Smartorhypo Highly Overrated But Still Good

Phonearl Good start, but then it gets ruined

Catangro After playing with our expectations, this turns out to be a very different sort of film.

Melanie Bouvet The movie's not perfect, but it sticks the landing of its message. It was engaging - thrilling at times - and I personally thought it was a great time.

dworldeater It has been a while since I watched Survival Of The Dead, which was a huge disappointment when it was released. After a long gap in viewings, I have maintained the same basic opinion. Coming off of Romero's excellent Diary Of The Dead, I was expecting George would deliver another excellent creative film. Not much so. While, I maintain that Survival Of The Dead is watchable, it is far from great. The film tries to take a lighter tone and forces comedy that is'nt funny into the mix. The Hatfield vs. The McCoys dynamic and big nods to the western are not bad ideas, but do few favors to a film that does'nt really work and is less than spectacular in the first place. It is clear that this film was made quickly and cheaply(where George usually shines). It would have been a lot better if George had more time and money to work out his best ideas and had more money to make this better visually. The f/x by Gregory Nicotero are not his best work and has a lot of really bad and obvious cgi. The acting is decent, but the story and characters are not that compelling. The prevalent theme of man's inhumanity to man is there, but is diluted by the sometimes goofy tone of the film and its poor execution. With all that being said, the film is not as bad as some would say. It certainly is better than lots of pure uninspired garbage that has since flooded the horror market, but for George A Romero it is his worst film. It is too bad that George has passed on and this was his last film, I was hoping he would have followed up with something really strong. Either way, Romero is a legend and his original trilogy of Dead films are untouchable, as well as other personal favorites like Martin, Knightriders and Creepshow.

empatmk Started with Land of The Dead, and now with this film, Survival of The Dead, George A. Romero tried to make zombies humanized. Perhaps, it began from Day of The Dead with Bub the Zombie character. But in my opinion, it is better to make a zombie film as it used to be. The flesh eater creatures that cannot think anymore only follow the instinct to chew the human meat and infected the victims. Overall, Survival of the Dead still a good zombie movie, though. Typical Romero's gore and the story also simple but not tacky at all.

geminiredblue Before I start the review, I want commend dear ole George. For over 40 years, he has consistently found ways to scare audiences. And he's pretty consistent in his message: No matter what we try to do to save ourselves, we are our own worst enemies. His first film, NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD, is a classic that redefined horror movies. His sequel, DAWN OF THE DEAD, is an epic classic too. In recent years, audiences have started to wonder if dear ole George has lost his spark. But I say, he hasn't lost one iota. Now as for the sixth installment in his DEAD series, I have to admit it's not quite as good as his previous films. In SURVIVAL OF THE DEAD, we have three competing stories. STORY 1: On Plum Island, off the coast of Delaware, two rival families square off against each other. Think the Hatfields and McCoys. Each has their own strategy for dealing with the dead. The O'Flynn family, led by Patrick (Kenneth Walsh) want to eliminate all the zombies. The Muldoon family, led by Seamus (Richard Fitzpatrick) want to cure the zombies. After a harrowing opening scene, Patrick O'Flynn and his followers are expelled from the island. STORY 2: A team of renegade National Guard troops, led by Sgt. Nicotine Crockett (Alan Van Sprang, Robert Downey's look-a-like) have commandeered an armored truck and have decided to head for Plum Island. At the docks, they form an unsteady alliance with Patrick, who leads them back to Plum Island. STORY 3: Once on Plum Island, they discover that the Muldoons have corralled most of the zombies. Muldoon's goal is to try and make the zombies eat something other than people. The finale is yet another bloody masterpiece as the rivalry between the O'Flynns and Muldoons comes to a head.While the movie is entertaining, with plenty of grisly moments, the movie isn't quite up to the quality of Romero's previous work. Part of the problem is that, with this film, the characters and dialogue are too self-referential. And while there are plenty of good ideas, they don't seem to gel very well together. And halfway through, the story loses its focus. Also, Muldoon's theory, that we're safe if zombies learn to eat something else, is sketchy. Just because zombies may learn to eat a horse doesn't necessarily mean they'll stop eating people. This isn't the worst zombie film ever, but it's far from the best.

reggiebottomtooth123 I'll keep this short for everyone who actually cares enough to read it: Shocking is how I'd describe finding out this movie was by THE George Romero. Why is that so surprising? Well, the movie is s***, you see. I gave it seven stars, sure. Because it's ENJOYABLE s***. It's one of those movies you hope to God wasn't supposed to be taken seriously. It's honestly got terribly hokey zombie scenes (not just fake, but just overall lousy scenes) throughout the movie. It's a movie about a post-apocalyptic world where hundreds of thousands of people die each day, and yet these characters often have time to look around, find an interesting weapon, and kill a zombie. Highlights include literally punching a zombie a couple times, then throwing it around without it doing anything, Upon throwing over that zombie, the character grabs a nearby flare gun, shoots it into the zombie's torso, and the zombie's head somehow spontaneously combusted. Another character kills a zombie by placing a fire extinguisher nozzle into a zombie's mouth, and using the extinguisher until the zombie's eyes explode out.Sorry, I dragged on. To sum up, sure. If you have 90 minutes to kill, watch it. Otherwise, exert the little amount of energy necessary to change the channel from whatever station is playing this (I assume) made-for-TV movie.