Blood Quantum (2019/2020) Film Review: A Good Zombie Film That Could Have Been One Of The Greats...

I recall when I was obsessed with zombie media during my youth. From films to TV to video games to books, I loved anything relating to zombies. However, as I grew up, I started to find the medium stale and anything zombie-related all began to feel repetitive and cliche. I still love some of those great zombie films from Romero and even an underrated flick such as "Dead Alive" or "Maggie", but I haven't really been fond of the material as of late. "Blood Quantum" is an example of a zombie film that, while good on its own merit, appears to fall behind due to some poor writing choices and contrived plot beats. Let's first talk about the story itself. In 1981, the Red Crow Indian Reservation begins to encounter the zombie apocalypse. As months past, the reservation proves to be one of the safe havens in the new world as the First Nations residents prove to be immune to the zombie virus, allowing them to survive otherwise deadly bites. However, tensions between the local sheriff's sons, Lysol and Joseph, are at an all-time high as the former is tired of allowing non-indigenous survivors into the compound due to their potential to infect the area. Joseph defends his choice as he has a white girlfriend who is pregnant. Lysol, through rushed character development, decides to destroy the compound by letting a zombie loose, causing chaos and the characters to try to make their way out of the reservation. The best part of the film is the first act, where the zombies are being discovered and the characters are all sharing this paranoia. Main characters are getting bit and they don't know if they are about to die or not and the tone and atmosphere is great in capturing this anxiety. However, after the time gap, the story starts to allow multiple plot conveniences such as allowing the girl who was infected inside the compound without a full body search, having Lysol's character arc and development flip-flop back and forth, the compound itself being overrun, and a meaningless sacrifice scene. All of these awful plot points feel forced in as typical zombie media demands a level of stupidity in the characters or story in some form. This messy writing also causes backlash to the film's themes of how the indigenous population is immune while the white people are at a disadvantage and treated like refugees. You'd think the conflict would be about a group of white survivors trying to get inside the compound while the indigenous group are afraid of them contaminating the community. But no, instead, Lysol decides to let the entire compound get overrun because the zombie he let loose bit his manhood off. I know that in the majority of zombie media, the humans are more barbaric than the zombies, but here, the human antagonist just doesn't make sense. The tone at the very least sticks to being serious for the most part. Any moment of absurd humour is mainly when the brothers, Lysol and Joseph, are talking to each other during a drunk or drugged state, which is only in a few moments in the film. It's more trying to create a realistic atmosphere and world-building, even though the story itself contradicts certain aspects of it.

The characters are above average for your typical zombie or horror flick, but they are still a mixed bag overall. Starting with the good characters, we got Traylor, played by Micheal Greyeyes. Traylor is the local sheriff of Red Crow and father to Lysol and Joseph, who is also the leader of the reservation once the zombies begin to take over their environment. Greyeyes takes what is a typically generic role and manages to breath some life and charisma as he has a sense of wit and cares for his family above all. Forrest Goodluck as Joseph is the troubled son of Traylor who manages to self-improve himself after the zombie apocalypse and attempts to help out his pregnant girlfriend in saving survivors and argue against his half-brother, Lysol. Joseph is by far the most developed character in the film and is really the protagonist next to Traylor as he actually changes as the film progresses and manages to have the most hardships in the story. Gisigu, Traylor's father, is perhaps the most enjoyable character of the film though due to how badass he is with the katana despite his age and is one of the smartest characters in the film due to his discovery of the virus and his choice to sacrifice himself so that the others can get away by boat. While the sacrifice scene itself is done fine, I just find it silly that he has to stay behind when a dying side character is taken to the boat anyways. Those are the only good characters as the others are pretty underdeveloped, useless or bland. Lysol, played by Kiowa Gordon, fits right here as the antagonist. Although you can understand his views on taking survivors in and how his penis being bit off can make him not fully there, the fact that he decides to let the compound overrun to begin with is very uncalled for and also undermines any development between him and Joseph. Joss, played by Elle-Maija Tailfeathers, is the ex-wife of Traylor and mother of Joseph who works as a nurse in the compound. The problem with her character is that not only is she barely important in the story, but her relationship with Lysol is barely developed, which, given the latter's lack of a mother figure in his life, could have been an interesting story to explore. Charlie, Joseph's pregnant girlfriend, is just not that engaging at all. They were already a couple prior to the film's events and, outside of her brief frustration of being a white girl and treated differently by the residents, she barely has a character outside of being a partial cause of the conflict and being pregnant to Joseph's child. As for the side characters, it's all over the place. They all might have a notable scene for themselves whether it's a memorable line or kill, but they all might as well not be in the film. You have characters such as Bumper, Moon, and Doris, who basically just serve as casualties, while characters such as Shooker, James, Shamu and Lilith practically disappear in the narrative after serving a shallow purpose. There's even a character named Rob Muppet, whose base proves to be indirectly important in the narrative, but we never even see this guy, alive, dead or zombified. As for the acting for all of these characters, it's honestly pretty good, considering some of these actors having limited acting jobs prior to this. It does feel a tad awkward here and there, but considering their background and the writing of the characters, it could have been much worse.

Jeff Barnaby is an indigenous filmmaker whose works all consist of relating to the treatment and role of First Nations people. His previous film, "Rhymes For Young Ghouls", was a great theatrical debut and his second outing shows signs of Barnaby's untapped talent in filmmaking. The first thing that hooks you in is the wonderful cinematography by Michel St-Martin. There are so many imaginative shots in the film that it's Hollywood quality. Whether it's the birds-eye view shots of the reservation as zombies run or linger, or just unique shots of tracking Traylor's police car, close-ups of making tea, or the bridge that connects the town and the reservation with shots that go upside down and around, the cinematography is perfectly executed to have a cinematic flair. Barnaby also knows how to make a grey, gritty, unfiltered world that has been overrun by zombies. The compound is realistically designed and the abundance of fog is well established, given the nearby river. I also like the world-building that the river, fish and dogs are tainted by the zombie virus, but mountain water, moose and deer are clean and safe as a backdrop of how First Nations culture and the untouched Canadian land is pure from the commercialized landscape that brought this disease. The music by Barnaby himself is also really good. While there are some nice use of songs appropriate to the time period, it's the synthesizer music that really trumps over the audio. Not only is the music itself great to listen to and fits with the serious tone, but the use of a synthesizer is both an homage to 80's filmmaking and the zombie genre with Romero's films having iconic synthesizer scores. Barnaby also uses some instances of some stylized animation, which not only matches the aesthetic of First Nations illustrations and art, but tells a hidden story that make it appear more like a legend, whether it's how the river is tainted from the zombie epidemic, Lysol's turn to darkness, and Gisigu's stand against the zombies. Speaking of which, the make-up effects of the zombies and gore are great. Although the zombies themselves are more on the standard side, the use of blood and gore are really effective with very little use of CGI and having some very grotesque deaths and imagery. The film might be one of the more goriest films in the genre as it not only includes some gory scenes of guts and intestines, but having a women eating a dead baby and Lysol's dick being eaten by the zombified Lilith is pretty jarring. While all of the filmmaking aspects are relatively unmatched, the editing is not on the same scale. The editing by Barnaby isn't bad overall and flows fine for the most part, but the film is cut in a rushed matter with characters disappearing in the narrative or events happening too quickly. It feels as though there was much more that Barnaby left out from the final cut and it does impact the film as a result, no matter how calculated it might have been. Regardless, Barnaby's filmmaking skills are a force to be reckoned with.

"Blood Quantum" is a film that had the potential to be one of the best zombie films to date. From a story premise that could have been engaging, a well-handled tone that has suspense, serious drama and a bit of humour, a few good characters with engaging personalities and performances, acting overall is pretty good given the inexperienced cast, excellent cinematography, wonderful use of synthesizer music, creative animated sequences that tell a story and match the First Nations artistry, the make-up and gore effects, and Barnaby's directing creating a realistic world overtaken by zombies and adding details to differentiate from most zombie media to add lore and aspects that relate to the indigenous culture. However, it's pretty painful for me to say that there are quite a number of mistakes. From the time-gap storyline, the conflict being completely different rather than having a indigenous vs white population debate, the handful of plot holes and story mistakes that don't make sense in the established setting and circumstance, Lysol being an rushed, underdeveloped villain, the female main characters aren't that interesting, side characters either get killed or disappear from the film altogether, and Barnaby's editing feels as if he cut out plenty of scenes that could have helped make the pacing and characters more effective. As it is, it's generally pretty good and one of the better indigenous or Canadian films ever made. However, as a zombie film, it's above average at best and would've been one of the best in the genre if Barnaby put more focus on the narrative or character development.

Verdict: 7/10. Good film as a whole, but reeks of the overwhelming potential of being amazing. Watch if you love zombie films with plenty of gore or like indigenous representation in film.

The Spongebob Squarepants Movie: Sponge On The Run (2020) Non-Spoiler Film Review: A Serviceable Love Letter To The Franchise...

 

After Spongebob foils Plankton's latest plan to steal the Krabby Patty secret formula, the villain deduces that the yellow sponge is the only hinderance in his evil plans. After he steals Gary, Spongebob's beloved snail, and sends him to Atlantic City where the King Poseidon is keeping him hostage as a facial ointment, Plankton sends Spongebob and Patrick on their journey. As the film goes on, the iconic duo meet new allies and challenges while the rest of Spongebob's friends, including Plankton himself with a change of heart, try to save him from the heartless Poseidon. The story is very similar to the first film that has the two characters go on an adventure to retrieve something, although the first film had more locations and detours. It also borrows the story from one of the show's more iconic episodes, where Gary runs away from home. Aside from one strange stop, the gang reaches Atlantic City by the middle of the second act, which doesn't really make this film be considered a road-trip adventure. This is kind of a problem as the story is being pretty lazy or standard, but at the same time, the story isn't really important in a Spongebob movie. The tone and humour is still that goofy, over-the-top nonsense that we all know from the franchise, but this might have the most bizarre moments in any of the films, yes, even rivalling Bubbles from the second movie. While not every joke works, there's plenty of laughs and references to the entire franchise that does put a smile on a fan's face.

The titular character, Spongebob Squarepants, is the same annoying, yet, loveable sponge that we all recognize. He's naive, but has some intelligence. He's forgiving, but can be arrogant when he can't control his emotions. Patrick Star is also the same doofus who is Spongebob's best friend. His portrayal is definitely on the more likeable route with him being supportive and not stupid to the point of harming others, compared to how he can be sometimes portrayed in the show. The other popular side characters include the miserable Squidward, the greedy yet kind-hearted Krabs, the Texan scientist Sandy, and the evil yet fair Plankton. All of these characters are given that same charm and energy with the help from their classic voice actors who are still to this day portraying these iconic characters. My favourites are Patrick and Plankton, which I like the latter not repeating the same old formula of reverting back to being the bad guy and attempting to steal the formula yet again. It might not be welcome to some, but I like the character to not always be treated horribly every time. As for the new characters, there's the antagonist, King Poseidon, the ruler of Atlantic City and who cares far more for his looks than for others. He's pretty enjoyable, but is similar in personality to King Neptune from the first film. There's Poseidon's chancellor, who plays off of his ruler's personality and offer some nice gags. Lastly, there's Keanu Reeves, who plays Sage, a tumbleweed who helps out Spongebob and Patrick in completing their quest.  Not only is Sage surprisingly in a good chunk of the film, but he is by far the most enjoyable character and it's just because Reeves is having this dry wit and fun that it's both surreal and hilarious with his inclusion. These are all of the character I can think of that are involved in the story. There are some cameos in the film that I would love to talk about, but I would rather keep them secret just because they happen to be part of one of the film's most memorable sequences. Overall, the characters are as good as always, and the new additions fit the universe and personality of the franchise and tone.

This film is the first time where the characters are fully CG throughout the entire film. While this might seem like a bad idea due to the charm of the 2D animated characters, the animation provided by Mikros Image, an animation studio in Montreal, provides a ton of care and attention to the modest budget. What makes the animation work is the fact that the film makes the CGI restricted to a hand-drawn style. It's similar to that of "The Peanuts Movie" or "Captain Underpants" where the characters move and act like they are mainly in a 2D plane, but are CG in design and style. Watching the film, you can imagine how scenes would look if they were hand-drawn, much like the series and previous films, proving that the animation works in capturing that 2D feel. And while the characters themselves act cartoony and zany for the medium, the textures and attention to detail on their designs are great. While some characters such as Plankton or Krabs looks a bit like polished clay due to their designs, it's characters like Spongebob and Sandy that have more detail such as the amount of tiny holes you can see on the sponge's body and the teddy bear-like fur that is presented on Sandy. On top of that, the clothing and materials of fabric, clothing, metal and glass are really good from how you can see how much use Sandy's glass bowl has to the individual thread of Spongebob and Patrick's pants. It also helps that the animation is just popping with bright, warm colours that match the softness of the characters. The music by Hans Zimmer is very much in nature to the series with the usual beats. To be honest, I didn't even know that Zimmer composed for this movie until I looked it up myself. His score is fine, but I think it's mainly the songs that I notice the most. Not only do you have your usual musical numbers that are in every movie in the franchise, but there's also some licensed songs such as Ricky Martin's "Viva la Vida Loca" and a cover of a-ha's "Take on Me". The songs, both original and licensed, are fun to listen to, with the licensed tracks just being enjoyable by how random their inclusions are. If there's one real issue with the film as a whole, it's the first half of the climax with a MILD SPOILER WARNING. While the second half of the climax is your fun chase/action scene, the first half, for some bizarre reason, really tries to market the Kamp Koral spin-off show that everyone is hating on for existing. I wouldn't be so distracted by it if the film didn't stop getting all of the characters to express their first time meeting Spongebob in summer camp. Not only does it kill the pacing, but fans will just complaining on how it ruins the series continuity, even though the franchise doesn't really have a huge continuity to begin with. I wouldn't go so far as to say it insults Stephan Hillenburg's creation, considering the film is in memory to him, but it does feel somewhat pandering and scummy by Nickelodeon and Paramount. 

"The Spongebob Squarepants Movie: Sponge On The Run" is once again a fine film to join the expanding franchise. From the enjoyable motifs of the tone and humour, the numerous references and easter-eggs to the franchise, the loveable returning cast given life by the legendary voice actors, the new characters and cameos adding to the zaniness of the series and feeling strangely natural in a way, the great use of animation to transition a 2D series into 3D that adds plenty of texture detail and colours on the very animated characters, and the songs, both original or existing, are pretty enjoyable in their respective scenes and adding on to the fun nature of the film. However, there are a couple of issues. The story is just borrowing from previous Spongebob material without too much creative liberties thrown in, not every joke works, and the climax having nearly ten minutes to advertise the spin-off show that nobody asked for can be pretty salty to some fans of the series. However, I personally feel that the film is, for the most part, in spirit to the franchise and a film that Hillenburg would be mostly satisfied with. As for how it ranks with the other Spongebob movies, honestly, I can't decide. I think all of them have their positives and negatives that counteract to each other and offers a distinct experience to a type of person. I think all of them are equal to each other in their own kind of way.

Verdict: 7/10. Good overall, but could have been better if a little more creativity and less corporate pandering was involved. If you manage to live in Canada, watch it in theatres as soon as you can for a fun time. As for non-Canadian fans, wait until it comes out on Netflix or CBS All Access, depending on your nationality. 

Paul (2011) Film Review: The Spiritual Spin-Off Of An Edgar Wright Film.

 

With the new "Spongebob" movie coming out this Friday, I wanted to review something over-the-top and goofy myself. I didn't own any of the previous Spongebob movies and I also didn't have any animated films that are similar in spirit. So, I felt that the next best thing was a crude live-action comedy that doesn't take itself seriously much. We all know of the "Three Flavours Cornetto" trilogy made by acclaimed director and writer, Edgar Wright, and co-stars, Simon Pegg and Nick Frost. If one sees a movie with the two actors, you generally assume that it's a work from Wright. With the case of this British-American production though, not at all. The movie follows Graeme and Clive, two British science-fiction nerds who went on a road-trip to Comic Con and some UFO-related attractions in the U.S. During their trip, they come across an alien named Paul, an English-speaking, foul-mouthed extraterrestrial with abilities such as invisibility, exchange knowledge, and healing others. Paul, after being kept by the government for decades, needs to get home by a rendezvous at the national monument, Devil's Tower, to which Graeme and Clive agree to help. Along the way, the two encounter/"kidnap" a Christian fundamentalist named Ruth, her aggressive father who is after them, and a crew of government agents taking orders from their boss known as "The Big Guy". The story is nothing new as it's clearly paying homage to classic sci-fi stories and tropes with the former being very inspired by Steven Spielberg films, although with a crude and meta twist. To the film's credit, whenever the story wants to take itself serious for a moment, it genuinely works as moments such as Paul healing his newfound friends and him reuniting with Tara, an old women who saved Paul back when he crash landed on Earth. The comedy, for the most part, honestly gets a lot of laughs both by the crudeness and how cleverly-written it is with a few running gags that manage to work. Even though it's not written by Wright himself, Pegg and Frost manage to get a similar tone and approach to the humour, mainly when it's focused on their character's interactions. However, not every joke works and the running gag of Ruth swearing due to her Christian beliefs being a sham is perhaps one of the unfunniest I've seen in a comedy. It wasn't funny the first time and it's not by the end of the film. Still, around 80% of the comedy does at least work and there are plenty of easter eggs and references to sci-fi fans to boot!

Simon Pegg and Nick Frost as Graeme and Clive are as perfect as two peas in a pod, with it largely being thanks to the actor's onscreen chemistry and comradery. I feel that their friendship shines through the most here compared to their other appearances, mainly due to how similar they are in their passion of sci-fi and how the arguments or disputes they have feel very rational and realistic when it comes to how two best friends should act. I think the comedy works the best when they are the focus as everything from their personalities to their homosexual-looking awkwardness is used greatly to the film's advantage. Seth Rogan voices Paul, who is practically an alien that acts like Seth Rogan from the crude humour to the dope-smoking charisma. Although not everyone might be a fan of him, I think Rogan really works as the titular character with his voice-acting and the performance never becomes uncanny or distracting. I buy Paul's personality traits as this laid-back being who means no harm. Kristen Wiig as Ruth is also pretty likeable. Aside from the painfully unfunny running joke of her attempts at swearing, I like Wiig's charm as this Christian nut who questions her beliefs and becomes the love interest of Graeme, who the latter falls in love with, even when she still had one eye due to her illness, which Paul soon decides to heal. The side characters are not only fun and enjoyable to watch, but they are actually given plenty of development as characters despite their limited appearances. From Jason Bateman's Agent Zoil, a man determined to find Paul, Bill Hader's Agent Haggard, a seemingly naive and inexperienced recruit who becomes hellbent on capturing Paul upon knowing the alien existence of him, Joe Lo Trugilo as Agent O'Reiley, an immature and nerdy recruit who's friends with Haggard, Blythe Danner as Tara, the elderly women who save Paul back when he crashed on Earth and has a sweet friendship with, John Carroll Lynch as Moses, the religious father of Ruth who chases after the protagonists, and lastly, Sigourney Weaver as "The Big Guy", a government official who mainly attends in public events and dates with others who decides to deal with Paul herself upon the end. All of these side characters are great, with Weaver's character being the best antagonist reveal role in her career that she became known for the past decade or so. However, it's Pegg and Frost that really steal the show as the loveable duo.

Greg Mottola is best known for directing the acclaimed "Superbad". Since then, he hasn't really been lucky with his films with most of them bombing, aside from "Paul", which not only manages to be a modest hit, but might be his best film in my opinion. A lot of it is really based on how much passion the film has for the aforementioned sci-fi genre, culture and Spielberg classics. Even if one removes the references, the setting of the Southwestern U.S and the alien-inspired attractions are pretty engaging to watch, which is mainly thanks to the British protagonists being out of their element in a way. There's a sense of scale in the film that makes it both an adventure and a parody by the balanced tone that Mottola manages to deliver. The cinematography by Lawrence Sher is also pretty good. It's not like his work on "Joker", but his shots are perfectly replicated to homage aspects of the genre or even famous films. This, on top of editing by Chris Dickens, allows for some great call-backs and even some effective visual gags. The score by David Arnold happens to be the last he's done for a major motion picture, which is a shame as I don't think he's a bad composer. His score is very much going for that mystery sci-fi aesthetic while also having that countryside road trip feel thrown in. It's not bad or anything special, but it works for this type of movie. The last thing to mention are the visual effects, mainly the appearance of Paul himself. Not only is his design fantastic being a callback to the classic designs of aliens as well as serving a story element for his looks, but the CGI on him is actually pretty good, given the production budget. He's well textured and animated and although he's not realistic-looking in a sense, he tends to look like he inhabits the same scene as the actors mainly by the dirty, unfiltered look of the film. If the movie looked very polished and professional, Paul wouldn't look as good as he does, but because the movie has a sense of grime and unpolished effect on it, the titular characters looks great. I hope Mottola manages to return to the industry and make a film that's just as good as his best works of the past.

"Paul" might not go down as one of the best comedies ever, but it's a pretty good one. From the engaging story, balanced tone, handfuls of laughs, enjoyable main leads, an effective supporting cast, Mottola's passionate directing, Sher's homage-filled cinematography paced with Dicken's skillful editing, and the effects of Paul are very good for the budget and is largely thanks to the dusty aesthetic of the film which itself matches the setting of the story. Outside of some awkward attempts of comedy and an average score by Arnold, the film's biggest weakness is also its biggest strength, which happens to be the vast use of references, homages and easter eggs. While I personally love their implementation as I see the film as a love letter to the genre, I can understand that not everyone might see it that way. Some might see the film as generic, unimaginative or piggybacking off on other successful films. If you love sci-fi as a whole along with buddy comedies that Pegg and Frost are known for, this movie will work extremely well, much like how horror fans adore "The Cabin In The Woods". However, if you're not a fan of crude humour or don't think references make a movie, this won't do you much good. Regardless, it's just a fun movie and love letter to the aforementioned genre at the end of the day.

Verdict: 8/10. A very good comedy that's enjoyment is reliant on how you feel of the genre, crude and reference humour as a whole. Weird film to proceed "Spongebob", but hey, when would I ever get to talk about this movie anyway?

The Equalizer 2 (2018) Film Review: A Perfectly, Balanced Sequel Equal Or Even Better Than The First!

The first "Equalizer" film managed to be one of my favourite action films of the last decade. A sequel would have been very hard to surpass the original, though considering Denzel Washington never taking up a sequel until now, it should inspire confidence that the second film was going to be worth it. Taking place after the events of the first film, Robert McCall has moved to another neighbourhood in Boston and is working as a Lyft driver on the side, while he works as a vigilante to those seeking his help. When Susan, an old friend of his, is murdered following an investigation, he needs to learn who is behind it and deliver ruthless justice to them. What works about the sequel is that it's completely stand-alone from the first film. Outside of him becoming a vigilante of sorts, nothing from the characters to mentions of the events from the preceding film is brought up in the sequel, which gives the film to be accessible to many people compared to most sequels. However, many still had issues with the story and pacing. From the main plot of Susan's murder, McCall helping and teaching a young man dignity and responsibility, and helping others such as a old Holocaust survivor to own a long lost painting, there's about as much sub-plots as the original and all of them do manage to feel integrated into the narrative better than the first. However, people can find it cluttered and unbalanced as the main story moves slowly. The pacing is also different from the first one. Rather than having a slow first act and having action and thrills take centrefold throughout the rest of the movie, the sequel has the first act open up with action and intrigue, but has a very slow-paced second act that focuses on McCall solving the murder mystery and helping out Miles, the troubled young man. The third act returns to the action and suspense much like the first film, but at that point, some viewers might have given up by the slow second act. Personally, the second act, as seemingly uneventful it appears to be, carries some of the best character-building and moments not only of the film, but in the action genre as a whole. The tone is much more mature from the first film. Although the first film takes itself seriously, the main plot is ripped out of a typical, action romp where the main character kills evil Russian gangsters, much like "The Boondock Saints" and many others. The sequel not only has a much stronger story that feels even more grounded and raw, but the villains and characters are much more fleshed out than just the typical good and bad.

Denzel Washington returns as Robert McCall with a full head of hair and the same caliber performance he gives out that is even better than the first outing.  Washington not only feels more comfortable, reserved and charismatic than ever before in the role, but he brings more depth with the character and offers a fantastic scene with him and Miles that showcases just how fantastic of an actor he is. Pedro Pascal plays Dave York, an old ally of McCall during their covert operation days who is revealed to be the antagonist, along with his team. While Teddy Rensen is an intriguing, yet pretty generic villain from the first film, York offers a more morally grey take as the villain. Not only does he have a loving family, but he chose to become an assassin after the government gave up on him and McCall's team following the latter's supposed death. He's the parallel opposite of McCall as he too also offers help and skills of combat to others, but for a price. Susan's death was mainly for business rather than personal reasons, yet it is that mistake that gives McCall the reason to not only seek his revenge, but to not even offer him a chance to redeem himself, unlike the many criminals he faced. York is simply a much more effective villain that plays off on McCall better than Rensen ever could. Ashton Sanders plays Miles, a role similar to that of Alina's vulnerable youth from the first film. Miles not only has more screentime than the teen prostitute, but is involved in all three acts of the film as his bond with McCall acts as the heart of the movie. Miles is hired by McCall to help repaint a mural in their apartment complex's courtyard due to his passion for drawing and painting. However, he is tempted to join a local gang as he not only wants to avenge his late brother's death, but believes that it will help pay more for himself and his mother. McCall delivers an emotional speech about the choice of life or death, whether it's to continue on pursuing your dreams or deciding to take on a darker path of death or harming others for profit. What is so beautiful about this scene is that you can take it out of context and apply it to any person or subject, whether it's taking drugs or suicide. Sanders offers a charismatic and loveable performance as the troubled youth that views McCall as a father figure of sorts as a result, playing off of Washington's amazing acting talents. The side characters include Susan Plummer, McCall's only friend from the agency and who helps him during his cases, Brian Plummer, Susan's husband who is made fun of for his book and is mainly spent mourning throughout the film after Susan is killed, and Sam Rubinstein, the old Holocaust survivor who is keen on finding a painting of his sister that was auctioned off, eventually leading him and his long lost sister to be reunited. Melissa Leo, Bill Pullman and the late Orson Bean all act perfectly for their roles. In fact, all of the cast is perfect, much like the first film, with their characters and development even more tightly written than before. Once again though, Washington takes the spotlight for his performance as McCall. 

Antione Fuqua returns to pen the sequel and not only is his directing just as good as before, he manages to give off a different flair to the sequel that is very much welcome. Starting off with the location of Boston, they could have made it similar to before where McCall lives in the same neighbourhood and make the city look like the seedy, criminal underbelly like before. However, not only does McCall live in Roxbury, but there's clearly more attempt to have Boston not only look normal, but filled with a tad more hope. From his apartment community to the friends he's made from his help as well as his Lyft shifts, Boston feels more warmer and lively than ever. However, there's still cracks of imperfection from troubled passengers to criminals hiding behind seemingly normal faces. It's a different take on presenting the city and yet it still works really well. This is all helped by veteran cinematographer, Oliver Wood, who offers a lot of great shots that matches to Fuqua's vision, as well as some amazing shots during the action sequences. Harry Gregson-Williams returns to compose the score and it's the same old, though with a few new tracks that are effective in their respective scene, mainly the scene where Denzel is solving the murder from Brussels by imagining he was positioned as the victims. Gregson-Williams also decided to limit the use of licensed songs. Outside of hearing what Miles is listening to, there's no song playing during the climax or a tie-in song with Eminem or anything. This is honestly a good choice as although they sound fine in the first film, removing these songs allow the sequel to be more timeless. Lastly, there's the action and suspense scenes that stole part of the show in the first film. There are some satisfying sequences from the apartment beatdown of the rapists, the car assassination attempt, and the climax are all great to watch in their own right. The climax has a very interesting setting of a seaside town being ravaged by a sea-storm and some inventive kills, although I prefer the first film's climax a bit more due to the stakes and grislier kills. The first film has more bloody kills in my opinion, but the second film focuses on being raw and stylish at the same time, which I feel manages to trade each other out. There's also another great suspense scene that's centred on the villain's breaking into McCall's apartment in an attempt to kill him similar to the first film, though it's done with a different circumstance and focus instead of clever misleading by Fuqua. I can even add Susan's attack by the robbers as a suspense scene, albeit it does contain action. The sequence is just so nerve-wrecking by the brutality by both Susan and the robbers and it can be a bit hard-to-watch at times. To top that, all of these sequences are perfectly edited by seasoned editor, Conrad Buff IV. Overall, Fuqua manages to not only make another great job on the sequel, but even manages it to have its own unique identity compared to the first with the ways he switches up the action, visuals, tone, etc.

"The Equalizer 2" joins the ever-growing list of sequels that manages to surpass the original in quite a few ways. Although there's still pacing issues by some with the second act containing little action and the first act having the story placed on the back-burner, that's really about it. From the much tighter story and how the overarching sub-plots are handled better, the tone being even more serious than ever before with a less cliched narrative, Washington's reprisal performance as McCall, York being a more effective villain than the previous one, the rest of the cast being very well-acted and likeable by their actors and personalities, Wood's great cinematography, a more timeless and refined score by Gregson-Williams, another batch of fantastic action and suspense scenes edited this time by Buff, and Fuqua's signature bow of his talented filmmaking holding everything together for a very effective package. The only thing I should point out is that this as well as the first film might be for those who can't stand seeing woman suffering. The sequel is worse as we not only see a female being a victim to a drugged sexual assault, but there are two women who are brutally killed for somewhat meaningless ways motivational-wise. Outside of this trigger warning, this film has to be watched and experienced, which is not as hard considering that it's a stand-alone sequel that doesn't require one to watch the previous installment. I just hope Washington and Fuqua can unite once more for one final film in this series.

Verdict: 9/10. A brilliant sequel that expands and excels in what the original did best. If you love thought-provoking, action-thrillers with Denzel Washington in them, this has to be watched period!

The Equilizer (2014) Film Review: Denzel's Best Action Vehicle To Date!

Denzel Washington is widely known to be one of the most best actors currently working today. Not only does he possess so much charisma both on and offscreen, but he has managed to grab multiple Oscar nominations, including two wins for his acting. Although he's mainly seen as a dramatic actor and one who has starred in multiple biopics, he has done his share of action flicks as well. While there are some good watches, the one that manages to take the spotlight is the 2014 film based on the 80's series, directed by one of his longtime collaborators and friends, Antoine Fuqua. Robert McCall seems like a mid-aged employee of a local department store, but is in fact a retired government assassin who swore off his violent actions to his deceased wife. When he befriends a teenage prostitute who gets beat-up by her Russian pimp, he takes matters into his own hands and brutally kills the pimp and his guards after they refuse a deal to let McCall buy the girl's freedom. This causes the Russian mafia to send in their enforcer known as Teddy Rensen to not only check up on the business in Boston, but to hunt down McCall for killing the pimp. While all of this is happening, McCall realizes that there's no chivalry or justice in this world and realizes that only a man like himself can put an end to evil. The story is engaging for your typical action thriller and feels in nature to the one made in the 1970's such as "Dirty Harry". The story however can feel a tad messy as there's a lot that happens in the movie. From McCall's various deeds helping people out, his friendship with a employee who wants to be a security guard, Rensen attempting to learn about McCall and the two clashing against each other, all of these do manage to be balanced, paced well and engage the viewer. However, the inciting story thread with the teenage prostitute is perhaps the weakest element. Although that thread is pivotal to the story and the story fully closes out by the end, the girl practically vanishes in the story after she is hospitalized, only appearing in the first act and at the very end. One could've made tweaks to make the narrative tighter, but it's fine as is. Pacing wise, the action really begins after the first act. So for almost half an hour, you have to stay patient as McCall spends time chatting with the prostitute and his co-workers. While I personally can deal with the wait, I know that there can be those who just want an even amount of action throughout the film, even if it means to undermine story or character. The tone sticks more to the serious route as the violence is not attempting to be stylish and gritty like in the "John Wick" films, but brutal and realistic. This film sets itself in a realistic world with crime that goes under the radar and bad man all over the place, but there are always glimpses of satisfaction and hope with the characters and desires. 

Robert McCall is by far one of the best action protagonists in recent years, which is helped by Denzel Washington's excellent performance. McCall is a deadly force and can be very brutal and seemingly heartless to his foes, but he's both philosophical and forgiving. He wants and hopes for people to take one chance to take back their misdeeds or face punishment in his hands. There's just so much detail and personality to his character that goes down into a surface level, such as his OCD condition and how he couldn't have a peaceful sleep until the night he kills. He might appear like the most unstoppable force put into film and never seems to actually suffer or take a beating, but at the same time, he doesn't fight for his own life, but for the lives of others, much like a real hero. Marton Csokas plays Teddy Rensen, a somewhat generic enforcer for the Russian mafia who acts as the primary antagonist. Although he's the typical, cold-hearted killer that only pursues his goals, the film even makes him interesting in some level with a fantastic scene of him and McCall meeting face-to-face at a restaurant where the latter reveals his knowledge of Rensen's identity and misdeeds of the past. Regardless of whether he's fully developed or engaging, Csokas does a good job in the role. Chloe Grace Moretz plays Alina, the teenage prostitute who befriends McCall and desires to live a normal life. Although the character doesn't show up much through majority of the film, Moretz is great as the wounded, vulnerable victim to not only a criminal enterprise, but the society that gave up on her unlike McCall's noble nature. The main cast is also supported by a great supporting cast of side characters. From the aspiring security guard, Ralph, the corrupt policeman tied to the Russian mafia, Frank Masters, and former DIA officer as well as McCall's friend, Susan Plummer, the side characters as well as a few other characters I haven't mentioned are all given talented actors and have a memorable scene of their own. However, it is all possible by Washington's riveting performance as McCall that gives off a quality of acting and character to the rest of the cast.

Antoine Fuqua is one of the most underrated directors in the industry. Although he has made various blockbusters and a critically-acclaimed film with "Training Day", not a lot of people really acknowledge how much talent he has for filmmaking. A lot of it has to do with the fantastic cinematography by Mauro Fiore, which captures the visually compelling vision of Fuqia. There's just so much good composition in this movie that it can be one of those films that can be muted and it will still tell the story and emotion through the camera lens and lighting alone. While there's not as much iconography or visually distinct, colourful sequences, it's not supposed to be, given the grounded tone and world. Boston is a city that can be pretty at times in the warm daytime scenes, but acts as the seedy underbelly of criminal activity in the nighttime. The score by Harry Gregson-Williams is very good with the highlights being the softer, somber theme for McCall and the main action theme that is played at the end of the climax that's both awesome for an action scene, yet effective in a dramatic sense. The song, "Vengeance" by Zack Hemsey, used throughout the climax is well paced and edited to the scene itself and I always connect that song to this movie because of it. "Gut Over Fear", the song by Eminem and Sia, is however not a memorable or even that good of a song. It honestly makes "Venom" look like "Lose Yourself". There has been better Eminem movie tie-in songs at the end of the day. The best thing to really demonstrate Fuqua's directing though is through the action and suspense scenes. Not only is Washington doing his own stunts, but the action is just both cool and hard to watch at the same time, just due to the brutality of the kills. The sequences are also just very creative from the quick massacre in the pimp's office, the suspenseful misdirection of the villains searching through McCall's apartment, McCall's interrogating Masters by suffocating him with gasoline, and the climax where McCall turns his local hardware store into a booby-trapped filled deathtrap for Rensen and his men. The scenes, especially the apartment scene, are edited perfectly by John Refoua and they create the exact amount of suspense and thrills that the viewer needs. It's an extremely well-made picture and it's mainly all thanks to Fuqua for leading his team the vision of the project.

"The Equilizer" remains as one of my favourite action film from the past decade. While the story is a tad messy with regards to the overstuffed narrative, Alina's relevance in the film feels somewhat half-baked as she disappears after the first act of the film, the pacing in the first act can make action fanatics test their patience, and the Eminem song tied in to the film is very mediocre. With that said though, everything else about the film is perfect. From the overarching story arcs, the handling of the tone, Washington as McCall, the entire cast being talented and having an engaging personality, the fantastic cinematography by Fiore, Gregson-William's score, awesome action and suspenseful sequences edited brilliantly by Refoua, and the extremely talented directing by Fuqua tying it all together. If you can't handle the slower-paced first act or stomach some of the hard-to-watch scenes regarding the prostitutes or the action, you might not get into this movie much. But, if you love action as a whole, excellent filmmaking in general, or a huge Washington fan, this will undoubtedly be a great watch for you.

Verdict: 8.5/10. A really great flick. Will be reviewing the sequel later this week and constantly hoping for a third film in the series. 

King Kong (2005) Film Review: The Remake That's Both Better And Worse Than The Original...

"King Kong" remains one of the most beloved films from the 1930's. From its groundbreaking special effects, the memorable characters, and the high sense of adventure and stakes, the film is recognized to not only be an important film from its time, but one of the greatest films of all time. Although there was a remake back in 1976 that got some acknowledgement for its visual effects and modern setting, it proved to not be very memorable as time goes on. However, it is Peter Jackson's 2005 remake that had everyone's attention from the moment of its production. From the big-name cast and crew, the largest budget up to date, and modern technology being able to accomplish more than what anyone could imagine from 1933, it was a smash hit and has sparked many debates of if the film was better or inferior than the classic, to which I will discuss in this review. During the Great Depression, a down-on-her-luck vaudeville actress, Ann Darrow, is hired by Carl Denham, a filmmaker wanted by the authorities, as she learns that her favourite playwright, Jack Driscoll, wrote the screenplay for Denham's movie. As the crew go on a long voyage by boat, Carl reveals that he intends to set the film on the undiscovered Skull Island. As the crew set foot on the mysterious island, they are attacked by the local natives and Ann is sent as a sacrifice to the giant ape known as Kong. While everyone forms a rescue operation to rescue Ann, the ape has no interest in eating the actress, but befriending her as she seems to be the only one to understand his animal instinct and behaviour. The remake stays pretty faithful to the original and just expands on it rather than alter or completely change it. When I mean expand upon, I literally mean expand upon as the runtime of over three hours crams in plenty of scenes, from the long boat ride, the various dangers on Skull Island, more chemistry with Ann and Kong, etc. While it allows so much extra detail, the issue is that the pacing is just completely all over the place. For almost an hour, the crew doesn't arrive on Skull Island, and by the time they capture Kong, there's still another hour left of the film. Every act has their respective moments in the film, but the core issue is that it's just way too long and while there's no real filler, scenes go on for just a bit too long. Tonally, it manages to stay in nature with the original as it's a film that is just a bit intense for children, but not enough to downright scare them as the movie does have its share of funny moments along with the action and horror-like elements. 

Naomi Watts as Ann Darrow is very good as the talented, but unlucky actress with her own sense of attitude. While she's an enjoyable presence in the first act, I love the lack of dialogue she shares with Kong throughout the movie as she knows that there's no real point in attempting to talk to it. Jack Black is such a strange, yet effective actor to play Carl Denham, the filmmaker who becomes obsessed with Kong whether it's to film or capture him. At first, it feels weird to have this very comedic actor to be in a film that mostly takes itself very seriously, but Black manages to slip into the role as both this sympathetic and unlikeable man who lost his sense of moral or loyalty. Adrien Brody is also a really good choice as Jack Driscoll, a playwright who falls in love with Ann and has no interest in capturing or killing Kong. While Brody fits the part for his dry wit, especially appearance-wise, he's not the most engaging character of the film as he never does anything notably bad-ass during the journey nor has a complex arc as Denham, other than being the one to save Ann from Kong by the end of the second act. The side characters include Captain Englehorn, the hardened leader of the ship who doesn't trust Denham, Preston, Denham's personal assistant, Benjamin Hayes, the first mate who leads the rescue expedition due to her army training back in The Great War, Jimmy, a young sailor who looks up to Hayes, Bruce Baxtor, an actor who specializes in adventure films and is hired by Denham to take part of the movie, Lumpy and Choy, notable sailors who join in the expedition, and Herb and Mike, Denham's cameraman and soundman. As you can tell, there's a lot of notable side characters in the film and although there are some very likeable performances and personalities, the issue is that there's just way too many side characters and some of them don't even do anything in the third act. I won't say who gets killed or not during the film, but I will say that some of those side characters do manage to survive, yet have no role in the third act whether it's to be killed or help out the main leads during Kong's rampage. The last character to mention is Kong himself, portrayed by motion-capture legend Andy Serkis, who also plays Lumpy. I personally love this interpretation of Kong the most, as it's essentially a giant silverback gorilla, which not only makes it a more distinct portrayal, but actually gives more reason for Ann to care for the creature as she acknowledges that he's really just a giant animal that means no real harm. However, I don't like how some scenes of the two go on for too long and the "ice-skating" scene in Central Park is just way too silly in my opinion. Regardless, all of the characters are actually very well-casted and characterized, it's just that there's way too many side characters for my liking.

After the immense success of the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy, many wondered what could be Peter Jackson's next cinematic epic and masterpiece. While Jackson didn't exactly create a revolutionary film with this remake, it's abundantly clear that he put all of his effort and dedication to the film, considering his love for the original. The 1930's backdrop is wonderfully created with tons of effects and excellent production design to have some authenticity to the world. Although it would have been more interesting to have the film be set in modern-day, I got to give credit to Jackson that he managed to perfectly emulate the time period. The third act also makes New York to be a very lavish and gorgeous city with the night sky and winter aesthetic, along with Times Square's shining aesthetic and product placement. Skull Island itself is also a haunting, yet lavish landscape filled with creative sets and tons of detail in its location. The set designs themselves are fantastic as practically all of the film was shot in some sound-stage or studio in New Zealand, which is an impressive feat for a film that looks like at least a quarter of it appeared to be on location. The cinematography by Andrew Lesnie, a long-time collaborator of Jackson, is very good and has expression depending on the location and mood, whether it's the cramp, tiny ship, the scary base of the island with the local natives, and the beautiful wide-shots of the island offering some beauty in an island filled with beasts. However, there are some shots of slowed-down, motion blur with awkward slants that really makes me nauseous. I assume that's by design, and it's clearly a trademark of both Lesnie and Jackson in other established works, but man, those moments are just ugly to the senses, regardless of the intention behind them. The score by James Newton Howard is very good and has lots of both epic and dramatic pieces. I love the subdued music at times, mainly during the snake pit scene. The visual effects still hold up fifteen years later. The majority of the CGI looks great with tons of detail and motion for Kong, dinosaurs, and creatures. However, there's a lot of green-screen being used and it gets very noticeable with the stampede scene and some instances with Ann being held by Kong. Lastly, there's the action to mention, which once again is simply captivating to watch. The highlights are clearly the snake pit, Kong's battle with the T-Rex pack, and the climax where Kong is causing a rampage in New York. The action is captured brilliantly with the best effects possible and some cool hero moments for plenty of the characters. Jackson is known to be a fantastic filmmaker and, although he made some mistakes, he still managed to make a great-looking and sounding blockbuster.

"King Kong" is a remake that has managed to surpass the original in a variety of ways, but still falls behind it in others. There's plenty of good that the remake does. The story and tone stays true to the original, all of the characters are casted well and given distinct and likeable personalities, the production and set design manages to bring life to Skull Island and takes viewers back into the world of the 1930's, Lesnie offer some great shots with plenty of emotion and mood captured in each one, Howard's score is as good as the composer is known for, the visual effects are still good-looking fifteen years later, there's plenty of noteworthy action or horror scenes that keeps you engaged or suspenseful for the outcome, and Jackson's directing manages to hold everything together by passion and skill. However, the original manages to be effective, mainly by how simple and precise the filmmakers were in taking an ambitious story and making it accessible for anyone, no matter as time goes on. While there are a lot of good things Jackson managed to come out with, there's a few glaring issues that stick out to everyone. The three hour runtime kills the pacing, the expanded story adds intriguing, but not very necessary, details in a snail's pace, scenes go on for too long, there's way too many side characters that won't play a role in the third act regardless of their fate, the motion blur shots Jackson is known for continue to make viewers like me nauseous, and the heavy amounts of green-screen causes people to point out some fake and awkward moments. So, although the remake has qualities that could have potentially made it one of the best films of the decade, there were just a few too many issues that prove critical to the viewing experience. Regardless if you prefer the original or the remake, there's one thing I can't deny, which is that Jackson's film is practically one of those films that must be watched at least once in your life, especially on the big screen.

Verdict: 7/10. Good, but not great. Both films will stand the test of time, though the original will be the easier watch. If you however want a more modern version with great action, filmmaking and effects, the remake should be able to more than please you.

Land of the Dead (2005) Film Review: Romero's Big Yet Satisfactory Return To The Zombie Genre

George A. Romero is best known for creating the modern zombie with the "Dead" trilogy. After "Day of the Day" initially didn't receive a warm welcome in the box office or critically, Romero took a hiatus and it seemed that we might never get another film of his again. However, twenty years after Day came out, he would return to make his grand return to the genre he helped create during the most popular decade of the flesh-eating monsters. Many years after the outbreak, a community of survivors have been able to create a secure outpost in Pittsburgh. The majority of survivors live on the streets protected by an electric fence and soldiers, while a group of volunteers will travel outside the city to grab food and supplies. The community is overrun by Paul Kaufman, the owner of an apartment complex known as Fiddler's Green, where the rich are able to live in comfort and security without worry of the dangers outside. When Kaufman denies a place at Fiddler's Green for the hard-working mercenary, Cholo, the hot-headed punk takes over a weaponized vehicle known as Dead Reckoning and threatens to blow up the building unless he's paid five million dollars. Kaufman decides to hire Riley, Cholo's former partner, in order to stop Cholo with a group of his own. While all of this is occurring, the survivors are unaware that the zombies are becoming more intelligent, as a leader of the hoard known as Big Daddy, are making their way towards the city and Fiddler's Green, seeking vengeance for their slain people. There's a lot that's happening in the plot, especially for the short runtime. While all three stories work fine enough and do all merge together by the end, the issue is that the story with Riley being hired to take down Cholo is the most uninteresting story. Not only are the characters involved in that story not interesting or engaging, but it really makes them unlikeable as they are taking orders from the villain to stop a guy with real motivation to kill the corrupt ruler of the city. It could be by design to make everyone this moral grey status, but it backfires on the characters and it just makes the viewers root for the zombies. The narrative as a whole though is still entertaining and the third act practically pays off everything that has been established. The tone is still in nature to Romero's franchise with a sense of humour and references to previous work, though still takes itself serious. It's pretty good and is accessible to those who both want a serious horror flick or a fun horror movie, though I personally think that Romero's previous films had a more solid tone.

The characters of the previous "Dead" films were generally pretty good. Not only are there plenty of fun and badass characters who take charge, but a lot of them feel somewhat realistic, given the circumstance. Not every character is likeable or very developed, but they have their share of lines and debates with other, colourful characters. Although the fourth installment brings a few, new likeable faces, there's a lot of uninteresting or even unlikeable characters that outnumber the good characters. First, I'll address the good characters. First, there's John Leguizamo's Cholo, who is an anti-hero figure who did a lot of Kaufman's dirty work in the hopes to earn a place in Fiddler's Green, which he finds out he would never get. He's both a character you want to root for as he's taking the initiative to get rid of Kaufman, but at the same time, he doesn't really care for people much and tends to be a bit of a douchebag. Robert Joy's Charlie is Riley's partner who really should have been the main character of the film in the first place. He's got a facial defect, has a nervous personality, yet he's a talented marksman with his trademark of licking his finger and placing it on the sight of his old, hunting rifle. There's also Pillsbury, the giant Samoan guard who has some good lines. Lastly, there's Big Daddy, the leader of the zombie horde. While he has no dialogue, the physical acting by Eugene Clark is so great at giving him a personality and a bit of emotion, even though all the zombie does is grunt and yell. Sadly, that's all of the good characters in the film to point out. Riley is by far the most boring protagonist in the series. Not only does he have some weird moral compasses as he takes orders from Kaufman, yet is clearly worried about the people first, but he has no fun personality. He's a stick in the mud that not only doesn't know how to have fun, but doesn't learn anything throughout the film. Slack, played by Asia Argento, is another generic female warrior archetype who doesn't like being talked down to. Not only is she a huge step-down from Sarah in "Day of the Dead", but she just comes across as a bland love interest for Riley who comes across as a bit of a douchebag for her uncalled shooting at her allies. Dennis Hopper as Kaufman does have some charisma as the slimy villain who wants to control the people of the city, but the character himself is just not that engaging, both personality-wise or hammy performance-wise. There were much better villains in previous "Dead" films and while Kaufman is one that the audience wants to see killed, he's also just not that interesting. The side characters are just there either as forgettable background roles such as the crew of Dead Reckoning, or just another number in the body count like Manolete and Motown. There are more interesting side characters in the survivor settlement such as Mulligan, but they barely do anything in the main story and it begs the question why these characters aren't the protagonists as anyone would be more interesting than Riley.

Romero's directing skills should never be doubted upon as he clearly has the love for the art of filmmaking. What is most striking of his films is that he really likes for the viewer to soak in the setting and environment. While the fourth "Dead" film is pretty dark and grimy with an emphasis on shadows and night-time scenes, you get the sense of scale that Romero is known for with the creative production and set design. From Fiddler's Green's luxurious setting to the slums where zombies have become entertainment for the poor and broken survivors, the world is fully realized and it's a more unique take on what would happen many years after the zombie outbreak. It makes sense that someone would attempt to have some feudal government that relies on wealth and power during this time. The cinematography by Miroslaw Baszak is good enough with some creative shots from time-to-time. The score by Reinhold Heil and Johnny Klimek is average for the most part, but the various nods to the thematic score of "Day of the Dead" whenever Big Daddy is leading a charge or thinking of a plan is an excellent homage. The make-up and gore effects are really good with some very gross-out moments that stand out. The make-up and visual designs of the zombies however could have gone for a more decaying look, considering that it's supposed to be years since the last film. However, if there's one issue with Romero's ambition, it would be that he went overboard with the use of CGI. While the use of green-screen for the city shots are acceptable, the fact that every head-shot or blood splatter is digital really bugs me as well as die-hard fans. There's still plenty of on-camera gore that proves really grotesque and convincing enough, but it begs the question why Romero had every head-shot be comprised from a computer, considering that his previous films made them look very grisly and effective. Regardless of how he used CGI to its effect, Romero still demonstrates a sense of vision and passion in the horror industry that is sorely missed in today's standards.

"Land of the Dead" is not going to rival the first three films that Romero had made. From the storyline of Riley being hired by Kaufman to kill Cholo hampering the characters involved, the characters of Riley and Slack being just generic archetypes of the genre, Kaufman not being an engaging villain despite Hooper's performance, the overwhelming amount of side-characters that make you stop caring, and the use of CGI blood and zombie kills remains pretty distracting. However, the film is actually good in its own merits. The overarching narrative as a whole is pretty fun to watch as you anticipate the chaotic third-act when all parties get involved, the tone is still that classic Romero feel with the cheeky humour thrown in with the serious nature of the story and characters, the characters of Cholo, Charlie, Pillsbury, and Big Daddy are enjoyable in their own right and makes you want to root for them in general, the dark, dreary landscape that is home to a distinctly creative city with its own developed functions thanks to some great production design and some shots by Baszak, the score by Heil and Klimek does its job fine with the homage to "Day of the Dad" being its saving grace, the make-up and gore effects are as good as ever, and Romero's creative and passionate direction really drives the film more into an above-average watch. It might be regarded by many as the fourth best of the series, but considering its competition from the franchise (both good and bad), that doesn't discredit the quality or Romero's skills as a filmmaker, even if there were hiccups that could've been avoided.

Verdict: 7/10. Good enough, but not in the levels of great that the previous films have reached. Watch if you're a fan of zombie flicks and Romero's work, even if the main characters and CGI blood are pretty awful at times.