Talk: Monsterfest

Talk

Start a Conversation

Talk is a public forum where you can ask questions and share your commentary with fellow Monsterfest fans.

Have We Seen Enough Zombie Movies?

This month George A. Romero released what must be his quadrillionth zombie movie, Diary of the Dead. And though the film proved to be extremely competent and unique in that it followed movies like The Blair Witch Project and Cloverfield in the cinema verite genre, I couldn't help but think to myself: how many zombie movies can we possibly watch before it gets old?

Now first of all, I love zombies. In fact I think the shark-fight scene in 1964's Zombies is one of the greatest in horror history. But by this point we've seen every single iteration of zombie possible, we've seen remakes of the originals, spoofs of the remakes, and on and on and on. The SciFi Department's Kevin Maher interviewed Romero and asked him what the evolution of the Zombie would be, and Romero said that honestly he saw nowhere else for the zombie to go. Essentially, a zombie is a zombie is a zombie.

So my question is, if there's nowhere else for zombie movies to go, why do filmmakers keep making them and why do we keep watching them? It seems to me that the horror genre in particular is extremely adept at exploiting a trope that "works." That's why we have 20 iterations of each Freddy, Jason, and Michael Myers movie. But is that necessary? Are we in danger of quashing fresh ideas, concepts, and themes simply because we know people will line up to watch Freddy Krueger terrorize some child, or a horde of flesh-eating zombies march through town?

Filed under: Horror Culture, Questions

Comments

user-pic

There is so much to this really. First the reason I think we see so many zombie movies, especially indie films, is because it doesn't take a lot of cash to make a zombie movie. Make-up (that you can buy at Wal-Mart) is relatively cheap and you don't really need to hire compotent actors to get the job done. Not a lot of emoting needs to come from a zombie unless of course you're in Romero's Land of the Dead and your name is Eugene Clarke. So that's why everybody and their dogs first film is a zombie movie, well everyone that has a passing fancy in the genre.

Secondly, I think a lot of filmmakers think that because Romero was so successful at getting his subversive political messages on the screen through the aliteration of the Zombie that they think they can do it as well. What they fail to notice is that Romero has written some pretty damn good scripts and the social commentaries of Night, Dawn and Day don't really stick on the bone now like they did then or like they did when we first discovered the social commentary when we originaly watched these films.

And why do we keep watching them. First and foremost it is our devoted love to the zombie really. The first reason I watch a zombie movie is for the gore. Really in all honesty that's the reason, I want to see some lumbering undead beast rip some person to pieces and naw on their intestines. I also take a chance on a lot of zombie movies because for every crappy one (A Virgin Amongst the Living Dead) you get something interesting like Fulci's Zombie or even Shatter Dead which for all intents and purposes isn't a great film but pushed some ideas in the genre.

And finally we are always in danger of quashing the themes and the ideas of the zombie genre, but like I said above you keep dipping your toe in the water wating for something to hit you new and fresh and re-energize your love for the zombie.

I'm guilty of watching anything that is put on a DVD, except for the Day of the Dead remake, I'm just terrified to watch that from the reviews I've read.

default userpic

Well what about movies like I Am Legend. Or should I say, the movie that I Am Legend should have been. In the book, the vampire/zombie things that attack eventually evolve into a new society. Maher asked Romero if he thought zombies could evolve in that sense, and Romero said no.

I'm not so sure. I think if zombies could somehow become more of a societal reflection, I would find a renewed interest in them. But if not, how many hordes of people walking around trancelike thirsting for flesh do I have to see before I say, "Okay! I get it!" Give me some depth, give me some motivation.

Now of course I say that, but that was my biggest problem with 30 Days of Night. Granted, it was based on the comic, but I thought the movie's biggest flaw was that the vampires, rather than being silent deadly blood-sucking machines, were given this societal hierarchy that sort of detracted from the horror of their actions. So maybe I don't know what I want in my horror--I just know that I don't want more and more of the same.

user-pic

Maher asked Romero if he thought zombies could evolve in that sense, and Romero said no.

This actually kind of surprises me because during the press tours for Land of the Dead Romero kept talking about the evolution of the Zombie and what if they become organized. He was really interested in giving them some hierarchy and some intelligence. I actually heard him in person talking about this at Fangoria's Weekend of Horrors in Chicago a few years ago. But I guess he's allowed to change his mind.

as far as 30 Days of Night goes I didn't have a problem with the pecking order. I guess so many years of reading Ann Rice's vampire chronicles got me used to the idea of a society of vampires who are ruled by an upper class. Same with the Underworld films. I guess for me it wasn't so much of a problem, but I'm also a fan of the comics so I may be skewed that wasy to begin with.

Leave a comment