5 reasons this movie is better than Shawshank Redemption

Rating: 10/10 (2 November 2009)

1) Humor. There wasn't much humor in Shawshank Redemption; this movie had more humor. That makes it better by my calculations. Jokes ranging from facebook to fat people to nerds filled my heart with glee. I literally "lol"d, if you will, at many points in the movie.
2) Death Scenes. Shawshank Redemption had a few death scenes, but I didn't get the point. Every death in Zombieland made sense. Every death felt important, planned out, and intrinsically important.
3) Plot. Shawshank Redemption didn't make sense. How could a man get out of prison? Prisons aren't supposed to let people out, that's why they're called prisons. Shawshank Redemption forced the plot on the viewer. In Zombieland, postmodernist scripting allowed the plot gaps to be filled in with the human mind! The writing style empowers the people to solve the problems of Zombieland for themselves.
4) Tim Robbins vs. Robin Williams. Let's be frank, Tim Robbins just isn't a good actor. That's why Forrest Gump won all the Academy Awards in 1994. In Zombieland, Robin Williams is funny, smart, and knows how to go out with a bang (pun intended). Robin Williams reminds the audience of Caddyshack and Ghostbusters. Tim Robbins reminds the audience of Austin Powers 2: The Spy Who Shagged Me and Anchorman. Robin Williams is just a funnier man.
5) Michael Cera. Michael Cera is funny in everything he does. Zombieland is just another example of something funny Michael Sera acts in. Shawshank Redemption's best actor is probably Morgan Freeman and that's only because he was in the Dark Knight (my favorite movie). Shawshank Redemption doesn't have Michael Cera. Plain and simple.
Reviewing this movie in a comparative manner to the #1 movie on IMDb will give you, probably a moviegoer yourself, a good perspective of how good Zombieland really is!