|
Showing all 11 reviews...
|
|
 |
Romero does it again, re-tooling his Living Dead series to be more now-friendly. At some point, he will have to give it a rest, or risk turning into Friday the 13th and become just downright cheezy! The script is ok, but flawed in several key areas. Quick writing? Lack of solid editing? Overall the movie has good parts and bad parts. At times, it is peppered with terrible acting, always the risk when going with lesser to unknown actors. That being said, some movies introduce us to up-and-coming future stars... me thinks this one had no such actor! Romero throws in a lot of criticisms and comments on today's technology-oriented society. A good thing at times, but not when it gets in the way of the whole purpose of the flick: to be a solid zombie creep-fest. The whole diary/home movie approach just didn't work very well in this movie, as opposed to how well it worked for Cloverfield. More work was needed on both the story itself AND on the direction. Some people did not like 28 Days Later (written by the incredible Alex Garland and directed by Danny Boyle) I loved it (and the screenplay was even better than the film, as Boyle decided to shoot it with a little less edge than Garland's script called for) I found that 28 Days did a much better job than Diary of the Dead... and the whole zombie dead franchise was created by Romero... it may be time for him to stop trying to re-tool his original idea and call it a career. He was great, he did some very inventive and innovative movies... but this one was quite sub-par to his usual standards. Not a bad movie... but nowhere near being good. 6/10. Period.
6/10
7.12.2008 -
rimbaud1972@ - age: 26-35
| | | | |
Garbage, I'm a horror fan and this tops my worst ever list. I think people who gave it a high rating probably worked on the crew. Oh look, I'm getting killed but I'm still holding my camera! Wow...
1/10
7.7.2008 -
pene96@ - age: 26-35
Wasn't the worst movie ever I could agree tought it could've been much better than it was.
8/10
6.6.2008 -
michaylo@ - age: 13-17
Boring... Look I am a major Living Dead fan... and this was a load of crap... cheap script... cheesy dialogue... after 5 minutes into the movie I knew it was a load of crap... Crap Crap Crap.
1/10
6.3.2008 -
streetsoxz@ - age: 26-35
| | | | |
Absolute garbage! And I thought Land of the Dead was bad. This is worse. Abysmal acting, low budget make-up FX, unrealistic storyline. Just a few minutes into it and I knew it was going to be a big disappointment. This movie looks cheap and it's boring as hell. Romero hasn't made a good horror film since the Dark Half. I think he should retire. How many freakin' zombie films can you make dude? This is another example of of an old timer past his prime, trying in vein to connect with the new teenage generation. Word of advice George. If zombie films is all you can come up with these days, stick to your old recipe. Otherwise start directing Life Insurance commercials.
1/10
5.28.2008 -
nonofurbusiness@ - age: 26-35
It is the best George Romero movie since Dawn of the Dead. It shouldn't have been a limited release because it kept many waiting and could have made more money. Once again this is one of the BEST zombie movie in years. It is a must-see!
10/10
4.14.2008 -
dawnofthejusticeleague_24@ - age: 13-17
This may be a zombie movie, but like all the other Romero entries, it has a lot more on its mind than flesh-eating. In my opinion, this is the best film in the series since the 1968 original--scary, socially relevant, visually and thematically exciting with its brilliant use of the subjective camera. The Toronto indie cast is stellar--major kudos to all involved! You've just made a classic.
10/10
3.1.2008 -
dpc@ - age: 36-49
I've seen it several times and like it more and more with every viewing. I especially enjoy watching other theatre-goers jump in their skins at a scary or suspenseful moment. It's fun and there are some clever moments and dialogue. I was also impressed with the editing. There are so many different cameras and angles and layers it really must have been difficult to sew it all together. I recommend sitting in the middle of the theatre since most of the camera work is hand held. It's really not that shaky though and doesn't give me vertigo like Cloverfield did so I hope it's good for you. Check it out!
8/10
2.28.2008 -
cinemaplayer@ - age: 36-49
Lets start with the acting which was terrible. The story had no substance. The make up was sub par. This movie would be good if it were a grade school project.
4/10
2.20.2008 -
ddayace76@ - age: 36-49
I too saw it at the TIFF. A great time was had by all. As far as zombie movies go, this movie ranks up there with the best of them. A new take on a fairly old topic, and in my opinion is works great. With great humour and not too much scary stuff it's well rounded and very enjoyable.
9/10
2.17.2008 -
goatnad@ - age: 26-35
This movie should get a much better distribution, as it's not playing in Ottawa, and only playing in Toronto as it's only Canadian date. This is likely due to the fact 'Bruiser' and 'Land Of The Dead' did so poorly here. It only has 95 prints circulating the U. S. A. Right now as well. Come on, this is GEORGE A. ROMERO! It should be shown EVERYWHERE in Canada, and other lousy films should not!
10/10
2.17.2008 -
thundercub1@ - age: 36-49
| 
