' Series - Part 1 (1968-1985)

One of my favourite directors. One my favourite series of films. I'm biased. While zombie films divide the movie going public, I'm here to stick up for them and give the unbeliever a glimpse of why they really should be on board.

Night of the Living Dead (1968) is often considered one of the original horror films, and certainly the scariest of the entire series. Any reviewer can talk about its cultural significance, the censoring, the legacy and interpretations, but lets not get too carried away. The film, or the most part, is solid, well written and tight. Direction is controlled and simple, with good use of light and dark to really get the most of the grim surroundings, making the house and fields area even more daunting and eerie. Characterisation is an obvious strength, each sympathetic in their own way. The ending is fantastic, and while the pace sags in places, the pay off is well worth the wait. On the whole, the film is a humourless, horrid spectacle that intrigues as much as it entertains, but bears very little resemblance to Romero's later work, of which I am more of a fan. The wit and fun of the sequels is strangely absent. While a solid classic, for me it's not something that can be re-watched and enjoyed more than a few times. 7/10

Dawn of the Dead (1978) is possibly one of the greatest horror films ever made. In fact, I would consider it to be one of the greatest films ever made, period. Social commentary and consumerism satire aside, it's tremendous fun. Sure, the direction is occasionally a little shaky. Okay, the dialogue is mostly ridiculous and borderline insane. It's one of those rare films that will provoke completely different responses from people. Some would see it as a horror, some as a comedy. I like to enjoy both perspectives when watching. Some of the sequences and exchanges between characters are undeniably funny, but there's always this heavy weight bearing down on the film, you can really feel the impending doom, the inevitability of the fact that even though they're living in luxury and the zombie's can barely put one foot in front of the other, they will eventually all die a horrible, theatre paint red death. Amazing fun, great effects, superb tone, a true original. 10/10

Day of the Dead (1985) was a true sequel to Dawn in style and substance. Perhaps even more bleak and dark than Dawn, the underground military base, home to grisly experiments and borderline psychotic soldiers makes for some riveting viewing. The balance of power between the parties involved is perhaps even more scary than the gore, as for the first time we are given a true antagonist in Captain Rhodes, who is delightfully unhinged, a victim of his environment and responsibility. Then add to the mix a lot of surreal dark humour, an Irishman with a catch phrase, caravans, 'a mouthful of Greek salad', a typically zany score, guts (lots of), an awesome opening scene and a better closing half an hour of zombie nonsense. It may not have the wide reaching themes of Dawn, but it's just as much fun. 9/10

Coming soon, Part 2 and the not so amazing 21st century Romero films...

Buried

Buried, the 2010 character study/thriller film stars Rom Com regular Ryan Reynolds, taking a bold step out of comic relief (see Blade: Trinity, and X-men Origins: Wolverine) and into the sole onscreen character of a private company truck driver stationed in Iraq, who wakes up 6 feet under, in a sealed coffin with nothing more than a hip flask, an extremely well filled Zippo and a Blackberry smartphone.

Reynolds shines as the desperate "average joe" in a beyond average situation, while trying to figure out why he's here and ultimately, if he'll ever get out, he runs the gambit of human emotion and while not leaving the confined space, takes us a journey we can only hope we never have to take.

While the social and political commentary (Iraqi attitude to everything American, not just the soldiers and how expendable a company could see its employees) it isnt rammed down your throat leaving it the only thing you walk away thinking about, toward the end i found it hard to breath, needing to get out just as much as he did, truly immersive and technically impressive (yes it CAN be achieved without 3D!) this film will leave you gasping for air and praying for the poor bastard.

Moving, claustrophobic, and well done in most aspects, 9/10