Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Land of the Dead

I was going to do this as a Mad Doc Defends, but I’m not sure it’s held in broadly low enough regard to be worthy.

This is George Romero’s fourth and somewhat belated entry in his zombie franchise. I think it’s in the same rough timeline as Night, Dawn and Day, but not 100% as it’s very much modernised.

Whilst, as Zombie flicks go, this is above par as we might expect from Romero? It doesn’t quite live up to its predecessor. And for me, that’s down to its more modern feel.

It is nice to have slow Zombies, and the human centric plot is typically Romero, serving as a semi-satire, semi-critique of social issues.

And it builds on Bub, showing zombies with a bit more direction in life than just stumbling around.

Where it falls down for me? Fiddlers Green is essentially a fortified city, and has been holding out for a decent length of time. Certainly long enough for its soldiery to have figured out you go for the head. Which….they almost never do. Even when we see zombies hoisted by the angle as live fire target practice? The targets are….on the chest. And sure, we’re not talking about a highly trained army here, but they panic and let their aim to pot all too quickly.

And we see the community’s scavengers, rogues, ne’er do wells and double hard bar stewards to a man, do Really Stupid Things for people we’re meant to see as natural survivors, who’ve made it this far by being cunning, savvy, and aware of the risks.

OK, I suppose some could be put down to over confidence. But it still feels a bit jarring.

Also, some of the Gore Moments stick out as set pieces. Cool, but not the “in the moment, what an awful way to go” we’ve come to expect from Romero. Not all though, so that’s nice. Certainly when the Zombies break into Toff Tower, we see some nasty, practical effect deth. So a bit of a mixed bag.

On the upside? The More Than Instinct Zombies work, and stop this being a lazy retread. And in a way that adds to the series overall. And our main cast are solid, well written and well portrayed. And we of course have the hopeful but ultimately ambiguous ending, with the survivors heading into an uncertain future.

And the film is nothing if not entertaining overall. Cool ideas, mostly realised, just let down by People Being Dumb Because The Plot Needs Them To Be Dumb.

I'll say Land of the Dead is one of my favourites of the Zombie genre. It doesn't take itself too seriously, it shows classic Zombies but makes them more intelligent, it has nice effects, all in all it's one of the few Zombie movies I've watched twice.
I get your criticism though, people doing dumb stuff. Basically all these people should be along the lines of Zombieland already, but they're rather stupid and do their stupid capitalism stuff to convey the satire I guess.
I don't think I've seen all four of Romero's Zombie movies.

The first three greatly benefit from a small cast, and essentially three flavours of siege scenario.

I do genuinely love Land of the Dead, and even Diary and Survival of the Dead. And I applaud it for being more than just a latter day retread.

But the Dumb Because They Need To Be Dumb is irritating.

They got the slightly smart zombies spot on. They’re not suddenly super intelligent and hyper competent, just not the same threat the survivors are used to.

But, because the Fiddler’s Green soldiers are woefully ineffective? It kind of wastes some really cool possibilities.

Of course, my imagination is without a budget, so I’m not playing with any restrictions. But imagine an otherwise well prepared and well drilled defence, being overrun due to unexpected flanking attacks.

Thought of course, having praised the Smart Zombies for being just smart enough to be interesting and not daft? Maybe it worked as well as it could.

Dawn of the Dead (The 00's remake version)

"When there's no more room in Hell the dead shall walk the earth."

I find the original a bit too slow paced for my liking, but this one has the opposite problem, everything seems to happen so fast. You barely get to know any of the (rather oversized) cast, and civilisation falls apart extremely quickly (They can't have been in the mall more than a few days).

Having said that it's still an entertaining movie if you like zombies.

I do consider the remake the lesser film, but in the same way a decent burger can’t compare to a good steak.

To its credit, it’s not some lazy reimagining relying solely on a well considered name.

Whilst fast zombies aren’t my bag? The film does work with it in a fairly impactful way.

Which I guess does describe the whole of the thing. It takes the same general setup, but explores it in a new way, and introduces some new horror (undead newborn is handled quite nicely), and manages to bring a disparate cast of survivors together in a realistic enough way.

Beetlejuice Beetlejuice

First saw this in the cinema, and it was alright. Decided to give it another whirl with the sad passing of Catherine O’Hara.

And it’s genuinely better than I remembered. Delores as a character still feels a bit tacked on, but not as starkly as my first impression.

What really works for me is that Lydia and Delia are the same people, but have developed and changed over the intervening 36 years. Which is disappointingly rare in latter day sequels.

Beetlegeuse himself, naturally, remains a rancid little pervert which entirely suits him. He’s not meant to change. He’s not meant to be redeemed.

I also appreciate more time spent exploring the afterlife and its rules.

So….not perfect, but thoroughly enjoyable.

I watched a bunch of movies over the past week that were new to me.

Anaconda (2025)

In the remake reinterpretation of the classic from the 90s Jack Black and Paul Rudd's characters decide to shoot a remake reinterpretation of the classic from the 90s. The gety a crew together and head for the Amazon. Complications inevitably ensue.

The movie is fairly by the numbers, but the humor worked for me throughout. Jack Black usually works for me, so there's that. Notably it's not a comedy take on the old movie but very much an original story in which said movie provides the main theme. I haven't seen the classic in a good bit so any Easter eggs or recreated scenes would pass me by. Of course there is a giant murderconda rampaging around the jungle. That one's hard to miss.

Hellboy - The Crooked Man (2024)

Better titled Blair Witch Appalachia - Now with 100% More Big Red Inside. Something something witch woods, yadda yadda soul collector, and random stuff happening. Mostly just random stuff happening.

So I don't know what to make of this one. I suppose if you're looking for straight supernatural horror that plays with suspense, the movie's got you covered. I can't say about how faithful it is to the source material, but it is most definitely different from earlier Hellboy movies, so going into it with expectations based on them is going to leave you disappointed. I wouldn't even call the movie bad as such. Definitely not my genre, but there were three things that just didn't work for me.

First the big one. Hellboy is a supporting character at best. Being a younger version in the 1950s, you'd expect less experience and a different attitude. That's fine. It's just that he barely does anything. His nominally inexperienced bookworm colleague is doing much of the heavy lifting, and the central character is some random hillbilly they meet along the way. That just felt off to me. That Hellboy is played without a hint of charisma doesn't help.

Second, and a realize it's a bit of a hazy point, they forgot to put any fun in the movie. Might be a case of wrong expectations, as mentioned above. But even with such a big focus on grim and dire goings-on, I would have thought that Hellboy would add a bit of interest. But he hardly participates.

Finally, jump scares. By and large they don't work on me, and I always find it bothersome when a movie keeps trying. Personal issue, I know. It's not a fault specific to this movie. But it adds another reason not to find the movie engaging when I had enough reason to begin with. For comparison, it's something that bothers me about the first Mill Jovovich Resident Evil, but the rest of the movie makes up for it by being good fun, so I actually like the movie as a whole. But with Hellboy severely lacking in the fun department...

Mortal Engines (2018)

Mobile cities with various types of locomotion roam a mildly post-apocalyptic Earth and prey on each other for fuel and other resources. A young woman really wants to stab Hugo Weaving's character because she has the meta-knowledge to know that nothing good ever comes of letting someone with Hugo Weaving's face live until the final act of a movie, but a less educated Londoner foils the assassination. Little did he know saving the Hugo-Weaving-looking-but-with-more-hair dude would get him in trouble. Vaguely post-apocalyptic stuff happens until it is revealed that dude who was said to be the bad guy, surprisingly, turns out to be the bad guy and stabbing him is back on the table.

Weird movie. It's good fun for the spectacle, but the setting is so preposterous that you'd better not stop to think about any of it. It's a Wingnut production, so it looks pretty, too. Worth a watch in my opinion, but nothing ground-breaking and definitely not for the critically-minded.

The Great War (2019)

It's not that great. Basically it's Saving Private Ryan on a budget, with added heavy messaging about them colored boys.

It's not terrible or anything. The craftsmanship is mostly there. It's a passable watch if you're in the mood for a World War I movie, and might even be interesting for leaving the typical muddy Western Front trenches for a less torn landscape past the established front lines. While it didn't feel particularly jarring, the worst part about it is probably the CGI battle effects. We all know they didn't have CGI bullets and explosions a hundred years ago, so it's just not historically accurate.

So fairly middling, but hardly offensive. Probably not a waste of time if you're in the mood.