A George Romero triumph times two! George Romero has single-handedly shown us what works in zombie movies and what doesn't. He's done both. But this story, which changes in form and style in each offering is still a good one, and a real eye opener about how the government will most likely respond to a real biological emergency. Unfortunately that's badly. Very badly.
In the 1973 original which Romero himself directed, the characters are likeable, and one honestly feels for what they're forced to go through by no fault of their own. The town is simply swept away by a government mistake: releasing a biological weapon 'Trixie' into the atmosphere, effectively dooming all who come in contact except a very small amount of people who are not affected.
In Romero's version (where they make a boo-boo and keep calling the virus a 'bacteriological weapon') the army is more sympathetic and shown to be almost as helpless as the town that is infected. The terror is more understated, the violence occurring as the townspeople lose their minds (a powerful scene is a woman sweeping the grass after a gun battle). The ending kind of falls flat though.
In the 2010 version which more people are probably familiar with, we have terrific casting in Timothy Olyphant, great in anything he does, Rahda Mitchell, a very strong character actress, and Joe Anderson, who I had never heard of before this movie but has actually accomplished a lot in his career.
The story is adjusted, maybe for the director's view of the story or just to update it for today's audience: The violence is immediate and unrelenting, the army is only seen as a tool to wipe out any hint of their 'mistake' killing people indiscriminately whether sick or not.
The tension is high through the whole film and you are acutely aware of the helplessness as the survivors desperately try to find a place to go. The ending confirms a hopeless future and we are left to ponder just how far the infection will spread.
No comments:
Post a Comment