HAMSTER RATING

STARRING: Simon Baker (Riley), John Leguizamo (Cholo), Asia Argento (Slack), Dennis Hopper (Kaufman), Eugene Clark (Big Daddy), Robert Joy (Charley)

SYNOPSIS: In a future where a plague of zombies has taken over the world, the survivors have isolated themselves in a barricaded city where the affluent, led by Kaufman, live in luxury and the rest in poverty, and hired gangs of looters are the only ones who venture out to gather supplies in their huge (and street-legal) tank, Dead Reckoning. Then zombie Big Daddy decides it's time to put the smack-down on the living, and Cholo, one of Kaufman's hired looters, commandeers the Dead Reckoning. Now it's up to Cholo's boss, good-guy Riley, to stop him and save the huddled masses from a massacre by the sentient Undead.

"Mr. Baker! Mr. Baker! We just want an autograph!"

REVIEW: Before George A. Romero took his camera and a bunch of associates into the Pittsburg countryside in 1968, there was no such thing as a "zombie movie." Not of the sort that Romero made, anyway. His cult classic, Night of the Living Dead spawned its own genre, dominated by two sequels, 1978's chilling Dawn of the Dead and 1985's far less impressive Day of the Dead. Now, after a 20-year hiatus filled in with copycat gore fests and remakes, Romero has returned to guide his wayward brainchild with Land of the Dead, a third--and by no means last--sequel. Harkening back to the curious blend of absurd humor, shocking gore and veiled social commentary that made Dawn of the Dead so enduring, Romero takes full advantage of the zombie-tastic $10 million he was allotted and has come up with a sophisticated-looking piece of work with a tight, cohesive story that runs a mere hour and forty minutes. But it doesn't feel short, and given the fact that the movie is retreading much of the ground already covered by its predecessors, Land of the Dead's skillful depiction of this familiar world with engaging, new elements shows how much the people involved in its creation still care about their material. That said, though, I must admit that I was less than ecstatic with the finished product.

Land of the Dead's casting is excellent. In a departure from his other zombie movies, Land of the Dead's main protagonist is actually a guy, straight-arrow boy scout Riley, played well by Simon Baker. John Leguizamo realizes the serpentine Cholo with ease but Robert Joy is particularly attention-getting as Charley, Riley's Forrest Gumpish but very useful sidekick. Dennis Hopper chews up and spits out Kaufman's ridiculously over-the-top dialogue with relish, but his characterization feels slightly confused as he swings from seductive and subtle to mustache-twirling cartoon villain. Asia Argento has difficulty creating a unique character, since she is saddled with the only significant (and obligatory) female role, but brings a sultry, gothic twist to her otherwise butt-kicking everygirl, Slack. The other main role in the story is Big Daddy, brought to un-life by Eugene Clark, and here is where the movie falters.

Riley looks and knows immediately that a man with as much ear hair as Kaufman cannot be trusted.

The film moves at a very quick pace, keeping the zombie montages and strategy sessions to a bare minimum. We get cursory character development and indelicate gobs of exposition laying the ground rules of Romero's world (including a tantalizing shot of a certain Zenith radio), and then, it's all about the zombies. Big Daddy is intended as a sequel to Day of the Dead's Bub, a zombie that can figure things out and even appears to have a sense of basic morality. What made Bub so fascinating to watch was because although he could think and feel like a person one moment, he could just as easily tear into bloody chunks of meat the next. Bub was us, and them and the unpredictable blend of the two was unnerving. Big Daddy, on the other hand, is too noble to chew face. He's a zombie Moses packin' heat and so obviously human that he isn't scary in the slightest. He doesn't even look that dessicated, having more in common with Joss Whedon's Buffy vampires than the filthy, blue-skinned corpses of Romero films past. As soon as the zombies are no longer scary, the movie loses much of its impact.

Making matters worse, Land of the Dead relies very heavily on initial shock value for most of its scares, many of which you can see coming a mile off. The movie also runs relatively light on gore. There's the obligatory entrails-orgy scene and plenty of zombie bites, but most of the grossness happens under the cover of darkness and isn't anything new to modern, desensitized audiences. Romero's social commentary is at its most obvious here, as well, with lines like:

GUY: "Look at them [zombies]. It's like they're pretending to live."

RILEY: "Isn't that what we're doing? Pretending to live?"

Well, in spite of the good production values, taunt story and enjoyable acting, Land of the Dead's inability to recapture the eerie mood of Romero's other zombie movies leaves me only pretending to be scared.