CommentsXp Best movie ever!

Fairaher The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

filippaberry84 I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

Candida It is neither dumb nor smart enough to be fun, and spends way too much time with its boring human characters.

fedor8 American Zombie: The Sean Penn Story.Actually, no. I would never insult the "living deceased" like that.AZ pretty much fails as a comedy, but succeeds to a limited extent as a mild curiosity, though far be it for me to imply that it is hugely original by any means. Woody Allen and Christopher Guest have already done this format, and with much better results.It's the sort of failed comedy which must have seemed funny when it was being written, i.e. appeared to be comical on paper, but when transferred to the screen fell apart. (Paper and screen, two entirely different worlds sometimes.) Try to remember that, future writers of comedy: not everything that's funny in written form actually works when filmed. As you write a screenplay, try to vividly imagine what your material would look like on the screen before rushing head-first into a project that will not shake the world of film at all.Also, keep in mind that the zombie comedy genre has been bled to death already. So if you want to be clever about it, then make an actual effort, as opposed to just going for the obvious gags, such as a "zombie song" about freedom. In fact, when the humour isn't predictable it is "too clever", too high-brow. Grace Lee (the writer/director) tried to impress with her "intelligence" rather than induce laughter, which is the totally wrong approach to any comedy. Set your ego aside, missus, and you might succeed the next time. I would have welcomed some "low-brow" gags, just to keep things a little more unpredictable, balanced and dynamic.Grace didn't have the guts to go for balls-out humour, possibly because she might have felt embarrassed (her former film-school pals, presumable all pretentious Bunuel fans, might have snickered, dunno). Instead, most of the movie is on one level, i.e. there is nearly only the subtle, satirical, quiet-monotone-monologue approach, not enough sight gags or action sequences to mix it up a bit - apart from the old guy demolishing a doll and the highly predictable (dramatic even!) ending in which one of the film-makers gets attacked by one of its interviewees. (Who didn't see that coming? And why the sudden drama?) I am not talking about turning this into an action comedy, because who the hell needs one more of those. AZ is too one-dimensional; for most of the first half it only has one flavour, one colour. It's like a straight horizontal line that never deviates from its style, one bit. That's what makes it somewhat dull as well as unfunny. It's mostly composed of monologues by actors who were so concerned with "mockumentary realism" that it's almost as if they forgot they had to be funny too.One of the rare amusing bits was the Chinese factory owner who employs zombie labour. That was a nice, original touch. More of that would have helped.Some potentially good gags were wasted. For example, the idea that "Jesus was the first zombie" could have been very funny if it had been mentioned in a dialogue between two people of differing religious views, which then could have turned into a heated debate - rather than just have a grinning guy say it in a monologue which is far less funny. Aditionally, instead of the film crew waiting for a permit for the "Live Dead" festival, it would have been funnier to have them camouflage themselves as zombies, getting inside that way. Besides, it makes no sense at all that they got permission to film there, considering that zombies eat the living there.I am not going to nitpick on the logic of a comedy, even if it is a high-brow wannabe mockumentary, but I do have to mention the illogic of having thousands of zombies wonder through the city when they are so obviously out-of-control and dangerous. The fact that zombies had been part of society for decades would mean that they would be sufficiently explored, all the hazards associated with them already known. Still, it's a forgivable error, this is after all just a zombie comedy, even if it does try to smother us with the writer/director's "cleverness".If Grace wanted to be so clever and original with AZ, she could have introduced the idea of old people close to death going out of their way to die violently, i.e. kill themselves or have themselves be killed, just so they could resurrect and continue "living". This whole aspect of people using the "R428" virus to their own advantage has barely been touched. I also think she missed out on an opportunity for a number of goofy sight gags, for example zombies being trained to collect and eat up fresh roadkill, since that was a job that no almost no human was eager to do. She could have had a zombie holding an animal carcass, unwilling to eat it because it "wasn't fresh enough". Silly stuff like that. I could think of dozens of funnier zombie gags than AZ offers us. Writing a zombie comedy isn't exactly rocket science - or at least isn't meant to be.Half the fun about zombies is their klutziness and dimwittedness, so for Grace to move away from that by focusing on zombies that walk and talk normally – a major mistake. The brief scene with the "low-functioning zombies" in the factory was much more fun than most of the stuff with the normal zombies. Too normal for my taste.I commend Grace though for taking jabs at fanatical, hypocritical, self-righteous political/social activism that has been polluting America in recent decades, but that too should have been funnier. And next time, Grace, don't put yourself in front of the camera. Stay behind it. You're neither charismatic nor an actress.

Slowblivion I initially was really pleased after watching American Zombie but after thinking on it for a bit... I'm not so sure. First, what I did like. I thought the acting is really well done in this. Yes it's supposed to be a mockumentary but characters like Jane really stood out. I did feel a tension which kept me interested through out the film. The production value was good, the sound was good, and the visuals were good. (Keep in mind it's a documentary style so there's no super cinematography in this but I was sold on the style) I really liked the idea of "normal" zombies. I think that's a really interesting concept that plays out very well. I really liked the interaction between (i'm sorry I forget her name, but the really upbeat girl who at the end attacks John) and her "boyfriend". I like the optimism in trying to be something she's not. I like the scrapbooking and how she has no memory before her death so now she tries to keep everything in a memory... I like the depth the characters a lot. Now, things after reflection... Too much goes unexplored and left on the table for me to just guess at. The blue vials, what are they? are they some substitution for human flesh? are they drugs? feral zombies, where are they?This film takes a while before it becomes interesting then that interest is quickly subsided as the pay offs fall flat. Live Dead... I'm thinking some subversive stuff, things the zombies don't want humans to see and it really is just Burning man for about 30 zombies. There just isn't enough tension to keep one engaged. A zombie stumbles next to the film makers tent... they complain about it then, nothing happens from it. They find their camp trashed, but they go to sleep with little worry. They are forced to leave the grounds but are easily able to film from a hill top near by. John drinks a blue vial... but he just feels a little sick then that's it. I think what this suffers from is telling not showing which I know is hard to say since it's a documentary style but... John says he saw some crazy stuff, but we don't see it. The filmmakers say they see a girl get eaten... but we don't actually see it. They say the girl who is eaten turns into a zombie... but we're told it, not shown it. We hear zombies outside the tent, but we don't see them. It's just hard to really feel the danger when we have to just assume it all. Another problem is I feel like there's a hugely interesting back story to how the undead came to be and how humans initially reacted to them, but all we get is a historian interview about how zombies happen, then stop for no reason. That's not backstory. That's just saying...look, we don't know, just go with it. This is a problem for me as one can't really understand humans reactions correctly. Zombies have jobs, walk freely, have their own apartments etc... people don't feel fear of them which is confusing as everyone is aware of the Hollywood zombie stereotype. Yet, John, still talks about how he wants to know if they eat flesh and what have you. The clarity of what humans know or believe or fear isn't clear so it makes it hard for a viewer, who naturally puts themselves in those shoes, to understand thus making everything have to be explained, but with so many things unexplained you feel you're not getting enough info to make any real decision. WHEW that's a run on, sorry. Finally Johns infection. While I like the idea of him turning, I think it's too on the nose. There's a scene where John says all the zombies names have 4 letters, then Grace says, yeah, like John. Well go figure John gets bitten and turns. But...why? Why be bitten? I get the idea others have talked about such as self fulfilling prophecy but I think the bigger picture is his recognition of his bias and facing his fear. He's looking for the dirt on being a zombie... now he knows. But the film paints zombies in so many lights... normal, crazy, deceitful, liars, conniving, plotting... (Yes I get that these are all also human traits). But the tension of the plotting and what have you is lost when Johns bitten. Then it's just spelling it out for you which isn't what a film like this should do. Having him turn from the vial drink would have been far more interesting to then see how he deals with his turning and even an interview with him at the end as a zombie. Look, this isn't a bad movie. And the fact that i'm focusing almost entirely on the story is important to note. This had many good things going for it. Again, acting, concept, production value, decent camera work etc... The way the story played out just didn't live up to what was a really good idea. I give a lot of credit for trying something new and in the zombie genre, originality is key and often lacking. The end product is a decent movie but I think it will bore gore hounds and general horror fans. I think the only people I could recommend this film to are people like me... those are people who enjoy zombie movies for subtext and meaning, not just for kills and girls in skimpy clothing.

Coventry "American Zombie" is probably the biggest pleasant surprise I encountered in quite a few years and I urge every fan of cinema – whether horror or films in general – to check it out as soon as the opportunity occurs. The film is an odd and unconventional mixture between a zombie film (duh!) and the so-called "mockumentary" (people with hand-held cameras registering the unusual situation they find themselves stuck in). Just because of this label, I approached "American Zombie" with extreme caution and low anticipations. Let's be honest, the market for zombie movies already suffers from over-saturation since many years and the Mockumentary forms a suddenly unstoppable trend ("Cloverfield", "rec", …) that yet has to prove its stability. George A. Romero also joined in on the combination of zombies and shaky cameras with his latest effort "Diary of the Dead". Now, he's an acclaimed director and even the founding father of zombie cinema, but what to expect from a bunch of inexperienced documentary makers? Well, I love being proved wrong when it comes to innovating and new film projects! "American Zombie" is refreshing, original, intelligent, well structured and far more stylish than it has any right to be. The subject matter may sound ridicule, but writer/director Grace Lee presents everything in a convincing style and even the cast members, who have the difficult task of depicting plausible corpses, play their roles with a constant straight face. The script uniquely introduces resurrection from the dead as some sort of congenital defect, caused by a substance in the brain that is activated in case of a violent death. There are several categories of "Revenants", varying from the absolute braindead to the living dead with most of their vital brain capacities still intact. Throughout a period of several days, a Los Angeles film crew follows four of these "intelligent" zombies and illustrates how they live their everyday afterlife, deal with all sorts of discrimination and desperately attempt to oppress their physical decomposing. Just like normal people, these revenants have different personalities, hopes, desires, sentiments and goals to achieve. Meanwhile the film also centers on the arguments between the filmmakers mutually, as Grace wants to maintain an objective viewpoint whereas John continuously confronts the revenants with provocative questions. The revenants' stories and the crew's constant quarrels are already fascinating to behold, but the script is uplifted to an even higher level of quality through interviews with other groups. There are scientists listing the characteristics and history of the Living Dead, Zombie-haters (displaying various ways to destroy a dead brain) and Zombie-chasers (similar to people who write love letters to convicts on death row). Seemingly without much effort, "American Zombie" succeeds in bringing a biting satire that subtly mocks modern social issues and media sensationalism, but simultaneously doesn't lose track of story depth and character drawings. There are multiple powerful scenes in the film and you honestly come to care for the revenants … even though the maggots occasionally fall out of their bodies. "American Zombie" is also a rather atypical "Mocumentary" (since there are still professionals in charge of photography, sound and editing) so the amount of shaky camera movements and extreme close-ups are thankfully kept to a minimum. Highly recommended to open-minded cinema lovers.

Adam Donaghey When asked if there are flesh-eating zombies out there, Joel--an undead political activist--quickly retorts: "are there flesh-eating humans?" Grace Lee not only directs American Zombie, but plays herself in the film. She teams up with John Solomon--also playing himself--to film a documentary project about an undead community living in L.A. The duo quickly find out that some sort of virus, brought on by a violent death, is plaguing its residents, and ultimately zombifying an entire community.American Zombie is a veritable slice-of-life of four "revenants"--Joel, founder of Z.A.G.: the Zombie Advocacy Group; Judy, who naively searches for true love and denies her zombiness; Ivan, a convenience store clerk who aspires to be a writer; and Lisa, a florist specializing in funeral arrangements for other people--who secretly longs for her own. Each character represents an average person with average emotions and average problems, showing us that the undead aren't too different than the living. Well, except for their rotting flesh, of course.What's really great about the film is the absolute mockery the protagonists make of themselves. Grace, the ever-so-astute naturalistic documentarian, and John, the bumbling investigative reporter, are at odds with each other throughout the film, and ultimately to a fault. What makes this film not-so-great is twofold: the running time and the conclusion. I think the film would have been better as a short. While it's in-depth look at each character is interesting, I'm not sure if its compelling enough to steer the audience towards anything meaningful. And even worse is the ending, after which, the audience can no longer sympathize with the plight of the community. Unfortunately, what could have been a provocative social commentary, becomes nothing more than a sensationalistic--albeit unique, comedic and funfilled--mockumentary.