What makes a Zombie Movie a Zombie Movie - Discussion #1

This is a very fair question, and one that came up while reading a comment from a contributor (Ypperst, under "Top 5 Zomcoms-- check out the Top 8 ZomComs -- an updated list). This contributor was a fan of "Severance", and was not sure whether or not it technically qualified as a Zombie movie.

So there it is, the crux of the matter. The fly in the ointment.  The monkey wrench if you will.  What exactly constitutes a Zombie flick?

Once again, this may seem like a pretty simple question, and I think Zombie purists would have a very clear and well defined answer.

Traditionally, movie zombies are:

#1) Human corpses (that is-- and this is important-- people who have died) that have:
#2) become re-animated in some way.
#3) The standard Zombie characteristic action that follows, after this re-animation, is the "seeking and munching of living human flesh."

The actual history surrounding zombies, of course, dates back to Haitian/Caribbean mythology, and the practice of Voodoo. The story goes, that a local villager (for example), pisses off a local witch doctor, is given a potion that renders the individual immobile and with no detectable vital signs. With the level of medicine that was present in the villages at the time, I think this is entirely plausible. We can check off (#1) above-- the individuals would very much resemble a corpse, and would then be buried - check!

When the buried individual revives (re-animates)-- and manages not to succumb to terror and suffocation-- he would likely claw his way out of the grave -- (#2) above - check (or be dug up to later be used as a slave).

And, well, I'm sure all the flesh-eating (#3) above, is all about being really pissed off about being drugged and buried alive.

That, of course, is the "scientific" explanation for the stories. Add a dash of witchcraft and a pinch of the supernatural, and you've got the silverscreen's rendition.

And while there are a number of zombie movies that incorporate the Voodoo explanation ("The Serpent and the Rainbow","Zombi 2", reviewed in this Blog, are two examples), most Zombie flicks as we all know and love today, make no reference to Voodoo or witchcraft.

In fact, so many of the recent zombie movies of the past few decades have not really had any supernatural basis to them whatsoever.

And I think this is what really helps define a zombie movie. Zombie culture (and the movies they spawn) are about the unknown, and the loss of control (and the fear of the loss of control). People of the past have feared the supernatural; therefore the creeping terror that stalked them was of course supernatural. It's interesting that the present day zombie flicks depict zombies brought to life by environmental, viral and/or chemical means. It's what is in the news today that is scaring the bejesus out of us. It might also explain why we have a new breed of zombies (the fast-paced "zoom-bies"). There's a real sense of urgency and impending doom to our fear-- hense the urgent pace of the undead movement (both literally and figuratively). Ah, the zombie movie as social commentary-- that's fodder for another discussion.

That being said-- some simple rules...

• Zombie flicks have gotta have flesh eating (brains, intestines, limbs-- it doesn't matter) and plenty of it. And FYI, zombies did not start wandering/limping/running around screaming "braaaaains" until "Return of the Living Dead" -- so I'm cool with any body part becoming a meal for a chomper. 

• I'd prefer the walking dead to have been dead before they started walking-- but I will settle for zombies that were alive when they become flesh-eaters (as in 28 Days/Weeks Later). We aren't talking about cannibals-- cannibals are really just carnivores that happen to eat their own species-- and it's entirely natural (at least to them). 

• The zombie-munching in zombie flicks should have a feeling of un-naturalness to it (but not necessarily supernatural). It's the loss of control by these undead that is truly horrifying; perhaps illustrated by their stinted gate (as if they're trying vainly to stop themselves, but just ... can't ... quite ... stop ... biting...) Even if somewhere deep down inside, they wanted to stop, they couldn't.  More horrifying is when they've acquired the ability to run... you down.

• And when you're bitten, and infected, that will be you-- trapped inside your undead, hungry, out-of-control body.

Of course, the stinted gate might just be because they're all a little stiff from lying in the ground for a couple decades.

The Un-Usual Suspect

It is with a very heavy heart that I heard about the demise of the true and only Suspect Video, here in Toronto. Yesterday, a blaze ripped through downtown Toronto, eating up a half a block of old buildings and businesses, and swallowing up Suspect Video in its wake.

It was one week ago today that I started this blog, and where I lauded the wonders of this iconic video store on Queen Street. From Zombie Night posting (below):

“…Suspect Video, Queen Street– if you haven’t been there, then why are you sitting here reading this???”

Many a lunch-hour I would wander down to Suspect Video with my good friend and film aficionado Craig, and peruse the stacks and stacks of video cartons, DVDs, tapes and boxes, to discover a “gem.” Honestly, you could find one pretty much every time you’d dip your hand into a section. Oh, and what great eclectic sections and categories: from Japanese Anime Tentacle Porn to Italian Female Prison Westerns.

I commented to a friend last night that it was like hearing about the burning down of a museum. So many of the films in Suspect Video were one of a kind– irreplaceable. No amount of insurance is going to be able to restore this landmark — oh the horror!

I felt compelled to go down to Queen Street and see the carnage myself. Half a block of Queen Street is a bloody mess, or gone. Suspect Video was barely distinguishable, though you could make out the stylized “Suspect” sign through the soot and icicles created by the water used to try and douse the flames. A lot of people had made their way down there– a bit of a pilgrimage perhaps. I overheard a couple of people bemoaning the loss.

From Manager Daniel Hanna: “I’d like to announce to Toronto that we’ve declared a late fee amnesty at Suspect Video on Queen Street.”

Ah– still a sense of humour.

Suspect Video… RIP

Zombie - aka Zombi 2 - aka Zombie Flesh Eaters - The Review

What inspired me to watch (and review) “Zombie aka - Zombi 2 - aka Zombie Flesh Eaters” (1979) this afternoon, was a Top 30 Zombie Movie List by About.com Horror columnist, Mark H. Harris. Check out his superb top 30 list at:

Got Brains? My Top 30 Zombie Movies

At number 4 on his list is the Italian classic “Zombi 2“, directed by shock-legend Lucio Fulci — director of a zombie movie I’d heard about, but never seen. As I’d previously viewed the number 3 ,2 and 1 zombie flicks on his list– I felt it was my duty to take on number 4.

While I agree with much of Mark’s observations in his Top 30 List (a very difficult list to hone, I must add), I’m not sure I entirely agree with his ranking of “Zombi 2.″  I realize this is not a popular view of this movie, but I'm sticking with my view, for reasons listed below (feel free to berate me mercilessly).


(I’d like to say “Spoilers ahead”, but aside from the one scene, which will become immediately obvious, the film is so predictable in this day and age, I’m not sure if I need to bother.)


Here’s my chew-by-chew assessment of the movie:

• Starts off with a bit of a “bang”, which has promise.
• I’m a half hour in and there really hasn’t been enough chewing (really just one bloated zombie on a boat).
• The premium scene of the flick: Zombie vs. Shark — worth the price of admission (oh, and a naked scuba diver chick). Points for originality here!
• At 44 minutes in, an eye piercing (standard horror fair these days, but perhaps somewhat shocking in 1979).
• The real moment of truth for every zombie movie worth its snuff — the barricading scene, in which our heroes and heroines barricade themselves inside of what inevitably amounts to their tomb.  This scene didn’t begin until 1 hour 12 minutes (1:12). I checked the length of the movie at that point, and I realized there really could be only 10 more minutes of zombie-goodness ahead.
• At 1:16 some of the survivors realized it was a head-shot that counted.
• There was, admittedly, some generous and explicit flesh-eating during this last 10 minutes– blood was flowing like it was coming from a fire hose! Nice!
• Our heroes also discover that fire works pretty well– you really can’t do much “shuffling” with burnt stumps, right?
• Final scene sets the stage for zombie world domination– starting in New York City– look for the Twin Towers in the background as the zombies shuffle across Brooklyn Bridge into the city.  Ahhh– the end is nigh…

Full credit to Fulci for an early groundbreaking and standard-establishing attempt, and for that, I give it a higher score than otherwise.

I give it: **** (4) out of ***** ***** (10)
Perhaps I’m jaded from all of my flesh-eating viewage.

Top 5 Zomcoms

When putting together a Top 5 or Top 10 Movie List (and in this case the sub-sub-horror genre Zomcom, or Zombie Comedy– dare I say, “Zomedy”), one must consider many factors.
Do the films listed, in fact fit into the Category? Is it fair to include certain films that are on the fence? When it comes to fitting in, should you include recent films along with the classics? Should we consider completely OVER-THE-TOP, blow your mind gross-out gore, funny? I think it’s with that one that we include “Dead Alive” in our list.
So, from last to first, here is our premiere Top 5 list:


TOP 5 ZOMCOMS


5 Evil Dead 2 (1987)

Sam Raimi’s follow up to the not-meant-to-be so funny “Evil Dead”. In this outing, our hero Ash wields a chainsaw for an arm to battle the “evil” once again, inside a small cabin in the woods. Not so much a sequel as a re-telling of the first “Evil Dead”, with a bigger budget and more wit.






4 Dead Alive (aka Brain Dead) (1992)


Before Peter Jackson was given a bajillion dollars to create “The Lord of The Rings” trilogy, he created the low-budget ($3 million), but fabulous gross-out zomcom, “Dead Alive”. It contains one of the bloodiest scenes in zombie-movie history– the now-famous lawn mower scene, in which our hero “cleans house” by wielding a lawn-mower like a huge motorized machete– completely pulverizing hundreds of zombies, and finishes, standing knee-deep in twitching undead flesh and blood. It is for that scene alone that “Dead Alive” makes it on this list. Oh, and the wonderful Aussie accents, as they deliver all the same wacky, confused, disturbed lines you come to expect in a low-budget zombie flick.


3 Fido (2006)

“Fido” stars wonderful comedic actor Billy Connolly, as Fido, the zombie-turned house-pet. Seems like a really silly premise, and it is– and it works. Witty and brilliant dialogue, satire and a whole slew of social commentaries, makes this movie a joy to watch. The “Lassie” scene almost made me pee my pants.






2 Return of the Living Dead (1985)

“Return of the Living Dead” is a brilliant send-off, spoof and antithesis to all of George Romero’s deep-dark zombie flicks. The witty reporte comes fast and furious, and the zombies (including Linnea Quigley as a memorable sexy punk chick), cadavers, split dogs and apply-named “Tar Man” (who gets his block knocked “out of the park” by a baseball bat wielding Clu Gulager.) are all first-rate zombie attractions!



1 Shaun of the Dead (2004)


Though this film only came out in 2004, it has quickly risen up the ranks to become one of the most entertaining zombie movies I’ve seen in years, let alone the funniest. It has even been categorized as the first RomZomCom — a Romantic-Zombie-Comedy, of course!). Yes, “Shaun of the Dead” ranks at the top of my Top 5 Zomcoms. The writing is fabulous, the actors brilliant (and perfect). Simon Pegg and Nick Frost (who also star in the equally stellar “Hot Fuzz”), are like an old British, married couple. They have the chemistry and timing of actors who’ve worked together for a long time. And although essentially a comedy, it doesn’t scrimp on the gore. Cricket bats and LP records are the weapons of choice here.

To be honest, we've added a number of Zomcoms to the list.  See it HERE!

The Best Zombie Scene Ever - Discussion 2

I titled this entry “Discussion 2″ -- we had a "Discussion #1-- but it was early in the life of this blog-- now that we have a body of intelleigent people reading-- let's try it again!

There is a challenge I like to extend to my film-fanatic friends, and that is this:
“What are the best movie scenes of all time?”

Seems easy. But I didn’t want the knee-jerk responses, like “Luke Skywalker destroying the Death Star” or “Frodo throwing the ring into the fires of Mordor” (I know, I know, technically he didn’t throw the ring in himself). These are truly climactic scenes, but are they truly “great scenes?”

I’m talking about scenes that stick with you LOOOOOONG after you’ve seen the movie. And I mean long after– maybe years. The scene must transcend the movie. That’s why a knee-jerk response just won’t do– inevitably the answer will come from something you’ve seen recently perhaps, or a scene that gets lumped in with the movie itself. As an example, I watched “No Country for Old Men” recently, and while it was a great film, I can’t say there was a scene that will stick with me years from now. But I can pick another great Coen Brothers’ film, “Miller’s Crossing” and I can definitively say that the scene involving the attempted assassination of Albert Finney’s mob boss while “Danny Boy” is playing on the record player (that’s the only soundtrack for that amazing sequence) is on my list of “All-time great Movie Scenes.” Like a great moment in my life, I remember it to this day, in its finest details.

I think that’s why it’s difficult to create a “Best Scenes” list, because only the truly great ones should be those that pop into your head years and years later, when asked “What are the Greatest movie scenes of All Time?” You need a bit of amnesia to make this work– only those scenes that are indelibly carved into your memory should make the list.

28 Weeks Later
That being said, I’m going to break this rule right now, to get the discussion going. The movie I’m going to refer to is a fairly new release (within the last year) and so therefore hasn’t stood the test of time (based on the criteria I’ve listed above). Only time will tell whether I think the following scene deserves to be on the list of “All-Time Great Zombie Movie scenes”, let alone one of the “Greatest Movie Scenes of All-time.”
The scene is from the movie “28 Weeks Later”, (sequel to “28 Days Later”) and is basically the first 10 minutes of the movie. The mood is so intense and claustrophobic, I was finding it hard to breath watching it.

The scene plays out like this:
Survivors (of apparently “28 Day Later”) have barricaded themselves into what appears to be a small cabin or house (you only see the inside, initially). Lighting for the scene is provided only by candles, and the survivors are preparing to eat supper. Everyone is on edge and moody, when a child comes to their door from the outside. When the door is opened we realize, for the first time, that it’s a very bright and sunny summer day outside. Then darkness again. The ensuing violence that quickly follows (as the child has been pursued by very fast-moving zombies — zoombies as I like to call them) is some of the most intense and riveting action in a movie I’ve experienced in a long time (which is really saying something in the zombie genre). The scene culminates with our hero escaping the claustrophobia of the house to the beautiful English countryside. He is seen racing from the house across a gorgeous green field (the camera tracking him from a distance) as, what can only be described as a swarm of racing zoombies pour over the top of the hill toward him. The juxtaposition of the beautiful landscape and open sky, with the crazy split-second cuts (insane camera-held jittery shots, pounding soundtrack and gnashing teeth) showing the landscape as it’s seen by the zoombies as they close in on our hero… just brilliant! It’s too bad the rest of the movie didn’t quite live up to this opening scene.

The scene has stuck with me for a few months. We’ll see how it holds up over time.

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.

First impressions– right out of the theatre– disappointed, mildly amused, too bad. I commented to my friend that there seems to be a bit of a trend developing in movies today– take a movie genre– squeeze it through a small hand-held camera lens (can you say reality TV), and voila– something new and exciting.

Well, I’m sorry to report folks, but “Cloverfield” did it better (and "Blair Witch Project" and especially Brian De Palma's "Redacted"). “Diary of the Dead” didn’t quite know what style of movie it wanted to be. As viewers, you were constantly taken outside of the confines of the single, personal hand-held POV (Point of View) shots. There were in fact two cameras, and a few security cameras (obviously a way of telling more of the story–or perhaps a story within a story). With the single viewpoint used in “Cloverfield”, you become intimately connected with what is seen by the camera. Switching back and forth between multiple viewpoints, as Romero did in “Diary of the Dead” feels too much like standard movie fair. I was never drawn into the experience like I was with “Cloverfield” because of this, among other things.

Interestingly, I read a review of “Cloverfield”, and their criticism of it was exactly what killed “Diary of the Dead”, in my view. They felt that what was needed in “Cloverfield” were the occasional “establishing shots”– to escape the confines of the single lens. I disagree vehemently, and feel that it was that, among other things, that made “Cloverfield” work.

Acting Styles

Acting styles in movies throughout the ages have evolved over time. They started out as exaggerated performances in the style of stage-acting. Then along came method acting, where the actors didn’t “act” like their characters– they”were” their characters. The performances were far more realistic. What we’ve seen in the age of reality TV is the advent of ultra-realism. They aren’t acting at all– it REALLY is them and their REAL responses. That’s what the “Blair Witch Project” pioneered, and “Cloverfield” excelled in capturing– that ultra-realism. These people on camera aren’t acting– they’re “reacting.”

Most of the characters in Romero’s film stay fairly true to the reality TV, ultra-realism performances required by this film style. But one of the central characters, a British chap, is a glaring problem here. He is obviously from the method school of acting, and it just doesn’t fit anywhere in the shaky, hand-held, POV flick we were watching. His dialog came across as “lines” in a movie. We weren’t supposed to be watching a movie– right?

From Diary of the Dead: “If it isn’t on camera, it didn’t happen.”

The video camera is just the next step in the evolution of the “recording” of history– of “reality”. If you think about it, if “reality” wasn’t recorded in some way (initially in the form of the spoken word, the written word, drawings, photographs, and then finally moving pictures and sounds) then who’s to say that it ever really happened. If the proverbial tree falls in the forest…

“If it isn’t on camera, it didn’t happen.”

At one point in the film, our protagonists encounter a deaf-mute Amish farmer (I’m not making this up). To be honest, it may have been the best part of the movie, and I found myself almost wishing the film would slip back into the traditional over-the-top, silly zombie story-telling mode. I was initially excited about the first-person POV zombie concept when I heard about “Diary of the Dead”, but I was about ready to give it up right about then for a good old-fashioned blood-letting.

“If it isn’t on camera, it didn’t happen.”

Romero is trying to make a social commentary here; that we are always “creating” reality by “recording” it, but his film gets muddled up in that very idea– one I’m sure he got all excited about when he first sold it to the studios. I think he realized that it’s really difficult to tell a compelling story from ONE viewpoint (and lens), and the film “evolved” into what we saw on screen. “Cloverfield” pulled it off– this one does not.

I give it: ***** (5) out of ***** ***** (10)

By way of comparison, I would give “Cloverfield”: **** **** (8) out of ***** ***** (10)

Zombie Night

About 20 years ago, a good friend of mine and I started a tradition which has followed me from my home province of New Brunswick, to my current province of residence, Ontario-- and in particular, to the great city of Toronto.
It was originally called "Zombie Day", and it basically worked like this:


To escape the awful confines of his stifling marriage (if even for an afternoon), we would head down to the local video store (yup, this is pre-DVD days), and rent an armful of the worst/best/most intense/graphic/poorly photographed/awfully written and most endearing horror movies we could find, and take them back to his apartment, along with several bags of McD's and couple of six packs. The only stipulation was that the horror flicks had to be about the living dead, and they preferably had to be REALLLLY bad!

We would barricade ourselves from the outside (and our wives), draw the shades, crack open the beers and Big Macs, and watch 5 or 6 zombie movies, back to back. Oh, I still get all warm and fuzzy inside when I think about it. Could there be anything better, I ask you?
It's funny-- in thinking back, I believe our activity really was a metaphor for what was going on in our lives-- and the typical zombie genre-- that of making a last stand behind some flimsy doors, held shut by flimsy planks of wood -- was really about us on those afternoons. Our lives were shit, and so were the movies! But we LOVED them, and if we could just keep the baddies from getting in, it would really be alright. I think that that mentality, in retrospect, is even more valid in today's freaky world climate of baddies-- out there.

But enough philosophizing. That was New Brunswick, circa 1990's. Flash ahead 20 years, and I find myself thousands of miles away, and one wife lighter. But my love of zombie movies, and basically all things undead, hasn't wavered or dissipated. And one day, I found, that I was among other zombie movie lovers-- coincidentally, my co-workers and best friends! How great is that?

And thusly, "Zombie Night" was born, and it basically worked like this:
To escape the awful confines of our stifling jobs (if even for an night), we would head down to the local video store (yup, Suspect Video, Queen Street-- if you haven't been there, then why are you sitting here reading this???), and rent an armful of the worst/best/most intense/graphic/poorly photographed/awfully written and most endearing horror movies we could find, and take them back to the office boardroom, crank up the video projector, along with several boxes of pizza and several cases of brewskies. The only stipulation was that the horror flicks had to be about the living dead, and they had to be REALLLLY bad!

Yes, I had evolved. It really was important at that time, that they had to be bad, and they had to have copious amounts of blood. The more decapitations, dismemberments, head splattering, bad acting and dialogue, the better. And lordy lordy-- there sure are alot to choose from! I think we only scratched the surface of the bad zombie flicks at Suspect Video, and if you know Suspect Video, you'd understand.

That, my brain-lovin' friends, is what this blog is about.
My zombie comrades (zomrades) have been thrown to all corners of the city (we all no longer work together)-- but we still get together to chew the fat (so to speak), drawn by a common desire to see flesh eating at it's worst (and therefore, at it's gut-wrenching best).
We've put in a lot of hours soaking up the bad blood so you don't have to. We will be your guide to the worst/best/most intense/graphic/poorly photographed/awfully written and most endearing zombie flicks of all time. As zombie movies become more mainstream, we will not ignore these as well. Some of the more current flicks will become or are on their way to becoming, legendary.

This bodes well for the future of this most particular of horror movie genres.


Bon appetite!