George A. Romero's Good, Bad and Ugly!

[Gabriel Girard]

Lots of bad and uglies to choose from.

[cdouglas]

Good: Dawn of the Dead

Bad: Creepshow

Ugly: Diary/Survival of the Dead

[mkiker2089]

Romero doesn't exactly make "ugly" movies, he just doesn't always finish his movies either. Rarely do I think that he had a bad idea, he just doesn't seem to polish his work unless there's a studio forcing him to. Perhaps that's his style. I for one don't really care for Night of the Living Dead while loving every sequel. Many think I'm a philistine for that but it's just the way it is. With that I'd have a hard time narrowing this down but I'd have to go with

Good: Land of the Dead. Dawn is my favorite, but Land just seems to have a broader appeal. If I take the average guy and force them to watch a Romero movie they will either love or hate Dawn but most will like Land.

Bad: Martin, again it's not horrible but it's just bland and unfinished. He really needs to trim and re-edit that one.

Ugly: I'm going to blind vote on the Survival. I've seen enough to know it's not what I want to see.

[mavrach]

Good: Night of the Living Dead. Romero's one classic. It's imperfections are masked with a low-budget charm. Pioneered the zombie movie and at least tries to say something.

Bad: Day of the Dead - Only saw this once. I remember hating any scene with dialogue and loving any scene with zombies.

Ugly: Survival of the Deal - Instantly dated with techie lingo (who says "the net" in 2005??" and Myspace references, further dated by being in the never-strong Found Footage genre. And the main thrust of preserving everything with the camera is either pointless if the world's about to black out, or deflates the zombie apocalypse by suggesting that the world won't black out.

[mkiker2089]

You should revisit Day of the Dead. It's one of the rare movies that got better with age. One of Romero's styles is that he can't help but get a little political. With the perspective of time (and perhaps I've mellowed with age myself) I've found that political slant to actually be very engaging.

As for tech references, movies that have them at all will always age badly. Technology augments life so it needs to be somewhat transparent. I remember a Morgan Freeman movie going into great detail about jpg files. No one EVER talked like that. They'd just say it's a picture. Or the Sandra Bullock movies where they have super internet anywhere but it still has to connect with a screechy sound. Romero should have known better.

[mavrach]

I just realized I said Survival of the Dead when I was referrng to Diary of the Dead. I haven't even seen Survival yet

Anyways, Diary feels like a tech movie in a world where technology should be collapsing



For Day of the Dead, I didn't have a problem with the politics. I really agee with Romero's messages in each of his movies. Just the performances didn't quite sell it. Somebody here a while back said the villain looks like he really has to pee. And the dumb (but frankly probably realistic) military characters create an unpleasant atmosphere for me.

[Dan Mancini]

And the dumb (but frankly probably realistic) military characters create an unpleasant atmosphere for me.

See, I'd say probably not realistic military characters. In the event of a zombie apocalypse, I'd wager that the vast majority of GIs would be the last people to go completely bonkers. I hate any kind of disaster flick in which soldiers turn into a violent, psychotic hive mind. It's cheap and lazy. But, then again, "cheap and lazy" describes most of Romero's filmmaking.

[mkiker2089]

And the dumb (but frankly probably realistic) military characters create an unpleasant atmosphere for me.

See, I'd say probably not realistic military characters. In the event of a zombie apocalypse, I'd wager that the vast majority of GIs would be the last people to go completely bonkers. I hate any kind of disaster flick in which soldiers turn into a violent, psychotic hive mind. It's cheap and lazy. But, then again, "cheap and lazy" describes most of Romero's filmmaking.

We could argue this one all day. First, these aren't normal GI's, these aren't normal military situations either. These are people hand picked to body the scientists. People who are used to an ordered world and excel in not asking questions but reading the book instead. Sometimes the people who follow the rules so easily are the same that break when the rules no longer apply. I could easily see them doing that. After all, what is the military but a chain of command structure. when the structure goes what's left? On the counter point however I don't mind seeing soldiers portrayed at their best either.

I guess it comes down to the old saying that persons (individuals) are smart but people (as a group) are always stupid. The soldiers fell apart because the weakest in each of them were exposed and it enhanced the weaknesses of the others. The scientists didn't because they weren't a true team. They were individuals collaborating instead. the weaknesses were mostly covered by the other members.

Lazy can describe Romero however. I won't argue that. I'd like to think that he has a reason to leave his movies unpolished but I don't know what it is.

[Mitchell Hattaway]

Good: Dawn of the Dead (but only because its existence allowed for Zack Snyder's infinitely better remake)

Bad: N/A

Ugly: Everything Else

[Dan Mancini]

The soldiers fell apart because the weakest in each of them were exposed and it enhanced the weaknesses of the others. The scientists didn't because they weren't a true team. They were individuals collaborating instead. the weaknesses were mostly covered by the other members.

I'm not sure we saw the same movie. Dr. Logan deserved the Sonny Corleone treatment long before he got it. What a complete douche that guy is.

[mkiker2089]

Maybe we didn't see the same movie after all. He didn't kill anyone like the military people did. He was doing legitimate research to help end the problem. He used organ donors to help that. The military people's feelings got all hurt. It's the same supporting theme used in all Romero movies. When the dead walk the earth the last thing we need to worry about is having an organized event when loved ones pass. To me Logan wasn't the issue at all. He didn't play well with others but he couldn't be expected to. He was doing a job that no one else was remotely qualified to help him with. To him the structure that the military insisted on was useless. Counter that with the fact that most of that structure was just to keep the military sane in the first place and we get back to the original argument over who really would be the first people to fall apart in this sort of crisis.

Of course it's been said that Romero movies are like ink blot tests. Often we get out of them what we bring to them. I have a friend who insists the ending of Dawn of the Dead is a suicide pact. Where he got that god only knows.

[Dan Mancini]

Of course it's been said that Romero movies are like ink blot tests.

Only by people who don't want to admit he's a hack.

And Romero clearly intends Logan to be a scientist of the mad variety. The soldiers are crazy. The scientists are crazy. Only the civilians who stumble upon them are rational pragmatists.