Document of the Dead

Given the avowed intentions of George Romero as an independent filmmaker, we can see his zombie epics as no mere tilting at windmills. Rather, Romero can be seen as a reflexive artist: his metaphorical depiction in these films of the constraints on attaining a fulfilling life run parallel to the difficulties he faced in the production process. This documentary charts the trajectory of Romero's career through a period in which access to the means of film production, he acknowledges, has become less possible for like minded independents trying to get a start in the film industry. These struggles are symptomatic of how globalisation has helped foster the libertarian survivalist mentality of "the player", dependent upon multi-skilling, movement and market "freedom" from government regulation and civility/citizenship (or loyalty to and/or lifetime employment by one studio/company). "Day of the Dead" depicts the destructive restlessness of soldiers and 1 mad scientist trapped in a bunker. With no government to sanction their role, they become increasingly mercenary/asocial. Rebellion against regulation is celebrated in the caricatures of BIG GOVERNMENT as Nazis or "the Evil Empire" in 2 of the biggest flagships for these changes; the Indiana Jones and "Star Wars" films produced by major studios. Their return of the "hero" cultivates reliance upon adaptive individual resources ("Han SOLO" indeed!) and changes in consciousness rather than social structures...the teachings of Anthony Robbins echo Yoda. Since the period in which this documentary was made, changes in media cross- ownership have led to films of popular computer and video games. It seems Romero has finally had to follow the trends by making "Resident Evil", if only to finance the concluding installment of his zombie series.

Shot when "making-of's" weren't standard practice yet, this is a fortunate movie in that it not only provides a lot of insight into George Romero's working methods, but also catches him making one of his (and the horror genre's) best films, the original "Dawn of the Dead." There's also a moderate amount of information about "Night of the Living Dead" and "Martin," used to further detail identifiable aspects of his cinematic style. It would have been interesting if the film had gone on to describe the marketing, box-office and general commercial rewards of "Dawn," rather than stopping with post-production and the decision to release without an MPAA rating.

I saw the 2nd of the documentary's three versions, which adds material shot ten years later when he was shooting his part of the two-part horror feature "Two Evil Eyes." That content is fine but doesn't really deepen the profile, beyond showing that Romero hadn't really profited from the horror explosion of the VCr era--perhaps because he preferred to work independently, perhaps because the increasingly franchise-driven nature of mainstream horror didn't appeal to him. (Even though, of course, he had his own "Dead" franchise--but that pretty much reinvented itself with each new entry.) In any case, he seems a bit embattled and weary of the constant struggle for funding in this shorter second section.

DOCUMENT OF THE DEAD has a promising idea behind it: the making of horror classic DAWN OF THE DEAD. Yet it only features a bit of footage centering around DAWN OF THE DEAD, which is not that interesting. Other footage revolves around MARTIN, NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD, and TWO EVIL EYES. Tom Savini is interviewed, but seems bitter in most of the footage. Romero seems like a nice, down-to-earth guy and gives valuable information about low-budget filmmaking, distribution, and ratings problems. Only three of the four DAWN leads are interviewed and not in-depth at all, which was of interest to me. Some nice bits about DOCUMENT is a Calgon soap commercial by Romero's 60s company featuring none other than NIGHT stars Russell Streiner and Karl Hardman!; also are some alternate takes of some scenes in DAWN (the scene of zombies breaking through the apartment complex barricade is longer and scarier; dialogue in the scene of subduing a black female zombie) that make me wonder if they appear in ANY cut of the finished product? I'd love to know, they really are more effective. Susan Tyrell, a personal favorite, narrates the whole thing. I love her voice, so it's nice to hear her. Select scenes from NOTLD and MARTIN are featured, but what are they doing here? It's as if director Roy Frumkes ran out of DAWN material and improvised in the editing room! Overall, DOCUMENT is recommended only to hardcore Romero and Savini fans; then again, I'm a hardcore fan myself and I STILL didn't like this. Oh well, give it a try, but don't expect a masterpiece.

Fans of the Dead Trilogy have to at least seen this flick twice let alone own a copy in their video library. It is a wonderful look in the early to mid career of George Romero and his work in the art of Horror Movie Making. We take a deep look into not only Pittsburgh, where Romero lived and worked, but Romero himself and the journey into Night of the Living Dead, and the many films to follow. I enjoyed this film for the simple reason that it was shot on film and for a very low budget. It added to the realness of the story and the struggle of an Independent Film Maker and his journey into creating a film that will last for generations.

Having just finished watching this for the third(and most likely last) time, I can sadly clearly see why I gave up on it around the half-way point the first time; as the credits rolled, I realized that I did not feel entertained or even informed... I merely felt relieved. Add to that the version I watched was only just over an hour in length, not the 90 minutes that this page lists it as, and you can tell that I, personally, was quite underwhelmed by this feature. The presentation felt flat; it really wasn't very engaging or fascinating, in spite of the movie it revolves around being both of those and more. The editing wasn't very tight, nor does it try anything interesting, but rather goes through the motions. However, I think what really slayed this was the idolization of Romero; he is compared to Hitchcock, his style is mercilessly praised and his films, shots and cuts are analyzed to mean far more and be far more planned and thought out than they actually are. Imagine the dichotomy when Romero himself, in his interviews, comes off as a down-to-Earth, nice, pleasant guy who just happens to rock at making horror movies and manages to inject satire and social commentary without it coming across as forced. These clips, as well as Tom Savini's presence(in which he confirms the viewer's first impression of Romero) are what make this watchable. Pacing is non-existent. The voice-over narration sounds as if the speaker is bored out of her mind, but I don't know what they had access to as far as that goes, so I'll cut them some slack on that. In any case, the pseudo-intellectual analysis and shameless praise is far more distracting. I respect Romero... I think he has created one heck of a horror trilogy. He's clearly talented and smart, but the way he's spoken of in this simply comes off as some excited, easily impressionable kids expressing their fandom without having the sense to openly admit that that's what it is. I recommend this to fans of Romero and Dawn of the Dead... just be aware of and prepared for the unintended hyperbole and the lackluster production. 5/10