What would you do if your best friend died and then rose from the dead and asked for help?
There is not much to expect from the film. All that can be observed on the screen is how a calm dead man walks around the gangster quarters, and his friend bursts out from the fact that they are now a mego team that will build everyone in this city on the string.
Although the film is not full of all the charms inherent in the dead in the world of the living (be it blood, intestines, thirst for meat and blood, repellent rotting flesh, etc.), watching it is still disgusting. The audience was shown all the abomination of the life of a simple, inferior person, starting with the manner of communicating and ending with actions that lead to corresponding consequences. Until the end of the film, you can doubt who the hero was resurrected, and most importantly, why it happened and why it happened. It is not necessary to talk about thinking about life-death, about God’s punishment or a special gift, even though the “Dead Man” needed it very much. And if many other paintings are built on a similar mystery, when viewers want to solve it or participate in the process of solving it, then Dead Man at once cancels out attempts to find out what happened, and presents its resurrected hero as a normal phenomenon, which can be given the name and life of an almost normal person.
In this film, everything is mixed: humor (in this case, it is only a word), and drama, and thriller, and elements of a failed horror, and much more, but this mixture, unfortunately, does not pour into one composition.
It was only the first and last five minutes of the film that were really interesting. Everything else is a pointless lump of wasted time on a film that didn’t live up to expectations.
A person who has returned, especially supposedly from the dead.
“The Man Who Came Back from the Dead” is the translation of the film’s title Renevant (from the same translator’s google). So it's not a ghost. Unfortunately, the comments of the person who distorted this fact, turned off, so I had to defend the truth in the review.
Now for the main thing.
The film itself is not very original, the idea is not fresh, but it is implemented coolly. There is no vulgarity, illogicality and immorality. The film shows ordinary normal guys and their dialogues and cues are very lively, emotional. Having gained unusual power, they played and overstepped the stick for which they were punished. There is a place for love, friendship, selflessness, repentance and even patriotism, in other words, all normal, bright human feelings. Perhaps that’s why the characters want to empathize, unlike other films with similar themes. Black humor is present, but it is rather a pleasant addition. I don’t understand why you have to turn off your mind when watching this movie. Everything here has its cause and its effect, everything is quite prosaic. I just don’t consider films whose directors and writers put their minds and logic on serious. In short, the snobs won't like this movie. But young people who are loyal to beer, mate and other charms of a bachelor broken life, very even yes.
It was worth registering for this review. No spoilers, but it can smooth out the intrigue.
In my opinion, the film stands alone in the modern film industry.
One can only envy the authors, they managed to bypass the stamps and the need to please the viewer and sponsors (well, so I see). It’s as if people were high in their vision.
The film also takes the fact that you do not expect this from him. If you sit down to watch a hobbit, then your expectations are appropriate. And I sat down to see a film about Zombara, from such a film you expect at best an exorbitant thrashiness and black humor. And you get a multi-genre film, interesting, unusual, psychologically realistic, and profound. Yes, I chose exactly the words that came to mind immediately after watching.
Alan Capcace says that there is nothing to laugh at here, I would probably agree with the amendment that one should cry rather than laugh, because it shows the bottom of the human psyche and all the relativity of human morality inside each skull. This morality is ready to quickly adapt to new conditions and needs. Although, personally, I appreciated the humor, although not a fan of petrosyans and camediclabs.
I'm going to celebrate how the American government is portrayed in the film, without beauty. There are no bad interests in government, but the government has interests that are morally unfriendly.
I really enjoyed the movie, I recommend it.
9 out of 10
And for the surprise, another ball. Do not think that such an assessment is easy. Such films are rare. Don’t forget the taste and color.
A brilliant collection of salt from everything and at once
I've been postponing watching this movie for a long time because of the title. The title, I confess, it has a little “faded” and not quite suitable for the meaning and idea of the whole film, from which I always watched something, but not “Dead Rover”.
But one day I forced myself to watch this masterpiece, as it turned out, because all the movies that are on the hard drive of my computer, somehow or in something interested me.
So what? This is, again, a masterpiece. Such a mixture of literally half of the main genres in one bottle, and even so successfully "packaged", I have not seen. By the way, it is very interesting that in red reviews people do not like this – a mixture of genres, which once again proves that “the taste and color ...”.
But let's get this straight. For those who haven’t seen the movie, don’t read the review, because spoilers, without them, I’m sorry.
The main idea, the core of the film
This, in my opinion, is a condemnation of war. This is what the first and last shots tell about, and they are very interestingly ringed (who watched - he will understand). Also, there are a couple of moments where you see the transformation of the main character, who was very talentedly played by actor David Anders, who was unknown to me before, from an ordinary young guy to a killing machine, and killing blind, unmotivated, just because you want to. From the scene where Bart first drinks the blood of a recently murdered thug in a car, just shudders. And I hope you noticed an analogy between this scene and the opening scene, where there was one doubting person who thought that murder and violence could not solve all problems, and the second who proved the opposite to him. And notice this same scenario - at first one doubts, does not seem to want to kill, is afraid. The second gives in principle the right arguments in favor of the opposite - it is necessary, it is necessary, it is necessary to kill! But the point is that the nature, the essence of these arguments is not to prove oneself right or some idea, but to find an excuse for one’s disgusting blind desire to kill, to drink blood, simply because one cannot without killing!
The funny side of the movie
Well, there's a place to go. Almost always, when Bart and his best friend get together, there is a “fun” beginning, from walking around the girls together to shooting each other, and again – because of the girl. How vital, isn't it? I don’t know why one comrade in the red review compared this humor to “Petrosyan” – I haven’t seen Petrosyan yet, but I always thought that it was something so vulgar, primitive, playing and speculating on our animal instincts. Here is a sophisticated "black" satire. But it should be noted that almost all the humor in this film is very, very black, and it can scare some impressionable people away. “Taste and color,” right?
It is noteworthy that humor in this film is very often intertwined with very successful parodies, for example, on such films as “The Matrix” and “Route 60”. Yeah, the homeless scene is something! Yes, grotesque, but still.
It is also worth noting that it is quite difficult to draw a line in this film between “fun” and “sad”, between “good” and “bad” because the first is very closely intertwined with the second and vice versa. I think it’s a big plus for the film, because it takes away the black and whiteness I hate in most movies. Look, this is a good guy, you see? He's so handsome, young, helping an old woman cross the street, loving his girlfriend, modest in communication, smart. This one is bad, okay? Do you see how nasty his drooling is? It also smells terrible, kills babies at night and is very, very, very angry. I hate it.
"The sad side of the movie"
Basically, it takes less screen time. The real sadness is the beginning and end of the film. Only at the end you understand what the director wanted to say and you are no longer up to jokes, without which the army, as you know, can not.
Scenario
In my opinion - excellent, holistic, not sagging and dynamic. The only complaint is the first 20 minutes of the film. The events of the funeral, the revival of the main character, his long conversations with his best friend were a little prolonged. There's no problem. By the way, you can notice such an interesting thing, if you did not notice when watching - there are a lot of scenes in the film that last from one and a half to almost three minutes in one frame! Even K. Tarantino will be jealous. For comparison, run any famous Hollywood or not very Hollywood movie and find out that the average frame duration is 3-4 seconds. I’m talking about people who have conversations, close-ups, etc. 4 seconds and 3 minutes - I think there's a difference?
"Director"
I'm a complete profane in this matter, but I liked it, that's all.
The result is a very high-quality, one-of-a-kind film for me, in which I saw so many things at once, and it was all so masterfully mixed with each other that ... Anyway, that's enough. Highest grade.
Ridiculously ambushed in Iraq, Bart returns home with his feet ahead. The guy, as usual, was buried with honors, but after a while he suddenly comes to life. Trying to understand the strangeness of the situation, he visits his best friend Joe, with whom they come to the conclusion that Bart is a dead vehicle that needs blood to continue to live and not decay. For this case, they go in search of random “donors”.
If there are enough films about the rebellious zombies, the plot of which is predetermined by the framework of the brainlessness of acting wickedness, then the theme of mors sapiens for some reason is limited exclusively to vampires, although a year ago in the 80th Return of the Living Dead showed that intelligent zombies are quite funny characters.
Directed by Kerry Pryor, on the contrary, goes untrodden way, with a certain amount of mysticism (and does not specify what caused the main character to return to life) and a lot of black humor fantasizing on the topic “What to do a dead man beyond the grave?” What is funny, the fantasy leads him not only to friendly parties and post-death clarifications of relations (his girlfriend also asks her to kill, and her best friend managed to sleep with her on the day of the funeral), but also to the very earthly theme of the fight against crime, when friends eventually come to the idea of eating only criminals, along the way cleansing the city that is flooded with filth.
Also interesting is the implementation - a slum-dirty, with not at all glossy walking dead, already its dilapidated nauseous appearance, exuding the stinking smell of real corpses, and comic-parody, curling in places into outright thrash (police care for their citizens leads to hysterical laughter). And what is most pleasant, equal to the beginning, the mystical conclusion of this ironic-bloody story can be associated with the first Return of the Living Dead, where the bred dead, rolled into barrels, eventually become a chemical-cannibal weapons of mass destruction, working for the benefit of democracy.
The filmmakers decided to distinguish themselves in almost everything, starting with the name, which translated as “dead man”. Original and incomprehensible, but attractive, right? In fact, the name is translated as “ghost”. Having freed his brainchild to the delight of the public from the cliches inherent in films about the dead, D. Kerry Pryor and the company gave us a story not about zombies, not about a vampire, not about their hybrid. Unusual, right? Just to watch the years and try to understand who he really is, absolutely uninteresting. Thinking to cook the film tastier, the authors mixed in it and drama, and comedy, and thrash, and zombie horror, seasoning all this with military themes. Sounds interesting, don’t you think?
So what do we really have? A murky movie in every sense. Swampy dark picture, often with fog, because the main character comes to life only at night. Unexpressive main characters, without any highlight. And don't compare this ridiculous duo to the brilliant Pegg-Frost couple from "Zombie Named Sean." Meaningless and stupid, drawn-out and flat dialogues, from which it is sleepy, then pulls to puke like the main character. Humor, say, black... yes, at least purple. I never even smiled. Boring walks of the heroes at night in the city with the aim of drinking, soaking a couple or two people, stepping on a couple.
Do you want it?
Backed up by positive reviews, he played the recording twice to digest this filmmaking product. It lasted an hour, no more. Think for yourself, decide for yourself, but to my taste it is slag.
4 out of 10
If you are sure that you have watched a huge amount of tintz about zombies and thought that you have had enough, then I advise you to think again! Because you haven't seen Merwehod yet! This is the most amazing movie about the living dead, at least for me.
So, what's the point? From Iraq, the body of a brave American soldier Bart, who is also played by David Anders (Heroes, Spy). His family mourns as much as they can, burys him, and after a couple of days he rises from the grave and returns home. Obviously, he needs blood and stuff to survive. But that's not the point. Bart's still a bit of a jerk, and his death didn't seem particularly sad. He drinks, kills some left-wing guys from the street, drives around in a wheelbarrow, picks out bullets from his body and does other similar babble. By the way, the translation is uncensored, which adds color. Cynical humor and an unexpected ending. I recommend it!
A film of hard category B with a delay, I would even say, on C. Tresh in the full sense of the word, So, sitting down to watch this picture, turn off your brain and mind, stock up on popcorn, coke and surround yourself with friends who are in the topic – this is important. For fans of serious thrillers and horrors will remain deeply disappointed. Even I, who adores such “garbage”, twisted my finger at my temple episode after episode.
Joey, who buried a military friend who died in Iraq, meets him on his doorstep a few days after the funeral. After tons of pranks like, Dude, what the fuck with your eyes? You stink! Bro, you're on the move, decomposing, Joey is still willing to join the game and helps Bart continue to live (if it can be called life) at night, as at dawn, the zombie switches off. The film is full of black humor, mata (I watched in a magnificent translation, where the rich and powerful Russian language of the direction is brilliantly demonstrated - obscene vocabulary) and, however strange it may look, a certain amount of drama and philosophy.
Sometimes it seems that the director slides down to complete and deep absurdity (read - insanity), but you are already picked up by the thought - How can such nonsense end?! But to be honest, the ending is boring. But it has a bit of logic and a kind of idea for the future. By the way, logic is not without, in principle, the whole film.
I would recommend that people who love movies, say, the Troma category, fit perfectly. I laughed and had a great time.