Reviews

If you have read the synopsis for Dead and Buried be advised that most of the movie your going to be waiting for the main character to wise up to plot. If the synopsis you read contained the word "zombie" you'll be in for an even longer wait, as it takes Sheriff Dan along time to unravel the mystery of the strange going on's at Potter's Bluff. Not that a slow moving mystery is inherently bad, but it is if certain things become obvious to the viewer long before the characters in the film. Those who are patient and continue to watch the film waiting for it to fill in the missing pieces will be disappointed as unfortunately the film isn't very good at doing so. Any film whose substitutes much needed motives for the old "I'm just crazy" bit is leaving a lot to be desired in my book.

Genre fans who have heard this film is a zombie film will be disappointed, as it is not. It has more in common with films like "The Stepford Wives" and "Invasion of the Body Snatchers", and shows like "The Twilight Zone" then "Night of Living Dead". Not that different is bad, but fair warning to people who want a visceral horror movie, look else where.

This film has serious flaws in term of pacing and logic. It's rare that a movie that is only 92 minutes long can be considered over long, but I think in Dead and Buried's case, less would have been more. The viewer is treated to many gruesome murder scenes, and while they initial provided tension, then eventually just slow the narrative down, by reinstating the obvious, "Bad things are happening in this town".

One such murder scene involves an out of town family and is prefect example of crappy horror movie logic. This family is following one of the locals to a gas station when suddenly something runs in front of the car, they swerve to avoid it, hitting a telephone poll. Then the mother sees a light blink on and off from a near by house, she tells her husband, but he inexplicable refuses to believe her. Obviously, the concept of a light being on in a house is inconceivable to him. After some pointless arguing the husband finally gives in and takes his family to the house, inside they find nothing dust and cobwebs. Not to be deterred by the obvious the wife tells her husband to "check the basement". The basement? Why on earth would you walk into a two story house, check the first floor, and then decided the basement is the next logical place to look for occupants? Especially if every light in the house is off and its obvious that no one has lived there for a very long time? The scene I just mentioned also the distinction of being horrible dubbed (see trivia for the reason why), it would have personally been first on the cutting room floor for me if I was the editor.

In addition to standard dumb horror movie logic, the plot is just not well thought as a whole, full of little things that are so illogical if you find your self accidentally thinking about what is happen on screen you'll just a have a "huh?" moment. For instance, the detective is clued into the possibility of zombies by overhearing a lecture on the subject, a lecture by someone who is revealed at the end of the film, to be a zombie! What? Why would a zombie give a lecture about zombies to possible other zombies? This ham fisted scenes serves no other purpose but to introduce the word into detective Dan's vocabulary. The ending is the biggest offender in terms of bad logic, the script obviously thought it was being clever, but spend a moment of thought on the ending revelation and how it relates to rest of the movie and it just doesn't make any sense.

The film is also brought down by one of the most obvious horror scores in history. Sinister moments are always punctuated, BUM BUM BUUUMM, just so you don't miss them.

On the bright side, this film succeeds at being creepy. There are some scenes in the movie that come off as effectively creepy and that's what saves the movie and makes it watchable. It also contains decent gore effects from Stan Winston, with the exception of one scene (see trivia again). This is one of those films that I think would be more effective if you just accidentally found it while flipping through channels in the middle of the night, as opposed to reading about it on the internet and actively seeking it out. However since you obviously have already read about it on the internet just be advised. Dead and Buried is a flawed movie that overcomes its flaws in places and still manages to be unnerving.

I'll make this brief. Director of Texas CHAINSAW MASSACRE, writer of ALIEN and RETURN OF THE LIVING DEAD, combing forces and make a movie about SPACE VAMPIRES, this must be a classic right? Wrong.

The best thing about this about this film is watching Mathilda May walking around naked for a few scenes at the beginning. By this comment I'm not trying to come off as exploitive or macho, just stating a fact, it really is the best thing about this movie. For some reason Tobe Hooper thought it would be cooler to not watch events happen but instead watch a bunch of prim British men sit in a room and talk about the events that are happening, for …. two … hours. Seriously, this movie will bore you to tears. When you finally trudge through a film containing people talking about stuff and a few poorly made scene where you actually get the treat of seeing things happen (most of which feel like they are clips from bad British television shows), you are rewarded with an extremely underwhelming finale, that at least has some brief footage of space zombies savaging London. Tobe Hooper spells space vampires, B-O-R-I-N-G. Just stay away.

Initially I had little or no interest in this film but after hearing good things about it from a lot of sources I decided to check it out. Unfortunately for me this was not a new classic of horror that some people hail it as, it's a disjointed mess that's light on scares, originality, and fun. House of 1000 Corpses somehow manages even to mess up when it comes to plot structure, something even the lowest of horror movies can usually pull off.

It does have a few redeeming elements; the carnival sideshow style of horror is an interesting motif for the film, Sid Haig's character is cool and underused unfortunately, and occasionally Zombie manages to unnerve by using quick jumps to snuff like 16mm footage, a technique that would have been better served if the director was able to exercise more restraint, especially in the early film. The film also contains a rather clever plot misdirection about mid way through, a subplot about cops and one of the victim's father that makes you think the plot is going to evolve one way, but then completely changes direction you. I have to give credit to Zombie for fooling and surprising me.

The film's real problem is in the comparison it invites with its betters, this film basically is "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre", and it doesn't hold up well to the seminal 1974 classic. A movie that was made for approximately $140,000, that still manages to be way more effective then House. Maybe if you stripped Zombie of his 7 million dollar budget he would have been able to show his true film-making chops and been able to pull off the low budget fun and carnage he so desperately tries to achieve with this film; more likely this film would have been stripped of it's disguise of high production values and clever sets, and be revealed to everyone as the naked unfocused mess that it is. Even with its budget, the gore is nothing; there is nothing shocking or creative or fun. Maybe the unrated version is better, but since it's completely unavailable I have no way of knowing. As the R rated version stands it fails as a gross out flick and then later goes on to fail even completely at the loftier goal of actually being scary. When I first watched TCM I really was unnerved by it, and I found myself thinking about for weeks after. I watched House of 1000 Corpses today, and nothing has stayed with me; what little effect it had on me was gone the second I stopped watching it. Hell, I might even be fooled into renting this again years from now when I completely forget about it.

"So what", you might say, "it's not scary, not all movies of this variety have to be scary, look at Evil Dead 2". Well the problem is it's not really fun either. The teen victims are completely indistinguishable, which in fairness is pretty common complaint for this genre, and the killers, who the film is obviously in love with, are just too gaudy and derivative of slasher stereotypes. The one that had the ability to stand out from the crowd, Sid Haig's Captain Spaulding, disappears for most of the movie. So for most the film you are left with a plot, that much like victims, runs but never gets anywhere. It almost seems like a masturbation reel for serial killers. I get what he was going for, I've seen the dinner scene from Texas Chainsaw Massacre (there is that comparison again, but I can't help if the shoe fits), Zombie just doesn't achieve the disquieting creepy effect that film had. Towards the end the plot just spirals out of control into what I think was a failed attempt at surrealism, personally I was just glad it was going somewhere. After what is a close approximation of the last teen going through a house of horrors, the films ends on a truly predictably note that once again feels ripped from TCM.

Overall this movie just kinda sucks plain and simple. I get that it's a homage, but it's just not a particularly effective one. Zombie might eventually be able to develop his directing into something interesting but first he has to clear the hurdle from music video style and shock to film atmosphere and substance. I will end by saying one more positive thing about the film; it's not the 2003 remake of Texas Chainsaw Massacre.

This movie is defiantly an oddity. I've sat through a lot of "b-movies" and mst3k episodes in my time, and this pushed my limits. Amateurish and crude, funny at times, incomprehensible at others, I can't say it has enough to recommend it. The plot and characters are paper thin even for this type of movie, the inspired moments are few and far between, and the script feels like it doesn't know when to end. It's obvious that this movie was made for next to nothing and by an inexperienced but ambitious filmmaker who had a preoccupation for gore and crude humor (Part Sam Rami, part Monty Python, part just plain gross). To put it in the same category of films like Dead Alive and Evil Dead (both of which I love) seems a bit unfair to the term B-Movie, this feels more like a C-Movie. It's not Manos the Hands of Fate or anything, but it's still extremely crude film making wise. Years ago this would have been available to film enthusiasts who spent money and time track down a bootleg copy, but now, thanks to Jackson's current success, the film has been released to mass audience on DVD. It's nice that it's available, but unless you're a Peter Jackson completist or a very forgiving genre fan , stay away, this probably should have been left in the world of bootleg VHS.

Those who are interested in Jackson would be better served by checking out movies like Heavenly Creatures, and the Frighteners. If you think you would like to see this movie, perform this test; first rent Dead Alive (which looks like Oscar material compared to this movie), if you can stomach that and want more then next you want to go rent Meet the Feebles. If you still feel the need to go back to Jackson's roots, by all means go check out this movie but be warned, these people giving this movie 10 stars are obviously hardcore low budget genre enthusiasts or insane, possibly both.