Zombieland

Zombieland
Genre: RomZomCom

Starring: Jesse Eisenberg, Woody Harrelson, Emma Stone, Abigail Breslin

Director: Ruben Fleischer

Release Date: October 2nd 2009







     It's not every day you come across a zombie flick with a real budget.  Or one with a director with an actual vision.  Maybe you lucked out, and you come across one with writers who are truly passionate about the genre.  Writers who can give it a real, developed story and write a good film, Zombie or not.  Maybe, just maybe, you came across the rare zombie flick with real and talented actors, who can bring integrity and sincerity to the project.  But what happens when you get all of these things in the same film?

     Zombieland.  This movie is the real deal folks.

     The film follows Columbus on his trek for survival across the United States of Zombieland.  Columbus is a coward, plain and simple, who has only survived due to his strict adherence to a list of carefully devised (and very humorous) rules.  These include "Cardio", "The Double-Tap", "Seatbelts", "Beware of Bathrooms" and MANY others.

     On his journey, he meets Tallahassee on the side of a wreck strewn highway.  Without saying a word, or even lowering their guns, the two make a silent pact.  They bond together for survival, a fact that the two are not always quite thrilled with.  The two soon meet and "befriend" (at least eventually) Little Rock and Wichita, sisters on their way to "Pacific Playland", a supposedly Zombie-Free California theme park.

     Zombieland has it all.  The script is well written and very funny.  The director not only has a good sense of the genre and how to use the horror to shock you, but he also manages to use it to make you laugh.
  
     Jesse Eisenberg (Adventureland) does a great job as the cowardly Columbus, a man who's biggest dream is to brush a girl's hair behind her ear.  The beautiful Emma Stone (Superbad, The Rocker) plays the tough and very clever Wichita.  She and Eisenberg have a real chemistry on screen, and she does a good and convincing job of being the "tough chick" archetype.  Not only is she quite pleasant to look at, she can actually act too!  Abigail Breslin plays Little Rock.  Naive about some things ("Who's Ghandi?") yet also surprisingly wise about things such as running cons and killing zombies.  She almost always impresses when on screen, and Zombieland is no exception.

     The real highlight of the movie, though, was Tallahassee, played by Woody Harrelson.  A border-line psychotic with an unnatural obsession with finding one more Twinkie, Tallahassee also has a preternatural gift for killing zombies, one he makes thorough and frequent use of.  That's right, folks, white man can't jump, but they can sure as hell kick some zombie ass!

     Not only does the movie have a talented cast and a devoted production crew, the gore is fantastic!  Whether is is a woman crashing through the window of a minivan and skidding face first along the pavement, or a horde of zombies ripping into a fresh meal, the effects reach new heights of realism.  At least for the zombie genre, that is.  The gore is perfectly handled, not used to excessive levels and not so pervasive that you get sick of it.  There are parts that, I swear, you will want to (and actually might) stand up and cheer out loud.

     The humor, unexpected as it may be in a zombie film, is spot on.  Often tongue in cheek, or executed through visual gags, you will find yourself laughing at things you never would have imagined.

     I am trying to remember complaints I had so that I can write about that end of things.  I realize, however, that I didn't have any.  NONE!  Everything worked for me.  Even the fact that the zombies' origins are left unknown didn't bother me as it usually would.  The few survivors we see have no idea why it happened, so how could we?  Basically, this movie took what Shaun of the Dead began with the RomZomCom (Romantic Zombie Comedy) genre, and perfected it.  Need more proof?  How about this exchange from the movie's second act:

     Little Rock: "Do you have any regrets?"

     Bill Muray:  "Garfield, maybe..."

Concept: 5 out of 5
Execution: 5 out of 5
Overall Rating: 6 out of 5!  (This movie exceeds my normal classification)

Breathers: A Zombie's Lament

Breathers: A Zombie's Lament
Genre: RomZomCom

By S.G. Browne


Release Date: March 3rd 2009










     Everyone who decides to make a movie or write a book about zombies inevitably has their own ideas about what a zombie is.  Purists among the ever growing fan base will insist that, to actually qualify as being a "zombie", it has to meet certain criteria:

1) They are mindless, base animals that exist only to devour.
2) Though animated once again, they are d-e-a-d, DEAD!
3) A bite from one transmits the "disease" to the victim, eventually making them into a new zombie.

     There are other points that could be argued, of course, but I think all can agree, those are the big three.  In these people's opinions, failing to meet these criteria means you are out.  Sorry 28 Days Later.  Sorry Dead Snow.  Sorry any of a number of other popular "zombie" films and books.  I admit that, individual quality aside, I tend to agree with the purists.  However, for zombie week, I am going to adopt the other perspective; that any of a number of attributes can make a zombie.  It is up to the author.

     I say all that because this inclusionist mindset is critical to qualify today's book, Breathers: A Zombie's Lament, as zombie fiction.  The author says they are zombies, so (for today at least) they are.

     Breathers follows Andy Werner.  After dying in a car crash, Werner revives to find that, despite a severely mangled body and a newly formed speech impediment (due to a more or less destroyed lower jaw), he is still kicking, despite not actually being alive.

     The problem becomes that, in this society, zombies are discriminated against, to the point of being seen as lower life forms.  They are thinking, feeling creatures, yet they are treated like dogs.  Whether being forced to attend Zombie Support Groups aimed at training him not to eat people, or being harassed and attacked in broad daylight, Andy has a lot on his plate.  Then, you add the fact that he is quickly falling in love with Rita, fellow zombie and support group member.

     One day Andy, Rita and some friends meet Ray, rogue zombie and anarchist who lives deliberately off the grid.  Ray and his cans of venison set off a series of events that will change everyone in the support group, and their outlook, forever.  I could go into more detail, but I don't want to give away important plot points.  Well thought out though the story may be, I found them pretty predictable.  Still, they were enjoyable, and it is not up to me to spoil them.

     S.G. Browne has written a very sweet and funny book, despite the usually horrific nature of the source material.  He isn't so much working in "zombie horror", though, as he is writing a RomZomCom (Romantic Zombie Comedy for the layperson).  He foregoes the frightening aspects almost entirely in order to write an effective allegory of racism and prejudice in society.

     The dialogue doesn't exactly "sparkle".  Te plot doesn't do much to surprise.  This is a first novel for Browne, and it shows.  That does not mean it is bad or unenjoyable, however.  Quite the opposite.  One place where Browne really impressed me was how well he developed characters.  This is particularly true of our anti-hero, Andy.  Perhaps surprisingly (perhaps not), character development is one of the hardest things for a writer to perfect, and Browne has done a nice job.

     Likewise, the plot felt complete.  No glaring holes jumped out to distract me from the read.  He didn't waste time on grossly unnecessary details, but didn't leave blank spots either.  He is a very balanced writer, and is a pleasure to read.

     I know I haven't discussed a lot in detail, but again, I fear spoiling the plot.  It is, I think, enough to say this.  Although this isn't going to top any of my lists, and if you aren't too much of a "Puritan" Zombiephile, Breathers will make for a nice read.

Concept: 4 out of 5
Execution: 3.5 out of 5
Overall Rating: 3.25 out of 5

Dead Snow

Dead Snow
Genre: Horror

Starring: A bunch of people from Norway

Director:  Tommy Wirkola

Release Date: January 9th 2009

Click the link below for our weekly

 Crappy Movie Night Podcast!

Dead Snow

Eli five minutes into Dead Snow and...

...me, five minutes after.  Enjoy!

World War Z

World War Z: An Oral History Of The Zombie War
Genre: Horror

By: Max Brooks


Release Date: September 12th 2006










     For the most part, books and movies classified as "Horror" are, sadly, just not scary.  Grotesque, yes.  Sometimes even horrific.  But not scary.  I know that must certainly be due, in large part, to my own mentality.  I was frightened of the as a kid, sure, but as I've gotten older (call it desensitization if you want), they just don't frighten me, despite my sincere enjoyment of them.  That is not the case with World War Z.

     Max Brooks (author of the wildly popular Zombie Survival Guide) has truly written a masterpiece of the horror genre.  I know there are naysayers who will argue that the words "horror" and "masterpiece" don't even belong on the same page, let alone in the same sentence.  I don't care.  That is exactly what it is.

     The books is told in a documentary style, presented as a series of interviews dictated to the page.  The subjects are everyone from highly trained elite soldiers, to common citizenry, to a Japanese warrior monk.  All the interviewees are survivors of the zombie apocalypse, or "World War Z" as it has come to be known.  Each account tells of their individual encounters and how they came to join the fight.  Each ties in perfectly to the next.  The tableau that Brooks created actually terrified me.

     Starting with accounts of the first reports of outbreaks from around the world, and how those reports were handled or ignored, the story advances and evolves quickly.  It continues at the same relentless pace as the globally increasing "Zack" threat (the signifier used by the Army for zombies).

     What makes this such a great piece of horror fiction is the undeniable fact that Brooks has done his homework.  The world he has created is so thorough, the manifestations of his "breed" of zombies so complete, that you become totally immersed.  An outbreak of this type and scale quickly moves from feeling like "fiction" to feeling entirely plausible and, more importantly, possible.  I became so enthralled with the world he had created, I found my mind running in circles, trying to figure out what I would do in such a situation.  This quickly spiraled into thoughts of, "What if my family were turned.  What would I do?"  It was that fact, that the book sent my imagination to a place completely out of my control, and made such preemptive thinking seem (at the time) entirely rational, that scared me the most.  Once the realization hit, I found I was so shaken, I had to set the book down and I believe I said out loud, "I need to read this during daylight."  The interesting thing is, rom conversations with friends who have also read this, I found that they had similar if not identical experiences!

     This was staggering for me.  That every single account had me on the edge of my seat, turning on lights, and listening for groans and shuffling feet around every corner.  Despite what it might do to my reputation as a horror buff with a relatively "iron" will, I admit it freely; I was scared shitless.

     It's not just the subject matter that caused this.  It is far more Brooks' execution of the story.  He has a natural ability of knowing exactly how much to explain, and how much to leave unknown.  He knows just where and how to let your mind take over.  Also, he seemed to have almost a sixth sense as to when to move to a new account, or perhaps to revisit an older one.  So thoroughly convincing is the book, you wonder at times (just for a moment) if perhaps this actually happened and you just somehow missed it.

     I could go on and on about what I liked about the book, but I won't.  Likewise, I could spend time discussing individual sessions that I particularly liked.  I won't risk spoiling even one line of it for those of you who will decide to read it.  I could even spend time talking about what I DIDN'T like.  The problem there is that the list is not only short, it is non-existent.

     If you like horror, or if you want to give it a try, READ THIS BOOK!  Hell, if you DON'T like horror, read the book.  It is, simply put, amazing.

     Now let's hope the movie is as good...

Concept: 5 out of 5
Execution: 5 out of 5
Fright Factor: An enthusiastic 5 out of 5!
Overall Rating: 5 out of 5

Diary Of The Dead

Diary Of The Dead
Genre: Horror

Starring: Michelle Morgan, Josh Close, Tony Ravello, Amy Lalonde, Joe Dinicol, Scott Wentworth, Philip Riccio

Director: George A. Romero

Release Date: September 8th 2007




     It is impossible to have "Zombie Week" without discussing one man in particular.  George A. Romero.  His 1968 classic Night Of The Living Dead not only defined a genre, it created it.  Unlike the legends of vampires, werewolves, etc., there is no historical basis for the zombie as it appears in popular culture.  There are voodoo legends of the "Zombi" as a deceased person who can be reanimated to serve the will of another. That is about as close as the legends come, though.

     Through his series of "Living Dead" movies, Romero has created an entire mythos that is now one of the most loved and cherished by horror fans the world over.  Though not all his films are of an equal caliber, when a Romero movie comes out, you had better believe that we Zombiephiles take notice.

     Though Diary of the Dead is not my ideal choice of a Romero to review for this week, it is the only one I have seen recently enough to feel I can do justice in a review.  So, I'm just gonna take what I have and run with it.  First, the premise.

     A group of film students are filming a horror film in the woods for a class project.  During a break on set, strange reports start coming over their radio about the dead returning to life and attacking the living.  While most of them brush it off as a hoax, a few take the stories seriously.  Divided on what to do, they collectively decide "better safe than sorry", and head to their hometowns and check on their loved ones.  With their teacher along for the ride, they start a journey that will teach them what true horror is.

     The movie is shown all from the "narrator's" point of view.  Or rather, from his camera's.  Not wanting to miss a thing, the camera never leaves his side, and the final product (the film you are watching) is presented as a documentary of what transpired.

     This was a great concept.  I like the idea largely because it puts you in the survivors' shoes more than other zombie flicks, which just cast you as an outside observer.  This boosts the film's "Fright Factor" considerably. However, as is often my experience with "Hand Held Cinema", the device tends to get a little old.

     Likewise, the story tends to drag.  The plot seems like it was just thrown together, serving as a mechanism only to get us to the next zombie attack.  There is certainly more character development than most other horror films.  For the story he was trying to tell, though, and considering how much we are obviously supposed to feel connected to the survivors, I didn't feel it was nearly enough.

     As for the zombies themselves, my hat is off to you, Mr. Romero.  One thing the man shows, time and again, is his mastery of the effects side of these movies.  No one else out there is using the makeup and SFX technology to it full potential quite the way Romero does.  The zombies in Diary are delightfully grotesque, the effects both startling and convincing.  In particular, I like the effects of the gunshots that fail to kill the walking dead.

     To summarize, this is far from the best zombie movie out there.  Despite a number of publications' claims to the contrary, it is not even Romero's best.  Most of the people making these lofty assertions gave me the impression that they thought this was his masterpiece simply because they had not seen any other of his catalog as comparison.

     The movie is NOT bad, though.  Certainly, the story/acting are "Horror Movie Bad" as I like to call it.  I almost expect that from modern horror, though, and it didn't at all prevent me from my enjoyment of the movie.  Also, for sheer shock value and gore, this one is certainly up there on my list.  If you like zombies or horror in general, give this at least one viewing.

Concept: 4 out of 5
Execution: 2.5 out of 5
Effects: 4.5 out of 5
Fright Factor: 4 out of 5
Overall Rating: 3.75 out of 5

Marvel Zombies: Volume 1

Marvel Zombies: Volume 1
Genre: Graphic Novel
Writer: Robert Kirkman
Artist: Sean Phillips
Release Date: September 6th 2006










     Sometimes, a person working in a certain field will come up with something so original, so far above what others have attempted, that their names become forever linked with that genre.  Zombies in popular culture are a great example of this.  You can't have a conversation about zombie films without discussing George Romero.  Likewise, Max Brooks has set such a standard with his books (The Zombie Survival Guide and World War Z), that anyone else is simply playing catch-up.

     Like these two greats, the comics industry has its own heavy hitter when it comes to the living dead; Robert Kirkman.  Fans will know his work from the amazing horror series The Walking Dead, but far more people will recognize him from another series he has helmed.  Marvel Zombies.

     Set in an alternate reality (a convenient plot device the industry as a whole makes liberal use of) we start the first of these five collected issues in Manhattan, the epicenter of superhuman activity.  We are dropped directly into the middle of the action.  The city is one giant disaster area, and Magneto, the only survivor in sight, is attempting to fight off a horde of zombified meta-humas.

     All the fan favorites are in the fray.  Wolverine, Spider-Man, Captain America, The Incredible Hulk, and so on.  Earth's mightiest heroes have become devourers, tearing apart everything and everyone they see in their unending hunger.

     What is different about these zombies from most representations is that, unlike their mindless, animalistic counterparts, these still have a part of who they were.  Whether they embrace their new state or mourn it, the "heroes" know full well what they are doing.  It is only as their hunger takes over that they really begin to lose control of themselves.

     What I find startling and very interesting in Kirkman's interpretation is just how quickly the bulk of these characters take to their new lot.  Most of them seem to become not only willing monsters, but are often thrilled to find their next meal.  In fact, the horrendous acts they commit while in control of their faculties are often worse than those done because of the hunger.  Also interesting is how much this mental transformation is left unexplained.  We don't know what of their new behavior is the cause of the virus, or was perhaps hiding below the surface in each of them, waiting to come out.

     Reading the book, one might begin to wonder why there are no zombified "normals".  Does the virus only target meta-humans?  Does exposure kill those without extraordinary gifts?  The answer is as simple as it is grotesque.  Any normal human facing exposure is also facing a horde of hungry supers.  Once they are done fighting for the scraps, there is simply nothing left.

     Through these first five issues, the books does a great job of exploring not only the toll this outbreak has taken on the few pockets of survivors, but also the changes to the lives of the former heroes.  I think it is a nice choice to make the "zombies" cognizant of what is happening.  It is an interesting change in perspective to have the story told from the point of view of the zombies, something that has been impossible in the bulk of zombie-lit.  Whether the character's response is revelry or regret, the dynamics between them make the book a fascinating read.  Once a powerful, intergalactic force makes an appearance, thing really start getting interesting.

     The art has all the gore and violence you would expect and hope for in a piece like this.  From the scenes of dismemberment and devouring, to the zombies themselves, who experience a wide spectrum of bodily destruction and decay, these monstrous versions of our childhood heroes are simultaneously repellent and fascinating.  That is what impressed me most about the illustrations.  The variety of characters tackled in the story, and how well the "zombification" translates for each of them.

     The coloring is, likewise, very appropriate.  With a lot of shadows and dark coloring, the reader is given the sense that not only is the sun gone, but that it is never coming back.  The horror being presented makes even the idea of a surcease impossible, setting and maintaining a great tone for the book.

     There is one place that I felt the book was lacking.  Being a comic, not much is left up to the imagination.  Any horrifying thing they want to depict is done vividly and graphically.  Though I usually don't mind this in a comic, part of what makes good horror books (like World War Z) so terrifying is precisely the fact that so much is left to the reader's imagination.  Therefore, it is the nature of the medium that the art here keeps the book from being truly frightening.  It is still a great read, with a number of equally gross and engaging books released since.  If you like zombies, then by all means, check out the whole catalog of the Marvel Zombies series.

Concept: 5 out of 5
Story: 4 out of 5
Art: 4 out of 5
Fright Factor: 3 out of 5
Overall Rating: 4 out of 5

Shaun Of The Dead

Shaun Of The Dead
Genre: RomZomCom

Starring: Simon Pegg, Nick Frost, Kate Ashfield, Nicola Cunningham, Bill Nighy, Lucy Davis, Dylan Moran

Release Date: April 9th 2004






     Shaun is a bit of a loser.  He works as a middle manager at an electronics store, he spends every night at the pub with his friend Ed (who is an even bigger loser than Shaun), and his girlfriend, Liz, has just dumped him.  He's made a complete mess of his life.  Shaun is, simply, a failure, and he knows it.  He also knows it is going to take drastic action to get his life on track, and get Liz to take him back.

     Then, zombies overrun London...

     In the face of the apocalypse, Shaun has to man up, fight some zombies, kill a few loved ones, save the day, and get the girl.  Now if he can just figure out how to manage all that without screwing it up.

     The term "RomZomCom" (or Romantic Zombie Comedy) is a pretty common part of the industry vernacular today.  It hasn't been that way for long, though.  Shaun of the Dead not only set the standard for the genre, but was singly responsible for its birth.  Prior to its release, zombie movies were just another part of the horror genre, taken in far too serious of a light by the industry and audiences alike.  Even those with excessive gore or laughably bad acting were making too much of an attempt to be taken seriously, in my opinion.

     Shaun of the Dead broke the mold completely.  It certainly helped that director Edgar Wright and star Simon Pegg are avid horror fans.  What they managed to create went far beyond what you would expect, though.  You might go into it thinking you're in for a silly spoof.  Possibly you are expecting a labored homage to the greats of the zombie movie such as Romero.  That doesn't begin to describe it, or to do it justice.

     The film is so carefully thought out, so precisely executed, that they have transcended being a spoof of any sort.  Instead, through the use of classic British wit and perhaps surprisingly good special effects, they have created a masterpiece of both the horror and comedy genres.  Ask any afficianado to name their top five zombie movies, and I can almost guarantee, Shaun of the Dead will come up.

     Additionally, by adding the truly brilliant humor, along with a touch of romance, they have single handedly made the genre more accessible to the average movie goer.  People who would never give horror the time of day have found themselves in equal parts cringing from and laughing at the "horror" of it.

     The humor adds another dimension to the film that so many others lack.  Where other zombie flicks try to create unease in the viewer through simple "shock cuts" and mood lighting, Simon Pegg as Shaun truly is an everyman.  The audience can connect to him, can get behind him, in a way they can't with other horror heroes.  You get sucked in, because you know that what Shaun does is exactly what you would do.  When faced with a dismembered man in a tuxedo, your first thought isn't to grab a gun and shoot for the head.  It is rather more like Shaun's reaction; to jump back, screaming "Oh my god!  His arm's off!"

     Shaun is also uncomfortable (as I imagine we all would be in his shoes) with using the term "zombie".  It simply makes it too real, and Shaun's reaction to the horror is what most everyone does when faced with the unbelievable.  They simply refuse to believe it.

     Along with Pegg is a brilliant supporting cast.  Nick Frost (Pegg's real-life friend) is Ed, a man idiotic to the point of being tragic, who still does a nice job of "rolling with punches".  Kate Ashfield as Liz is sweet yet severe, willing to take charge when need be, making her a perfect counterpoint to Shaun's indecisiveness.  Lucy Davis and Dylan Moran are hysterical as the bickering couple Dianne and David.

     The real highlights of the supporting cast for me, though, were Nicola Cunningham and Bill Nighy.  Cunningham is Shaun's mother, Mary.  Rather than being stupid or oblivious, as she comes off at first, she is simply too sweet to believe, or even to comprehend, the events unfolding around her.  Bill Nighy is Shaun's step-father, Philip, a serious, authoritarian man who is certain his bite wound will be fine.  Why?  Because he "...ran it under a cold tap."  In his short time on screen, Nighy draws the viewer in (as he always does) and manages to simultaneously touch and repulse us.

     Finally, for being made six years ago, the effects are on par  with anything released in its time, and even most zombie films since.  The gore is used perfectly, and the only places it might normally start to feel excessive, it doesn't.  Those are the times you are laughing the hardest.

     In summary, this is not your normal horror film, or your normal comedy.  It stood out so much, that when he was making Land of the Dead, George Romero offered cameos to Pegg and Wright (which they, of course, accepted).  Shaun of the Dead is, and always will be, a standard by which great zombie movies are judged, and will proudly hold its title as the first RomZomCom.

Concept: 5 out of 5
Story and Script: 5 out of 5
Effects: 4.5 out of 5
Originality: 5 out of 5
Overall Rating: An enthusiastic 5 out of 5!

Pride And Prejudice And Zombies

Pride And Prejudice And Zombies

by Seth Grahame-Smith

Genre: Classics, Horror, Spoof

Published by Quirk Classics

Date of Publication: April 4th 2009

     They say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.  I suppose spoofs fall into that category, and I have yet to find a better one than Pride And Prejudice And Zombies.  Rather than rewrite the regency classic, Grahame-Smith has used a different tactic.  Taking Austen's original text, he has expanded it in a number of places, adding scenes and a backstory of a zombie outbreak.  The rest, he left completely untouched.

     For the sake of this review, I am going to have to assume you, the reader, have at the very least a cursory knowledge of the original.  It is not my intention to try and "review" a masterpiece of English literature, and I find even the idea of such an attempt intimidating and far beyond my meager talents.

     This version of the book follows the Bennett family (particularly Elizabeth) through the same course of events as the original.  The class intrigues, romances, and family disputes all remain largely unsullied.  In fact, the bulk of the book (say 85%) remains identical to the original piece, down to the word.

     In this version, however, the countryside has been overrun by Unmentionables.  Oddly enough, the word "Zombie" rearely appears in the book.  Rather than being the somewhat less than "prim and proper" society ladies we know them as, the Bennett sisters are a highly trained and widely respected group of zombie slayers, whose collective technique (learned in a monastery in the orient) is referred to as the "Pentagram of Death".  Elizabeth is, as expected, the fiercest and most talented martialist of the bunch, and possibly in the world.

     Likewise, Mr. Darcy is esteemed across the country as being unmatched with a blade, and his record of kills borders on uncountable.  Their matched skill as combatants adds a very nice additional layer of tension and one-upsmanship to their courtship, and brings a new dimension to their feuding.

     Through questions of their suitability as women of class, to the infection and death of a close friend, and through all the same trials and tribulations, this time with "added zombie carnege and mayhem", there are no twists that can catch you offhand.  But then again, how could you possibly expect there would be with any book as established as Pride And Prejudice.

     The thing that really made this book for me is the flawless reworking of certain famous lines, in particular, the opening line of the book:

     "It is a truth universally acknowledged that a zombie in possession of brains must be in want of more brains"

     In addition to the flawless used Victorian language, there are several sparsely used illustrations peppered throughout the book.  Done in much the same style as old woodblock prints, these add a very nice touch to the volume.

     When this book was announced, Austen fans the world over rose up as one to collective complain, flooding book sites with wordy diatribes why this idea was not only ludicrous, but bordered on the blasphemous.  They ranted against the bastardization of the beloved classic, and tried ardently to persuade everyone they could to not even give it the time of day.

     Yet in spite of all that, the book not only saw it's release, but the sentiment of hatred and revulsion (one widely shared across a large cross section of literati) proved an old saying true; "There's no such thing as bad publicity".  In fact, preorders reached incredible numbers, surpassing the records for many years, and it was even optioned as a movie PRIOR to the book hitting shelves.  Why?  Because zombies are awesome, and so is Pride And Prejudice And Zombies.

     I would not suggest reading the original and this back to ack, as I did.  No matter how great the classic is, Pride And Prejudice And Zombies is still largely the same book, and even a classic like Pride And Prejudice gets a little old (no pun intended) after two consecutive readings.  Also, I admit to wishing for more narrative about the zombies.  But, the next time you would revisit the original, consider picking this up instead.  If you can keep an open mind, or are anything at all like me, I promise you won't regret it.  The book does exactly what it claims it does on the back cover.  It "transforms a masterpiece of world literature into something you'd actually want to read."

Concept: 5 out of 5
Execution: 4 out of 5
Overall Rating: 4.5 out of 5

OMG! Zombies!

Graphic Novels:
Marvel Zombies: Volume 1

Books:
Breathers
Pride And Prejudice And Zombies
World War Z

Movies:
Dead Snow
Diary Of The Dead
Shaun Of The Dead
Zombieland