Movie Review: 28 Years Later


I have often wondered how the late director George A. Romero would have reacted to the hundreds of zombie movies and long-standing TV shows his original “Night of the Living Dead” (1968) has spawned since its release. This original zombie movie was about as disgusting, disturbing, and horrifying as any horror movie could be. However, 1968 was 57 long years ago, and by now, anyone would think that we have all had enough of the living dead, and the living dead eating living people, and the shooting or stabbing the dead in the head to kill them. Enough already.

The new movie “28 Years Later” is somewhat unique for two reasons. Number one, the movie trailer is one of the most annoying and overplayed of all time. Number two, by far the most used method for killing the zombies in this story is by using a bow and arrow.

This movie is mainly about two acts. Act one is about a father, Jamie, leaving the confines of a protected human camp and teaching his 11-year-old son Spike how to hunt and kill zombies with a bow and arrow. Obviously, this is an absurd idea, risking the life of a young boy like this, but for some unknown reason, this is the longest part of this movie. This first act consists of running, stopping, and shooting zombies in the head with a bow and arrow, resulting in repeated scenes that get old very quickly, in this remarkably bad movie.

The second act unfolds after a significant argument between Spike and his father. Following this conflict, Spike ventures out with his sick mother, Isla, into Zombieland for reasons that mostly lack clarity. By the end of the second act, they encounter Dr. Kelson, played by the film’s only well-known actor, Ralph Fiennes. To protect himself from the zombies, Dr. Kelson covers himself in iodine, which I found amusing, almost as if Fiennes was trying to disguise himself for participating in this surprisingly bad and boring movie.

It is anyone’s guess why the Rotten Tomatoes ratings for this film are as high as 90%, with a far more accurate audience rating of 67%. My rating for this waste of 2 hours is 30%, but only for the most die-hard zombie movie hobbyists.

Movie Review: Conclave


The new movie “Conclave” is about the aftermath of the Pope’s death and what happens when the conclave at the Vatican goes through the extensive process of electing a new Pope. As a screenwriter, I have always known that for movies “show rather than tell”, but with a film that is all dialogue, it still works as an impressive production because the acting is so well done.

Conclave stars Ralph Fiennes as the main character Lawrence who is in the middle of all the politics and backstabbing as 5 other Cardinals all maneuver to be the new Pope. Even though Lawrence does not want to be the new pope, he is still being voted for by the members of the conclave even while he tries to deflect their votes to another Cardinal, Bellini played by Stanley Tucci.

John Lithgow plays Cardinal Tremblay, who is the leading candidate for the new Pope, but Lawrence finds out that Tremblay would do anything to be the next pope including trying to ruin the reputation of his main contenders. Other candidates include Cardinal Adeyemi from Nigeria who wants to be elected the first black pope and finally Cardian Tedesco, a hardline conservative who wants to undo 50 years of progress the Catholic Church has made. Cardinal Bellini is the liberal in the group who wants to prevent Cardinal Tedesco from having a chance of being elected. This story creates scene after scene of intense dialogue as new information unfolds as the conclave votes several times to elect a new Pope.

This entire story is another example that blind ambition is greater than even the most devout believers of God and religion. Some people will do anything to get what they want, even at the expense of others, forgetting that what good is succeeding when you ruin the life and career of someone else?

The Rotten Tomatoes ratings for Conclave are a very high 92% with my rating at 85% for the excellent acting and a solid recommendation.

Movie Review: The Menu


The new movie “The Menu” succeeds in one very big area. It is far different than any movie most of us will ever see. But trying to be so different will never make any film great or even good. This movie goes from one new strange and weird idea to the next strange and weird scene, then on to the next one. Then finally some insane ending, considering all that came before, makes very little sense.

A group of very rich couples all congregate on some isolated Island, somewhere in the world, to experience a dinner given by one of the most highly respected chefs in the world. Everything is going fine as far as the impressive food until one of the workers commits suicide by shooting himself. Then they all find out that they will be dying at the end of the dinner. Then all the men in the congregation have to run out onto the island, at night, and the workers in the restaurant try to find and capture them. Surprisingly, nothing really comes out of this idea – continuing the strange “trying to fool the audience” theme of this movie.

Ultimately, this movie is far too weird and strange – across the board – to ever recommend. The high rotten Tomatoes rating of 89% makes absolutely no sense. The only upside is the long list of named actors who agreed to make this mostly bad and weird movie, including Ralph Fiennes, Judith Light, John Leguizamo, Anya Taylor-Joy, and Janet McTeer. It is even harder to believe that all of these named actors would agree to make this movie after reading the script.

I cannot recommend a movie that is all about being so different, rather than actually being good and entertaining. I rate The Menu a solid pass.