Just as in the beginning with Night of the Living Dead, the source of horror for Romero is located in the loss of identity. The 'faceless' zombies of one generation are translated into the callous yuppies of another period. This dehumanizing existence can only result in people vengefully dehumanizing their surroundings, and thus Creedlow descends into violence toward those around him (cont.)
Une première partie excellente, description patronale hénaurme entre grotesque et caricature, puis le film s'englue et se dissout lentement jusqu'à une stupide soirée masquée qui a dû permettre à Roméro de fêter à moindres frais la fin du tournage... www.cinefiches.com
So far, the only Romero movie I do not like. A sort of compilation of "what's what" of movies and filmmakers of reference- a little Argento, something of Castle's nonsense and plenty of De Palma's "Phantom of Paradise" and Raimi's "Darkman" - to an incongruence with little interest, with a set of horrendous actors, Peter Stormare in particular, and a very poor use of a very bad soundtrack. And yet, what a good idea.
I've struggled for years to find a positive review of this film. I rate it as one of Romero's greatest. Wonderful and at times subtle performances make this a compelling film that never tries to do more than it needs. The absurdity of the concept never really left me startled, I loved this film... "Bruiser Man."
*1/2 . After MONKEY SHINES and THE DARK HALF, BRUISER is the third Romero movie on the bounce dealing with the theme of Revenge. After the monkey and the evil twin, the director uses a virtual mask à la Halloween in order to embody the hero's rage. Yes. With the exception of the social comment on Peter Stormare's way of dealing with his CEO title, the film is anecdotical. Already forgotten.