Entertaining but ultimately disappointing, and nowhere near as great as Shaun of the Dead

Rating: 6/10 (8 October 2009)

Touted as an American version of Shaun of the Dead, Zombieland follows Columbus (Jesse Eisenberg), Tallahassee (Woody Harrelson), and sisters Wichita (Emma Stone) and Little Rock (Abigail Breslin) as they fight and drive across the United States, avoiding becoming the next statistic of an all encompassing zombie infection. For those wondering, to avoid any real connections to each other, the group goes by city names to avoid exchanging their real names. An interesting touch in an otherwise bafflingly disappointing film.
I wanted to love Zombieland the same way I do Shaun, but sadly, the film fails to deliver the same way that low budget British rom-zom-com did five years ago. It has the intentions to be an amazingly hilarious horror film, but it never delivers on the promises of the hysterical trailers.
Speaking of those trailers, they are the biggest point of contention I have with the film. They reveal almost every single one of the best jokes. Outside of the crazily hilarious and out-of-this-world cameo appearance, the trailers show and tell almost everything else. And if you have had the misfortune of learning which actor appears in that cameo, half the joke has been ruined already. It feels a bit mismanaged on Sony's part, especially for such a ridiculously short film (80-minutes and change), to basically give away all the best parts. It is something that a lot of studios have tended to not really do so much anymore, but here it just feels silly. A lot of these lines were laugh-out-loud hysterical the first time, but on the second round, seem not so clever or unique. Many of the lines suffer even worse fates. They simply lose their luster, and end up being not funny at all.
The film also lacks what is key for every good film involving zombies: satire. George A. Romero became famous for his zombie films, but only because of the ulterior messages he was using the flesh hungry horrors to put across. Isolation and fear were always apparent in his films, and every film from Shaun to the incredibly overrated 28 Days Later has used some part of his famous works to make their own film shine all the brighter. Zombieland does away with this almost entirely. It wisely does not elaborate to in-depth on the cause of the infection, or even how far it reaches (is it just in the United States, or has the whole world become zombies?). But outside of Columbus' rules to live by, which comically appear every few minutes during his narrative speeches, the film never makes an attempt at satirizing anything. It just makes jokes at the expense of pop culture, the cameo actors previous films (good and horrible), and Harrelson's bizarre redneck attitude. Any attempts at drama fall flat on its face.
The film also suffers from having an episodic feel. I found it strange how the film seems to take place almost blatantly in acts; sticking to one conflict, subplot or setting at once, and never moving out of it. Learning that the film was supposed to be a television series helps shed light on why it felt this way, but does not explain why the filmmakers did not attempt to jazz it up with more scenes in more places. It gives the film a great low-budgeted feel, and makes it feel more authentic and diverse. But after seeing what a group of amateur South Africans did with 30-million dollars in District 9, I have come to expect a bit more of low budget film-making. Even Shaun manages to do a whole lot more, and from my understanding, it was made for a fairly smaller amount of money as well. The problems Zombieland suffers from here could have only been amended in editing. But with how straight and to the point the film tends to be, I doubt there was any room for added filler at any point (outside of a very dry section taking place shortly after the two groups meet for the first time).
The inventive camera angles and consistently dystopic feel are the most powerful points in the film. While the entire film is not made of crazy and unique camera angles, there are plenty that feel original or used far too often. They give a certain taste to the film that makes it much better than it actually is, but do tend to make the film all the more uncommon. The hard rocking soundtrack is pretty well done as well, setting the tone for the film right from Metallica's opening note over the hugely entertaining opening credits.
Eisenberg, while saddled with playing almost entirely the same character as he does in Adventureland, does some fairly good work here. His narration adds a comical element to the film that would have been sorrowly missed, and even with his same-note performance, he manages to be convincing in the role. Branching out and doing more unique things with the character could have only been beneficial to him. Harrelson, much accustomed to playing silly and unhinged characters, is solid throughout the film. He has enough finesse and charisma to work off his much younger supporting cast, and manages to make his role fun from beginning to end. Seeing him in roles like this begs the question of why he has not been playing and sticking to characters like these at all times. Stone and Breslin do some decent work in their roles, but are never really explained like Eisenberg and Harrelson are. Their one-dimensionality is a bit silly in the long run (especially when looking at their actions in the final act), but both actresses are convincing in their roles.
Saying Zombieland was anything like Shaun of the Dead was the first mistake anyone made with this film. It is a fairly competent film in its own right with good performances, but nowhere near the classic Shaun is and will always be.
6.5/10.