Reviews

---------SPOILER ALERT----------------------------

This was the worst of the series, it is horror disguised as political satire and it is as subtle as a sledge hammer, not very scary and not very insightful. Did Micheal Moore have anything to do with this piece of Garbage.?

I'm really sick of Hollywood using entertainment as a political campaign against George Bush and constantly repeating the same talking points over and over again. This movie wants to be DeathDream, but unlike that movie which subtly poignantly tackled the problems soldiers who came back from Vietnam by clever making the main character come back as a blood craving zombie and slowly built on this theme: it was a true horror film that was also good social commentary, because it didn't get sanctimonious, exploitave and preachy.

I guess Joe Dante, thought this was trying to make a horror film to scare Republicans, conservatives and Libertarians and me being the last in that list found this film to be totally ridiculous, manipulative and exploitave all at the same time and I don't mean the good type of exploitative, that you often find in the " drive-in" type movies, I mean exploitative in the most sickening and vile manner: using the deaths of our soldiers as a manipulative political statement disguised as a horror film.

This film assumes that all the soldiers who died in Iraq, would vote against a conservative president if they would come back to life as zombies, which is a flawed premise, because as I recall for the most part and going by George Romero's rules; zombies are mindless, flesh eating creatures, operating on pure impulse and even though the zombie Andy, in DeathDream could talk, he couldn't really hold a conversation and he was driven by his addiction to human blood. Okay, zombies are mindless creatures driven by impulse and not intellect and obviously they are dead, so why would dead people be allowed to vote in the first place? My interpretation of this film is that the only war a liberal democrat could win is by having mindless, dead people vote for him, I guess they meant to say the people that vote for presidents like George Bush are the mindless zombies, while the real mindless zombies, are actually the ones making the intellectually sounds decisions. Yeah, whatever. Dawn of the Dead tackled this idea much better, but user the idea of mindless consumerism. This film isn't Dawn of the Dead by any stretched of the imagination.

The film addresses the issue while the soldiers are alive that a majority of them voted for a Bush like president, but after they die they would vote for a liberal anti-war democrat after they are zombies, who are normally considered brain dead creatures and laughably has them destruct after they vote.

If you are gonna make a zombie movie Mr. Dante and invoke George Romero's name in it, you better have mindless zombies that like ripping people apart and eating their intestines, not zombies that vote. I also like how the zombies just go "evil" conservatives who support the war.

If you want a good movie with social commentary skip this poorly made, preachy piece of junk and watch DeathDream instead.

The worst of the Master of Horror Series hands down.

The people on this site that complained about this movie being boring, must have seen an entirely different movie, on the contrary, I found it to be an exciting, action packed and culturally enlightening film. It isnt perfect, but It is defintely worth the time and money I spent on the VCD. To the uninformed I saw the original Thai cut of this film esp. when I heard that Francis Ford Coppola was going to release a shorter version of it, because he in all his benevolent wisdom knows better than the director how the picture needed to be edited. Mr Coppola all I want to ask is how come you didnt get rights to release all five hours of footage that was shot, instead of taking out scenes and replacing it with others? Somebody in Thailand should take 40 minutes out of Apocalypse Now and take out entire scenes and replace them with scenes from the additional 3 hours of footage that FFC shot for the movie.

All the critics of this movie, esp those who feel it was too long need to think and consider that maybe the reason why: it jumps around in the story, there seems to be little character development, and some of the dialogue seems choppy might be because it was orignally intended after theater release to be shown on Thai television as a 2 part miniseries. My personal opinion is I dont think the film was long enough and in spite of that and the other weak points I mentioned I seldom found it boring. Great care and detail obviously went into period costumes and sets and the scope of this film is tremendous, especially in the intricate battle scenes, which were on par with many of the Hollywood spectacles. I also found a rare peek into Thai culture extremely fasinating, since it so seldom that we get an accurate glimpse of Asian cultures aside from the Japanese and Chinese cultures, and even though those protrayals usually condescending and jingoistic. Many of the same people who complain about this movie had no problem going to see long movies like Dances with Wolves or Braveheart, which too were highly entertaing if historical inaccurate films. I found that even though the dialogue in the final scene was a bit hokey, that it still packed an emotional wallop even knowing the Queen Suriyothai is going to die, not a spoiler folks, because the film opens with her death, there is just something about the sacrifice of one's life for something greater than yourself which is very dramatic and inspiring.

The films major weakness is that even though the film is about her, it spends a lot of time on a lot of secondary characters most of which are fairly interesting, I wanted to see more of what made her tick. The whole thing works inspite of this weaknesses. If you like larger than life characters, well choreographed and bloody battle sequences, and some drama and intrigue then you will love this film.

I would have to agree the quote that said that this was Wong Kar Wai mixed with John Woo and that was my thoughts exactly when I saw the movie.

Its a good movie, could have been great, but definitely worth seeing. The movie is gritty and realistic and like a Woo film has characters that are flawed, but sympathetic and likeable which makes the violence and there is some graphic violence here have a lot more impact than in the average smash and crash movies. The hitman with a heart of gold scenario has been done before, but this one covers some new ground.

*SPOILER ALERT*---------------------------------------------------------

The new ground covered is that the hitman actually realizes the consequences and impact of the killings he has committed on the victim's families, which if I recall is rarely ever touch upon in the hitman movies. Most of the targets in other movies of this genre all thugs who probably deserve a bullet put through their head and not an innocent person who is just living his life.

*END OF SPOILER --------------------------------------------------------

This film has a lot going for it: stylish visuals, tight direction, and good melodrama, but I think the major fault of the film that kept it from being great was when the main character was onscreen, I felt that we should have been looking through his world through his eyes, as if we were deaf too, but instead only does this when he is making a hit. I think that would have been a lot people than having the characters write notes to him and having us hear what they are saying to have. I really like how the director's made what could have been an imitation of the classic restaurant shootout in A Better Tomorrow and with a visual twist gave the scene an originality all its own.

I also found the ending to be a bit, corny and manipulative, although it did work and the decision that Kong made to change his fate was sad and at the same time clever and creative.

All in all I would give this movie *** out a possible ***** because it did breathe some fresh life into a very cliched genre and is definitely worth watching.