Land of the Dead was good but not in a scary way.

[Andy]

From this topic i started a few years back. A lot of people have asked me in the last few weeks what my big issue with land of the dead is, ive had PM's from a couple of members asking me to explain myself, how can I rank a Romero movie my personal worse movie ever? Well im setting out my points here, before I do so though, I want to point out, this is not open for debate, I dont need persuading and my mind wont be changed. I hate land more than any other zombie movie, that includes night of the living dead 30th anniversary edition, contagium, the day remake, children.. any other piece of shit zombie flick you care to throw out, I rank land worse. Dosnt matter what anybody posts in this topic, you will not change my mind on this matter so don't attempt to. I am simply laying out my reasons, as I have been asked to several times. OK lets begin. OK lets start with the setting. The whole setting is wrong, we are lead to believe that this movie takes place 3 years after day of the dead, one of my favourite movies of all time, yet the atmosphere looks like its come from the dawn of the dead time period. Let me elaborate, in Day, you have your survivors in the bunker, they fly 100 miles up and down the coast looking for other survivors and they find zilch. Watching this movie, you really do get a sense that this is the end, this is it, the human race is fucked. Land on the other hand, an entire city has somehow been missed off the zombie map? Your kidding me right? An entire city full of bums and tramps, seriously the lowest of the low, societies bottom rung.. these guys would be the first to die if a zombie apocalypse actually happened, who are more concerned with getting drunk and gambling than they are about the undead horde outside? Yeah right, as if these idiots would survive.. how the hell have a group of bums and tramps got to this city? “what if they weren't tramps before Z-Day?” Were they normal people beforehand and then they reached the city and succumbed to Kaufman rule and happily accepted living as a tramp? Really?... Also on the topic of the atmosphere/setting, what's up with the scale? Again using day of the dead as a reference, Logan says that they outnumber humans by around 500,000 to 1. Just take a minute to think about that scale, 500,000 to 1... how many zombies come after the helicopter when they disturb the city at the beginning? Fucking loads... how many engulf the bunker at the end? Fucking loads..... Now in land, how many zombies are attacking the city? What about 20 or 30? WHERE THE FUCK ARE THE REST OF THEM? On a giant zombie vacation? Your seriously expecting me to believe this is 3 years AFTER day, zombies outnumbered humans by 500,000 to 1 and threw massive attacks of hundreds of zombs at whatever survivors there where and now all of a sudden there's only about 30 of them attacking a city? A full city with lights and noise that could be heard for miles away? Seriously? Incredibly stupid stupid stupid Romero. Next up is the story, now I have to admit I avoid watching this film whenever I can, it pains me to watch it, so im not 100% up to speed with the story but from what I remember, there's a good guy who is charge of “dead reckoning” (ohh ill get to that) and there is a bad guy, chodo or something.. I always think of the dog from wizard of oz when i hear his name mentioned so from now on ill be referring to him as toto.. they have some kind of rivalry going on i think even though its never explained as they both fetch things for Mr Kaufmann and his city. The good guy wants to leave the city and be a kind of wondering nomad amongst the zombies, although again, its never explained why he dosnt just do this? he needs Kaufmann's permission for some reason which isnt explained.. this movie does that alot, i guess romero didnt have time for explainations.. Anyway toto however, he wants to live in the tower in the middle of the city with all the rich folks and thinks he can buy his way in, but Kaufmann tells him to fuck off, he gets mad and steals dead reckoning, and drives off, letting a huge unstopable group of about 25-30 zombies into the city which the military, which has up to this point survived for 3 years of zombie apocalypsee so they cant say their not experienced, anyway this military cant handle a school group size gang of zombies. Toto then aims some missiles at the city and demands $1,000,000 (ill get to that too) or else he'll blow it up. Then the good guy goes out of the city in a car of some sort, with his crew and gets dead reckoning back, saving the day. Am I the only one who thinks that is absolutely ridiculous? I was writing better stories in primary school (elementary school to you Americans) and this has come from George Romero.. the creator of the holy trilogy of movies. Did he envision this during a seizure of some kind? Seriously.. its tragically bad, it is the single worse storyline ive ever heard for a movie. Fact. First off dead reckoning, not only has this city had time to build and fortify itself while the rest of the world falls to pieces and zombies take over, but the inhabitants of said city have had time to build a huge armour plated “big brother of the buses from dawn'04”.. where exactly have they got the materials for this? Where does it get its ammo for its incredible arsenal? Come to think of it, how the hell do they keep it fuelled up? Something that size must get through a good few gallons every mile, its fair enough saying they scavenge it but where and how far must they travel? Its simply not realistic and the movie makes no attempt to explain this, its just there and your expected to accept it. Now you might say im picking too deep, but am I? Look at how far we pick the trilogy every day and how well they stand up to scrutiny.. there are no (or very few) plotholes in the original trilogy and none as gaping huge as this. OK dead reckoning. Not realistic. Next up is Toto's demand for $1,000,000. my only question with this point is why? In a post apocalyptic world, what use is money? (Think start of day, outside the bank) Why dosnt toto ask for fuel, ammo, food, drink, weapons, armour, vehicles, general supplies.. anything USEFUL.. what the hell is he going to do with $1,000,000? buy a beach condo in Florida? Even if he does want $1,000,000 that badly.. why dosnt he just drive to a bank and grab it? Would be easier.. And I can hear some of you saying “but there would be other cities he could spend it there...” how do you know? When do you see these cities or even hear them mentioned?.. Again i remind you, in DAY, the group flies a helicopter 100 miles north and south and finds nothing at all.. and toto can simply drive to a neighbouring city in a vehicle that must get about half a mile to the gallon with no functioning petrol stations en route? And IF there are and we beleive this much, what makes you think they would use money? Money is used now because its hard to come by, you earn it, steal it or win it.. you dont just find it lying around in the street like you would in a post apocalypse zombie world (think start of day again...) if I was running a city in this kind of atmosphere, and god willing I will be one day, I would not use money as currency, id use something valuable like I listed above... food, drink, ammo, supplies.. anything I could use. Useful things. Another ill thought out plot point Romero.. This post is getting longer than I intended so I have one final point id like to touch on then ill wrap it up, big daddy. LOL What the hell is this? I wanna know what Romero was smoking when he thought this would be a good idea. Now let me just point out, as I said before, I love day of the dead and I freaking love bub. Genius idea. The difference? Well bub became domesticated by mimicking Logan and using faint memories that remained in the functioning parts of his brain, which isnt much so I put it down to mimicking behaviour.. although smart for a zombie, bub is still pretty dumb and I like to think of his intelligence as that of a dog. As Rhodes says, Logan is teaching him tricks and he is performing them. Thats my take on bub. Big daddy, first of all has a gay porn star name, secondly.. how exactly has cock daddy developed his intelligence “in the wild”? Never explained. Why only him? Why havnt any other zombies developed this level of thought? Never Explained. Why do other zombies follow him? I've discussed in other topics what I call the herd effect, where one zombie mindlessly follows another creating a herd, but it isnt a Romero based theory and there is no evidence to suggest it occurs in any of the trilogy, apart from maybe zombies following Stephen up to the lair in dawn, so again, never explained. Thats my problem with big daddy, potentially another good creation, he had the makings of a advanced bub, but nothing is explained about him.. we're just expected to believe that one zombie, and only 1 out of billions has developed rudimentary intelligence and the ability to lead and it is never damn well explained. Is he supposed to be the zombie equivalent of Jesus or something? Explain it to me George!? Its just baffling. Which brings me to my last, and most important point about this movie.. all the points above alone add up to a bad movie, but no-where near as gut wrenchingly awful as land is, so what is the last point that really tips this over the edge? George Romero. This is the man who brought me night of the living dead, Dawn of the Dead and Day of the Dead.. this man played a huge part in my childhood and gave me what I hope is a lifelong and joyful obsession some would call it. So imagine my feeling when I heard a new George Romero zombie movie was coming out and I would get to see it in the cinema? Now being born in 1985, this would be the first I get to see in a cinema too. And then I see it, and its everything I have stated above. From any other other name, this would be a bad horror movie.. but from George Romero, this is a spectacular disappointment and really made me question my following of zombie movies in general. Some would say thats my own fault for building up such big hopes, but when you think about the mans previous movies IE the holy trilogy “night, dawn and day”, I think I was quite within my rights to build up hopes and dreams. I mean fucking hell when I heard that Romero was making a new movie I was staying awake all night having wet dreams about what it would be like... and I got land. That my friends is a mental scar that will never heal. So, those are my main reasons for ranking land as my absolute worse zombie movie ever. I don't expect any of you to agree with me and I fully expect some of you to attempt to “win me over” or “prove my points wrong” and your fully welcome to, but I wont be responding.. as I said my points are my own and I havnt posted this with the intention of starting a debate to whether land is a good movie or not, I've posted it simply as its been requested. Just because i cant be bothered writing it all out again and because its still as true now as when i wrote it originally. Nobody has ever convinced me otherwise. I didnt like like diary or survival but land really got my wrath and i still detest it to this day.

[Wyldwraith]

Not responding to Andy as he isn't interested, But someone pointed out Cholo earlier becoming an "Instant Smart Zombie"...when I don't think that's what the scene meant at all. When Kaufmann first sees him, Cholo is in the shadows and fires his spike gun (relatively) accurately at him, though misses. Kaufmann returns fire, and we see spurts/aerosolized blood erupt from the locations where Cholo gets hit. Cholo slumps down, unmoving. Kaufmann returns to his run-away-like-a-bitch preparations, and is then surprised to see Cholo coming at him. He says something to the effect of "Can't be, you're dead. I killed you." Then Cholo steps into the light and its revealed he's a zombie. Now, given this sequence of events HERE is what I believe happened. Cholo set off for Fiddler's Green (wasn't that far away when he parted ways with his partner) after having been bitten and deciding to "see how the other half lives", and I believe intent on revenge against Kaufmann, which was really his driving goal from the moment Kaufmann rejected him as too low-class for the rich folks high-rise. He arrives, and enters by the same means the first group of zombies did when he stole Dead Reckoning, sees the city is in chaos and (correctly) guesses that Kaufmann, being the get-others-to-do-the-dirty-work coward that he is, will be in the process of fleeing the sinking ship that is Fiddler's Green. Given that Cholo was privy to much of Kaufmann's clandestine activities, up to and including disposing of the bodies of Kaufmann's murdered enemies, it's not much of a stretch for the audience to believe he knows where Kaufmann's getaway vehicle is stashed. (Hell, even Big Daddy found his way there!) Cholo fires at Kaufmann, but sick, fevered and frankly minutes from expiring due to the bite-induced infection, he misses. Kaufmann doesn't, hitting Cholo twice when he returns fire. Now, this next part is my OPINION, but then again, that's all this entire post is. I believe the blood-spurts and the misty sort of spray of blood from Cholo's body when Kaufmann's bullets strike him was meant to demonstrate to the audience that Cholo was still alive at this point. Unfortunately the scene wasn't detailed enough for this sort of nuanced conclusion to be properly communicated to the point many viewers would understand GAR's intention. Cholo expires from the gunshots, and almost immediately reanimates (not a stretch, as there are numerous precedents of individuals who've been languishing for hours after a zombie bite in the Romeroverse reanimating very quickly once they finally do expire, starting with the Coopers' little girl in the original Night)...then, with Kaufmann being the closest (if not only, I forget if the chauffeur had bugged out by this point) human, zombie-Cholo came after Kaufmann based either on basic zombie instinct or a flicker of a very intense, very recent memory (his burning desire to avenge himself upon Kauffman). In conclusion, I agree that the scene has flaws...the biggest being the ambiguity concerning Cholo's status at the time of his firing upon Kauffman, which came about IMO due to the blood-spatter FX not being up to snuff. Had they done a better job with the splatter from Cholo's body when Kauffman's bullets hit home, there wouldn't have been (as I believed was intended) any doubt that Cholo was alive, got shot and then reanimated before coming after Kauffman again. My reasoning for believing Cholo was alive when he got hit by Kauffman's 2 bullets is this: 1) Kauffman's pistol was either a .25 or (AT BEST) a .32 caliber. It was far too small to be even a 9mm. I don't believe such a small round would cause a misty spray of ballistic spatter to erupt from a gunshot wound to the abdomen of an already dead body, LET ALONE the very quick spurts of obviously quite liquid blood. Blood spurts from wounds due to blood pressure, no blood pressure = a small amount of spatter from the exit wound (which in this case there wasn't one) and some sluggish leaking from the small holes in Cholo's gut. 2) Zombies don't lurk in shadow and WAIT for a potential victim to leave a shot-obstructing area (like that near the side of the car) to only take an almost-hit of a shot once Kaufmann had come forward/away from the obstructions. Big Daddy might've figured out pull-trigger-bullets-fire, and even manage to communicate this primitive epiphany to the female teenage zombie, but things like at-range accuracy and patiently waiting for better conditions from which to take a shot were light-years beyond his rudimentary intelligence...let alone the self-awareness it takes to actively attempt to hide from another being...an action that requires a Theory of Mind-level of mental development so far beyond Bub/Big Daddy as to make arithmetic being grasped by an amoeba look simple. Just my .02, but I think the movie's admittedly failed attempt at scene-setting supports my contention. Peace be with you, or at least a Carry Permit and nice Heater.

[AcesandEights]

A bunch of good detailed observations and well-reasoned opinions. Well put! Way more nuanced approach in dissecting the scene than I have taken, but essentially I agree and this is the assumption I operated under when watching that scene unfold. It seems relatively straightforward and makes the most sense.

[shootemindehead]

My take on Cholo, is that he was "half way there" to being a zombie, just like yer man in 'Dawn of the Dead'. Both of them are TOO made up in my opinion, but it isn't a leap of logic to assume that an infectious bite may speed up the "zombification" as it were. Sickboy in 'Dawn of the Dead' looks like a zombie before he kicks the bucket and isn't that much different looking when he comes back and Peter has o shoot him. Cholo was probably minutes away from death by the time he got to the underground. As far as 'Land of the Dead' is concerned, I like it. It certainly has flaws, but the only Romero film that doesn't is 'Day of the Dead'. I agree with Andy on the money thing, outside of "Fiddler's Green", it would make no sense, unless Cholo is hoping to find another township that still clings onto cash as a means of transaction. The chopper crew in 'Day of the Dead' may have gone a 100 miles up and down the Florida coast, but that isn't really that far in the grand scheme of things. 600 miles west could be a totally different story. The biggest thing that annoyed me though, was very easily fixable. Some of the people use laptops and modern day weaponry which wouldn't be available if this chapter took place after 'Day of the Dead'. Romero really should have stuck to M-16's and UZI's, and just ditched the more fancy equipment. The "Dead Reckoning" was fine except for all the bells and whistles. Again, drop the computers and it isn't beyond belief that such a vehicle could be built from gear cobbled together. There's be tons of scrap from the disused underground alone to put to use. "Fiddler's Green" didn't bother me too much either and the idea of some sort of enclave like that was ok. It's a good point that there weren't too many "zombies at the gates", but one of the guards did mention that they tended "...not to come around too much any more."...which suffices as an explanation. 'Land of the Dead' is an ok chapter to the original series. The real shame is that Romero turned his back on that series and tried to start again, with truly awful results.

[Morto Vivente]

@Wyld Assuming Cholo reanimates almost instantly I agree, your breakdown of the scene appears flawless. However, being barely alive when he enters the underground coupled with the fact that he makes his presence known seems clumsy to me. He must be aware that he's about to die, why sacrifice his chance at revenge so readily? I suppose you could argue it's his last ditch attempt, but it's still clunky IMO and indicative of the writing quality regarding the movie in general. I always had the idea that with Romero's zombies it took longer than a minute or so for reanimation to occur. I can't remember the exact circumstances of the Cooper girl's return from death, but I wouldn't say that NotLD contains a fully formed indication of what GAR's zombies were to become. Based on Roger's reanimation I had always thought that primarily these zombies are lethargic, including the reanimation time. In DotD it seems to me that Peter has been drinking that bottle of hooch for a reasonable length of time while waiting for Roger to "come back". Roger is also already covered with the sheet, added to the fact that both Fran and Flyboy are elsewhere all creating the impression that he's been dead for some time, while they wait, dreading the inevitable outcome. Have I been mistaken all this time, do reanimation times vary wildly in Romero's "zombie guidelines" as with TWD, or did GAR change tack when it came to LotD? I had assumed, perhaps mistakenly that the combination of zombies and speed in any form wasn't part of the Romero canon? Anyway, the concept of slower reanimation times combined with the Big Daddy increase in "zombie intelligence", sorry even writing it makes me cringe. I have to agree with Andy on "Cock Daddy". Plus, both him and Cholo desiring revenge, albeit with different motives, led me to believe that Cholo was already undead when he entered the parking garage. He looks like he's been dead for hours, definitely a conflict between plausibility and cheap scare value when his condition is finally revealed. But hey, I'm definitely open to changing my interpretation, particularly if it partially rescues a scene for me. --------update-------- Since your post I've been thinking about the whole garage sequence. I knew there was something bugging me. Supposing the bite that Cholo received reached a major artery in his hand and almost turned him in 2 hours or so, shouldn't he have become sick and debilitated to the point that he would have been unable to reach the parking garage, i.e. on his back dying until he reanimated (like Roger and the Cooper girl)? I'd imagine that rate of infection would be quite virulent, how did Cholo keep functioning? Fed by his desire for revenge? If that's the case it seems pretty naff. Considering your post and Shoot's, I now think Cholo is alive, but has almost turned when he enters the garage and is able to walk upright (in the manner of zombie it seemed to me not an infected human) but unable to aim. This would explain also why he reveals himself so readily in an open confrontation (not thinking very coherently). Although I have a better interpretation of the scene now (thanks), IMO though the back story for it is a bit contrived, as well as the execution, i.e. keeping Cholo in the shadows and having him move like a zombie rather than someone who is sick, it seems intentionally vague and forced. I suspect if this was TWD tv show it would be ripped to shreds. Also with Kauffman being the type of character who attempts to cover all his bases, why after Cholo goes down doesn't he shoot him in the head, considering the fact he then futters around looking for the keys or whatever? He must be aware that Cholo still poses a danger. Come on, Cholo goes down, dies, reanimates and closes the distance between them; all in 10 to 15 seconds. It's terrible. I think the scene is ill conceived and forced in order to pander to certain expectations or possibly fit some sub-text. The difference in quality between Day and Land is astounding to me. That being said other ideas are great, such as the zombie vs human gladiator matches as entertainment, in fact the whole club sequence. From the limited perspective of reasonable plausibility, could the unpopular Diary be a better installment of the sub-par latter trilogy than Land? Thoughts anyone?

[Wyldwraith]

I agree the scene was poorly done in several ways, However, Cholo was a scavenger and a killer. During the zombie apocalypse, such an occupation would require a certain amount of grit & physical fitness for him to have lasted this long. As for Cholo being too sick to reach Kaufmann, he was driven most of the way to Fiddler's Green almost immediately after receiving his bite. Like any bloodborne pathogen, lower heart-rate = slower proliferation of the pathogen. Cholo wasn't exerting himself until he began walking, and even then a steady walk isn't going to raise the heart rate too terribly much...Still, given that he's swaying as he takes his shot at Kauffman I believe that by that point all that was keeping Cholo standing was sheer hatred and willpower. Forget that crap about mothers lifting cars off their kids. Ask cops about how many incidents of domestic abuse turned lethal they've seen where, for example, the woman has shot the man repeatedly, in vital locations that under almost any conditions would nearly immediately drop a man of that size, yet said abusive male STILL survives long enough to corner and kill the woman before expiring. Every YEAR police respond to domestic disturbances where both parties are dead, where the abuser's wounds were incredibly extensive, yet the victim/defender is still dead as well. Hatred/rage/willpower can, IMHO, override biology (to an EXTENT), and for VERY LIMITED durations...unless the wounds compromise something utterly vital for continued function (basically the same shit that kills a zombie, + massive damage to the heart, like Trayvon Martin received from Zimmerman's gunshot while Zimmerman was defending himself.) Ie: No brain/heart/spinal function, and it doesn't matter, you're wormfood. On other notes, Kaufmann not performing a coup de grace on Cholo can easily be explained by his relative inexperience with the undead phenomena. He's been insulated from all danger for years, and probably used his white collar resources at the outbreak's beginning to avoid much of the chaos...so it makes sense it wouldn't be habit for him to render a body incapable of reanimation. Still, all this ambiguity wouldn't exist if GAR had just manned up and actually given a shit during shooting and editing...and didn't cop out with the SFX.

[Morto Vivente]

On other notes, Kaufmann not performing a coup de grace on Cholo can easily be explained by his relative inexperience with the undead phenomena. He's been insulated from all danger for years, and probably used his white collar resources at the outbreak's beginning to avoid much of the chaos...so it makes sense it wouldn't be habit for him to render a body incapable of reanimation. Still, all this ambiguity wouldn't exist if GAR had just manned up and actually given a shit during shooting and editing...and didn't cop out with the SFX. I'm on board with everything you've pointed out aside from Kauffmann. LotD is set 3 years after Day I believe. If this was the beginning of the outbreak then Kauffmann being totally inefficient at dealing with the threat would be completely believeable. However, even although he has managed to isolate himself from the commonplace reality of the ZA I think that: 1. He would still be acutely aware of what is required to eliminate a zed. The few years of isolation wouldn't IMO cause him to forget the necessity of a head-shot, which at this point would be common knowledge concerning a phenomena that's drastically changed the world. That would be like saying, I haven't had casual sex in a while, so relative to HIV I forgot to use a condom. I don't buy it man, not the emotional reality of this character combined with his personal survival being at stake. Doing something in practice and being aware of it in theory are two different things. Maybe Kauffmann hasn't eliminated many zeds in practice but I'd almost definitely say he knows what to do in theory. 2. Also considering that Logan states the ratio of humans to undead as 500,000 to 1. To imagine that since the beginning of the outbreak Kauffmann has never had to kill a zed or two in order to survive seems unlikely to me. Combined with the other points I feel that his lack of follow through was too convenient in order to let the scene conclude as it did. I get the point about Kauffman being out of touch in his ivory tower, his state of denial and his connection to Cholo in this respect. However the couching of the sociopolitical observations within the scene for me were poorly written (contrived) and not limited only to the SFX and editing (which as you said do confuse the scene rather than clarify it).

[Trin]

A few points: - Cholo was alive when he entered the garage. The fact that being shot caused him to stagger and eventually crumple to the ground is evidence of that. Since Cholo was able to walk and shoot we cannot conclude that he was on the brink of death. He was clearly ravaged by infection given his aim and his eventual coloration when we see his zombified self enter the light. But considering that he took multiple gunshots to the torso I think it's reasonable to conclude that the gunshots finished him off, not the infection. - I don't think we can conclude that Kaufman has ever put down a zed. I tend to find it unlikely that he has. The movie states clearly that he has been in this position of power since close to the beginning. I also don't think that just because someone has lasted so long they *must've* learned how to fight zombies. Looking at Day, we don't know that Bill or John ever put down a zed. I think it's assumed that they had... but think about it. Bill handles the electronics and John flies the whirlybird. Both of them were living in the facility since the operation was put together, which was very early on. It's entirely possible that neither of them had ever cracked a skull prior to the events we saw. - Kaufman's knowledge of zed destruction and his ability to perform the act are two different things. I can coach my kids when to throw to second to get a double play... but hit the ball to me and I am just as likely to forget all that as to do it right. - Romero may have been purposeful in making Cholo's situation ambiguous and arguable. I doubt it was a situation where he didn't think it through.

[Morto Vivente]

Kaufmann isn't a kid though and he's already put Cholo down. All he had to do is step up and shoot an immobilized target in the head, it's not complicated and rather instinctual IMO (seeing as we agree that he knows what to do in theory). Instead he turns his back on him and invites a possible attack from behind. Why? I certainly wouldn't turn my back in that situation, would you? I'm sure Romero did think it through, and IMO chose to sacrifice the credibility of the scene in order to fit the commentary/subtext of the Kaufmann Cholo relationship. I just happen not to like it, and find it contrived and overly intellectualized and therefore lacking in emotional truth. Also concerning Bill and John, that's my point in essence. Maybe they hadn't put a zed down before, but when it mattered they took the theory and put it into practice because their lives depended on it. I find Kaufmann's actions totally artificial. In Day the marriage of commentary and plot is far superior IMO, and far more natural. I find LotD to be greatly inferior to the previous flicks, particularly Day.

[Trin]

All he had to do is step up and shoot an immobilized target in the head, it's not complicated and rather instinctual IMO (seeing as we agree that he knows what to do in theory). Instinctual seems like a stretch. I agree he knew what to do and could've successfully done it. Instead he turns his back on him and invites a possible attack from behind. Why? I certainly wouldn't turn my back in that situation, would you? I agree Kaufman never should've turned his back on dead Cholo. He should've kept his head on a swivel (gratuitous Anchorman quote for Bassman) given Cholo... plus the open garage door, Big Daddy's presence, and the hundreds of zombies streaming into the building. That said, I think leaving Cholo lying there was the right decision. There's no way I leave my car to walk halfway across the garage to finish off one not-yet-reanimated corpse. Keep an eye on him... but keep working on getting the car ready. The car is the priority. If Cholo becomes a problem then deal with him. If not you saved a bullet and you can laugh knowing that Cholo will get his place in Fiddler's Green ... as a zombie. I'm sure Romero did think it through, and IMO chose to sacrifice the credibility of the scene in order to fit the commentary/subtext of the Kaufmann Cholo relationship. I just happen not to like it, and find it contrived... It's unforgivable that Cholo managed to turn, rise, and shamble over without Kaufman once looking over his shoulder. It absolutely smells of plot contrivance. And Diary and Survival proved that Romero will sacrifice plausibility for almost any odd notion. Also concerning Bill and John, that's my point in essence. Maybe they hadn't put a zed down before, but when it mattered they took the theory and put it into practice because their lives depended on it. It's just as arguable that John and Bill (especially John) should've never been able to shoot zombies so effectively. But I agree that Land was more artificial and Night/Dawn/Day rang more true to life.

[Ragnarr]

Sorry brothers, I really hated this movie. Can't decide which movie I hated more; Land or Diary (the latter I affectionally remember as "Diarrhea of the Dead" and the former as "Bland of the Dead"). Land had a lame plot, little or no thrills/chills, and was just another attempt at riding the zombie money train imo. If one accepts the premise that the undead are decaying corpses who shuffle about daily looking for the living to munch on, how in the name of Jupiter's BALLS are their brains capable of "learning" and "planning" anything. I work for the postal service here in NJ wondering the same thing of management.

[dracenstein]

I agree with the Cholo was alive when he shot at Kaufman and Kaufman killed him and Cholo returns as a zombie. A thought about all those poor people living outside of Kaufman's tower block, couldn't they have rewired other buildings to get light and heating and more secured housing? And these people weren't getting proper medical care, so shouldn't they be getting diseased more and dying?

[krisvds]

If one accepts the premise that the undead are decaying corpses who shuffle about daily looking for the living to munch on, how in the name of Jupiter's BALLS are their brains capable of "learning" and "planning" anything. I work for the postal service here in NJ wondering the same thing of management. Does a reanimated corpse continue to decay? I'm not quite sure. If it does the zombie apocalypse would be over in weeks. They'd just rot to a state of imobility. Problem solved. Also; why can't some zombies be 'smarter' than others? Remember the first zombie in Night? It picked up a stone to smash the car's window. That's basic problem solving right there, hinting at a certain level of intelligence. And let's not forget Bub's ability to pick up and use tools. Also: IMO Land is way better than diary. It may not be the best in the series but it is way more fun than the two that came after.

[Neil]

Does a reanimated corpse continue to decay? I'm not quite sure. If it does the zombie apocalypse would be over in weeks. They'd just rot to a state of imobility. Problem solved. In my story "The Midas Touch" I suggest the 'infection' typically causes decaying to slow down dramatically... And if we look at Day of the Dead, the corpses we see in the opening scenes all look fairly intact, so I think in Romero's universe decay is slowed.

[shootemindehead]

DR. LOGAN: On revival, the rate of decomposition slows substantially. Indications are that these beings could function over a period of years-- In cases of early revival, 10 to 12 years before decay would threaten mobility.