Keeping in mind that I think George A. Romero is one of the most talented Americans of all-time (if he's from Canada or something FUCK YOU I am not looking it up, and in fact, backspacing in a forum post in Chrome created a Rube Goldberg-style debacle) (and I originally typed "Rube Goldstein," so I had to backspace anyway, and ffffffffffffuck!)
But George A. Romero made a shitty movie, and it's Diary of the Dead.
First off - what the fuck is going on here? Have all his movies just had people BECOME zombies no matter how they were killed? Did they whole infection-spreading thing come about from other zombie movies, and now the problem is clearly with me?
Is that what happened?
I didn't like any part of this. Nobody could act - say what you will about Land of the Dead (which I loved) it is filled with people who have acted well elsewhere. I know that Diary of the Dead had a low budget, but the stiff performances shouldn't have resulted from not being able to pay anybody anything.
And I guess my real issue is in seeing technology in movies - there really wasn't anything particularly offensive about the use in this movie, but we've been conditioned to wince everytime we see a laptop and, in fact, I think we're so convinced that we'd wince even if... I'm just saying! Even if we were dead... and brought back to life.
Perhaps we are the real monsters after all...?
Yeah, no, Diary of the Dead - zero stars
[Review] Diary of the Dead
Moderators: AArdvark, Ice Cream Jonsey
- Ice Cream Jonsey
- Posts: 30453
- Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2002 2:44 pm
- Location: Colorado
- Contact:
[Review] Diary of the Dead
the dark and gritty...Ice Cream Jonsey!