11:14 (2003)

Director: Greg Marcks
Format: DVD
DVD Features: trailer, commentary, deleted scenes, featurette
Starring: Patrick Swayze, Shawn Hatosy, Rachael Lee Cook, Hillary Duff
trailer

If there’s a moral to the story of 11:14, it’s that idiots shouldn’t drive. And if there’s a second lesson to be learned, it’s that if you find a body, don’t try to hide it.

11:14 is about the mishaps of five (or six, or four, depending on which review you read) different people living in Middletown, Rural America. The significance of the time mark indicates the point at which their stories intersect. Each story is presented, and then, time reversed so that another tale can be told, all culminating in the moment when the their connection is clarified.

Our first victim of circumstance is Jack (Henry Thomas). He’s just finished a phone conversation when, out of nowhere, a body lands on his car. Since he’s been drinking, he decides that it might be a good idea to hide the evidence. A passerby stops to ask what the trouble is, and assumes that the driver has hit a deer in the road. But, when the cop who reports to the scene opens up the trunk, a mad chase through the woods ensues.

Flash back to Frank (Patrick Swayze), who’s watching his daughter leave from the window of their home. He decides to take his dog out for a walk through the cemetery. His discovers his daughter’s keys on the ground and then runs headlong into a body, its skull crushed beyond identification. Thinking that it was his daughter who committed the murder in self-defense, he decides to protect her by getting rid of the corpse.

Enter Eddie (Ben Foster), Mark (Colin Hanks) and Tim (Stark Sands). They’re a trio of drunken misfits out for a joyride, setting things on fire and hucking stale donuts at passing cars. When one of them decides that to hang his manhood out of the window instead of making a pit stop, he winds up seriously regretting it.

Then, we have Duffy (Shawn Hatosy), who is Cheri’s boyfriend (and who totally reminds me of my ex) and he’s gotten himself into quite a fix. His girlfriend is pregnant and the only way he sees to get the money for her abortion is to rob the convenience store he works at. Buzzy (Hilary Swank), the girl on night shift, doesn’t want to cooperate. But, when she realizes that she might lose her job for accidentally busting a window, she elects to take a bullet wound to make the robbery look convincing.

Cheri (Rachael Lee Cook) is Frank’s daughter. She’s also Duffy’s girlfriend, with a couple of tricks up her sleeve. Not only does she have Duffy running her errands, she’s got two more boyfriends under her thumb and a plot to make it out of town with some cash. It’s Cheri's story that finally wraps everything up and ties all of the tales together.

Even though she’s not the main focus of this movie, Hillary Duff plays her role fantastically. Her tendency to take on characters which make her look neither sexy nor glamorous really earns her a bit of credit in my eyes. I think that it shows that she’s built her career on solid acting skills rather than a huge rack and a family fortune. Swayze, who usually annoys the hell out of me, fits perfectly into the role of overprotective father. The entire cast of 11:14 impressed the hell out of me. I was totally convinced of each and every character and it was one of the best features of the film. The character around which all three stories ultimately spawn is Cook’s. Even though she’s the town tramp, this little chick’s a bit more clever than I expected.

For an inexperienced director, Marcks does a heck of a job with 11:14. Even though I’ve read a series of glowing reviews of this film, I don’t remember it getting much attention in the press at all. While the storytelling technique in his movie has been used before in movies like Momento, Pulp Fiction and Amores Perros, it doesn’t appear tired and uninspired here. It’s true that 11:14 could have taken a more serious spin, trying to teach lessons about morality and consequence, but it doesn’t take on such a lofty attitude. On the contrary, the entire adventure is treated with a comic touch. Nobody in the film is without blame, but there isn’t anyone to hate all the same. It’s a whole lot of fun and doesn’t try to preach.

Overall Rating: 4
Hottie Rating: 2 (for Cook and her outfit)

Alternate viewing: Run Lola Run
Official site
IMDB site
The Onion AV Club Review

***Note: If you found this review via IMDB, please let us know by leaving a comment. Thanks!***

Runaway Jury (2003)

Director: Gary Fleder
Format: DVD
DVD Features: commentary, deleted scenes, featurettes
Starring: John Cusack, Dustin Hoffman, Rachel Weisz, Gene Hackman
Trailer

The latest trend arriving in my mailbox appears to be a series of John Grisham inspired films. Previously, I had never been partial to court drama. However, working in a law office has given me a bit of new perspective on the topic. I have also never been a reader of Grisham’s novels, although I haven’t intentionally avoided them. So, it seems slightly odd to me that at some point many months ago, I felt that I needed to add some legal material to my movie repertoire. It has become somewhat of an adventure to travel this seemingly random path I have chosen. It almost makes me wonder if I shouldn’t open up my Netflix queue to the general public just to see what I’ll end up with.

In Runaway Jury, Wendell Rohr (Dustin Hoffman) and Durwood Cable (Bruce Davison) are attorneys on opposing sides of lawsuit that will ultimately decide whether or not gun manufacturers can be held responsible for the deaths of people killed by their products. The plot thickens, though, when a third party surfaces offering to sway the jury to either side in return for a cool ten million (give or take a few mil). On each side of the case, is a jury consultant who makes his living trying to judge which jurors will vote in their favor.

There are a lot of dual-sided elements to this film. Obviously, there is the conflict involved with the case itself. Then, just as obviously, there is the issue of gun control and constitutional rights. Two lawyers represent opposite sides of the case, two profilers attempting to aid either side, and two people working together to manipulate the case. But despite this black and white aspect to the film, the characters don’t quite balance each other out. Gene Hackman’s character, Rankin Fitch (I like the name), is working for the bad guys. He directs a team assigned to photograph, investigate and basically stalk all of the potential jurors in the case. After the jury is chosen, they continue to manipulate the lives of these people in order to convince them to favor their side of the case. Fitch is apparently an old hand at the business and his personality far overshadows that of Lawrence Green (Jeremy Piven), who is his counterpart on the good guy’s side. Rohr is counsel for the good side of the fight, but this is one of Hoffman’s weaker roles. Cusack is….well, typically Cusack. His girlfriend Marlee (Rachel Weisz) is a bit more hardcore than he is. Weisz is very strong in this role and gives an excellent performance. She is fast becoming one of my more favorite actors.

One particularly disappointing characteristic of Runaway Jury is that the filmmakers make it abundantly clear which side of the gun control issue the story favors. Hoffman and Piven are both the more humble, earthy type of people than their counterparts, who are greasy, big city men. The conclusion of the film, not just the verdict in the case, leaves no grey area as to how the audience should feel about the right to bear arms. I have not read John Grisham’s novel, and therefore cannot attest as to the accuracy of the movie, but I wish that Runaway Jury had shown more of a balanced argument. Regardless of my personal beliefs surrounding the issue, I always like to see both sides of a topic represented, giving more freedom to the audience; more respect for their right to make their own descisions.

I really did enjoy the story, aside from the weight so apparently shifted to one side. I did not see the ending coming (the verdict, yes, but not the true motives of Easter and Marlee), so it was refreshing to be surprised. The story is sufficiently intricate and most of the characters are very strong. I would recommend Runaway Jury if you are the type of person who enjoys a good court mystery. If you aren’t usually the kind to go in for this sort of thing, I don’t think it’s so distinctly different from the rest of the genre.

Overall Rating: 3
Hottie Rating: 2 (for Weisz and Cusack in general)

Alternate viewing: The Pelican Brief
Official site (I was unable to navigate to Runaway Jury at Fox’s site here, even though there is a link to it. Maybe you’ll have better luck.)
IMDB site
The Onion AV Club review

***Note: If you found this review via IMDB, please let us know by leaving a comment. Thanks!***

Big Fish (2003)

Director: Tim Burton
Format: DVD
DVD Features: trivia game, commenatry, featurettes
Starring: Billy Crudup, Ewan McGregor, Albert Finney, Helena Bonham Carter
Trailer

Since the release of Frankenweenie and Pee Wee’s Big Adventure in the mid 80s, Tim Burton has been cultivating a loyal fan base. Most of his films are very successful at the box office and there are a number of well-known figures in Hollywood who collaborate with him regularly. In fact, part of the appeal to his movies, at least for me, is to see what people like Johnny Depp and Danny Elfman will have to contribute. There is no project in which he is involved however, that does not carry Burton’s unique stamp in one form or another. From the telltale black and white wardrobes and sets to the fairy tale ambiance, when you see a Burton film, there’s no mistaking that style.

In Big Fish, Albert Finney plays the aged and ailing Edward Bloom. Realizing that he might not get another chance, Mr. Bloom’s estranged son Will (Billy Crudup) travels to his father’s bedside in an attempt to find out the truth about the man’s life before it’s over. Will is frustrated because he has always heard about his father’s history in the form of fanciful stories and incredible adventures. He stopped believing the tales when he grew up, but has endured them over and over again whenever the elder Bloom recounts his past. It is through these recollections that the audience is introduced to the young Edward Bloom (Ewan McGregor).

As a young man, Bloom was the energetic hero of a small town. When he decides that he’s grown to big for his surroundings, he leaves to explore the bigger picture. He meets up with a giant named Carl (Matthew McGrory) and wanders off through an enchanted forest. There, he finds the small town of Spector; eerily pristine and picturesque. The two travel on and meet a roaming carnival. Under the big top, Edward spots the girl of his dreams, and Carl finds a career. For years, Bloom slaves away, doing odd jobs for the carnival’s boss, Amos (Danny DeVito) in exchange for simple facts about the mystery girl. Finally, he is able to woo her and shortly after the two are married, he is drafted into the war. Taking on the most dangerous assignments, the young hero parachutes into China where he meets the Siamese twins, Ping and Jing. After returning from the war, Bloom takes on a traveling sales job, ending up in the town of Spector again. He finds the town in disrepair and sets about rejuvenating the buildings and the residents. In between these flights of fancy, Will is trying to dig up the truth behind each tale.

Big Fish definitely has star power. Ewan McGregor, Danny DeVito, Helena Bonham Carter, Steve Buscemi, and Jessica Lange give stellar performances as the various and colorful characters in Blooms adventures. McGregor has always been an actor I enjoy. I like that he takes on a wide range of roles and I empathize with his distain for Hollywood. If it weren’t for the way he portrays Edward Bloom in this film, I think the character would have come off as a pretentious jerk. But, McGregor’s treatment of the role with sparkling grin and perseverance in the face of adversity makes Bloom eminently likeable. One other actor of note in this movie is Matthew McGrory. He made it into the Guinness Book of World Records twice; once for tallest actor and in 2006 for having the longest recorded feet.

The very best effect in Big Fish comes when Bloom spots the lovely young Sandra (Alison Lohman) under the big top. The surroundings come to a complete standstill, popcorn suspended in air and cat mid-jump. If you’ve seen the trailers to the film, you might recognize the scene I’m describing. There are some other computer aided scenes in the movie, particularly those of the fish, but they don’t click with the rest of the footage quite as nicely. Most of the visual appeal on screen comes from the very Burtonesque costuming and set design. Keep an eye on Mr. Soggybottom’s outfit particularly.

I don’t think that my enthusiasm for Tim Burton’s films is easily veiled. Because I enjoy the darker side of cinema and the aesthetic texture his movies project, I’d be predisposed to his work anyway. However, there’s a definite way in which he conveys each story and a style in which he directs the actors that goes beyond set design and stop action animation. There have been two disappointments to date in his filmography, but Big Fish wasn’t one of them. Despite the slightly creepy overtones to this film, it remains, much like Burton’s other works, upbeat and fun.

Overall Rating: 4
Hottie Rating: 1 (not McGregor at his hottest)

Alternate Viewing: Pee Wee's Big Adventure
Official site
IMDB site
Rotten Tomatoes review

***Note: If you found this review via IMDB, please let us know by leaving a comment. Thanks!***

I’ll Sleep When I’m Dead (2003)

Director: Mike Hodges
Venue: DVD
Trailer

The only complaint that I have with Netflix is that, often times, a disc will wait in my cue for several weeks before its turn to be shipped off in the mail. By the time that I get it, I can’t remember why I wanted that particular movie. Sometimes I just cruise around their site and click on whatever catches my fancy at the time. Other times, I get an interest in a certain actor and will rent anything with their name on it (anything that doesn’t look like a chick-flick). When I’ll Sleep When I’m Dead appeared in my mailbox, I remembered who’s filmography it came from, but my concept of the film was a good deal different from the reality of it.

Will Graham (Clive Owen) has spent the last 3 years living a quiet life in the forest; quite a change from the life he led as a gangster in the city. He’s left that life behind – or so he thinks. When his employment as a lumberjack is cut short, he decides to return to the city and check in with his brother Davey (Jonathan Rhys Meyers). Little does he know, just the day before his arrival, his brother had met an untimely end. So, he sets out – with little help from his severely dysfunctional family – to discover the reason behind his brother’s death and punish whoever may be responsible. The focus of this film is not actually Davey, as one might initially perceive. Rather, I saw the point being more about Will and the change – or inability to change – in his life, or in anyone’s life. I respect the choice of the director to create Will’s past out of character interaction, rather than flashbacks. Flashbacks have always seemed like the easy way out to me. Refraining from depicting Will’s former life visually serves to anchor the plot on the here and now and helps to maintain the focus of the story.

Plot: 3 stars

As I mentioned earlier, sometimes I get a fancy for a certain actor and decide to shop their filmography. The actor, in this case, is Clive Owen. I had seen him in Gosford Park and Closer. My interest was peaked by his performance in Sin City. I still haven’t decided if I like him or not though. After all, he doesn’t play the friendliest of characters. But, it’s that voice and that calm, cool delivery I can’t escape. Jonathan Rhys Meyers offers up a solid performance as the younger brother, even if it is a short part (and is, incidentally, quite the hottie). The mother (actually, I couldn’t quite tell if she was mom or not) of the two brothers (Helen) is played by Charlotte Rampling. Her character is completely devoid of maternal warmth and bitterly icy. I haven’t figured out what her motivations as the movie closes are, but she was perhaps the most complex person in the film. Although I disliked Mickser, the father figure of the boys, it is due entirely to the script and not at all to Jamie Foreman’s performance. In fact, it might be considered a testimony to it. The more I consider it, the acting was wonderful, but the roles themselves didn’t grab my interest as much as they should have.

Acting: 3 stars

If I was to be shelving movies at a rental store, I would file I’ll Sleep…under “drama” rather than “action”. For a movie about a former gangster, there is very little action involved. In fact, the film moves at a very slow pace. People walk slowly, move slowly, talk slowly and the story takes its own sweet time. A relaxed pace is not always a negative quality in a movie. Many Akira Kurosawa films are epically long, and still earn the description “masterpiece”. However, if you’re trying to watch this with an Attention Deficit Disorder afflicted teenager and a fidgety father, it can be painful.

Action: 1 star

I’ll Sleep When I’m Dead is beautifully filmed. Each frame is delectable and easily imagined as a postcard. Be sure to pick up the widescreen version (which is always preferable) so that you can fully enjoy each shot. It is imagery that illustrates the bridge between Will’s mountain man life and his return to gangsta, which is pivotal to the story. Costume and set design, while not surreal, are appropriate to the time and characters.

Visual: 3 ½ stars

As mentioned earlier, it is the dialogue in the movie that serves to describe Will’s former character. And, as the transition is so very important to the plot, the dialogue plays a vital role. I have to wonder what the person who titled this film was smoking. “I’ll sleep when I’m dead” isn’t even a spoken line in the movie, let alone descriptive of its content. One line that is spoken, however, is “You think you've changed, do you? You haven't changed. Not really. People like us don't change. Not deep down.” And that, I think, is the summing up of the film. Part of the reason that I’ll Sleep..moves so leisurely is its lack of dialogue, and what little there is can be quite confusing.

Dialogue: 2 stars

I’ll Sleep ..is not a movie that will make it onto my “to buy” list or even my “will watch again” list. The director seems to be attempting some sort of existential artsy beyondness, but it doesn’t work the right way. There are a few elements missing that would have pulled the film together more and still left some of the more interesting questions intact. The cinematography is fantastic, but the other factors don’t quite measure up.

Alternate viewing choice: Violent Cop
IMDB site
Official site
Rotten Tomatoes Review

***Note: If you found this review via IMDB, please let us know by leaving a comment. Thanks!***

Seabiscuit (2003)

Director: Gary Ross
Venue: DVD
DVD Features: commentaries, history, making of, photographs
Trailer

I had hesitated for quite some time before seeing Seabiscuit. For one thing, horse racing has never been an interest of mine. For another, I wasn’t sure that I could see Tobey Maguire as anyone other than Spiderman. Its amount of critical acclaim (it was nominated for 7 Academy Awards) didn’t convince me either. However, when my father rented this movie for one of his friends, I decided that I might give it a shot, if only for the fact that it was a movie I’d never seen (there aren’t many).

This movie is the story of a racehorse, Seabiscuit, and his jockey, Red Pollard (Maguire), who rise to the top of the racing world in depression era America. Because his parents lack the ability to provide for their many children, Red is left to live on a horse ranch at a young age. He grows up handling the horses and fist fighting for money. Seabiscuit is a bit small as racehorse standards go, but full of spirit and untapped potential. These two underdogs (Red is too tall for a jockey) become a team under the training of Tom Smith (Chris Cooper) and the ownership of Charles Howard (Jeff Bridges). All of these characters mourn some sort of loss in their lives and their concentration on training horse and rider become a focal point for them and eventually a way to heal. As cheesy as the basic plot outline sounds, Seabiscuit really pulls off an inspiring and absorbing story. It’s not one that has been overused and overproduced.

Plot: 3 stars

After about the first half hour or so, I stopped seeing Maguire as Peter Parker and started to realize him as Red Pollard. I really hope that when the Spiderman series is over, he can move on from the roll and not be forever typecast. Bridges is a seasoned actor and makes a convincing ex-automobile tycoon. Cooper’s character is suffering the loss of the open range and finds a place caring for the animals in the arena. He acts as a kind of sage in the story. However, it’s a role I frequently see him play and I wasn’t able to generate much sympathy for the character.

Acting: 3 ½ stars

Seabiscuit is surprisingly good on action. Although they lack the fiery explosions of car racing, the horse races get the adrenaline pumping and genuinely entice routing for the star players. There are a few fistfights, seeing as how Pollard’s beginnings, and one of his handicaps, evolve from that occupation. I didn’t feel that the story lagged too much in any one place, so the action was well paced throughout.

Action: 3 ½ stars

Visually, the set design and costuming are successful in creating a 1920’s atmosphere. Old cars are a significant part of the storyline and also add to the flavor of the times. However, during the racing scenes, it is a little bit too clear that Maguire isn’t really atop a horse. Although I understand the insurance risks of having a Hollywood actor actually race a horse, I have seen movies where the effect is achieved more seamlessly than it was here. The countryside where Seabiscuit was filmed is very appealing, but nothing about the cinematography says, “Wow!”

Visual: 3 stars

This movie was basically on par with what I expect from the genre as far as dialogue is concerned. I vaguely remember a line about not “throwing away a life”, but nothing so inspiring as to plant itself firmly in my memory.

Dialogue: 3 stars

Finally, Seabiscuit was far better than I expected. Enjoyment of the film is not contingent upon a love of horseracing, so let that not be cause for hesitation when considering it as a viewing option. Probably not something I would run out and purchase, but not a movie I regret spending my time on.

Alternate viewing choice: Million Dollar Baby
IMDB site
Official site
Rotten Tomatoes Review

***Note: If you found this review via IMDB, please let us know by leaving a comment. Thanks!***

Master and Commander (2003)

Master & Commander: The Far Side of the World (2003)
Director: Peter Weir
Venue: DVD
DVD Features: The Day After Tomorrow trailer, I, Robot “Inside Look” and Man On Fire trailer.
Trailer

After seeing the latest Pirates of the Caribbean movie, I was hankering for more sea-faring adventure. While not at all a pirate movie, Master and Commander was the first film that sprang to my nautical mind. So, off I ran to the video store and picked up two movies about trans-oceanographic exploring. (I’m not telling what the other one was just yet). I still want pirates. But, I’ll take seamen as a substitute (hee hee)

Jack Aubrey (Russell Crowe) captains a large sailing ship under the directives of the British (?) Navy. The movie takes place during the war with Napoleon (1805) and Aubrey and his crew are to hunt down enemy ships. While sailing in mysterious waters, an enemy ship appears out of the fog and attacks. Not able to resist a good battle, Capt. Jack spends the rest of the movie pursuing the ghostly ship. There is a sub-plot regarding the relationship that the captain and his friend, the naturalist, have. The naturalist acts as a foil to Aubrey, but it’s a little transparent and doesn’t satisfy. The movies also features a handful of characters that the audience is meant to care about. However, I wasn’t able to feel any emotion or concern when the crew starts to drop off. This movie was based on a series of books by Patrick O’Brian. And, if I had more than just a passing interest in sailing, I might be tempted to pick them up. It’s almost always a good bet that a novel will be more entertaining than it’s adaptation and I get the sense that Master & Commander falls into that category.

Plot: 2 1/2 stars

All in all, the acting in this film was convincing. I could see Crowe as the fanatical captain and the rest of the crew met their roles well. Although I don’t generally enjoy child actors, the youngest member of the cast was tolerable. However, as I mentioned previously, I wasn’t able to muster up any real concern or attachment for anyone in the film. I would have been drawn more to the naturalist, if he hadn’t been such a prick. It could be that the foregoing is a fault of the script rather than the players involved. I spent a good deal of the movie playing “spot the hobbit”.

Acting: 3 stars

The action in Master and Commander is the one thing that drew me into the movie. There are cannon blasts, careening debris, sword-fights, floggings, and raging storms! I’m terrified of the sea (go figure) and so every hull breach and man-overboard made my toes curl. I can’t imagine what it must have been like “back in the day” when a ship full of men put their lives in the hands of a wooden sailing vessel and spent months away from solid ground. Well, actually, I can now. The action choreography during the sword fight left something to be desired. Why is it that American directors like to focus in close and make the combat confusing? I couldn’t tell which men were the good guys and which were bad. I couldn’t tell who was shot, stabbed or wounded until the final body count. Sure the cannon blasts were pulse-pounding, but certain scenes should have been less confusing. I realize that, in all actuality, a battle across two ships would be confusing. However, when making a film, there comes a time to set aside a little of that authenticity in the interest of your audience.

Action: 3 ½ stars

Master & Commander is visually wonderful. I was told that authentic sailing ships and true to period costuming were applied. Whether or not the scenes were actually filmed out at sea, it’s hard to determine. The visual appeal doesn’t lie in the use of color; most of the film is greyish blue with splashes of color dotted here and there. Where it lies, however, is in the set design and costuming. I can honestly write that some scenes almost made me seasick. That’s realistic.

Visual: 4 1/2 stars

Once again, I am disappointed by the lack of snappy dialogue. And while snappy dialogue doesn’t make a movie, it certainly adds an attractive element. I keep hoping for a film that leaves me either pondering several lines, or repeating them endlessly in my head. No such recognizable banter in Master and Commander. While the conversations between the naturalist and the commander intend to serve a specific purpose, they lack a certain follow-through. Aside from a few quips placed here and there, no actual substance appears to support the dialogue.

Dialogue: 3 stars

While this movie had action that drew me into the moment, I didn’t find that I was actually left with any lasting effect. I think Master and Commander would hold up to one repeat viewing, but that’s all. I won’t be purchasing the DVD. The features of the DVD suck drastically anyway. If you really, really like sea adventures and old-school boats, you might be able to get into this film. If not, I don’t think you’d cry over passing it up at the video store.

Alternate viewing choice: Pirates of the Caribbean (either one)
IMDB site
Official site
Rotten Tomatoes review

***Note: If you found this review via IMDB, please let us know by leaving a comment. Thanks!***

UnDead (2003)

Director: The Spierig Brothers
Venue: DVD
DVD Features: unavailable

Althought I’ve long been a horror movie fan, I had, until recently, shied away from zombie flicks. However, movies like Night of the Living Dead and 28 Days Later have forced me to recognize that there are a handful of genuinely entertaining films that feature animated corpses. While digging through the “4 for 20” bin at the local movie store, I stumbled across UnDead. It was the endorsement at the top of the box that convinced me to give it a shot. It read, “The most inventive zombie film since Peter Jackson’s Brain Dead”, a quote by Tony Timpone of Fangoria Magazine. First, Peter Jackson has made a few great horror movies (yes, he worked before Lord of the Rings). Second, I figure that anyone working at Fangoria must know a thing or two about horror.

UnDead takes place in a small town somewhere in Australia. It involves a small handful of characters, a dash of comedy, and a twist of alien encounter. I won’t bother breaking down the plot, as it’s basically the same as every other zombie film ever made. A band of unlikely cohorts find themselves surrounded by legions of the walking dead and have to fight their way out. I did enjoy the alien twist, the “down under” lingo and the ending.

Plot: 3 ½ stars

There weren’t any actors in UnDead that I recognized, but they all did a solid job (on the scale of horror movie acting). The two primary characters are a gun-toting fisherman, who seems a little nuts, and a newly crowned “catch of the day” queen down on her luck. They both kick ass at kicking zombie ass. They’re also both likeable in their strange and separate ways. In any zombie movie, there are two types of human characters. One the one hand, there are those who embrace their survival role with gusto. On the other, there are the helpless hysterics. Among the latter, UnDead features a law officer who agitated my nerves completely. I think he must have been an Australian inside joke, but does the fact that I hated the guy point to good acting or no?

Acting: 3 stars

There has to be a certain element of action in any zombie movie. After all, the best way to kill one is to remove its head. I have a sneaking suspeicion that The Spierig Brothers are fans of John Woo. The action in UnDead is practically an homage to Woo’s gunplay choreography. There are some inventive weapons in the movie as well. Zombies get killed via sawblade, canned air and “The Club”. Overall, the action is entertaining, comedic and well placed.

Action: 4 stars

Another vitally important aspect to reviewing a zombie movie is atmosphere and special effects. UnDead does have some CGI, but it isn’t overused or hokey. If UnDead had had a larger budget, I think it would have been tempting to go overboard. Most of the gore is done the old fashioned way and I almost always appreciate it when film-makers go that route in an age when it’s become easy to rely on computers. The atmosphere in this movie is appropriately dark and desolate.

Visual: 4 stars

There isn’t much to say about the dialogue in this film. “Braaaaains…” In a few scenes, a noticeable attempt is made at humor and “cool”, but that effort falls short of the mark. There weren’t any lines that really stuck with me and there weren’t any “laugh-out-loud” moments via dialoge.

Dialogue: 2 stars

Overall, I can say that UnDead is a solid, fun zombie film with a healthy helping of gore. I recommend viewing, definitely and possibly purchase.

Alternate viewing choice: Shawn of the Dead
IMDB site
Official site: not found (Lions Gate Films)
Rotten Tomatoes review

***Note: If you found this review via IMDB, please let us know by leaving a comment. Thanks!***