In George A. Romero’s Land of the Dead we are introduced to a world where humanity has lost and what is left is hardly worth the saving. One could argue, for what ought they be saved? It is fairly clear that the point of Romero’s work in this case is to be critical of George W. Bush’s America. There was and is much to be critical of in America due to the policies of those in power, though it is somewhat unfair to lay the blame so heavily on one man, particularly when that one man comes from a long line of men who have little real power to make America the way that it is. In reality it is a collective effort of generations of people to engrain an ideology that ultimately is so damaging to the weakest of us. It is interesting to look at what Romero does with his film in comparison with another set of artists 70 years before, dealing with many similar conditions. In 1931, Georg Pabst released his adaptation of Bertold Brecht’s play The 3-Penny Opera (which was itself an adaptation of John Gay’s Beggar’s Opera). While Brecht was none to happy with the final result of the film, it does have at its core some important commonalities that can be related to Romero’s film.
In Romero’s film there is an isolated area of Pittsburg where a largish population lives. The population is divided into haves and have-nots. The haves live in a high-rise called Fiddler’s Green and spend their days in consumption of goods. The main floor of the building, the foundation you might say, is a shopping mall full of high end retail and restaurants. The have-nots live in the squalor of slums and make most of their living through black-market trading and other illegal activities (e.g. prostitution, smuggling, zombie fighting, etc.) They have no hope of making it into the Fiddler’s Green regardless of their financial status. Even though Cholo has saved much money and served the ruler of Fiddler’s Green, he has no hope of ever being allowed in. There is a small group of men and women who essentially loot the abandoned towns around Pittsburgh to bring in the goods for the sustenance of the city. Outside of the realm of the city is populated by zombies who more or less continue as they would have had the lived. They are led by a large african american zombie in coveralls.
In Pabst’s film we see some similarities. Set in London it represents a world in which the poor have no recourse. There is a class of people who have all and control all. However, they play a much smaller role that in Romero’s film. They are represented by the coronation of the Queen, which is significant by the end of the film. It largely focuses on the relationship between the thieves and the beggar’s. The thieves are lead by Mack the Knife and the Beggar’s by Peachum. One can draw a comparison between the Thieves in this film and the Looters in Romero’s film. The beggar’s can be likened unto the zombies. In Romero’s film it is discovered that the Zombies are making their way to the city as they have learned to solve problems (like how to cross water). The Looters have decided that the best plan is to take advantage of the system and get out. They see the Zombies as an inevitable tide of destruction.
The climax of both films is remarkably similar. In Romero’s film the Zombies break their way into the city. They are introduced to the scene shambling down the street and soon attack the poor of the city working their way to Fiddler’s Green where they rapidly and voraciously consume the citizens who so readily were engaged in consumption. In Pabst’s film Peachum has his Beggar’s march down the street during the coronation of the Queen against the wishes of the Thieves. Their march is very like the zombies of Romero’s film. Shambling en masse with a dead look in the eyes, many with missing limbs. They do not attack the upper class other that with their abominable sight and stench.
These two moments connect to the ultimate purpose of Romero and Pabst/Brecht’s films. According to Karl Marx, to whom these two auteurs ascribe in many ways, the rising up of the proletariat is an inevitability. Judging from the course of history, the oppressed only stay oppressed for so long then they will rise up and destroy their oppressors establishing an new order. The zombies/beggars coming into the city is a sign of that inevitability. Whether they are responding to a stale monarchy that has maintained its power through financial means or a post-apocalyptic world where no crisis has gone to waste to solidify power, the oppressed will rise up. They will find a means to exact their revenge.
Perhaps the comparison between these two films is guilty of reading against the grain, but the similarities in the shot of the beggar’s and zombies marching down the street are too striking to be ignored. It is true that Brecht might be more of a traditional Marxist than Romero, or that Pabst might be too dissimilar from Romero to say they saw the same solutions to a world of problems. But they did identify the same sense of inequality, and they showed that inequality through many of the same means. In that sense I think that Brecht would agree, and maybe be a little proud.
No comments:
Post a Comment