Diário dos Mortos

While filming a horror movie of mummy in a forest, the students of the University of Pittsburgh Jason Creed (Joshua Close), Ridley Wilmot (Phillip Riccio), Francine Shane (Megan Park), Tony Ravelo (Shawn Roberts), Elliot Stone (Joe Dinicol), Mary Dexter (Tatiana Maslany), Elliot "Gordo" Thorson (Chris Violetti) and Tracy Thurman (Amy Lalonde) and their professor Andrew Maxwell (Scott Wentworth) hear on the TV news that the dead are awaking and walking. Ridley and Francine decide to leave the group, while Jason heads to the dormitory of his girlfriend Debra Monahan (Michelle Morgan). She does not succeed in contacting her family and they travel in Mary's van to the house of Debra's parents in Scranton, Pennsylvania. While driving her van, Mary sees a car accident and runs over a highway patrolman and three other zombies trying to escape from them. Later the religious Mary is depressed, questioning whether the victims where really dead, and tries to commit suicide, shooting herself with a pistol. Her friends bring her to a hospital where they realize that the dead are indeed awaking and walking and they need to fight to survive while traveling to house of Debra's parents.

I do not say that "Diary of the Dead" is disappointing, but indeed there is nothing new in this movie "à la The Blair Witch Project (or Cloverfield)". The story is a kind of "documentary" of George A. Romero's trilogy, with the cinema student Jason Creed shooting the movie with his handy camera. Unfortunately there is a total lack of credibility in this unreasonable character that keeps shooting his movie even in the most weird or dangerous situation for himself or for his group of friends. My vote is six.

Title (Brazil): Not Available

I never thought i would say this about a Romero zombie film but i was really disappointed by this one and in my opinion it's the worst one of the series. The zombie attacks are few and far between and when they do happen they're over so quickly that there's no time for any anticipation or fear to build up. There's hardly any gore. Anybody wanting lots of scenes of people being eaten by zombies had better stay away from this one. The thing that irritated me most and it's probably why i wouldn't bother watching the film again is the fact that when a character is being attacked hardly any of the group goes to help. They all either stand there or are too obsessed with filming it on their camcorders. OK i know it's only a film but if a friend of mine was being attacked by one of the living dead i would drop the camera and go and HELP. The female lead Deb was a stroppy cow who needed a good slap and Jason was a waste of space. I kept hoping somebody would smash the camera over his head and put him out of his misery. None of the characters were likable and the only interesting ones, for example Samuel, aren't in the movie long enough. I just didn't care what happened to any of them and i wasn't interested in what any of them had to say. That plus the fact that there is hardly any action meant that i found the film dull. It's well made but i wouldn't recommend it.

I had no idea that this existed and I seem to be in the minority here as I didn't think it was too bad for what it is, though it's a bit polished for a George Romero film. Crude was usually his style. I don't recall liking the previous one, Land of the Dead, which seemed ridiculous, but it's been a while. I also have no idea if I've seen his final film, Survival of the Dead, as we've seen an awful lot of walking dead movies since he got this ball rolling in 1968. This has a dumb premise of some students, with cameras they won't let go of, filming a mummy movie when they hear about people dying and eating each other and seem so shocked and surprised. Don't these people ever go to the movies?! The acting's not bad here and there is some creativity, though yet another person running around filming everything is, as usual, beyond belief. Nothing special, but it held my attention.

I really dislike the whole "found footage" genre, and I wish it would finally die. Luckily, this movie doesn't quite fit 100% into that genre, but it's close enough that I got fairly annoyed. Diary of the Dead is basically about some film school kids documenting the beginning of the zombie apocalypse, and thus it's more of a fake documentary than anything else. Unlike some movies shot in this style, one of the main themes involves criticism of the obsessive need to document everything rather than actually participating. There are also some shots at censorship, social media, and the propaganda potential for the mainstream media.

Unfortunately, Diary of the Dead feels like a watered-down reboot of his classic franchise, modernized and targeted at teenagers, with the requisite group of stereotypical dumb ass characters found in every direct-to-video slasher movie. The social criticism is blatant and lacks subtlety, and Romero resorts to outright lecturing the audience. I generally agree with Romero, but I prefer his older movies. He's never been particularly subtle, but this is just too overt and generic for my taste. He comes off as having been inspired by soulless ripoffs of his own work.

It's one of Romero's worst movies, but that still makes it better than much of the crap that litters the horror landscape. Hopefully, if we get any more movies from Romero, they'll be as uncompromising and powerful as his earlier work, but it seems as though Romero has had some real problems getting funding. Watered-down, mainstream Romero is better than no Romero, but it's difficult to recommend. This may be a good introduction to his material for younger audiences, though.

I just saw a screening in Glasgow last night and was really impressed. After seeing Land of the Dead I feared GAR was destined to make only studio controlled zombie films that sold out his previous works, but this is something of a return to form. The budget is tiny and the actors unknown (as is the case with his best films), but the special effects are top-notch and there is plenty of gore that's made even more unsettling as seen through the lens of a camcorder.

The 'Point Of View' technique is bound to generate concern over similarities to other films using the same style (Cloverfield for instance) but Diary is a very different kind of film and certainly not a 'rip-off', but rather a smaller scale movie doing it's own thing.

There's humour (some real laugh-out-loud moments), social commentary (perhaps a little heavy handed, but relevant and intelligent), suspense, gore and everything else we've come to expect from a Romero film but bundled-up into a new and fresher style by the old guy. It was really interesting to see him trying something new.

As a fan of the genre and of Romero's works I was ultimately relieved and impressed by Diary after entering the theatre a sceptic. This isn't his best film and some fans will no doubt be let down, but after seeing it myself I was happy to see him back on track.

Thanks George.