Yeah... I was waiting to see this again and last night at about 12:00 I went to pick up "Day of the Dead contagium" and picked this up while I was at it.

I wanted to review the movie again cause I believe back in June I walked away only slightly happy with this movie and actually wanted to believe it was better than "Dawn Remake" I'm really sad to say this but... it wasn't as good...

George Romero has never been that good of a writer or director. Not really. He is but he isn't. See, Romero isn't consistent with his work... for every Night,Dawn and Day he has a Monkey Shine or a Land of The dead waiting for you somewhere... He's never fully been brilliant... Not like a H.G. Lewis a Fulci or an Argento or A Wesley... by this I mean he's never had a string of really good movies.

I believe Romero's best work is behind him. He's done. The only movies I really liked of his was "and in order"

1-Day Of the Dead
2-Dawn Of the Dead
3-Creepshow
4-Creepshow 2
5-Night of the living Dead
6-Bruiser
7-Martin

The rest of his movies are lack luster and abysmal. Even the tail end of this list gets pretty bleak... really. But anyways, this isn't about his movies or his credibility... this is about "Land Of the Dead"

The dvd said to house extra gore and scenes not found in the theater... well, this is true and it isn't. The gore was so lame in this movie it all looked the same. No trick they threw at you was any better than the next or last... so while they had more "GORE" you really wouldn't notice it cause nothing in the movie was that meaningful.

I guess when a movie opens up with zombies walking hand in hand in a park with the clank and clatter of other zombies trying to play musical instruments... I guess you know it's not gonna be good. Then we are treated to Big Cheese dick Daddy. I mean... really, was it ever gonna be good after all that?

The characters in this movie were among the worst in any of his movies. I believe not one character really grabs your attention. Nobody stood out in this picture over anyone else. I think he was smoking pot and watching "OF MICE & MEN" when he wrote the lead and his retarded friend too. I thought as a whole all the characters lacked style and diversity... something Dawn and more so Day had in spades.

The lead zombie was just... it was so bad I don't want to comment on it. It was the most absurd part of any zombie movie I've ever seen.................. ever. I cannot believe he believed that was a good idea. "Big Daddy" if you will... was so damn gay that I fast forward the parts he's on. He's a joke. A tune smith.

I don't want a zombie who feels anything. He feels sorry for his other zombie friends???? That's gay. He even cries at one point in the movie... What is that!? A zombie that cries? Romero... what is wrong with you?  He even takes it a step further by having the zombie train all the other zombies to be soldiers... shooting guns, wielding weapons and just being stupid all around.

The zombies became the good guys. To where in the past you wanted the characters to live... in this one he made them so bad, so shallow and paper thin that you wanted the zombies to eat them all. Everyone of them. They all sucked.

I'm not disappointed it wasn't any better than it was, cause I knew it was gonna suck deep down inside... I really did. I'm also not so disappointed cause so many good zombie films are still out there... just most of them are Italian.

At the end of the day... Land of the dead just fell short. Short of everything. It was absurd by design. I mean... Chloe's main concern was money... why? What the hell good was it outside the "one" city? It meant nothing no more, yet Romero brought this to our attention time and time again how greedy everyone became. I can see them being this way within' the confides of this "one" city but hell... Chole was bitching about getting out of it most of the movie... LOL!

Romero just... what is was is this. He saw them ass ream his Dawn Of the Dead and he felt pressured to rush this to the market. It's true. He could've took another year to write it and it'd be good I'm willing to bet... the way it went down it's laughable. I mean, everything in it... Nothing was good.

Oh wait... yeah there is... The DVD extras house some good content... I really liked the interviews and when Asia talks about her father and growing up on the sets of his horror movies. That was a good look back. I was just hopping she'd have said something about her role in Demons 2 or many of her fathers other movies along with Fulci as well.

Other than that and a neat little screen showing of how all the movie's backdrops were C.G. the DVD is a hung day.

I bought it for the collection and yet... I don't even like it being next to the others, cause the original 3 are where it's at. They showcase something. Something Land and all these new zombie movies simply cannot... Maybe it was the era they were made in. Maybe it was the subject matter behind them all. Maybe Land does show how mundane life has become and how utterly shit the 2000's really are.

I was talking to a friend of mine and we come to the conclusion... A zombie movie doesn't' need to be good to be good. It really doesn't.  I believe Zombie 3 is better than 98% of all Zombie movies...

I have fun watching it. I laugh at times. Cringe at others. Have to turn my head at the gore on a few occasions. Try to figure out what Fulci and Mattie were on while making it. Try to make sense out of a Zombie DJ and at the end of all of that... I can still say. "ZOMBIE 3" is an enjoyable movie. It's not gonna win Oscars or praise from anyone but it was better than Land Of the Dead and Dawn remake... from which James Gun and Zach Snyder stole heavily from. Zombie baby, running zombies, ambushing zombies and all.

So in conclusion...

Land Of The Dead 2 out of 5 - A flawed movie on all fronts. Nothing in this movie will make you sing its praise. I can't say one character in the movie had anything going for them. I think the lead zombie was just a joke. I think that the movie ends how it begins... and that is sad.

I beg to differ, Balt. I thoughougly enjoy Land, and thought it far supassed the efforts of Day. While Dawn still and will alway remain the pinnacle of the Romero zombie horror films, Land of the Dead is none the less a worthy entry to the series. You mention that the zombies now become the "good guys" they're not. As Kenneth observed in Dawn, they're going on instict, they feed and meander about. Big Daddy was just an evolved form which we saw earlier in Bub from Day. The sympathy that he showed towards the zombies was signs of evolution, that he was developing beyond simple instinct. You question why Chole was concerned with money. But look at the state they lived in. The wealthy lived in luxury and protection. Well the poor had to live in sqaulor and were the ones protecting the rich. It was Romero's way of satirizing and making note on the conditions that are at works today. Sure we don't live in sqaulor or in a city walled from zombies, but is it not the poor who fight the wars. The notion that money, even though it was basically useless, still held such a grasp on both Kaufman and Chole was a brilliant social statement.
This wasn't a movie about the zombies, this was more or less about the control the upperclass and wealthy place on the poor. In Romero's work it's never the zombies that are the focal point, they're never the true antagonist, the people like the bikers, Logan, and Kaufman are.

Land of the Dead

***1/2 out of ****

Your points are your own... I'm not gonna sway your opinion in the least but c'mon... You're comparing Bub to this other fuck... you can't do that.

Here is why... Bub was being worked with daily with a doctor. A doctor who was skilled in human beavior... Big Daddy was a typical run of the mill nobody. I'm sorry you buy into this so much, but this wouldn't happen. It's not logical, even if Zombies were reality.

I'm also sorry you believe money actually means something in this movie... like I said It might in the city, but Chole was bitching the whole movie about leaving it. There was "NOTHING" out there... except in Canada, and that was a maybe if you recall.

Day was by far the best in opinion. It made the most sense and was completly logical.

Balt, please write a review of "Contagium."  When I went out to pick up "Land" today, I had to subdue myself from buying this sequel/prequel to "Day of the Dead."  It was only fifteen bucks, but I just couldn't bring myself to buy it.  It looked "House of the Dead"-bad, but I couldn't be sure.  Have you watched it yet?

Oh yeah, I've watched it already... Oh yeah. It's not at all what you're expecting I can tell you that much. Yeah, it's only 15 bucks but is it really worth the 15 bucks? I don't believe land of the dead was worth the 20 I paid for it, but I bought it anyways. I'm an impulse buyer... If I have to have it I have to have it. I don't need it. I didn't even want Land really, not really... I just had to have it for the collection.

Anyways, yeah, I'll review DAY OF THE DEAD 2 Contagium if no one else does today.

My final statment in retrospect about the movie is this...

Big Daddy ruined it. He did. He was absurd and not even logical in the setting of the movie. He did things that nobody else could do, not even humman. He was a jack ass and had it not been for that one zombie, I'd have liked the movie. Not loved the movie. Just liked, cause their were other problems in it.

I didn't like big Daddy cause he wasn't a zombie. You never once saw him feed on anyone. That pissed me off. He never tried to even get to anyone in that attempt. It wasn't right. He's a zombie he should have the same impulse or "INSTINCT" as you wanna throw around. They did this so you would feel more for him. Cause if he would've been chewing on guts like a zombie is supposed to do and taking bites out of people, well then... then people wouldn't like him and root for his gay ass. Like it, love it or hate it... that's the real deal.

I don't like how he had a vendetta against Hopper, why? Why'd he pick "HIM" to follow? It made no sense.

Why did it take ROGER weeks to change into a ZOMBIe in Dawn of the Dead but it only took these guys an hour or hell, not even that in most cases.

Another thing... Why do zombies eat people? If they eat them they don't come back as zombies, ever noticed that? Only the dip shits thatare bit come back. LMFAO!

Chloe wanted money and for no reason. Money had no value outside the city. IT had none!!!!!! Yet his demand seemed to take up the last 40 minutes of the movie, it was Bullshit.

I finally seen Romero rip off other zombie movies in this one too. I thought I'd never see the day this happened but it did. The zombie with the head and spinal chord detatched was stolen from Return Of the Living Dead 3 ... what a sad movie and an even sadder day when Romero of all people WES CRAVEN's something out of a movie for his own use. & that wasn't all he took. He borrowed heavily from FULCI/MATTIE's ZOMBIE 3.

Big Daddy is a zombie... he has no emotions and no working emotional functions ... but for some reason he mustered up the strength to cry and put other zombies out of their misery. LOL!

Then the end... Oh boy... You mean to tell me, these "Things" just ate and mamed all of these people and you're just gonna let them go? You've spent the last two hours fighting these things for your own survival and you're just gonna let them go??? Whatever! Let them go for what? So they can amass more numbers and so Big Daddy can teach them how to do other task such as mowing, driving and knitting... That is the most ass fucked ending I've ever seen.

The even funnier thing about it was that none of the poor were killed... they only killed the rich people LOL! Did you see how at the end... "new hope" was restored when all the poor fucks come running out with their guns to greet the main cast "who not one of them fuggin' died" it was just stupiD! I mean, everyone they killed in the movie was not important to the plot but Hopper and Lego ... I wanted to see the Retard get it and that main dick stain... he sucked.

Anyways, that's it... those are my points and they are all valid. Like the movie if you want. This review was legit and all spot on true. I don't see how anyone can let these flaws go, but hey... maybe you don't care about continuity and being as logical as possible when it comes to any movie, not just horror.

If I wanted a comedy or a parody or a cartoon I'd have gotten one of them. This movie was a bad move on Romero's part.

I already reviewed this three different times, so I'm not going to go into the storyline too much.  Also, if you haven't read my earlier review, you should know that my mind changed many a time on this one.

I have to say, after watching this on DVD, it just seems to get better and better to me.  Yes, it is a bit too obvious at some points (though I really like John Leguizamo's character, he has that one painfully un-subtle line about "starting a jihad" that had me cringing) and there are a few characters that some may find one dimensional.  But, as a whole, I very much enjoyed this one and seems only to get better each time I see it.

And as for Big Daddy, you know what?  As corny as he may have been, I found myself actually siding with a zombie for the first time since "Day of the Dead."  For that, I give immense credit to Romero.  And though I understand that you may have wanted to see him feed, I liked the fact that this time around it was more of a real live war, with zombies killing humans not so much to re-populate themselves (they are, after all, estimated to be 400,000 to one), but to just get rid of them.  I also liked the fact that in the beginning Daddy was shown shoving the other cadavers to the ground, like he was just trying to save his buddies.  I'm gonna say it: it was surprisingly touching.

I also have to say that I very much enjoyed Dennis Hopper.  He gets some wonderful one-liners and memorable moments.  My favorite is (and I'm taking this from another review I read, but it is still poignant) when Kaufman points the gun directly at Big Daddy and shouts, "What gives you the right!?"  Daddy responds with this guttaral roar, as if he is throwing the same question right back to Hopper.  Am I looking too deep into things?  Yeah, probably.  But I still found it fairly deep on its own merits.

All in all, this one doesn't even come close to "Dawn of the Dead," or "Night" for that matter.  I would say though, that I liked this one probably just as much as "Day" (and, coincidentally enough, I'm one of those Romero fans who terribly enjoyed his third installment).

Movie: ***1/2 out of ****

DVD Extras: ***1/2 out of ****

I picked up the Unrated version not expecting much.  But, as I saw this three times during its theatrical run, I was able to see what was added.  Not only is there a noticible ammount of gore (specifically two memorable ones; the first involves a large bludgeoning tool to the head delivered by Leguizamo, the second being a man's face torn off of his bloodied skull like it was a Halloween mask), but also a whole deleted scene re-inserted into the film that has Cholo running into a suicide victim (which is the scene that includes the aforementioned bludgeoning).  

There's also a commentary from Romero and a slew of various making-of's, my favorite of which is "When Shaun Met George," which has "Shaun of the Dead" star Simon Pegg and director Edgar Wright meeting Romero and preparing for their zombie cameos.  It's very funny to see these two interact with George, as they come off as two giggling fanboys (towards the end of the featurette, you can even see that at one point Wright got his DVD of "Dawn" signed).  Some cool features, though I'm sure come next Halloween, I'll be going out and purchasing the two disc double dip.

I think that this film proves George Romero is overrated, I liked it though. Sure smart zombies are a new different approach but I think they are a breath of fresh air.

Where this movie goes wrong is the weak story and good characters they fail to keep up...  Also all the CG violence is a little disappointing.

The only way they'll release a 2 disc version is if they are making the sequel. The DVD features packed on this DVD are enough to make it worth it so anymore would be overkill.

I enjoyed this movie, but it wasn't as good as Dawn of the Dead (remake).

I like the fact, though, that he made the zombies able to learn and think, and not just wander around wanting humans to chew on. He actually made the plot interesting, having zombies able to use guns and weapons to break into buildings.

I have to admit, though, Big Daddy should have eaten some people, but that would probably mess up his beard...