This was surprisingly good, but could have been so much more. The story felt small for some reason. I felt that the characters and situation were screaming for the plot to be on a much grander scale. They hint at it later in the movie, but too little too late.
Excellent reboot of the franchise. Never was a big fan of the originals, nor of Burton’s horrendous remake. I could see this one becoming a series and myself watching every single movie. To me, this movie answers the more interesting question. How did it happen? Can’t wait to see more.
Caught these two on AMC’s Fearfest marathon the past week or so. Even given the declining quality of his zombie movies over the years (with “Dawn” being the pinnacle of all zombie movies), being the Romero fan that I am, I couldn’t resist.
“Diary” is interesting only because of the modern social media aspect of it. The found footage technique is getting overused, but is well-deployed here. Romero may be old, but he’s still sharp in his social commentary. This may be no “Dawn of the Dead,” but it still has plenty to say about humanity. And the bad acting kind of works in this situation given these are just a bunch of kids running around with cameras at the beginning of a zombie outbreak. Zombie movies need a little camp anyway. 4/5
“Survival” on the other hand is a completely different story. A weak B-movie (and that’s being generous). Really bad acting and very little camp. I really didn’t see the point of this at all. Paycheck movie? 2/5
I think it’s safe to say that after 40+ years, George A. Romero has said all that needs to be said by a single person about zombies. George, please move on and do something else. You’re better than that.
Turned it off a little more than halfway through. I wanted to like it. I loved Ritchie’s “Snatch” and I think he has some talent. But really, this should have been called “Generic Period Action Whodunit,” which I might have liked. I’m not necessarily opposed to big dumb action movies, but I think the fact that he turned the brilliance that is “Sherlock Holmes” into a big dumb action movie is offensive to a good portion of my brain.
Meh. I don’t see what all the fuss was about. Trying too much to be like “The Hangover”. There were 2 or 3 really funny comedic set pieces, but the rest left me lukewarm. Maybe there was just too much hype. It was a pleasant enough diversion, but it’s no “The Hangover.”
I somehow managed to make it to 33 before I saw this. Probably because I was a junior in high school when it came out and decidedly too cool for it. Great and memorable movie. I almost teared up once or twice. Classic story and I was digging the old school animation style (although I’m pretty sure they were using computers in some capacity by 1994).
Entertaining enough. The action sequences were too gimmicky and it was funny enough at times, but I expected better from a director as gifted as Michel Gondry. Although I suppose he’s the wrong man for this material, in which case he should have turned it down. Not a bad diversion altogether.
Seriously good sci-fi action movie. And smart too. Not that the whole jacking into someone’s mind thing makes much sense (and hasn’t been done before), but it makes sense within this universe and although some might consider the ending tacked on, I think it really worked.
I was under the impression that I had seen all of the TNG-cast Star Trek movies. Seems I was wrong. I had somehow completely missed an entire movie, the final one with the TNG cast. It had some serious issues, like the Data 2 plot line, which didn’t fit at all and went nowhere (Yes, I know it was to give Data’s eventual death more impact, but it just didn’t work for me at all), but I actually did like it. Even though it’s not very highly regarded and it didn’t do the TNG cast finale much justice, just as a Star Trek movie on its own, it certainly isn’t the worst of the bunch and it was enjoyable to watch.
