Watch Land of the Dead For Free

Don't listen to the negative reviews

best movie i've ever seen.

it is finally so absorbing because it plays like a lyrical road odyssey that’s also a detective story.

Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

Hollywood 'A' listers Dennis Hopper and John Leguizamo ride George Romero's coat tails with mediocre results in the fourth installment of the Dead series. The plot seems like an afterthought after the first three. Here, an established colony faces life in a zombie infested world. They play the class warfare card throughout- positioning different characters in different social classes and portraying the zombies themselves as the ultimate "have nots" in the new society. So, George Romero and Company have definitely entered the post modern identity politics conflict. Man has become the prime villain again in this one with Dennis Hopper exploiting the masses for his own personal gain.Our zombies are evolving in this one as well, with some starting to show signs of cognitive thought. Interesting idea, but we didn't really have to go there to freshen this up.

George A. Romero finally was able to continue his legendary "living dead" series, 20 years after "Day of the Dead", with this apocalyptic horror / action film. Zombies are now everywhere you look, but in a community dubbed Fiddler's Green, people are protected by the fact that the city is surrounded on three sides by rivers. And zombies haven't learned to swim...yet. The less fortunate are left to fend for themselves while rich people like Kaufman (Dennis Hopper) live in luxurious high rises. Trouble arises when Kaufmans' errand boy Cholo DeMora (John Leguizamo) is not compensated for his services, and becomes disgruntled, stealing a cutting edge vehicle called Dead Reckoning and intending to use its weapons."Land of the Dead" in no way compares to Romeros' original trilogy: "Night", "Dawn", and "Day". Nothing here is destined to become iconic, although Dead Reckoning is itself pretty cool. The action is decent, the violence and makeup effects good (despite the overuse of digital gore), and some of the supporting characters (like Robert Joy's slow witted burn victim Charlie) are interesting or amusing (Leguizamo is great fun). However, Romeros' expected social commentary component may be a little too on the nose and unsubtle here, with the upper class seen as largely villainous and the unruly lower class left out in the cold. Kaufman in particular is pretty one dimensional, but Hopper is good in the role.Simon Baker ('The Mentalist') is a passable hero, but he is very well supported by Leguizamo, Joy, the sultry Asia (daughter of Dario) Argento as a hooker whose fortunes keep changing, and Eugene Clark, who gets the showcase role of "Big Daddy", a zombie with an especially commanding presence who is shown to be able to communicate with and lead others of his kind. Horror / zombie buffs will appreciate the cameos by a select few performers.There's nothing special here, but "Land" does entertain in capable enough fashion.Seven out of 10.

We begin the movie seeing zombies milling around aimlessly, suggesting that they have spent way too much time unable to do what they mostly love to do, which is feed. Apparently, the inactivity was so endless, the zombies began to retake their former lives and carry out certain aspects of it. Meanwhile, civilization is not completely lost. There is a haven that is called "Fiddler's Green" which is owned and operated by a business mogul named Kaufman, who has been able to continue his trade, even in the face of humanity's total annihilation and provides divided shelter to anyone that is left alive. He has assembled an army of mercenaries, military men and even police officers to ensure some type of order in his empire, and these same people are the ones trusted with the task of scouring for whatever resources they can find deep within enemy lines. Enter our leading men; Riley, Cholo and Charlie. Riley and Charlie representing the good nature that is still preserved in man and Cholo continuing the time honored tradition of greed and mistrust. Longer story short, Kaufman summons the fury of Cholo by treating him like a total peon, after Cholo had the notion that he would be able to join Fiddler's Green's finest living arrangements and become part of the respected elite but Kaufman declines his solicitation, proving that elitism and social class distinction is still alive and well. Cholo seeks comeuppance a different way, by stealing the Green's most powerful vehicle "Dead Reckoning" which is designed to repel a strong zombie attack and holds it for ransom, with the intention of cheating Kaufman out of both his money and car, just like Kaufman cheated Cholo out of a better life. Riley is summoned to retrieve both Cholo and Dead Reckoning by Kaufman, considering Riley designed Dead Reckoning and is closer to Cholo than anyone left in the Green. Riley takes Charlie and a lady who was rescued by both from being eaten by zombies and they go pursue Cholo. Kaufman has sent 3 soldiers with Riley, who are instructed to take Dead Reckoning back, but also dispose of Riley because like Cholo, he also reflects dissent in Kaufman's utopia. Riley succeeds in taking back Dead Reckoning, leaving Cholo to fend for himself and choose his own path, as he no longer wishes to be part of any team. All throughout this, the zombies had actually managed to kill off surrounding patrols and cross a river in order to get to Fiddler's, proving that they have indeed evolved and develop limited but effective cognitive skills. Fiddler's Green becomes under siege and Kaufman becomes a casualty, thanks to Cholo himself and Riley and his team finish off the remaining threat, and proceed to find less secluded but secure locations in Canada.The movie has strong points and goes a different direction by allowing zombies to actually communicate and rationalize. Personally, I loved it. Here are the only 2 points I didn't like about this film, though: The ending. The movie was awesome in its darker and hopeless tone, it gave you a feeling of actual doom. Even though that the zombies have become more aware, they are still relatively evil and naturally inclined to eliminate whatever is left human. So why let a rather large population of them roam around when you're looking for a safer place? The movies themselves have said it: As long as we're alive, they will never run out of food. As long as they're around, there ARE NO safer places. They are not animals. Animals have the capacity to show emotion, compassion and even love. Zombies, no matter how progressed they are, are by all means unable to develop these traits. Their survival instincts may improve but ultimately their purpose should not change as their bodies have wasted away whatever humanity they had left. Pretty questionable move on Romero in the end, but since the movie barely shows any real heart, Im guessing this was done to make up for that. The second point I disagreed with was the dialogue. In Night, Dawn and Day, it seemed to tie the movie together, to have characters show a sense of rationality or reasoning as to why this has happened, thus making us sympathize with them in their situation. Here in Land, it's nowhere to be found. The Riley character was pretty weak and it made you wonder how Bub, who could not speak as he was a zombie in Day, made you bawl your eyes out in his performance, and yet Simon Baker who has a leading role could not. Asia Argento is in this movie but her character is really not that important to the story. I will end this by saying that I love the movie. For what it is, it is pretty good, I mean it is still better than any zombie stuff made around the time it came out, most notably Resident Evil, which degenerated after the 2nd installment and definitely way better than Diary of the Dead, which came after it but it relied on the overused hand-held horror technique. Survival of the Dead was just a horror spoof of a horror classic. One thing this movie continues to emphasize: The ego and pride of man continue to be his worst enemy. You know humanity is in trouble when after 40 years of horror, the zombies have managed to come together for a purpose and end up overtaking the seemingly smarter humans. Nice one, Mr. Romero.

After producing a highly successful trilogy and the most notorious zombie films, Romero launched his 4th film Land of the Dead, putting him in a pressure situation to pull off another classic. Even though it's respectable of Romero to make each film unique and sort of evolve through each stage of film-making, it seems he lost a bit of touch when creating Land of the Dead. The zombie's make-up, walking motions and the traditional ghoulish completeness was missing or not executed to Romero's standard. Furthermore, the special effects seemed to be too modern and had less attention to detail in death scenes. There is one really cool scene that sticks out when two zombies rip a hand apart but that's about all that's memorable.With all that being said, it's not to say Land of the Dead was completely lousy since his characters and storyline maintained my viewing interest. Dennis Hopper, Simon Baker, Asia Argento and John Luguizamo were all excellent, as well as the supporting cast members like Robert Joy and Joanne Boland. The most important thing when watching this movie is to expect a quality or traditional nature of Romero's previous three films, he always seems to throw some curve balls. If that's done as a viewer, perhaps some enjoyment can be found when checking out Land of the Dead.