Return of the Living Dead: Necropolis (2005) User Reviews

Just saw the Sci-Fi Channel premiere.

[FleshAndTheFiends · 2/10 · 15 October 2005]

With nostalgic thoughts of the original 1985 comic horror classic lurching through my head, I approached Return 4 with a little more excitement than your usual sequel. Hey, it didn't HAVE have to be bad. Return of the Living Dead III, also a direct-to-video/cable release, was actually quite good and developed a strong and deserved cult following. Unfortunately, my joy was quickly extinguished only a few minutes into this truly boring zombie crap-fest. I should have known, given it is a Sci-Fi Channel 'original' movie. Has the Sci-Fi Channel EVER made a good movie? On the plus side, this movie does not stick by Sci-Fi Channel's typical horror offering of giant, toxic-waste exposed, killer snakes, dinosaurs, bugs and duckbilled playpi. On the down side, it sticks by the same exact formula (trapped people facing off against something wanting to eat them) and has the expected bad writing, bad acting and stupid story. Return of the Living Dead, Part 2 (1988) disappointed many fans of the first. After recent zombie offerings like this and All Souls Day: Dia De Los Muertos, Return 2 is actually starting to look good by comparison.

Here are ten things you should know before viewing...

1. Nothing of interest happened during the first hour aside from lots of talk. Not interesting talk, just time-killer talk that amounts to nothing and generates no interest for either the story or the characters. Snooze city, baby.

2. The zombie military-unit theme was carried over from Return 3 but nothing of interest is done with it.

3. A bite to the back of the head from a zombie will result in blood gushing out like it's being shot from a waterhose.

4. Why does every teenager in a movie like this know advanced karate? The part where the guy drops his gun and says "It's game time!" before kung fu-ing a zombie reminded me of everyone's favorite movie, House of the Dead. If that isn't a bad sign, I don't know what is. And while I'm on it, how come every teenager is some kind of expert on high-powered weaponry? Just hand them any kind of huge gun or blowtorch and they automatically know exactly how to use it and their aim is always perfect.

5. Dialogue like "They're making uber zombies!" and "Do you ever feel like drilling a hole in your head to let the screams out?" just doesn't sound natural, even when spoken by someone semi-undead.

6. Male zombie-cyborg hybrids look like RoboCop with gangrene.

7. Grey-blue photography throughout does not make your film look sinister and dark, it makes it look cheap and bland. Nor does using one boring location for the majority of the film automatically make it seem scary and claustrophobic. The whole presentation of this movie was terrible.

8. When a zombie appears, make sure to cue a lame late-80s 'hair band'-style rock song that sounds like it would even be rejected from a Warrant album.

9. Watch and you'll notice that someone's gun malfunctions and/or runs out of ammo in this movie at least FOUR TIMES! And it always happens right when a hundred zombies are closing in. Of course.

10. Female zombie-cyborg hybrids go to the same hairdresser as Predator.

Well, that's my take on this future dust bin dweller. The make-up was pretty good, I especially liked the head-crushed-by-tank-wheel effect, but the rest was formula zombie movie at its most boring and unimaginative. The level of humor, in case you're interested, reaches its peak when a man is reluctant to shoot a zombie because, "I lost my virginity to her!" Give me a break.

My vote of 2/10 is both generous and kind. As of this writing, the film has 9.2 rating. I expect that to plummet by the end of the week.

so bad it's...awful

[brennan79 · 2/10 · 15 October 2005]

THIS is what we waited for? THIS is what we've been given after more than a year of hype? I can't believe how bad this was! It's not funny, it's not scary, it's not even "so bad it's good", it's just "so bad it's really bad"...

We are talking about some grade-z bad direction, I'm not sure what was worse: watching everyone don mining helmets to explore a research facility or watching 2 of the characters test their walkie-talkies while standing five feet apart in the same shot! No wait, the worst was the fistfight (?!) between the talking (?!) zombie and the human...or any scene with the girl in pigtails. Speaking of the characters, this movie has the most unlikable group of (horrible) actors you could possibly imagine. Most of them seem to think they are in a high-school play and overact accordingly, with ridiculously exaggerated expressions of (insert emotion here). The others can barely muster up enough inflection in their voices to break past monotone...and when they do, it's only at the end of the line, so everything they say sounds like a question.

I'm not usually one to speak too badly about films because it takes a lot of work to make one. In fact, I usually give more credit than is probably deserved and therefore end up liking (or at least not minding) films everyone else hates. I thought "House of the Dead" tried too hard but was mildly entertaining and found good points to "Cry_Wolf"...that should pretty much put my movie viewing into perspective.

With this film, there just isn't anything to speak highly about. Originally, I gave this film a rating of "1" but changed it to a "2" after seeing part 5. I didn't think it possible, but part 5 is worse than this one. As a matter of fact, the only positive thing I can say about this film is that it is slightly more bearable than part 5 and I guess that's worth something.

I thought it was hysterical when they put a preview for 'Land of the Dead' with this movie...it's like they couldn't make it look bad enough on it's own, they had to give us something for comparison!

The writers never watched the first movie!

[jsauce · 2/10 · 17 October 2005]

Yes it's pretty clear when people make sequels today they never bother to actually watch the original movies. In this case ROTLD 4 is again one of these movies.

The movie begins by giving us a glimpse at Hybra-Tech through a commercial. The commercial tells us how this powerful chemical company is responsible for all the delights of the modern world from food products to zombie cleanup.

( First this is nothing more than stealing portions of the plot of Resident Evil. The Umbrella corporation anyone? Get some new material. You should also know that at the end of both ROTLD 1, 2, and 3. There was no indication of an outbreak the Government wasn't able to control.)

So we continue, enter Peter Coyote who is interested in buying the last canisters containing trioxin 5. (Sorry again its called 2-4-5-trioxin.)

For what reason? Who knows yet. But apparently the last canisters are contained in Chernobyl. So some Russian mobsters take him to the canisters and so it begins. One of the mobsters while moving the canister, gets some green crap on his hand and becomes a zombie.

(Sorry again, just getting trioxin on you will not infect you. Kids from ROTLD1 were all in the rain and only the one who died in it became a zombie.)

So this dead Russian mobster appears and kills the other one by grabbing onto his head and taking a chunk out. Then Peter Coyote's character uses a pistol to put one in the zombie's head. The zombie falls down, dead again.

(OKAY WTF! Did any of these writers even watch the original movies? You cannot kill an ROTLD zombie by shooting it, not in the chest, not in the head not anywhere. The only way to kill an ROTLD zombie is to reduce all of it to ash so there is nothing left of it.You cannot simply kill something that is already dead. ROTLD zombies are not alive they are reanimated.)

The rest of the film is the same except rather than exciting us with the tension created by unstoppable zombies chasing kids to their death, we get an hour of boring nonsense. And then when it gets good the swat team shows up and shoots them in the chest to kill them. Bad movie! It was hyped up as being a sequel, please don't call it that. It's not worth your time.

An Open Letter to the Filmmakers:

[SnacksForAll · 1/10 · 18 October 2005]

This time, I am going to skip a conventionally formatted "review." No need for that here. All I want to do is ask those involved with the production of this "film" a question:

1) Did you actually WATCH the original? Wait, dumb question. I know you did. I remember, a couple years back, reading some comments from the film's writer (William Butler, a veteran actor of such late 80s B-horror films as Texas Chainsaw Massacre 3, Ghoulies 2, and the Night of the Living Dead Remake) that he was enthused to be making two new sequels to such a great film. Okay, well, perhaps I should REPHRASE my question. WHEN was the LAST TIME you watched the original? Let's get some things straight -- in the original, the zombies are completely unstoppable. You can't kill them -- not even with a gunshot to the head.

What? You want to "change things up" a little? Okay. I can live with that. So, gunshots to the head DO kill these zombies. Okay. I can live with that too. I'm all for artistic expansion and exploration. Just promise me one thing: BE CONSISTENT. In the ENDLESS slow-mo scenes of zombies getting shot you threw in, shooting them TWICE in the chest also seems to do it. This must be a new and effective technique of dispatching the dead, because it happened no less than six times in your film.

As for other matters of authenticity, I'll reserve my observations on the overall "feel" of the film (or lack thereof) in respect to the originals as that would require an entire essay to get into.

2) What was Peter Coyote doing here? And what was with that awkward grimace on his face? He must have been hard up for cash. I will never look at E.T. the same again.

It's really hard to critique this film using the normal methods. All I can say is, what SHOULD have been a revitalization of a franchise wound up as nothing more than a shining, blunt example of what a monumentally wasted opportunity is.

Return of the Livig Dead 4, like its sequel part 5: Rave to the Grave, are the kind of movies that make moviegoers sit in their seats during the end credits and think, "I could have done it better." If any of those responsible for the RETURN sequels happen to be reading this, feel free to email my IMDb profile to answer my questions and perhaps continue this discussion. I promise I will be civilized.

And while I'm at it, an open letter to the Sci-Fi channel: you might want to look into funding and/or programming better films for your "Sci Fi Originals" line up. Let's put it this way: you're quickly becoming synonymous with sub-par crap.

Return of the Living Dead. May you rest in peace.

silly kids zombies can kill you

[draven528 · 15 October 2005]

I just saw ROTLD 4: Necropolis and I have to say if your a fan of the series, stay away from this one. The Sci-Fi channel premiered the movie tonight along with it's sequel "rave from the grave". Where to start, first off the actors suck, all of them, even peter coyote was bad. The script was unbelievable and the characters were all the same type of characters you'd expect in a low budget horror movie. The way the movie started looked promising but right when it got into the story about the teens looking for their friend, that's where it went all down hill. There were only two things that pleased me during the movie, the violence/gore was good. It wasn't anything like you see in a big budget horror movie, but it was okay. The second was that the little brother died. Yes somebody finally had the guts to kill a younger sibling. Anyway stay away from this one.

Zombies with Russian accents?

[jayce2279 · 1/10 · 15 January 2007]

If you're a fan of the first Return of the Living Dead movie, please don't watch this one. You'll loose ten years of your life from aggravation. The film is supposed to be set in the United States, but was actually shot in Romania and most of the actors' accents are worse than Jurgen Prochnov's on a good day. The Return of the Living Dead: Necropolis won't even qualify as a "good bad cult movie" 20 years from now. Parts 2 and 3 were already pretty bad, but this one is just embarrassing. Trash, Suicide and even Julie Walker will roll over in their graves. I wonder if the makers have even bothered to watch the first three films. Unlike Romero's walking corpses, the Return of the Living Dead zombies are not supposed to die when you shoot them in the head! Nor do they give speeches or box. The movie does have one thing going for it, though: it proves that all those B actors they got playing KGB agents in cheap 80s crime flicks got their accents right after all.

Pure pain

[HorrorEnjoyer · 1/10 · 27 December 2009]

This movie is horrendous! It's undeniably one of the worst movies of all time it's up there with disaster/epic movies, return of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre, Mangler and the others, Manos: the hands of fate looks like masterpiece in comparison to this mess. So now, after experiencing this nightmare I fell I MUST warn the other unfortunate souls who may be going through Return of the living dead series and are contemplating to watch part 4 of it. Don't do it! And here's top 5 reasons why.

5. Why secret lab of a massive corporation, holding mass destruction weapons have no guards in it? There were like two fat perverts, college student and random guy with a gun in all the building "guarding" all the stuff they were developing for "world domination." What's the point of having "minimum" or "maximum" guard sectors if there aren't anyone to guard anything? Jeez...

4. There are like hundreds of gaping plot holes and plot lines witch just go nowhere and are never explained so it's pretty much crystal clear that they were just making stuff up while they were going along - incompetent bastards. All the movie is like random mess of generic plots taken from any random movie they could get their hands on and I don't even talk about horror movies only - that would be too convenient.

3. You can clearly tell they felt really confident while making this garbage - throwing in cocky dialog and smart-ass wannabe lines like - "Lead, follow or get out of the way" what does that even mean? It's like saying go, walk or stand in one place. Like "so"? What are you trying to tell? And they felt really proud of this line because they used it two times.

2. Acting. Again, this movie has one of the worst acting performances of all time, everyone sucks, and you can see that they aren't even trying, they don't even care. Main villain smile all the freak-in time like he is a joker from batman with permanent grin on hes face and half of the cast talks through their teeth, you can see more emotion in local children play than here.

1. Creators haven't watch any movies of the series, no kidding, they just assumed it works like all the other generic zombie flicks and gone along with that idea, but the problem is that Return of the living dead doesn't follow the exact formula of zombie movies and the main difference in the series is that you can't kill the zombies - if you want them gone you must burn them to ashes and even then you must be careful because if it comes in contact with any kind of entity - living or dead they get infected and you get more zombies. How long do you think it takes for them to break this main rule? How about 5 minutes? 5 minutes into the movie zombie gets shot in the head and he dies, and I would even be OK with that if they explained that like some other generation or type of that stuff but they don't - hell, they even show the classic containers at the beginning, the doctor even brings back to life a separate hand at one point - what the hell? How does it work? If separate limb can live without a body why can't it live when it's brains get bashed out? Does it make sense to anyone? Hell, they kill zombies with their BARE HANDS in this abomination of a movie. Morons made this mess...

And if you're not convinced yet just remember that these are just top 5 - there are hundreds and hundreds of other little things which just pile up onto one another to make this THING unbearable to sit through. So don't watch it! You were warned!

The Story, Screenplay, Direction and Acting Are So Bad That Become Funny

[claudio_carvalho · 4/10 · 18 December 2006]

The scientist of the powerful and evil corporation Hybra-Tech Charles (Peter Coyote) goes to Chernobyl to buy some gallons of toxic waste to perform experiments with zombies. When a teenager has an accident with his motorcycle and vanishes, his teenager's friends, leaded by Charles' nephew, find that he was moved to Hybra-Tech. They break in the facility trying to find their friend and accidentally release a group of zombies starving for brains.

"Return of the Living Dead: Necropolis" is incredibly awful. The absurd story and the screenplay are among the most ridiculous collection of clichés I have ever seen. The lame direction works with a group of young actors and actresses that seem to be amateurish. It is amazing how bad the acting is, leaded by Peter Coyote, who seems to have had a neurological problem that deformed his lips. I guess the level of the sequel of this crap. In the end, this flick is so dreadful that becomes funny. My vote is four.

Title (Brazil): "A Volta dos Mortos Vivos: Necrópolis" ("The Return of the Living Dead: Necropolis")

Whimpy Zombies... Bad Writing... Yuck.

[licktheenvelope · 1/10 · 25 September 2010]

I am a big fan of thew original Return of the Living Dead, and like the 2nd and 3rd just fine. I wasn't expecting much from 4, but was hoping they would go back to slightly more campy than 3 which was more of a serious love story. Not a terrible film though. What we have here is soooooo much worse.

First off the zombies in ROTLD Necropolis DIE EASILY!!! Several times they just shoot the zombies and that's it. At one point there's a mock 3 on 3 fist-fight between the kids and some zombies and the zombies are THROWING PUNCHES! *sigh* Was it really so hard to stick with the "Zombies run after people and grab them" tried and true method." As mentioned in a couple of reviews there's a number of scenes filled with characters 'running out of ammo' for guns, including 3 times in less than 30 seconds. This particular writing selection struck me as odd as they had the kids in a massive armoury.

The writing in this movie is just awful, not original anywhere, clichéd and over the top... but sadly it doesn't give you any kind of character development or cohesive plot.

"They are making UBER Zombies!" ... Wow...

Such a bad bad movie. There's so many scenes of pure annoyance I can't go through them all without suffering mental issues.

Good B-Movie

[southwestern-1 · 8/10 · 17 October 2005]

First of all this movie is a low budget B-movie so don't expect much. That said, I give this movie a "good" rating. All the main actors and actresses performed well. Aimee Lynn Chadwick, specially, gave the movie some comic relief. Peter Coyote seemed to be out of place in this movie. One secondary actor, a Romanian actor, briefly stole some scenes in the movie even though he did not get to say much. Some of the locations where the film was shot, most notably at the start, added eeriness to the film. The flow from one scene to another was sometimes bumpy leaving you with the feeling that something is missing or was cut out. The zombies were OK but they were not the classic zombies many are use to seeing. Would have preferred another ending to the movie but you cannot have everything. Overall, I recommend this movie to all B-movie fans.

Just Fun!

[austinmanix · 6/10 · 21 October 2008]

It's not gonna win any awards, but it's fun to watch. Anyone who has seen the first two (Return of the Living Dead and Return of the Living Dead Part 2) knows that these movies are supposed to be something you laugh at and jump at a few times. You aren't supposed to root for the good guys because the good guys are stupid.

The story is simple; a group of high school students who know how to ride dirt bikes, shoot machine guns and for the most part have mad fighting skills discover tons of zombies in a building that houses everything from WMA's to, well, zombies. A$$hole bad guy locks them in, good stupid guy shoots a lock...bam! Zombies. This movie has everything one has come to expect from the Return of the Living Dead series, the school bimbo (who looks about 30), the hot nerd chick, the annoying little brother, the bad ass, the hero, the hero's girl, the jerk and the one that never really says anything and he dies and you realize that you forgot he was even part of the group.

Think of it like this. It's Troma meets Resident Evil meets Star Trek:First Contact meets MacGyver.

Just watch it knowing that it it's a far cry from Dawn of the Dead (the 1978) but it doesn't suck even half as much as Anaconda and Halloween 3 combined.

high-schoolers v zombies

[thein433 · 1/10 · 19 June 2006]

Wow. Where should I start. I've seen quite a few zombie movies in my lifetime, and there is always a never ending supply of worthless garbage in the genre. Not to say worthless garbage cant be fun, i happened to enjoy much of the stupidity and plot holes of "Hard-Rock Zombies" (a movie where an 80's hard rock band goes up against Hitler and his horde of zombies). They can be good for a laugh, no doubt. But THIS particular movie, this just wasn't funny, scary, or entertaining at all.

ROTLD4 plays like one of the movies i've seen actual high-schoolers tape without knowing or caring how to edit.

The makeup, granted passed as acceptable, but the super-soldiers were like a cross between a nemesis (from Resident Evil) and what happens to a squirrel while you clean it, (it gets turned inside out for all of you city-dwellers.)

If i start to talk about the ridiculous and unbelievable plot, its very possible i could rant for far longer than i'm willing to devote to this movie. It was atrocious. 'Nuff said.

Listening to this movie is about as bad as watching it. The crappy generic rock music every time the local kids hop on their dirt-bikes gets old. And when you repeat that same music for every scene a zombie bursts out of a ventilation shaft, you're only making it harder for anyone wanting to find something worthwhile about this film.

As to the dialog, wha' happened? The kid cant shoot his friend because "I lost my virginity to her man!" is not only the most ridiculous and strange thing ever to appear in a film, but its not the worst. The guy from E.T. (Peter Coyote), when asked why hes creating these zombies replies with, "For world domination! What else?" How can you explain a gigantic facility and a "nursery" for zombies as a bout for world domination? Whats more interesting is, he DOESN'T EVEN EXPLAIN how he's supposed to dominate the world with zombies.

The main character was a total wuss, and one of the supporting characters was featured using numbchuks, rappelling from a skyscraper, fighting karate style, shooting high-powered smgs with perfect aim, and hacking computers.

Please, waste your time on this movie. It'll make you appreciate competent actors.

"...a thoughtless by-the-numbers Resi knock-off..."

[TheCaptain_And_TheKing · 1/10 · 13 July 2009]

> More than 20 years have passed since John Russo's feud with George Romero finally spawned his uniquely comic take on the zombie genre; but whilst 1988's Part 2 kept the spirit of the original alive, and the third instalment took an unusual but welcome departure that in essence paved the way for smoulderingly sexy undead-anti-heroines in the early 90s (not least Resident Evil's Alice), the most recent additions to the franchise would well leave anybody that may have questioned the quality of Romero's work in light of Diary of the Dead feeling that their criticism was groundless when this is what's being produced as an alternative. > It's literally only minutes before we get our first glimpse at what we're all eagerly anticipating from a series that last got a sequel when plaid was still in fashion, and surely enough the characteristically B-Movie approach to horror storytelling is present and correct as those ill-fated barrels fall once more into the hands of a malevolent weapons developer whose intentions are for his paymasters world domination at any cost. The predictable narrative focuses around Julian (John Keefe), a High school student who in the company of his arson obsessed younger brother (Alexandru Geoana), have lost both their parents during their employ at Hybra Tech: a veritable Walmart meets the Soylent Corporation amalgamation whose unhealthy yet secretive interest in the undead inevitably leads to trouble for all concerned. Of course what nobody could have possibly seen from a mile away was that the same malevolent weapons developer just happens to be Uncle Charles (Peter Coyote), the primary care giver to the unfortunately doomed orphans who fall into his care. > However despite this perfectly acceptable, albeit far-fetched re-introduction to the series, the request for "brains" from cloudy eyed monsters begins to fade like a distant memory while we, the viewing audience, are pushed back from the edge of our seats and are forced to endure the monotonous antics of a predictably clichéd menagerie of practically indistinguishable teenagers as they attempt to sloppily lay down the building blocks of a decidedly familiar world permeated in all facets by the series unscrupulous answer to Resi's Umbrella Corporation. Queue one minor motorcycle accident later involving Julian's bestest bud (Elvin Dandel), and his reportedly suspicious death leads our hapless heroes to dig a little deeper, finding that he is in fact alive and well in the custody of Uncle Charles. Sure enough this leads them to discover the nature of his ungodly "research", and to Necropolis, as well as the realisation that the death of Julian's parents may not have been so accidental after all. > Of course what I have failed to mention thus far is that the story is excruciatingly slow to get started, and despite an initial offering, it feels like some considerable time before we really get another glimpse of any action; a tremendous downfall for a movie that has one primary responsibility in that it should be ready to deliver hordes of zombies from as early as feasibly possible. Even when the so-called action can be said to begin when the startling gravity of the situation first strikes our heroes, a moment that most films of the genre share, the resulting confrontation left a questionable taste in my mouth as what is usually a tense and horrifying moment as moral deliberation by usually peaceful everymen is quickly outweighed by the need to survive, was instead replaced by an eagerness to seemingly murder two eccentric hobos in a sewer without ascertaining the danger they posed. Even this moment was fairly lacklustre however with no member of the cast looking remotely fazed by exploding heads or the possibility of walking corpses. Their reactions here were largely indicative of their portrayal throughout the entire piece, and left me yearning for the over-the-top and cartoonish frolics offered by O'Bannon's original. > Even quicker than a reanimated body can suck out the innards of a skull, it became painfully clear very early in proceedings that everything that was so lovable about the original instalment has been entirely lost; replaced instead with a moodier and more serious atmosphere that not only feels artificial and ultimately prevents an audience from being drawn in, but that fans simply do not expect. However even this unsuccessful change in style and execution thereof does nothing to distract from rudimentary problems stemming from the bland and mediocre dialogue as the cast of forgettable no-names, with as much acting prowess on screen as your average High School drama class, go through the motions as they churn out their lines without an iota of impact. > Overall what we see on screen is dull and predictable, and what action there is on offer is largely samey and unimpressive. Attempts to cover up this failing and educe some tension with a heavy-metal soundtrack are laughable, and not unlike the amateurish offerings from 17 year olds found in almost any Media class. It is only fair to say that for what was clearly a low-budget production many of the special effects were passable if not a little underwhelming, and the zombie make-up was to a far greater standard than I had expected. I even managed to squeeze out an otherwise suppressed titter when an homage to the original reared its head when one of the ghouls used a radio to request that someone "send more security guards" as the outbreak finished snacking on the clerk at the front desk. In short however, Return of the Living Dead IV: Necropolis can be described as nothing more than a thoughtless by-the-numbers Resi knock-off executed by a director with limited experience and stunted vision as attempts are made to cash-in once more on a tired series. I get the distinct sense that the fifth instalment, filmed simultaneously as its numerical predecessor, will be just as disappointing. I dare say I will find out shortly enough as much like the waning zombie genre itself, I am a glutton for punishment

Bad, bad acting, bad zombies...just BAD.

[itshardtopickausername · 2/10 · 6 October 2010]

I never had that much experience with horror/zombie movies until I met my boyfriend, but now I can say I've seen a ton. Italian directors, American directors, cheesy ones, serious ones, you name it. The first ROTLD movie was fantastic, I loved the zombie-humor mix, and the characters were stupid but still managed to be likable enough for me to want (at least some) of them to live. Necropolis tries to achieve these things, and fails...so, so badly. The characters are all played by actors who seem to have learned how to act from a pamphlet they ordered for $2 off the back of an Archie comic. I've seen school plays acted this well, if not better. The dialog is cheesy and uninteresting,and you find yourself very quickly hoping for all of them to die just so they'll stop being so annoying. Trying to find the likable character to root for? Give up now, because there isn't one. The plot really isn't too terrible, as long as you don't mind all the continuity errors with regard to the first 3 films. Personally, I found the movie to be so intolerable due to the acting, that I didn't have time to worry about whether they were killing zombies by a shot to the head or not. I did find some things to be quite hilarious, the roasted rat attack for example, but it wasn't enough to make the movie enjoyable. There were things that made no sense, even in the context of a ROTLD movie...why in hell did the main guy's "best" friend (who was thoroughly a jerk to him the whole way through the movie, btw), come back as a zombie all vengeful and ready to kill because "you been messing around with my woman"????? Gawd, you're a ZOMBIE, shouldn't you be looking for brains or something? Who said you could be coherent? The robo-zombies concept isn't that weird, it carried on from the third film and actually made a little sense, even if the "world domination" thing was a bit far-fetched. And the buzz-saw hand? I confess, I loved that. I wish there had been more buzz-saw hand action. This might be worth watching as an example of how not to make a movie, but if you're looking for a good zombie film, I would recommend looking elsewhere.

Should have stayed dead

[darksyde-63508 · 1/10 · 25 April 2016]

Why? Just ....just why? This film, and the one that proceeded it are just too horrible for words. The first Return is a classic of the zombie genre, the second one sucked, the third was alright, but still not great, and then they released this tepid pile of crap. Almost nothing makes sense throughout this entire movie. How soldiers could be so stupid to let a group of teenagers into a government facility the way they do is beyond me. And you'll be rooting for every single character in this movie to die in horribly painful ways. Their is not a likable person among them at all. And remember the zombies from the second Resident Evil movie? Yeah, me too. They make an appearance near the end in a how the hell did they get away with this without copyright infringement rip off. If you're gonna see ANY movie in this series, stick with parts one and three. Skip the second fourth and fifth films. You'll wish a zombie were chomping on YOUR brain otherwise.

Just awful

[michle53 · 1/10 · 11 May 2017]

This is a teenage dirt bike movie with a subplot about zombies. It appears they had a pretty good budget. Too bad they spent it on this script. Honestly, I couldn't make it to the end because the movie was relentlessly boring. But also irritating. One could argue that since it was irritating, since it made me feel something, then it must have some artistic merit.

No. None of this movie makes any sense. That's why it's Irritating.

Comments from the Director

[Watson99 · 14 December 2005]

Last week, December 2, 2005, I was at the Hollywood home of the Director, Ellory Elkayam, who is married to my niece. I told Ellory about the comments on IMDb, so we logged in and read what was written by draven528, brennan79, ibanez747, jsauce, and many others.

Ellory said, "I don't disagree with what any of these people wrote." and stated that he needed the money and accepted the job for Return of the Living Dead 4: Necropolis and Return of the Living Dead 5: Rave to the Grave. He stated that he had no control over the script and that the whole experience was something that he wishes to forget. He may send in his own critique of these movies to IMDb in the future.

Direct-to-TV Release...Saved me a couple bucks

[ibanez747 · 3/10 · 17 October 2005]

I saw this movie on the Sci-Fi Channel the other night. I think the fact that this was on cable television speaks volumes on what kind of movie this is. I think it was better than most "original" movies that pop up on late night television; it still does not make up for how bad this movie became. It's hard to believe that this is a sequel to a movie that was originally released theatrically.

This movie has just about everything corny from bad acting to Nick-at-Nite humor. The writing by William Butler was absolutely dreadful, and even a Jack Nicholson-like performance by the cast could not have made his writing appear any better. William Butler was just all over the place.

Dirtbikes, machine guns, kung-fu are some of the stupid things about the plot. Is this a horror film or an action film with some zombies? None of the characters take anything seriously in this movie. A group of high school kids know everything and there is no reason to be afraid. None of them were fazed by the fact that zombies were eating their friends and fellow classmates. Its like "Eh, whatever." and they move on to the next action sequence. A 7 year old child with a flame thrower. A little blonde girl beating up zombies. If children aren't afraid of these things, then why in the hell should I be?! Come on.

Everything about this movie was going through the motions and that comes across quite clear after viewing this movie.

I can see why many DVD distributors passed at this movie. If they get lucky, they can maybe get a deal with Anchor Bay or Elite Entertainment.

The only reason why I give this movie a 3 is because of the special effects. I appreciate that cable television probably showed more than they should have, but this movie is a joke anyway so why get worked up about some blood and brains. The special effects were the ONLY thing good about this movie.

Watch the Chernobyl opening, then eject

[McCrackan · 3/10 · 17 May 2006]

I was really impressed with the atmosphere created by the first ten minutes in Chernobyl. The grim surreality of the actual setting perfectly set the mood for living death.

Unfortunately, the film plummets from that point. The two-dimensional characters and talentless cast are forgivable--no one rents a zombie flick for Shakespearean depth--but is basic continuity too much to ask from the fourth installment of a series? Or how about some black humor, which made the first two films stand out from vanilla zombie flicks? After the Chernobyl opening, there's no reason to waste the next hour of your life. There's not even a titty flash to wake you up. Peter Coyote was a near-relief from the rest of the dreck, planting his thumb firmly in cheek as if to say, "Yeah, I know: this film is runny crap and I apologize, but I have gambling debts to pay off by Thursday or they'll break my kneecaps. But hey, dig my impression of a James Bond villain." Lots of people gave this film a 10 rating. Don't be fooled--they must be friends and family of the film-makers. "Dawn of the Dead" deserves a 10; the original "Return of the Living Dead" an 8 or 9. But this movie has next to nothing going for it.

This is just a bad movie

[Daman-Malone · 1/10 · 24 January 2015]

It really comes down to choice I guess. However one word describes this movie.....crap. There are so many flaws in this movie it is not even funny. Zombies goes down with a bullet to the belly, there motivation now is not to eat brains, but to fight. Fight you know like Bare knuckle fighting or specifically in this movie high school slapping.

The story was so bad and all over the place that any studio should use this movie as a reason to make sure they check the scripts 5 times before funding.

The acting is well...acting.

When I watch movies like this, I always think some spoilt little, big mouth kid has begged like a little wiener to get his budget and loans to make his so-called 'HOLLYWOOD BLOCKBUSTER' movie...THE NEXT BIG THING.

Some movies just shouldn't be make let alone associated with a classic spoof like in this case.

Beautifully Shitty Zombie Fun

[artist_tristan · 9/10 · 7 July 2006]

This one seems to garner quite a bit of bad press. As far as Zombie movies go I quite liked it.

We get to see a crusty vagrant muttering "brains", the 'bad guy" looks like a combination of US presidents, and there are a few homages to the older ROTLD flicks, my favorite being "send more security guards".

For the most part regarding Zombie movies I want the lame acting, bad cohesion, and general shoddiness.

Particular favorites were: when the 3 teens were heading up to the 12th floor, and opened up the doors and did the overplayed searching for danger w/ guns pointed.....the doors were glass, they could see everything already.....

The fistfight was hilarious! The zombies jumping...from out of the ceiling?????....to kill the slut & the lazy security guard, man that was funny! I have no idea where they came form they just sort of ...fell from out of nowhere.

The fried rat attack was great too! All this and people got eaten!!!! ...Yeah I'll probably ramble here, but as the owner of more than 40 zombie flicks, I've seen a lot of bad ones, and we know there are tons of those out there.

Necropolis gets my vote though, I totally enjoyed it.

Not as bad as people says

[arte-callejero · 6/10 · 11 December 2005]

I saw this movie despite everything people said about. "It sucks" "it's worthless" etc. etc.

I actually enjoyed it. It wasn't the new "dawn of the dead" I can admit that. And it was far from the top 5 best zombie flicks. But hey, it DID have it's moment. Like when the security guard called the girl in the surveillance room right before he got bitten. That was a true 20th century joke! And what's all this talk about the acting? C'mon it was a lot better then mainstream zombie flicks like Resident Evil and RE:apocalypse. And these actors were kids! So if you see this movie on the shelf in your local video store, DC++ or on any bittorrent site. Download it! but don't expect it to be the greatest movie you've seen! expect 90 minutes of blood and laughter. This movie is for all you zombie fans out there! and not for the pathetic nerd who sits at home all day and thinks he knows everything about movies and what makes a movie "good"

Not the worst zombie movie ever made, but a disgrace to the Return of the Living Dead series

[TheLittleSongbird · 2/10 · 19 August 2015]

Return of the Living Dead: Necropolis as far as zombie movies go is not as bad as House of the Dead, Vampegeddon, Zombie Night, Vampires vs. Zombies and Zombie Nation, and I do remember Rave to the Grave being slightly worse, but it is a disgrace to the Return of the Living Dead series (the previous three movies vary in quality, but never to the same level of badness of Necropolis and Rave to the Grave).

There is hardly anything good to say about it, other than that the zombie make-up was pretty good and the use of Alice Cooper's Cold Machines was cool and used appropriately. That's where any redeeming merits end. Return of the Living Dead: Necropolis is poorly-made, there is a distinct lack of atmosphere and everything just looks drab and cheap from the haphazard camera work, cheap and sometimes gratuitous gore and incomplete-looking effects. Apart from Cold Machines, the heavy rock soundtrack is over-bearing and takes one of the movie completely.

The movie's direction is so flat it completely undermines any tension or suspense, while the script is so awkward-sounding and intelligence-insultingly dumb, tension and suspense is replaced by rapidly tiresome unintentional humour and the story is thin, dull, mind-numbingly stupid and often leads nowhere. The scary moments are all predictable and come off cheesily, and Return of the Living Dead: Necropolis does a poor job with the zombies, they should be the stars and heart of their movie but are severely under-utilised and when they do appear they are very goofy, lifeless and not menacing at all.

Return of the Living Dead: Necropolis' characters are as thin as paper and so incredibly dumb they come off irritating, while the acting is a bad mixture of over-acting and going-through-the-motions, I found myself most annoyed by Peter Coyote. To conclude, there are worse zombie movies around but Return of the Living Dead: Necropolis is a disgrace to the series. 2/10 Bethany Cox