When Jim Reed returns to Maxwell, TN after fifteen years, he does so in the hopes of putting the nightmares that have been haunting him all this time—burning dead coming to drag him to Hell—to rest.  A decade and a half earlier, the town was destroyed in a fire.  Jim isn’t the only survivor, nothing so melodramatic.  The town was rebuilt and most of the survivors hung around and got on with their lives.  But a lot of lives WERE lost, Jim’s parents included.  Since then he’s been haunted by the memories, and he doesn’t understand why.

When he returns, he’s staying with his cousin Ben.  Jim confides in Ben’s wife about his nightmares.  At first she and Ben are sympathetic and understand Jim’s therapist may be right in suggesting he return home and try to put his demons to rest.  But when they wake up one night and find Jim standing over their sleeping son with a hammer above his head, they freak out.  Understandably.  And when Jim tries to explain it wasn’t him, that the smoke had possessed him, they attribute it to insanity.  And then they see the burned corpses, too.  The wife and son go to her parents’ house while Ben stays behind to help Jim understand and deal with the problem.

Meanwhile, during his stay in town, Jim’s reconnected with an old friend, Bill, and his first love, Shelly—who has also returned to town recently.  As all these paths begin to cross, Jim’s memories flood back and he suddenly understands why the burning dead have been coming for him.  Throw in a little black magic, some double-crossing and sacrificial murder, and you got yourself a movie.

Of all the bad movies I’ve watched recently, I think BURNING DEAD definitely looks the best.  No, it’s not the best movie, but the look of it is better.  It’s still shot on video, but at least whoever was behind this movie knew enough about lighting I wasn’t straining to see anything.  And the burned corpse effects were pretty convincing, too.  Top rate stuff there.  I have a feeling they saved a little on locations by using one house for two different locations, Ben’s house and Bill’s house, but when the dead bodies look so good, who’s noticing something like two different houses having the same surround sound speakers on the living room walls?  I mean, who other than me, obviously.

There are no words I’m familiar enough with to express how bad the acting was, though.  D. Vincent Ashby as Jim . . . wow, dude.  I know you meant well, your good intentions are very evident.  But you really shouldn’t be a leading man.  The Jesus look I can deal with, but the constant scowl, the twitches, the crazy eyebrows . . . you gotta settle down, man.  Normally when you’re watching a bad actor, you can kinda see who it is they’re trying to emulate, but with Ashby, I don’t know.  The closest I can come to describing his antics is Shatner, but even James T. Kirk was never this all over the place.

The rest of the cast was even worse.  At least Ashby was trying.  Everyone else just showed up, found their mark, said their lines with what I’m sure they believed was conviction, then got a sandwich and went home.

I also have issue with the plot.  I get the story, it makes sense and everything, but I question the logic of it.

If Jim’s been haunted by constant nightmares, from the time he goes to sleep to the time he wakes up, is what he says, every night for the last fifteen years, you’d think he’d want to find out the cause a little sooner.  I mean, fifteen years of constant mental torment?  I can see maybe dealing with it for a couple of months, a YEAR at best, before you start to get into some serious therapy to find out what the hell’s wrong, but FIFTEEN YEARS?  I don’t buy that.

I know in terms of story, to give the characters time to scatter, then come together and still make the reunion a big moment—as well as giving the town time to rebuild and thrive—it was necessary for a long time to have passed, but I don’t think Jim claiming his nightmares have been constant the entire time was the way to go.  I’d have bought it much easier if they were sporadic, and had started getting more frequent lately.  But I digress.

I liked BURNING DEAD.  I could have liked it better, video quality and all, if Ashby had been just a little less irritating to watch.

The twist in the third act, Jim’s revelation, took the thing in a goofier direction than I think it needed, and things could have been tied up and resolved much simpler and with more believability, but at the same time, it did come out of nowhere and provided a few moments of unpredictability.

I think director George Demick had something worthwhile on his hands, and the talent to back up his vision.  Man, Ashby was silly, though.  I’ll never be able to take BURNING DEAD completely seriously with the image of Jim scowling through every line, eyebrows leaping about his forehead like they were.



other Decrepit Crypts of Nightmares
A Candle in the Dark
Demon Slaughter
Nightmare Asylum
The River: The Legend of La Llorona
Serial Killer
The Crawlspace
Catholic Ghoulgirls
The Bewitching
High Desert
Hell‘s Highway
Hellbound: Book of the Dead
I Dream of Dracula
The Veil
When Heaven Comes Down
The Dead Live
Hip Hop Locos
Invitation
Las Vegas Blood Bath
Before I Die
Terror Toons
Toe Tags
This Darkness


Recommended:
Yes

Viewing Format: DVD
Video Occasion: Good for a Rainy Day
Suitability For Children: Suitable for Children Age 13 and Older