Well it's been 20 years since the last "dead" movie in the series. Does it live up to expectations? To me it did. It wasn't scary at all. It was funny and yes it does have alot of gore and bloody death scenes. Dennis Hopper was actually the main villain in this movie. And he played it good. I do think that if you're a horror fan or just a fan of the "dead" series then you should see this. If not then by all means go watch something else. Thoughts?

What about Dawn of the Dead in 2004? Guess it's only a remake, not a new occurence but w/e.

I was bored silly, despite the fact it was a zombie movie. The performances were alright I guess, probably better on Dennis Hopper's part, but nothing really notable. It's interesting that Land of the Dead continues where other zombie movies tend to leave off, but the story is unenthusiastic and doesn't contain any significant characters. It's too busy pushing its sordid political agenda (i.e. Hopper's character - "We don't negotiate with terrorists!", zombies mesmerized by fireworks/"media", rich citizens/those in power pinned in by fences/"money") I suppose I wouldn't have cared so much about that aspect if the story had been interesting but it wasn't really. And the action sequences were really bland, with little of the relentless nature that is supposed to accompany this type of thing. Heh, and I was annoyed that Dawn of the Dead had zombies running (which they can't do because of muscular deterioration, in the definition of being a zombie), here they actually think! It's not really zombies now - more like diseased citizens. Although that probably fits more since the politics are obviously more important than plot practicality or significance.

very well said. Dawn 04 was good despite the running zombies. I cna understand if they just died since they're still "Fresh" but after a while they SHOULD be going slow. Oh well.