Diary of the Dead (2007)

Highly Overrated But Still Good

I cannot think of one single thing that I would change about this film. The acting is incomparable, the directing deft, and the writing poignantly brilliant.

This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.

There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes

DIARY OF THE DEAD is another zombie movie from genre founder George A. Romero, this time combining the found footage and zombie genres into a supposedly fresh and original product. What it turns out to be is a crushing disappointment in every respect, especially so given that Romero himself invented the modern zombie genre pretty much single-handedly.DIARY OF THE DEAD isn't just a bad film; it's a bad film even by found footage standards. It's not the first found footage zombie film I've seen, and I can report that the same year's Spanish zombie flick REC is about a hundred times better than this movie. What we get here is a cheap, slapdash, and completely boring zombie story as a bunch of uninteresting characters wander around a world which is quickly being taken over by the undead.This film looks and feels cheap throughout and Greg Nicotero's zombie effects are surprisingly cheesy looking, which I guess comes down to budget again. The script is awful, merely attempting to reheat former themes (us vs. them, the breakdown of society, there's even a militant black guy) instead of delivering anything new. The attempted scare scenes are anything but frightening and the story is so predictable that everything that happens is signposted way in advance. Of the cast, the worst actress gets the lead role, with the likable Tatiana Maslany hidden way down in the cast list. DIARY OF THE DEAD is a complete bore and it's difficult to credit this to the man behind the classic DEAD trilogy.

The Zombies which rated this movie after DOTD remake or other "action" zombie movie/TV series viewpoints just don't get the point. Romero isn't after entertainment in this movie. This is a very metaphysical movie. Why filming this in handcam style? Because it is said in the movie several times that nothing happens if it hasn't been filmed. This is a philosophical discourse at least since Jean Baudrilard (spiritual father of the Matrix movies). Who in the new internet-television civilization believes anything if it hasn't been filmed and is been watched on youtube or television? This movie is compressed themes which Romero handled over his previous films in 95min runtime. Romero fans who actually have put a thought on Romeros films will very much appreciate it. It feels like his previous filmthemes put all together with a new theme which I described above and actually asks an uncomfortable question. If you grew up with Walking Dead, World War Z or Dawn of the Dead remake don't waste your time...

I'll keep this short: This is not what you would normally expect form George Romero. The story line is weak, the acting is weak and the screenplay is, guess what, weak.These "actors" in this movie are not qualified to do the only thing they are Required to do - act! The first time i saw this movie, back in '08, it didn't seem as boring and poorly done as it seems now, that's why i decided to re-watch it again. Honest to god i nearly fell asleep, i wanted it to be over as quickly as possible. The only thing scary about this movie was that it sucked so frigging much!If you're looking for a good horror flick watch something else, Romero's early works perhaps. As for me, i want my 95 minutes back.

So, over the past few years just about everybody in Hollywood has jumped on the "found footage" band wagon. This is George Romero's effort to get on board with the rest of the crowd. What none of the film makers on the band wagon have bothered to realize is that the dam thing has no wheels and it was never really going anywhere.There have been a few decent entries into the genre, they can occasionally be worth watching but in my experience that's very rarely the case. That said...maybe there was potential with Diary of the Dead. I would go so far as to say I can see what Romero was trying to do but ultimately, he missed the mark entirely. The acting is sub par, the story slower than a snail race and the special effects are just downright terrible. The latter is due to Tom Savini not being involved as head of special effects and not creating the signature gore that Romero's movies have become so famous for. If I remember correctly even Romero himself later admitted he knew going ahead without Savini was a mistake.Even if Savini had been present, sadly I still doubt this movie would be worthwhile. I could enter into a lot of theorizing as to what Romero could have done that would have made this better but the bottom line is the film is just below average. It's far to derivative of other found footage movies and so unworthy of even having Romero's name on it to bother thinking it could have been better. Okay, it's not the worst movie in history but it really is just a total disappointment for a horror fan and for a Romero fan. Do yourself a favor and just skip this one.