On June 16th, Paul Waldman at The American Prospect posted an online essay entitled "The Left and the Living Dead". In this piece, Waldman suggests that the despite all the reasons that zombie fiction would normally fade away, the zombie zeitgeist remains viable because there is a progressive Liberal core underneath the extreme violence and metaphors for death expressed in zombie films.
The interpretation of Liberal ideology in zombie films is not a new idea, as Waldman notes, but he sums it up nicely when he writes, "Surviving the tide of zombies requires community and mutual responsibility. What could be more progressive than that?"
Although Waldman glances over what I feel are the equally conservative values as well as anti-progressive racial and misogynistic values present in zombie films, I agree that a signfiicant aspect of zombie films is an underlying Liberal philosophy. With that being said, I wish Waldman were a little more progressive in his own view of zombie fans. Waldman begins his article by suggesting that while ghosts, vampires, and werewolves can be and have been presented in highbrow or upper-middle highbrow art, "there are no highbrow zombie movies or novels, and admitting you love them [zombies] amounts to a declaration that your tastes are unrefined."
I find this aside fairly insulting in the way he blankets a whole group of horror fans in broad strokes. Maybe it depends on his definition of zombie? Sure, there are not many gut-munching art films out there, but many consider the people in Les Revenants to be zombies, and that movie's pretty high-brow. What about Soavi's Dellamorte, Dellamore? It's full of splatter and nudity, but you can't watch that movie and not come away feeling it's reaching for more artful, abstract themes.
I guess I'm more offended at the suggestion that those who are fans of zombies don't care for "refined" film, as if it's impossible to do both. As if people don't have a variety of compex tastes. It's this kind of pigeonholing of horror fans that was one of the reasons I never went back to University for a PhD. I wanted to work in the study of genres, especially of cult and exploitation films, but I often felt that even the most open-minded scholars of popular culture feel the material is not worth examining on principle. Even worse, when scholars and writers do examine these works for their cultural significance, there is still apparently a desire to denigrate those who enjoy the subject matter -- as if the only way to enjoy a cult or exploitation film is from an academic level that "betters" the subject matter by virtue of its analytical approach.
One of the few horror scholars I've read who approaches horror fans with respect is Matt Hills. In his book The Pleasures of Horror (London: Continuum, 2005), he writes that too often scholars approach the study of horror and horror fans as a problem that needs to be solved through academic study:
I would argue that some horror scholarship (though by no means all) has viewed horror’s pleasures as a kind of problem in need of explanation because it has prematurely accepted common-sense, hegemonic accounts of the genre. As represented in the Western news media, horror is frequently depicted as a source of mimetic infection, or of moral pollution . . . . But while critics such as Martin Barker, Julian Petley, David Buckingham (1996) and David Gauntlett (1995 and 2001) have worked to contest mass media narratives of horror’s ‘effects’ on audiences, work on the pleasures of horror seems to have unwittingly adopted media discourses surrounding horror via its willingness to view horror’s pleasures as a puzzle, conundrum or a ‘problem’ in need of further study. Horror’s pleasures have been defined, conservatively, as ‘aberrant’ in sectors of contemporary culture other than academia, with this symbolic equation then implicitly or explicitly taken up in studies of the genre . . . . (Hills 3)Here, Hills suggests that the approach to take to horror is not to "solve" the problem of why people seek pleasure in horror or "trash" cinema. Instead, we should approach the pleasure of horror not from the question of "Why do people enjoy horror" but the question of where the pleasure comes from and how it is expressed. Too often, the former view of exploring why people enjoy horror leads to arguments that do not separate horror fans from the mentally ill; there is an implicit suggestion that watching horror films will either: (a) ‘corrupt and deprave’ or (b) ‘desensitize’ viewers (Hills 5).
So, I would recommend everyone read Waldman's article, but keep in mind that his description of zombie fans is generally reductive and offhandedly insulting. Waldman's take on zombie films and progressive ideology is not as progressive in its approach to why horror fans may enjoy zombie films.



REVIEW


So the zombies are great, but a zombie film is only as good as its human characters. Luckily, the film combines the pop sensibilities of Snyder's
Finally, the film is not perfect. I have some issues with the CGI. Because of the relatively low budget, many of the effects are computer generated. The film begins with a rocking CGI title sequence full of blood and organ imagery, but other areas of the film are disappointing. All exterior shots of the plane are CGI (obvious from the solid-yellow windows that look painted on the texture map of the plane). There's also clear use of digital blood spray and splatter effects. For the most part, these effects are handled subtlety, but the more spectacular effects in the climax of the film are obviously green-screened and look more artificial than one can suspend with imagination. You just have to kind of roll with it as best you can.
Congratulations to
Where's... my cake? I... want... my... cake! Where's my cake, Bedelia? Where's my Father's Day cake? I want my cake you dirty BITCH! I'm going to have it! BEDELIA! It's Father's Day! Where's my cake? You promised me my cake! Bedelia, I'm your father and you're supposed to be taking care of me! BEDELIA, YOU BITCH! What do you think I've got you here for? You're just like all the others - you're nothing but a bunch of VULTURES! BEDELIA! WHERE'S MY FATHER'S DAY CAKE?




REVIEW

Ever wonder how best to coordinate the skin colour of your zombies? When describing them to your friends, are you unsure whether you would describe your zombies as "cuticle pink" or "rotten pumpkin"?
Taking a quick survey of zombie comics, here’s a brief rundown of some interesting developments in the world of sequential undead art.
In other zombie news, the Marvel Zombies series keeps on going. 






This past Thursday, my two favorite podcasters, Brother D and Miss Bren, uploaded a very special Episode 71 of their awesome podcast 
Mainstream audiences know Carradine best from his standout performance as Bill, Uma Thurman's nemesis / lover in Quentin Tarantino's
But even Carradine got in on the zombie genre eventually. Carradine has a role in Steven Rumbelow's film adaptation of
For one, many have commented on how
TV zombies rose up in Texas last week, but not to attack. Instead, they wanted to thank legislatures in Texas for passing a bill to make the recycling of old televisions easier. Discarded televisions never die -- they continue to plague the future with their toxic materials in landfills and dumps -- but Texas will legislate mandatory recycling programs. Good for Texas! And good for these zombies ! It is nice to see socially conscious undead out there. [via