After the thumping success of 'Return of the Living Dead' in all its gory, anarchic and acidic glory, a sequel was all but inevitable. But what do you do when your runaway success picture ends with the nuclear holocaust?! Well…you have 2 options realistically, Post apocalyptic zombies, or you hit the 'reset' button. 'Return of the Living Dead: Part 2' had a 50/50 chance of getting this right…and it wasnt even close.
SO! They went for the reset button…In a way that…well, its a unique twist on the method i'll give it that.
The film is set in an alternate reality from the original film, and a chunk of the details from the original film are pulled through into this story, but its like the chunks have been put into a smoothie maker. Whereas the original film dealt with a medical resourcing store where a vat of deadly 'Trioxin' had been secretly stored in the basement after it fell off a government wagon during a clean up operation to contain the events of 'Night of the Living Dead' Which is then hit and spills its gasses into the basement ressurecting cadavers and causing several people to become sick with a 'zombie' virus…leading to shenanigans and punk rock.
'Return of the Living Dead: Part 2' opens with the government shifting vats of 'Trioxin' (presumably after a big cleanup event) when one of the trucks hits a bump in the road, knocking a vat out of the back of the truck and down under a small bridge on the outskirts of town. Well; naturally a bunch of kids find it and on messing around with it, they reveal a fully sealed 'Tar man' preserved in the goo. They freak out and head into a local cemetary where familiar faces in the form of James Karen and Thom Matthews (previously Freddy and Frank in the original film) are back, here playing TOTALLY different characters Joey and Ed.
Instead of working in medical supplies, in this universe Joey and Ed are effectively 'grave robbers' stealing bones to sell on the black market for profit. However, when the kids are scared out of the grave yard by Joey and Ed, they head back to the vat to see whats going on with it, and accidentally release its entire contents of 'Trioxin' and a full size Tar man to boot!
The gas spreads through the cemetary ressurecting the dead, who this time are a LOT goofier and a LOT more talkative. Both the kids and Joey and Ed are naturally confused and terrified, and begin to formulate a plan to get to safety (bearing in mind at this point that Joey and Ed are once again infected with Trioxin…and once again will slowly begin to turn into the undead…these guys just cant catch a break.)
Anyway, the group manage to escape the graveyard and congregate in a place of safety where they meet up with one of the kids relatives. they all try to hunker down and survive the invasion, which doesnt work, and so they wind up at a hydroplant and…things get a bit zombie invasioney and…well…from there this is the only thing this movies really got, so I dont wanna spoil it…but its probably the best this movie gets realistically.
Out of the original 'Return' trilogy, I find for me that 'Part 2' is somewhat lacking…its the odd duck in between a cult classic directed by Dan O Bannon, and a cult classic directed by Brian Yuzna…and as such, it across the board just feels a bit 'vanilla'…its not the films fault specifically, indeed; had this just been a standalone zombie movie, i'd probably hold it in the same regard as 'The Video Dead' or 'The Dead Next Door' in terms of being solidly built…but when held up against arguably 2 of the better examples of the 'Zombie' genre? man this thing is wheat toast.
The plot lacks the bite and comedy of the original entry, instead falling back on more screwball and 'one liner' gags to try and pull things together…which makes it feel like it doesnt quite have the soul or intentions of the other entries. The pacings quite a bit slower than the other movies in the series, the characters dont feel as interesting or engaging, their motives and character arcs all feel a bit flat and futile…Theres just a sense of it feeling somewhat glossy eye'd. Its got the basics down pat, a clean 3 act structure, smooth transitions to guide the audience through those 3 acts, consistent tone, steady pacing…it does the basics…it just doesnt do them all that well in my opinion and it never really rises to do something a bit more unique or out there with its premise…which is a shame.
The direction too takes a massive hit, both the original and the next sequel in this series are heavily stylized, carefully thought through and curated viewing experiences that felt like they had something to say…Part 2 feels like director Ken Wiederhorn had seen dribs and drabs of the first film, was told to make a 'zombie film thats funny' and made just that. a zombie movie thats broadly funny, but overtly safe. Theres minimal guts, gore and ooze…the whole thing feels like it could have been a more mature 'Goosebumps' entry honestly, not helped by the fact that one of the main subplots of the film quite literally is a kid experiencing a zombie invasion while ALSO having to deal with his bullies! (being a kids tough amairight!?)
I'd say the film for about 75% of the runtime runs the gauntlet between being vaguely solid and eeking into a more creative space…and just…flat, lifeless, most basic of basic sequence structurings.
mercifully 25% of the feature (mainly in the 3rd act) DOES get a creative shot to the head, as things suddenly turn colourful, incredibly well composed and decently structured in a way that makes this film feel like its found its identity…about 80 minutes too late.
The cine is a mixture of bland and safe compositional shots that feel overly muted and honestly…deathly dull…with the occasional flash of distinct, colourful greatness. Which is a real shame. it never dips below the expectations in quality that I would assume to find in a studio picture. But it meanders in that middle ground of just being 'kinda sorta okay' for WAY longer than im comfortable with. The edit isnt half bad, though again, they dont really take any risks their either in terms of experimentation with transitions or cuts to make things look a bit jazzier…its just, the simplest thing they could do with the footage available.
The performances are a LOT more muted and a LOT less eccentric than the first and third films, theres still an element of 'wacky' thrown into the mix, because I think there'd have been rioting in the streets had they COMPLETELY defanged this thing. but again, the humour is coming from a place of broad 'KERRRAZY' humour…rather than the more pointed or darker humour the other films are known for…and as a result it makes a lot of the performances here feel a lot quieter, a lot less entertaining and a lot more 'basic' than i'd have liked. Ultimately, I didnt really care about any of these characters, and the performances seem to reflect the quality of the penmanship they recieved…
and the soundtracks a travesty. the punk rock jukebox is gone, and we have largely generic 'rocky' horror music and the occasional synth piece playing throughout. I understand if they wanted to make a break from the first film and try something different. But if they DID want to do that, then why did they bother bringing half the plot and a fifth of the original cast back in different configurations…dissapointed is an understatement.
In short? I dont much care for this one. I dont think its bad, I just think its overly generic. it doesnt really excel at anything, everything just kind of 'okay' and it misses a LOT more than it hits. Theres a reason the other entries get more plays out of me than this one, those films I can gladly sit and watch almost any time…this one? feels like the kind of movie I have on in the background when I just need something to fill in the silence while im sorting the dishwasher, or straightening up the living room. and the fact that im saying that about a 'Return of the living dead' movie, should tell you everything you need to know about the quality of this one.
source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/return-of-the-living-dead-part-ii/
