The Question

Below I gave my opinion of a film that is based upon a classic zombie novel. But, zombies are not the only post-apocalyptic creatures in film lore. Other than the walking dead there are the talking apes of the The Planet Of The Apes franchise.

And I find the zombies of the 28 Days Later mode silly. The dumb, slow zombies of The Last Man On Earth and Night Of The Living Dead to be more scary, simply because they at least obey semi-plausible scientific realities.

So, forgetting whether you like zombie or ape flicks more, you have a choice. The world has ended. You are alone in the world, until you discover you are not. Which would be a scarier menace to face? The walking dead who will try to eat and/or infect you to become one of them? Or the apes, who are scared fascistic, enslaving, religious lunatics? Bear in mind, as long as you were healthy, you could likely avoid the zombie hordes, and dispatch them with ease. You would be the smartest creature on the planet, possibly a 'legend.' On the other hand, in the ape world, if they knew you could speak, they would hunt you down, lobotomize or kill you, and, even if mute, they would enslave you? You would be the low man on the totem pole, rather than at the top in the zombie world.

Here are snippets of the sorts of zombie hordes you would face:




And here is what you would face in the ape world:



Gotta love the fascistic gorilla played by James Gregory, who also boasts, 'The only good human is a dead human!'
..........

Ok, times up....which scenario would you choose, and why? Personally, give me the zombies, because I would have a more realistic shot at survival. After all, on ape world the humans are all deaf mutes or psychotic mutants, whereas there would have to be survivors on zombie world, and connecting up with them would allow a new world to begin after the cleanup of the dead, which might take a lifetime. But, how would one insurrect ape world with a bunch of mutes and mutants?

The Birds

While Alfred Hitchcock was not a great director, he could have been, and his failures are often more fascinating than far greater films. One of his greatest films, however, is The Birds, which I mentioned below.

Here is the original trailer:



Here is a cool, condensed version:



The reason the film works is because it is realistic, save for one key element being off. In fact, many sci fi or fantasy films that work, do so precisely because they don't require superhuman BS to come into play. Think of Dave Bowman in 2001: A Space Odyssey. Think of Colonel Taylor in The Planet Of The Apes. Think of the cast of the original Night Of The Living Dead. Think of the characters in Colossus: The Forbin Project.

The cliche about human civilization being a thin veneer is true, in many ways, and these sorts of films exploit that to the fullest logical extent. Imagine being confronted with killer computers, talking apes, walking dead, or wilding birds. How else, but the way most of these films play out, would people react?

Why Hitchcock failed as a great director is because, unlike Ingmar Bergman, Akira Kurosawa, or Michelangelo Antonioni, he was never able to let go of his rationality- save for films like Psycho, The Birds, and a few others. He lacked Keatsian Negative Capability- the ability to make seemingly irrational leap of faith connections that, in reflection, are not irrational.

Night Of The Living Dead

Ok, you just knew I had to add this freeby, eh?

Here it is:


Still the prime example of a great idea trumping limited budgets. Yes, the acting is hit and miss, but has there ever been a more symbolically political film (ok, maybe the original Planet Of The Apes, released in 1968, as well)?

I'll one day have to review the Millennium Edition of this classic film, but has there been a more analyzed film? Not even 2001: A Space Odyssey, Gone With The Wind, nor Citizen Kane likely equal all the ink spilled over this film.

Like 2001 (also a 1968 release), I saw this film for the first time about a decade after its initial release, and late at night. It really was scary. Granted, I was likely less scared than most kids my age were when they saw this, but that a film could scare me at all is a testament to its craft.

Unfortunately, while director George Romero made some interesting films throughout the 1970s and thru the early 1980s, the last 25 years have been a, ahum....Dead Zone.

This is his masterpiece, and likely a film that will still be watched centuries hence. Give it aanother go, or, if you are a Dead virgin, let it play out fully on you.