Romero’s ‘Diary of the Dead’ (2007): A Zombie Flop or Cult Classic?

by

Should I have left this until October? Maybe I should have left this until October.

Instead, let me tell you that I’ve chosen to handle the duties of the “zombie master,” who seemed to dislike the connection between his initial movie and the term “zombie.” But why was that so?

Romero bears a resemblance to Wes Craven, albeit from a distance. Both aren’t just recognized for their horror movies; they ventured into the genre because it was affordable and popular at the time. However, neither intended to limit themselves as exclusive horror directors; ironically, this is exactly what they became renowned for later on.

I’m drawn to Romero’s filmography even without delving too deeply. He’s recognized for five or six movies (the borderline being Martin), but he has a total of sixteen feature films under his belt. I’m curious about the other ten. They appear to all be less acclaimed, much like Wes Craven’s work, where there are a few standout masterpieces amidst a body of lesser quality productions. It promises to be an exciting exploration!

Given my knowledge of “Dawn of the Dead“, I can confidently assert that the peaks will be even more intense. I’m curious if the valleys might dip as deeply as in “The Hills Have Eyes Part II”.

With that in mind, shall we proceed? But remember, zombies move slowly, so there’s no rush.

Let’s move on now, but keep in mind that zombies don’t exactly sprint ahead.

Or for a more conversational tone:

Alrighty then, let’s hit the road! Just remember, zombies aren’t known for their speed, though.

Romero’s peaks were significantly greater than Craven’s, yet his troughs weren’t far behind. I admired him more during his initial phase when he aspired to be more than just a horror filmmaker, but eventually, he became comfortable with that role, even while facing ongoing difficulties in launching new projects. Perhaps if he had permanently relocated to Hollywood instead of residing in the outskirts of Pittsburgh.

A more unfortunate turn in his career was that he became synonymous with zombie movies. Being linked to classics like “Night of the Living Dead,” “Dawn of the Dead,” and “Day of the Dead” may have been advantageous initially, but as his skills in developing captivating characters or constructing believable worlds waned, it led him into a rather lifeless state. He thrived when he could take his cameras and a group of actors on an adventure to create films through unconventional methods and extensive editing. However, this style didn’t align well with the more structured productions he faced as his budgets grew larger. Consequently, his films began to rely heavily on his writing, which was not one of his strong suits.

Similar to Wes Craven, it’s too bad he didn’t have a dependable collaborator, but at least he kicked off his career quite solidly. His fame was largely established through his initial zombie films, and for the following couple of decades, he attempted to create other projects with varying success, finding consistent work mainly by revisiting the theme of zombies, particularly towards the end of his career.

In my opinion, Romero demonstrated significant talent as a director, although his skills as a writer were less impressive. However, there was potential in him that could have been developed further. Regrettably, this potential seemed to be largely wasted during the later stages of his career. It’s unfortunate, but he did have some remarkable peaks in his work.

In this case, his filmography has undoubtedly been ranked and there seems to be no reason for me to update it with additional entries moving forward. However, if by some chance he miraculously returns from the dead, that could potentially alter things, which is something to keep in mind.

Also, check out the rest of the definitive rankings to bask in their definitiveness.

Lastly, a brief remark: I omitted “Two Evil Eyes” from the list as it was merely half of a movie. On the other hand, I included “The Amusement Park” since it was comprehensive and lengthy enough to stand alone.

#16 in my ranking of George A. Romero’s filmography.

This movie is nothing but mediocre garbage, especially when it comes to the subgenre of found footage. Even Romero, once a captivating filmmaker, seems to have lost his touch here, as he fails to develop compelling characters even in less obvious themes. To make matters worse, the use of found footage undermines suspense and emotional depth. Furthermore, zombies are poorly designed monsters that only appear frightening due to characters acting irrationally. In essence, this film is a laborious attempt by an aging artist to grasp a world evolving beyond his comprehension.

As a fervent enthusiast, let me share my perspective on the narrative presented by Debra, a diligent film student at Pitt, who miraculously endured the onset of the zombie apocalypse. She and her partner, Jason, were engaged in a senior project to create a horror movie short. Our undead menace was a mummy, skillfully portrayed by Ridley, while our leading lady was Tracy. Our esteemed professor is Maxwell, and our makeup artist is Tony. There are a few more characters, but I’ll save the details for later. The zombie pandemic spread while we were filming in the forest under the cover of night, and we returned to Pitt to find an eerily vacant campus. Now, here’s where things start getting questionable…The University of Pittsburgh is situated right in the heart of a bustling city. If the outbreak had reached catastrophic proportions, wouldn’t the city have been overrun, making it impossible for us to reach the dormitories? This movie just doesn’t make sense.

Essentially, the movie transitions into a road trip storyline as they journey in an RV across Pennsylvania’s landscape, primarily headed towards Debra’s parents’ home, attempting to navigate their uncertain future. However, the characters lack depth, and we fail to delve into their thoughts. Moreover, the zombie apocalypse theme has been overused, making it monotonous to watch them grapple with understanding the rules. It’s similar to spending twenty minutes discussing vampire rules when all you have are classic Draculas. To make matters worse, these lengthy scenes are filled with unnecessary padding, featuring characters moving from one place to another and plenty of vacant spaces. This combination results in a rather dull opening for the movie.

Interestingly, in this film, Romero’s habit of subtly incorporating minor themes into his work is evident, yet it’s primarily conveyed through Debra’s voiceover. Strangely, these themes are rarely discussed by the characters, and they seem disconnected from one another. The most prevalent theme is the shift from old media to new media, but it’s presented awkwardly throughout. There are also themes about humanity’s fall and race relations, but they’re thin and not well-supported by the storyline, which is essentially a poorly executed monster movie.

The storyline spans across a hospital, Debra’s parents’ residence, and concludes at Riley’s grand mansion. The plot hinges on characters displaying a lack of understanding about zombies, leading to numerous misunderstandings, trivial disagreements, and flat dialogue delivery by actors who appear to lack clear direction from their director.

In my opinion, there are some genuinely amusing scenes interspersed throughout it. One of them seems deliberate, while the other might not be. The first instance takes place when they encounter a secluded Amish farm where Samuel (R.D. Reid) resides. He plays a crucial role by hurling dynamite at three approaching zombies and, in a well-timed comedic touch, displays his name on a sign just as a splatter of blood crosses the camera’s view. This moment had me chuckling out loud. The second instance involves a small zombie being flung against a wall by an arrow, which doesn’t seem intentionally humorous, but I still found myself laughing.

The production lacks originality and creativity. It’s tedious and repetitive, rehashing information that has already been widely discussed. Its aesthetic is unappealing and its visual style is poorly executed. It heavily relies on clichés typical of the found footage genre, with characters often prioritizing filming over their own safety, even in life-threatening situations where a zombie is close by. This lacks intelligence and good judgment.

If there hadn’t been a few laughs, I might have thought it had no value whatsoever. However, I did laugh at least two times. It could have just been twice.

Read More

2025-02-20 00:31