Contains spoilers.
There's two things
I'll take from Brian Yuzna (director) and John Penney 's (writer) twisted
little zombie love tragedy. One is never, ever stick your hand in the mouth of
a zombie however permanently dead you think it might be and two, don't ever
think resurrecting your significant other with a highly experimental biological
agent in a top secret military base is a good idea, however much you miss her.
They're two quite avoidable scenarios when you think about it, but where would
we, the zombie enthusiast who gets off on buckets of gore, total pandemonium
and apocalyptic end game scenarios, be, if people could be relied on to
demonstrate the tiniest bit of common sense.
The story in Return of the Living
Dead 3 is really that of a succession of bad ideas. Whether it's Curt Reynolds (J. Trevor
Edmond) stealing his father Col. John Reynolds' (Kent McCord) security key
card, so he and his girlfriend, Julie Walker (Melinda Clarke) can break in to the top secret military base to see what they're all up to, or speeding down a highway helmet free in the
centre of the road at night with your crotch being fondled, it's one moment of
stupidity after another. In fact the whole idea, that there could still be a
practical use for Trioxin, the highly volatile and dangerous zombie
resurrection compound responsible for all the trouble and death in part's one
and two, is itself a really bad idea. But as I said earlier, it doesn't half
lay a great foundation for another good zombie horror film.
I didn't really like
part II; I felt it was watered down and excessively family friendly-goofy with
a Goonies vibe and too much focus on the teen audience. Right a way I'll say
part 3 is back to where I feel it should be. It's visceral, it's depraved, deaths
are plentiful and nasty and there's an abundance of gratuitous blood and gore
thanks to some down right imaginative and gruesome brain eating zombies.
If Curt didn't take
Julie's death well the same can really be said of Julie's reaction to being
brought back to life. Sequels have a fine line to tread balancing respect and
homage with telling something new, yet with the toy box provided. Part II got it
wrong, losing focusing too hard on having fun and thinking re-filming verbatim scenes from the first was what fans would want to see again. Part 3, by spinning
a tale that references all that has gone before, subtly using imagery and the
zombie set of rules Dan O' Bannon set out, yet telling something unique in
content and style demonstrates with confidence how a sequel should be done. At heart what we have is a story of love,
forgiveness and redemption; a Greek tragedy. Julie isn't upset to be reunited
with Curt, she's upset because she knows a line that should not have been
crossed has, and the story is their journey to accept the mistake and forgive
each other and accept the inevitable however painful it will be. It's stylish, at times poignant and what's most important, it works.
I should also mention that
along with the sad tender journey, there's also the fair bit of action, blood and
gore and Brian Yuzna isn't afraid to crank things up. As well as being sought by
his dad, the base commander, and the morally unscrupulous Colonel Sinclair
(Sarah Douglas), the love-struck duo manage to upset a local gang of four
Mexicans lead by Santos (Mike Moroff), get a shopkeeper killed and even manage
to find room to return some hospitality shown on them by a homeless river-man
(Basil Wallace) by seeing ultimately turned into the worlds first prototype
zombie cyborg. It's quite the trail of destruction all delightfully presented and
paced.
When Julie first
comes back, with a pulse we might add, she's coherent, her memories of the bed
they shared just before the accident are still in her mind and she's walking and
talking as if nothing is really wrong. It doesn't take long however, with the onset of numbness and cramps for her to tell Curt she can tell something definitely is amiss though.
Melinda Clarke is exceptional as Julie, authentically portraying a woman slowly
deteriorating in mind and body and desperately grasping on to what little
humanity and self she has left, all the while fighting off an insatiable
hunger that promises to consume her entirely. Cramps and a general feeling of
unease turns to stiffness, pain and ravenous hunger which after failing to satiate with
snacks at a 24 hour convenience store, she realises her hunger is actually for brains. It all stays true to Return of the Living Dead zombie lore,
this time we're told by the military scientists the zombie craving is for
electricity, from the neurons in the brains rather than endorphins, but it's
still brains and this time we get to see a lot more of them, both splattered
about and being chewed on. Another thing still firmly entrenched is the idea
that the dead undeaded (should be a word) are in a lot of pain.
The hunger is the
pain but fortunately for Curt, Julie has also worked out that actual pain, most of which is
brutally and sadistically excessively self inflicted, can be temporarily relieved. It in some way's goes to alleviate the
discrepancy why she alone is able to fight off turning full on zombie but it
doesn't do so, if I'm honest totally convincingly. Other than Julie, a whiff of
Trioxin or a bite and transference of the compound and you're turned, groaning
and bashing at doors and walls as if the old self and all humanity has been
extinguished like a flame. This disparity between 'good' dead and 'bad' dead doesn't
detract too much if taken for what it is and understanding Yuzna still wanted
to fashion a good old zombie film with zombies in it. In many ways, the film shares much with Warm Bodies, albeit this time Juliet plays the zombie-aberration, and it perhaps, as Col. John Reynolds comments near the end, introduces a new element to the given rule-set, as the old self might not actually be gone after all.
The franchise is
renowned for it's fast pace, over the top presentation and slightly camp
tongue-in-cheek undertone. Return part 3 has embraced all these, albeit with
less overt playfulness, and fashioned arguably the most complete, original and
cohesive horror narrative of the lot. With brilliant acting, a tight cohesive
story, an abundance of over the top make-up, prosthetic and gore excessiveness, and an explosively satisfying ending, I'm surprised this isn't more highly
regarded. It's certainly re-peeked my interest in in parts 4 and 5 and I'll
even be taking a more active role in looking at Brian Yuzna's other work.
Extremely satisfying, 8/10.
I, too, have often wondered why we don't hear more of this movie in genre circles. I'm assuming you've already seen parts 4 and 5, but if not, be prepared for a harsh example of the law of diminishing returns in action. Speaking of Yuzna flicks, have you seen Society? Not a zombie movie, of course, but sometimes they're not. lol
ReplyDeleteNope, not seen them but looking at their amazon reviews I'm not actually holding out much hope. I think I'm pretty much at the stage now where anything reviewed will be a first time watch; think of these ramblings as a written zombie voyage of cinematic discovery (or a load of old tosh).
DeleteI really didn't expect much from this film but it'll definitely appear when I (finally) get round to reviewing and expanding my top 10.
Thanks for leaving a comment and I''ll be sure to check out Society.