Diary of the Dead – The Review
(No spoilers)
OK– this review is being written about one hour after watching George A. Romero’s “Diary of the Dead” — so it’s still fresh in my brain.
(No spoilers)
OK– this review is being written about one hour after watching George A. Romero’s “Diary of the Dead” — so it’s still fresh in my brain.
February 20, 2008 at 2:58 pm
Another mystery movie, I didn’t see it yet but I’m looking forward to see it to know whether all was posted is right…Anyway I like your review though…
February 21, 2008 at 10:11 am
Thanks! Write back when you’ve had a chance to see it, and let me know what you thought.
February 22, 2008 at 10:41 am
I must agree. Overall, very disappointing. My second least-favorite Romero dead movie. I only place Night of the Living Dead below it because it’s so boring. I know, it’s a horror movie from 1969. I’m sure it was quite shocking back then, so it’s unfair to compare it to modern movies. But it pales so far in comparison to even Romero’s next Dead movie, Dawn of the Dead, the best of the bunch.
And I also must agree about the hand-held part. (I know, for some people, the whole hand-held thing makes them queasy. Well, then don’t go see them.) Anyway, Diary of the Dead seemed to be made by an old-style director trying to approximate what a hand-held camera would appear like. And not quite getting it. Whatever complaints you might have about Cloverfield, they nailed that part. Grainy film, bad lighting, incredibly shaky. Or even little things… when a character drops the camera, its autofocus whirs away as it trys and pick out something to focus on. A great, and very real, small touch. It really seemed that it was a home movie, as implausible as the subject matter might seem.