Night of the Living Dead: Resurrection (2012)

As Good As It Gets

It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.

The best films of this genre always show a path and provide a takeaway for being a better person.

Don't you just hate those reviews that say blunt things like 'This film is rubbish!'I try to give a little more information than that, but, I have to say, that that is the crux of my review. For those ten people out there who don't know, the title of 'Night of the Living Dead' comes from the sixties zombie film, made by George Romero film and sporting the same name. The original sixties version is largely considered to be the 'start' of the modern take on the undead. This film, ie. The 2012 version where the film-makers have stuck the word 'Resurrection' on the end has NOTHING to do with the original or the official sequels spawned from it.It is a 'homage' to George Romero's classic. Therefore it takes the best bits and tries to give them a 'fresh' new spin. And it fails.Saying it's made on a 'shoestring budget,' would be an overstatement. I doubt they had a budget at all. The actors (and I use that term loosely) seem to be straight out of the amateur dramatics society and the camera is mainly hand-held all the way through, making it seem like your old home video footage of your holiday to Spain when you were a child.One plus point: the gore is reasonable in the few places it's used, plus there's quite a shocking moment early on that I doubt many will see coming.However, a couple of nice touches do not make a movie. The rest is just awful.Don't be lulled into thinking it'll be good just because the film-makers stole a classic's title. It's just a poor attempt at cashing in on the name. If you like British zombie movies then stick to the 28 Days Later pair, or Shaun of the Dead if you want your gore with some light-hearted moments in it.http://thewrongtreemoviereviews.blogspot.co.uk/

This sequence of pictures deserve 0.02 KB of swf file to this world, not worth any physical storage. The very non experienced herd of pictures and sounds gathering-i'm not use the word "movie" for this worse than garbage sh*t, is do nothing to any kind of media production. Not worth even a clip. Can't help to think that the production came out of Movie Maker which even some 5 years old boy/girl can give more inspirations. I see full of disharmony in every single second. The way of camera angel usages, timings, amateur technics of making movie, ridiculous actings, non sense plots ... it's all go well with unsystematic outcome.Try it yourself and see if it gives value to your ever worst nightmare to what extension.

It's a decent movie worth watching, if you think of it as not a remake, but from a different group of survivors. I don't know much about the director of this film, but it seems he screwed up by trying to pay homage to Romeros classic by including as many "cameos" as he could (Barbara, Ben and for some reason or another, the actual picture of the 1968 film on the guys phone as a screen saver). If you go into it thinking (as the name implies) a remake, you WILL be disappointed. If you go into it as a different group of survivors, you may just find some like (not love...far from it) from this movie. And, wow, my first review on IMDb. Sorry, the rest of this is to fulfill my 10 line requirement.

I don't usually write reviews but felt compelled to after viewing this piece of trash.It was rather reminiscent of a home movie made by drama students,not that they are all bad but this was amateur film-making at its highest. The acting was bad,horror effects when there was horror were appalling.I expect the makers were trying to make money off the living dead franchise.For horror movie buffs there is nothing here to like and much better b-grade horror movies.I want my 90 minutes back that I wasted. If I could recommend a good zombie movie besides the current blockbuster it would be 1985's "Return of the Living Dead". I found it laughable that 15-18 hrs a day was involved in making this movie and I don't think this would make it to cinema but even straight to DVD would be too good for it,maybe it should be showed in the early hours of the morning when its only viewed by a small part of the population.