Day of the Dead (2008)
Director: Steve Miner
Writer: Jeffrey Reddick
Synopsis: In Leadville, Colorado, Captain Rhodes and his army seals off the town to contain an influenza-type epidemic. The locals are not allowed to leave the town and the Pine Valley Medical Center is crowded with sick people. Corporal Sarah Bowman was born and raised in Leadville and goes to her home with Private Bud Crain to visit her mother. Sarah finds that her mother is ill and takes her to the local hospital. However, the sick people suddenly transform in flesh eating, fast moving zombies which attack the non-infected humans. Sarah, Bud and Private Salazar get a jeep and head to the town exit to escape from the dead. But Sarah hears the voice of her brother, Trevor, on the radio and is compelled to go to the radio station where Trevor is hidden with his girlfriend Nina. The group of survivors drives to the isolated Nike missile site seeking shelter, where they discover an underground army base.
For the love of zombies...WHY?!?!!?
1) ACTING: I was really surprised by the quality of acting in this movie. I wasn't expecting Sir Lawrence Oliver doing 'Hamlet,' but I really thought it would have been better than it was. I thought that some of the best work in this movie came from the lesser known actors. Maybe they thought they had to prove themselves next to the established actors in this movie. Nick Cannon comes off as a poor man's Will Smith, and Mena Suvari and Ving Rhames seem to have just stopped by for the paycheck. I thought the actor that played "Bud" was pretty good, though.
2) PRODUCTION: I only need to say this: C.G.I. I know that nowadays computer generated effects are easy to do and more more inexpensive than actual physical special effects, but I would think somewhere in the production line, someone would point out that everything can't (or shouldn't) be generated by a computer.
The filming of this movie was acceptable as was the soundtrack. I was greatly disappointed that a lot of simple special effects, such as blood splattering, was done by C.G.I. I'm assuming that the majority of the money spent on this opus was to pay the salaries of Suvari, Rhames and Cannon. I would've sent in ten bucks so the make up artist could've ran to the corner 7-11 and bought some Karo syruo and red food dye. And the scene on the cover? Doesn't even happen in this movie.
3) ZOMBIES: HUH?!? 1968--Zombies walking? It defies logic! 2004--Zombies running?? That's just not possible!! 2008--Zombies sticking to the walls like Spider-man??? Ummmm....okay...
The zombie make up is okay, but nothing incredible. It is a step up from the "pale faced raccoon eyes" that we're so accustomed to seeing in low / no budget zombie flicks.
4) THE CAUSE: Government created flu-like virus.
5) NUDITY: None.
FINAL: I'm kinda speechless. The fact that this cinematic gem is a "remake" of Romero's 1985 flick may have been it's biggest flaw. I really feel that if this movie was called something else, we, the zombie loving community that we are, would've ben more accepting of it. It would've gone down as just another cheesy, mediocre zombie flick. I guess there really isn't a thing called "bad publicity." How many debates and arguements have and will occur as this is compared to Romero's original?
And sadly, Steve Miner is an established known horror director. Here, it seems he showed up, again, just for the paycheck. Ving Rhames, in my opinion, was in this to make potential viewers think that this was a continuation of the much better 2004 remake of 'Dawn of the Dead,' even though his character died in that one.
Now, here's the clinker. If this was, as I mentioned, a cheesy, mediocre zombie flick with a different name, lesser known actors and an unknown / unproven director, I think I would've enjoyed it more. I could've been more forgiving. The fact that it was to be a remake, with an established director and proven actors, means that it should've been so much more. Sadly, I was glad when this 'Day' was over.
RATING: 1.5 out of 5
No comments:
Post a Comment