More and more dead.
I did not doubt that the master of the zombie horror genre would make a very worthy and creepy movie that would be interesting to watch to this day, more than 30 years later.
But let's start with the shortcomings, without which, unfortunately, it could not have done. First plot plot. The action is too dynamic, it is not clear who the heroes are, either the military, or the police, or just members of the voluntary rebel army. It is also not clear what is happening at all, who is being shot at, where does the zombies come from, and now, after only a moment, our heroes are already sitting in a helicopter and it is not clear where and where they are flying from. It seems to me that it was possible to start right from this scene.
Of course, one can not say about the zombies themselves, it was possible to make them at least more diverse, and not all on one blue-white face. The blood is also not very realistic. It is not clear how the dead manage to bite through their clothes, biting off pieces of meat directly from the body.
Now about the "pleasant".
Firstly, this movie has a very creepy atmosphere, it is no worse than in the “Night of the Living Dead” of 1968, and thanks to a lot more of those very dead, even something better.
Secondly, there is a sea of blood, murder, dismemberment, and so on, which is just what shocked the first film, in which it has been brought to a much larger size.
In the third, I will note a good and vivid game of actors who play no less vivid and colorful characters, with whom you manage to become related while watching, and for which you sincerely worry.
In the fourth, the very idea of the film, that people are sometimes worse than zombies, is shown much deeper here. If in the film in '68 it was shown on the example of one person, then here we see a whole social stratum, formed as a consequence after the global epidemic. These people do not recognize anything except brute force and their desire for profit, and they do not stop in front of the living dead, nor in moral values, killing both the living and the dead. This idea will be similarly reflected in the 1990 Nights remake.
It is impossible not to note the moment at the very end of the film, when a crowd of zombies, similar to ordinary customers, wandering aimlessly around a deserted supermarket, were not symbolically right?
There are some not clear points, for example, why some gang members (well, at least one) have a swastika on their clothes, this is evident, for example, at the moment of tearing one of the gangsters to pieces. Perhaps this was some kind of hidden meaning, but see him underestimated, that in other matters does not imply the picture.
Summing up, I can say that this is one of the most exciting zombie films ever made. Despite the shortcomings, it looks great as an example for modern zombie movies, and surpasses many of them. I think every fan of the zombie genre is simply obliged to see this picture.
Still, taking into account the shortcomings and evaluating the film by modern standards, I put:
8 out of 10
But let's start with the shortcomings, without which, unfortunately, it could not have done. First plot plot. The action is too dynamic, it is not clear who the heroes are, either the military, or the police, or just members of the voluntary rebel army. It is also not clear what is happening at all, who is being shot at, where does the zombies come from, and now, after only a moment, our heroes are already sitting in a helicopter and it is not clear where and where they are flying from. It seems to me that it was possible to start right from this scene.
Of course, one can not say about the zombies themselves, it was possible to make them at least more diverse, and not all on one blue-white face. The blood is also not very realistic. It is not clear how the dead manage to bite through their clothes, biting off pieces of meat directly from the body.
Now about the "pleasant".
Firstly, this movie has a very creepy atmosphere, it is no worse than in the “Night of the Living Dead” of 1968, and thanks to a lot more of those very dead, even something better.
Secondly, there is a sea of blood, murder, dismemberment, and so on, which is just what shocked the first film, in which it has been brought to a much larger size.
In the third, I will note a good and vivid game of actors who play no less vivid and colorful characters, with whom you manage to become related while watching, and for which you sincerely worry.
In the fourth, the very idea of the film, that people are sometimes worse than zombies, is shown much deeper here. If in the film in '68 it was shown on the example of one person, then here we see a whole social stratum, formed as a consequence after the global epidemic. These people do not recognize anything except brute force and their desire for profit, and they do not stop in front of the living dead, nor in moral values, killing both the living and the dead. This idea will be similarly reflected in the 1990 Nights remake.
It is impossible not to note the moment at the very end of the film, when a crowd of zombies, similar to ordinary customers, wandering aimlessly around a deserted supermarket, were not symbolically right?
There are some not clear points, for example, why some gang members (well, at least one) have a swastika on their clothes, this is evident, for example, at the moment of tearing one of the gangsters to pieces. Perhaps this was some kind of hidden meaning, but see him underestimated, that in other matters does not imply the picture.
Summing up, I can say that this is one of the most exciting zombie films ever made. Despite the shortcomings, it looks great as an example for modern zombie movies, and surpasses many of them. I think every fan of the zombie genre is simply obliged to see this picture.
Still, taking into account the shortcomings and evaluating the film by modern standards, I put:
8 out of 10
Комментарии
Отправить комментарий