George A. Romero's Diary of the Dead

First off, I didn't care about the characters. At all. I couldn't relate to them, I didn't want to hear them talk, I wanted them all to die. And from there, we get what George Romero must have thought would be cute: a homevideo style chronicle of the start of a zombie outbreak. It was sort of interesting to watch at points, seeing the background reaction of the media and everybody posting to youtube and all that. But it ended at sor t of and never grew. It didn't provide anything new, and I mean if George Romero is going to plaster his name right there in the title he better back himself up with something that will make me think some more about the genre. Even a little. I didn't. It's all stuff that I've either seen on tiny low budget movies, read in novels or short stories, or hell even just read on a typo filled message board. It was so flat and uninspired.

I did have some hopes for this film, but they were all dashed. It just annoyed me more than anything else.

When it comes to the genre/films of Zombies and the Undead, especially the works of it's biggest creator George A. Romero, I am one of it's biggest fans. It takes alot for me to dislike the barrage of films we've received since it's official conception over 40 years ago with Night Of The Living Dead. But after four films by Romero himself, one being the somewhat disappointing & commercial Land Of The Dead, does a now 66 year old George still have what it takes to scare us with these creatures? With his latest chapter Diary Of The Dead, he still proves he can be relevant while bringing us some old time scares at the same time.

Diary basically is a reboot of his franchise bringing it back to the first outbreak of the dead rising from their graves. But this time their coming back in the digital age, where now any Joe Schmo could video record the events and post them on a variety of websites for the whole world to see rather than just the local news. The film concentrates on a group of Pittsburgh film students shooting a Mummy monster movie when the initial outbreak begins, and in their Winnebago they try to travel back to their homes and safety. All along the way, they turn their movie into a documentary trying to capture, obsessively mind you, the events of Horror and Death they encounter every time, using the logic of "If the camera doesn't see it, it really didn't happen".

Unlike other films in Romero's Dead library, this one is in an "edited after the fact" documentary style, but unlike last year's Cloverfield, instead of a small handheld camera bought at any electronic store, the main camera used is the type you'd notice carried by your local news team, so the picture it produces wouldn't be as shaky and uncontrolled. And much like The Blair Witch Project, what you see has already been edited, so it's more like a movie made from raw footage instead of just plopping in the original tape in a player and pressing play. For the film it works quite well, but unfortunately it leaves open other problems of logic along the way.

On the negative side, the unknown actors used here act about as stiff as the Zombies they're recording. Even though this is supposed to be really happening, at times they just don't seem believable in their emotions & reactions. Another is the fact that at times the girlfriend of the group narrates the documentary but mostly comes across like she's the little sister of Sarah Connor, flat and unaffected. Also, if a Zombie was coming after you I personally would be too afraid to just keep rolling and hope someone else comes to save me instead of putting the damn thing down and running like Hell. But again, these kids are from the "You Tube" generation, where hobby becomes life itself, and that should be taken into consideration when watching this film.

On the plus side however, there are deaths here that I can assure you that you haven't seen before, the acting does either get better (or you just get used to it), the overall vibe of the film takes on a '85 Day Of The Dead-like quality, and unlike Land Of The Dead never seems too commercialized or sterile. I'm giving this movie a low 8.0, and that's in part to the disc's great extras including commentary, behind-the-scenes, and some great home movies shot by fans for some contest ran before the movie premiered. I would say if you own at least four Zombie movies in your collection, Diary should be in there as well. It is a very good representative of the Digital Age & Social Commentary we now live in and how today's youth would handle it. It's not a Romero Masterpiece like others have claimed, but after four films George could have done alot worse.
(RedSabbath Rating:8.0/10)

George Romero's name goes a long way with undead/zombie fans.

This movie is not part of the other films, but it is a step out of time, but it still has biting social commentary (pardon the pun.) The acting is not great, but it's a fun story, if your style of fun is watching zombies killing everybody they can.

George Romero's four previous zombie films have all followed a natural progression. The Zombie outbreak started in Night of the Living Dead and by the time we reached Land of the Dead the zombies had become the dominant species. However, Romero takes the series back to its roots with Diary of the Dead in more ways than one. Consider this a reboot or a re-take on the start of the zombie outbreak. We are back in Pennsylvania just as the first few reports of the dead returning to life are being broadcast on local news stations. A group of University of Pittsburgh students, working on their own horror film for a class project, pile into a motor home to try and get home. Jason (Joshua Close), the director of their film, decides to start recording the entire event on his camera.

The group has their first encounter with a zombie along the highway as a burned up state trooper tries to stop their RV. The full realization of what is happening finally hits them as they take an injured friend to a hospital only to find it empty...except for a few undead doctors and nurses. Even as the carnage unfolds, Jason continues to film, uploading his footage onto the Internet even as his girlfriend Debra chastises him for his insensitivity. Immediately you're thinking Night of the Living Dead meets Cloverfield because of the handheld camera. The camera work in Diary is certainly less jerky than in Cloverfield and much of the time you'll barely notice it.

Diary is the closest zombie film yet in terms of scope to Night of the Living Dead. It's a small cast working within the confines of a handful of sets and locations. There are fewer zombies than in any previous Romero zombie film since "Night". This is all by design. Romero wanted to return to a smaller, independent feature. His intent was to make the film for under a million dollars. This was a very personal film for George, one that he could do entirely his way without having to please studio bosses. Romero talks quite candidly about this during the making of documentary. While he certainly enjoyed working with the bigger budget he had with Land of the Dead, you get the feeling that he's more comfortable with a smaller film.

The cast is largely unknown but not inexperienced. Most of the actors have at least a couple of dozen credits in both film and TV. No one stands out but no one hams it up either. What the film lacks, however, is any real tension. The difference with Diary and the rest of the series is that our survivors are mobile, and are not trapped within a farmhouse, shopping mall, underground bunker, or a walled city. The one time they are pinned down within an old barn they are able to make a quick getaway.

Diary is also less bloody than Romero's previous films, in part because of the camera work. Since the whole thing is supposed to take place through the lens of Jason's camera, some of the zombie feeding activity must be imagined. There are some notable special effects, such as the zombie who gets a jar of acid busted over his head and his skull slowly is dissolved down to the brain. Still, you have to admire Romero. He could have made another big-budget zombie film but he told the story that he wanted to tell.

Extras

Pulling up the grade on the DVD is a nice set of extras. Romero, Director of Photography Adam Swica, and Editor Michael Doherty provide a lively audio commentary. The best extra is the feature lengths (80+ minutes) making of documentary covering the cast, crew, special effects, make-up, and more.

Other extras include featurettes on the first week of filming, character confessionals, and the inspiration for the film. Romero recruited some well-known horror personalities to do some of the voices you hear over the radio and TV in the film and these are covered in a featurette called "Familiar Voices".

Finally there are five short zombie films, winners of a Myspace contest that are quite entertaining and well-made.

Ah, hell. I'd might as well put my two cents in about the new Romero zombie film. I see it has succeeded in disappointing many fans for the most part. That's too bad. But for those who thought this movie was a big letdown, I do see why you feel that way. All around I actually did like the movie.
There is one misconception about this movie I have to address. Many folks think this film ripped off Cloverfield. Not true. I don't know about anyone else out there, but I remember reading about this movie a few years ago. This film hit the market after Cloverfield, but it must have been shot right around the same time. I do know that Romero had the idea for this one a few years ago. SO THERE!!
Romero's original Living Dead Trilogy is required viewing for any hardcore horror fan. For most of us horror geeks, these films served as the gateway to the world of gruesome, extreme and other-side-of-the-fence types of horror movies and a lot of us have never looked back since. They're essential movies! They're as essential as Number of the Beast is to the Iron Maiden fan or Hannah Montana to preteen girls and pedophiles, or "Margaritaville" to every damn ocean cruise you go on.
So many years of repeated viewings of the Trilogy(if you're like me you could do a one man Broadway performance of all three films), and the impact it's had on our movie tastes, how is Romero supposed to top that? Or even get close to that? Eight billion zombie films make it into the theater and video shelves every month anymore it seems. Romero's films don't seem terribly unique anymore. I enjoyed Land of the Dead(a lot of people seemed to), but it just didn't feel the same. It was a good movie, but I just couldn't find myself lumping it in with the Trilogy. Too much time has passed and too many bad changes to the film industry have occurred.
I feel pretty much the same for Diary. I like the fact that Romero went back to his low budget, independent style of film making. Like in Land, he approaches the subject matter with a bit more intelligence than most zombie films. After all, it is HIS genre. Romero and John Russo more or less created the world and the rules that most zombie films play by.
I didn't mind the story of Diary, nor did I mind not seeing hordes and hordes of zombies onscreen. I actually enjoyed the "less is more" type of approach. But as a personal preference, I don't like films that are presented as footage through the camera lens of an individual shooting the events. I don't think it's a dumb idea, I unfortunately get ill when I watch it. I always get a headache and/or nauseous feeling when watching it. Most people don't experience this at all, and it may be piddly, but the fact is that it always does it to me, so I don't enjoy this type of format. I am glad that I watched it however. I probably just won't want it many times unless I take the necessary precautions beforehand.