George A. Romero's Survival of the Dead Movie Review

Posted by: TheNightlyGamer

George A. Romero is a name synonymous with the zombie sub-genre. The man has been at it for so long that the first entry in his “of the Dead” series was in black and white for Christ’s sake. If it weren’t for him, films like “28 Days/Weeks Later,” “Return of the Living Dead,” “Dawn of the Dead 2004″ and “Shaun of the Dead” would never exist, among many others. Not only has the man inspired some great zombie films, but he’s made quite a few of his own. “Survival of the Dead” is his most recent and it’s exactly what you would expect from such a veteran of the craft.

It’s widely known that each of the “of the Dead” films by Romero have a theme of sorts. In “Dawn of the Dead,” the theme was consumerism, dependence on material goods to bring one happiness. Flash forward to “Diary of the Dead” where the theme is about people disassociating themselves from an event when they’re behind the lens of a camera and the ever-growing popularity of viral videos. With “Survival of the Dead,” the theme doesn’t seem to be as broad as the themes in other films, but it’s still quite engaging. In this one, the theme appears to be the pride of man and how it can literally ruin their entire lives.

There isn’t one specific main character in this movie which is quite common for the genre. Instead, there is a rag-tag band of characters who have come together out of desperation. One of the more important characters is ‘Nicotine’ Crocket (Alan Van Sprang) who you may remember as the leader of the rogue militant group that robbed the kids from “Diary ofthe Dead .” He and his troupe are as ruthless as ever, but after watching this film, you’ll look probably look at them in a different light. Desperate times call for desperate measuresand the gangs tactics for survival are only natural.

Another notable character who affects the storyline more so than Crocket and his band is Patrick O’Flynn. (Kenneth Welsh) He’s the head of the O’Flynn family and he lives on a little island called “Plum.” Since the schoolyard, he’s never seen eye-to-eye with the head of the Muldoon family, a man named Shamus. (Richard Fitzpatrick) Oncethe zombie apocalypse begins, tensions grow even more between Patrick and Shamus. Patrick gathers a posse together to put bullets in the heads of all those that dare to continue to walk long after they’re dead. On the other hand, Shamus and his posse believe that the dead can be cured of their condition at some point and that they can grow to accept animals as a food source instead of humans. This disagreement between Patrick and Shamus leads to a tense stand-off that ends with Patrick being banished from theisland.

Without giving too much away, after being banished, Patrick as well as the remaining members of his posse meet up with Crocket and his crew. They form an unsteady allianceand the wiley O’Flynn convinces Crocket to return to “Plum” with promises of a docile environment to live. Suffice to say, once returning to “Plum,” things don’t stay friendly for too long as the rivalry between Patrick and Shamus reaches new levels. It should be clear to you that this is a very story driven film. Much like any “ofthe Dead” film, this emphasis on story-telling is what separates George A. Romero’s zombie films from the others in the genre.

It’s been decades since the first movie in the series, “Night of the Living Dead” was released and the reason for the sudden zombie outbreak is still unknown. Unlike other zombie movies, the “of the Dead” series doesn’t revolve around the origins of the outbreak, whether it be viral or supernatural. The outbreak is occurring and the movies are about how various people from all walks of life are dealing with the situation. “Survival of the Dead” tells an extremely interesting tale about how a mans pride can take him to depths that he probably never thought he could reach. If Patrick and Shamus could simply come to an agreement, so much blood-shed could have been avoided. Not only that, but a possible solution tothe zombie outbreak could have been found.

In addition to having a strong story and some admirable acting across the board, “Survival of the Dead” will not disappoint the gore-hounds out there. There is some not-too-impressive CG gore at times, but for the most part, the effects are organic and incredibly gruesome. You can expect to see cheeks torn off and spinal chords chewed on. There’s plenty of violence throughout, but it really picks up near the end. The phrase “no animals were harmed during the making of this film” appears during the credits of any film with animals in it, but it’s never been more necessary than it is in “Survival ofthe Dead .” Most people could care less about human-on-human violence, but add a farm animal to the equation and they get all whiny. A particular scene in this film towards the end is especially for them.

Zombie films don’t get much better than “Survival of the Dead.” It doesn’t have the fast moving zombies of “28 Days/Weeks Later” and it really doesn’t need them. The story is thoroughly entertaining as is the action and violence. When compared to other films in the genre, “Survival ofthe Dead” is certainly a league above. Horror fans in general should easily find something to like about this one. All of George A. Romero’s “of the Dead ” films are entertaining in some manner, but this is definitely one of the better of the series, if not the best. Hopefully, the age-old director has a couple more films left in him, because he seems to be back on track with the series. If you consider yourself a zombie fan, you’d have to be infected with some sort of unspecified plague to miss “Survival of the Dead.”