The other night I went to a new bar in my home town- the concept behind it (I hate the fact that bars now require concepts) was a 1980s Berlin crackden. I kid you not. So we went, and it turned out to be exactly that- apart from the strewn, drug-addled usual suspects and actual drug paraphenalia I found myself drinking in a shit-hole that seemed to be celebrating the fact that it was clever enough to forget all design necessities. I got exactly what I expected, but I couldn't help but miss the point and feel completely let down. With Zombieland, I was expecting the reverse- my expectations of the film itself missed my hopes for it by a Berlin mile and I was ready to accept a near-miss zom-com that just didnt leave me feeling any particular connection. As a reviewer I see an inordinate amount of poorly made horror films,with zombie flicks rating a definite first in the shit stakes, and it seems harder to make a good back-from-the-dead yarn than a bad one, and far less appealing (I blame it on the so-bad-its-good mind-set that trends in those circles), and I felt a familiar niggling sense of doubt with Woody Harrelson's latest trip to the box office. On paper it perhaps shouldnt work- but dear God was I wrong. I was convinced I was going to be treated to some inept zomploitation bollocks, with the obligatory cast of psuedo-characters (probably refered to as "rag-tag" throughout), but what I got was pure zomploitation genius, joyously playing with the idea of the rules of the zombie film as the rules of surviving zombies in the real world. I love inter-textuality when its done well, and the rule system that Zombieland uses to shape the perameters of the story and to give an idea of every particular neurosis of what has to be one of the most inspired leading characters of the year. Jesse Eisenberg's Columbus is my type of character- in the vein of the Michael Cera-style- reimagining of Woody Allen's neurotic nerdlinger caricature that seems so popular these days. Awkward nerdiness is in (good news for the blogosphere regulars no doubt), and what better way to stick two fingers up at the usual zombie film by making the insecure, socially uncomfortable nerd the impenetrable hero, and making his survival dependant on his geekhood? And then teaming him up with Woody Harrelson's Tallahassee, a broken, red-neck borderline sociopath with a distinct taste for zombie slaying and a personal vendetta that reveals him to be heartwarmingly human. Forgive the gushing; it's a long time since characters have been this compelling in this genre. Expendable humanity is all well and good when you have a really iconic and charismatic villain, but too many zombie films neglect really establishign a rapport between auudience and hero in favour of merely making their survival a result of their being less hateful than the rest of the bunch of survivors they are unwittingly lumped together with. In Zombieland, curiously, you really root for the human foursome- revelling in the ingenius ways in which they despatch their flesh-guzzling foes rather than in watching them being picked off like fish in a barrel. Oh and the Breslin child from Little Miss Sunshine is in it as well, but she was unfortunately overshadowed by her on-screen sister, the beautiful, sexy as hell Emma Stone, who has the kind of eyes that could strip a 20lb steak of its meat from across a crowded biker bar. Oh to be that steak! She's not a bad actor either- continuing her cookie sex-appeal that somehow came across in the glorious Superbad, despite the wa she is treated in that movie, and providing the excellent foil and simultaneous pay-off to Eisenberg's awkward sexual blossoming. Now, moving on from the characters, briefly... I'm all for the cultural commentary that some of the more self-styled high-brow examples of the genre- the idea of zombie infection being merely a natural extrapolation of the dehumanising effect of consumerism (hence Dawn of the Dead plays out in mall, where all the zombies have gravitated towards because that's their only enduring memory from life), but Im sort of glad Zombieland doesnt tread those waters. For this kind of unabridged violence to be enjoyed in th purest manner, the zombies need only be considered as a manifestation of malignance- heads to be smashed, limbs to be removed without conscience, and this allows Harrelson's character free-reign to work his own magic. And when the reallisation comes that Tallahasee has a tragic personal reason for his almost reckless abandonment when facing the zombies, the development of the character so far is such that it comes as a stark moment of realisation and is more affecting than I thought possible in such a context. In the same vein, the film is peppered with little instances of the survivors trying to hang onto their humanity, and not just their humanness, which makes it all the more enjoying to watch their triumphs. I admit that I might spend too much time in some of my reviews talking about characterisation, but I'm of the opinion that characters make a narrative work properly- there is now way I can be carried along a story trail by someone I dont believe in or even like. And with Zombieland the success is all about the characters. Hence the well-trodden story-line feels newer than it should and doesnt feel anything like just another addition to a tired genre that didnt need another sub-standard addition. I really cant say enough good about Zombieland, hence the abundant hyperbole, and no review would do this immensely clever genre movie the justice that just going to see it will.