Login
When you think about zombies two things that pop into your mind is flesh eating monsters and George A Romero. At least that was the way it was for an entire generation of people who grew up believing zombies tore the flesh from bones and were rotting decaying shells of the human being the used to be.
Going into Warm Bodies I was sceptical about a zombie film that had emotions on display, and coming out of it I am still sceptical about the execution, the idea that an entire mystical, unearthly creatures decades long lore has been thrown out the window for a film that is essentially about how love conquers all.
How can this not be called the Twilight of Zombie films? It’s not an insult to call it that, because in many ways it does to the zombie genre what Twilight did to vampires. It neglected to follow the lore, the written code of the creature on display, it portrayed a vastly ineffective romance bit that was all too cheesy and rushed. It featured a natural handsome leading man, in films about true love. First off, original vampires are essentially described as freaks, and modern zombies, thanks to George A Romero are rotting decaying, people hungry emotionless dead creatures.
Which is not to say this movie was bad for choosing to be different, but in the end I wouldn’t call it a zombie film because the main crew of zombies eat one or two poor souls through-out the film, then begin talking, loving, breathing and bleeding. It’s as if they awoke from a terrible nightmare, from a state of hypnosis. Good play on the original definition of zombie Isaac Marion and Jonathan Levine, while still trying to incorporate touches of the modern definition. Speaking of classic’s what was with the Zombie Romeo and Juliet moment?
On many levels it seemed rushed for film purposes, one minute R is munching on poor Dave Franco, the next he is forming sentences and learning to drive like a normal human being, albeit for a normal human being there is a large time gap between their first sentence and their first drive, but I digress. This film seemed to have a harder time defining what genre it really wanted to be a part of, a love drama, a romantic comedy, an action flick or a parody comedy. For a film that is barely over 90 minutes in length that is a lot of different films to take in.
This is again not to say it was bad, just terrible on being decisive. It seemed like when writing the screenplay Levine would write dramatic bits, laugh a little with friends want to start a whole new parody but because we was lazy he made it all into one poorly written screenplay. The actors did all the could, unlike Twilight at least Teresa Palmer proved that opening the box of emotions is good, and displaying them on your face is the mark of an even better actress. Hoult proved he could stumble through words, act awkward as a zombie and learn to love again, but that was better then being a pale faced 108 year old still attending the local high school. Analeigh Tipton and Anna Kendrick played almost identical roles, so no judgement there.
I’m not saying don’t see it, I’m just saying if you just came off watching The Walking Dead season finale, and have seen George A Romero’s classics, this may not be the zombie substitute you were hoping for or that you should even consider. It is what it is, honestly you can take it or leave it, I’m just saying it wasn’t something I would label as a zombie film. More like Romeo and Juliet meets Frankenstein meets When Harry Met Sally, meets 30 Days of Night. Weird right?
6/10
