Survival of the Dead should be called Snooze of the Dead

[MalpasoFan]

I'm not quite sure what to make of George Romero these days. His first four Dead films are fine to watch (Day being my favorite) and have a purpose. Diary annoyed me with the hand-held approach and excessive, pointless profanity. While hoping Survival would be an improvement, it's sadly the worst and most pointless installment.

There's nothing in this film that we haven't seen or heard before and been done better. It plays like a TV movie with profanity (an Irish Western, if you will). Worse yet, it plays like a Day of the Dead retread substituting the military vs. scientists motif with feuding Irish families. The ending was particularly desperate and embarrassing (Zombie Bolero girl eats horse? Please.....).

George has stated he has two more zombie films left in him. I think he should stop here to further avoid and expose how creatively bankrupt his zombie films have sadly become.

[Steve T Power]

Is it only now that people realize that Emperor Romero has no clothes?

[Dan Mancini]

Night of the Living Dead is the classic zombie flick, and a fun little no-budget romp. Dawn of the Dead is the best of the series. Day of the Dead is an enormously entertaining over-the-top gorefest. Everything else suffers from Romero believing the hype that he's a brilliant social commentator. Land of the Dead would be forgotten already if it had been directed by anyone other than Romero (Zack Snyder's Dawn of the Dead remake blows it away -- as do 28 Days Later and 28 Weeks Later). Diary of the Dead is unwatchable. And Naugle's review makes Survival of the Dead sound like Romero is unintentionally making fun of himself.

[Andrew Forbes]

Is it only now that people realize that Emperor Romero has no clothes?

He's definitely lost the grasp on the genre he once had. I know you're no Romero fan, Steve, but I think when separated from the more excessive praise surrounding his better films, Romero was an important creator of some very entertaining movies. He's the first to point out that Dawn of the Dead is anything but subtle. I dig the overall tone of Dawn, and it has some brilliant moments, so I can look beyond the shoddy makeup and workmanlike direction. The Crazies and Night of the Living Dead actually benefit from Romero's sloppy shooting style (he once said his approach was to get as much footage as time would allow and sort it out in editing). He's never been much of a writer, nor is he a strong director of actors, and his ability to construct coherent action is non-existent. Nevertheless, his ability to create an atmosphere of dread and paranoia was, up until the early 80s, tremendously effective.

And Creepshow rules.

[Andrew Forbes]

Oh, and a note regarding the review: Patrick, you refer to Land of the Dead as a "big budget flop." Considering the movie had a budget of only $15 million (which hasn't been considered a big budget for decades) and grossed over $20 million in the U.S. alone, not counting DVD rentals and sales, I don't think the description quite holds true. Or am I overlooking something?

[Steve T Power]

Is it only now that people realize that Emperor Romero has no clothes?

He's definitely lost the grasp on the genre he once had. I know you're no Romero fan, Steve, but I think when separated from the more excessive praise surrounding his better films, Romero was an important creator of some very entertaining movies. He's the first to point out that Dawn of the Dead is anything but subtle. I dig the overall tone of Dawn, and it has some brilliant moments, so I can look beyond the shoddy makeup and workmanlike direction. The Crazies and Night of the Living Dead actually benefit from Romero's sloppy shooting style (he once said his approach was to get as much footage as time would allow and sort it out in editing). He's never been much of a writer, nor is he a strong director of actors, and his ability to construct coherent action is non-existent. Nevertheless, his ability to create an atmosphere of dread and paranoia was, up until the early 80s, tremendously effective.

And Creepshow rules.

Romero and Argento can suck it. Overrated crazy people, both of em.

[Andrew Forbes]

Romero and Argento can suck it. Overrated crazy people, both of em.

I hope you're not judging Argento solely on Suspiria. I don't hate it like you and Mercer do, but it's crazy overrated. The Bird with the Crystal Plumage, Deep Red and Tenebre are so very much better.

[Steve T Power]

Romero and Argento can suck it. Overrated crazy people, both of em.

I hope you're not judging Argento solely on Suspiria. I don't hate it like you and Mercer do, but it's crazy overrated. The Bird with the Crystal Plumage, Deep Red and Tenebre are so very much better.

Nah, i was just being facetious.

Someday I will take The Bird with the Crystal Plumage for a spin.

[Dan Mancini]

And Creepshow rules.

QFMFT.

[mkiker2089]

Romero is difficult to pin down. I didn't care for Martin, and to me most of the rest of his movies are mediocre. However Dawn, Day, and Land of the Dead are great movies. So why does he settle for making less?

Regarding Land being a flop, at the time it was said to have grossed more per budget dollar than the Dawn remake. It wasn't a flop at all and pretty much restarted his career.

Calling it a big budget flop is further wrong. It looked big but was relatively cheap to make. That shows that Romero has some talent at least.