Zombie Night (2003 Video) User Reviews

One of the worst I've seen

[paultagonist · 3/10 · 29 April 2009]

First, I watch a lot of zombie flicks. At least one a week. My love for the genre includes all the B-horror indie stuff, made with a camera you got for Christmas, made with friends in school. But at least those kind of films know what they are.

Rarely do I feel the need to comment on a bad zombie movie, as there's so many out there it'd take up a lot of my time. But sometimes one comes along that just reeks of failure. Zombie Night is one of those.

I sought this out based on a review on ZMDB.org. The review said "good acting, plot, cared about the characters, check it out".. but holy crap, now I think it was all tongue-in-cheek. The acting is some of the worst I've seen. It's right up there with Zombie Nation and Rising Dead. The actors actually stammer their lines sometimes, as if it's difficult to speak. They're so poorly delivered I actually cringed a few times (when I wasn't laughing and rolling my eyes). The actors are like talking stone walls, until the script says "move," and then, they promptly become stone walls again.

The story is average, but execution is unenthusiastic and extremely bland. I pray this is the director's first film. You don't care about any of the characters (though you do want Derrek to make up his mind on staying or leaving), and just wait for the gory parts, of which there are few (though it is decent special effects for such a low-budget film). There's a couple topless scenes, but other than that, f***ing yawn.

Would've been 2/10 but I gave it an extra star for the decent bloodwork. I was glad when it was over. I wish I could wash this movie off of me.

Pray for... it to be over.

[ieatzombies · 2/10 · 2 January 2008]

As a big fan of zombie movies and B-horror, I have come to expect enormous plot holes, sub-par editing, hard-not-to-laugh-at acting, and poor dialog. With these in mind I purchased Zombie Night from my local DVD/CD shop for 4$, why not add to the collection? What I didn't expect was that the acting would be SO bad that I would feel almost embarrassed watching and listening to these characters interact in the film. The dialog and actors leave you to believe they were selected minutes before the shooting and given no script as they make quite a few mistakes. Shouldn't they edit those out?

Additionally. the editing here was downright confusing. In one scene a couple is listening to the radio on their car stereo and when the girl reaches to turn it up... the scene cuts to live news broadcasts on a television highlighting the zombie uprising before cutting back to the pair in the car discussing the "magical" TV broadcasts? The cause of the outbreak is practically left to the imagination. Something about WW3 causing nuclear fallout which in turn is causing people to rise from death as flesh hungry zombies?

A couple scenes of nice gore including an excellent shotgun blast to the leg and a decent bit of gut munching simply weren't enough save Zombie Night from the ABYSMAL dialog, editing, and acting. Overall, a good rental for the die-hard zombie fan or something to pop on if your looking for a laugh-at-with-your-friends style horror flick.

Should've stayed dead

[kyledutch00 · 2/10 · 7 December 2005]

This 'film' is absolute trash. I've seen amateurs in high school do a much better job then what these guys attempted in "Zombie Night." Shot on what looks like a cheap Circuit City hand camera, the 'actors' portrayed are flat in character, and the acting is so poor it could give people like Hulk Hogan hope for his acting career. The only good quality of this movie was it's gore effects, which were handled with enough care. However, this movie is merely just a vehicle for decent zombie gore, and not much else.

A bare bones plot, a script that could bore you to tears, combined with worthless acting and quality leads to a 2/10 in my book. You lose, good day sir!

Zombie Night: Get's worse and worse

[Platypuschow · 1/10 · 19 January 2018]

Within the first 5 minutes I was struck with arrogance. You know how some movies begin with a quote or piece of poetry by some famous scholar or writer? Well this one starts with a quote, from one of the movies creators.

Then the movie really begins, a generic zombie film revolving around a group of survivors and their valiant efforts to survive the movies 90 minute runtime.

Full of the usual cliches but taking them considerably too far especially the one about the "Bad apple" of the group who jeopardises the safety of the others.

It gets stupid, we have a character who continues to be a liability from stealing to sabotaging to straight up murdering and yet our "Heroes" do little to prevent him from carrying on with his behaviour.

The bad acting, poor sound editing and writing which several times throughout the film made me cringe. It defies belief just how stupid this film is and to be clear I watch a lot of hyper low budget zombie affairs and this is one of the worst.

Even the most hardcore zombie fan will struggle with this embarassment.

The Good:

Nope

The Bad:

Laughable acting

Awful writing

A hero simply called Dave, really?

The god monologue is one of the dumbest things I've ever seen

Things I Learnt From This Movie:

I would have shot Derek in the face, twice

If a man falls down it's best to talk for a while then shoot him in the head to save him from getting bitten

Even a person killed via a shot to the head will rise as a zombie

Storyline?

[dirtmckert · 1/10 · 1 November 2007]

If I could hand out awards, I would give this movie the Worst Movie Ever Award for being devoid of any real plot and having absolutely no believable characters with terrible dialog. I was never sure how much time had passed or how all the random people kept showing up. And because there were so many randoms in this movie it made it hard to even follow who some of the main characters were (i.e. Amber). The supposed "good guy" was almost as much of a douche as Derrick (up until the point that Derrick kills the girl). Also, if you're fighting for survival in a world overrun by zombies (and in a supposed nuclear fallout - or something quite similar), why would you let such a terrible person stay in your midst? Anyhow. This movie was terrible, and I only finished watching it out of pure fascination as to how it is possible to make such a terrible movie, even on such a low budget - which is no excuse, just to let you know.

A cheesy movie is acceptable when done right - this wasn't.

If you're going to watch this movie, be prepared for the worst cinematic adventure of your life.

PS, I agree that this should be called an F Movie instead of a B Movie, and should not even get the good graces of a 1, for it was far more terrible than that. Also, there should never be a sequel to this atrocity.

Thank you, and good night.

So bad it's good

[zhadi · 6 November 2006]

I don't really want to give this movie any stars at all because it was so bad that I have to own it. Yup, one of those that has so many things wrong with it in terms of story, dialogue, acting, plot holes and yes, editing, that it earns a place on my list of Most Fun Bad Movies Ever. It's up there with SHOWGIRLS and FEMALE MERCENARIES ON ZOMBIE ISLAND. MST3K was made for movies like ZOMBIE NIGHT. You could definitely drive a Humvie Limo through the plot holes and the way some of the people apathetically strolled away from the equally apathetic zombies reminded me of KIDS IN THE HALL's zombie sketch. And you gotta love an 'impenetrable barrier' made of a few wooden crates tied together with two pieces of rope. Heh. I'm gonna watch it again with friends.

Rather eat a maggot than watch this again

[happyangie99 · 1/10 · 5 January 2006]

This movie is proof that if you let some one watch to many zombie movies and give them a cheap camera and a bunch of air head extras, you to can make a BAD movie. The acting is some of the worst I have seen in awhile. The sets, locations and sound are way below par as well. This movie has nothing to make it worth while. In some scenes there are 5 or 6 people making plans, and then the next scene the have added about 10 to 15 more people to their group. The don't explain it either. Also the gore effects are not that good. To make matters even worse, the previews on the DVD were almost as bad as the main movie. I heard there was going to be a part 2 to this mess. I don't know how. If this played in any theater it should be closed down. When I got suckered into renting this there was only one copy in the store. If you like to waste 90 minutes of you life on bad movies, than this is for you. Yuck !!!

It could have been worse...

[RobynBelfry · 1/10 · 1 August 2006]

...but I can't imagine how...

This film is misguided, to say the least. I felt like I was watching a high-school produced video (as in VHS) presentation. Devoid of anything that makes cinema magical, this humourless train wreak of a film was painful in most parts and laugh-out-loud awful in the rest. And not even the fun kind of laugh... The so-bad-it's-great kind of laugh that we all love so much. This is a "this makes me angry" kind of bad.

I dare anyone out there to watch three minutes of this film without finding one major, fatal flaw in the scene. From the characters who appear and disappear at random, to the "Hey man, you've always wanted to act" casting, to the horrible camera work and lighting, this isn't even on par with second unit material from a porn shoot.

About the only saving grace is that every now and again you can see something, a faint hope... and I'm not sure if it's a glimmer of respect from one Zombie movie fan to another... a tip of the hat to the genre by stealing ideas from other, greater zombie films that shows through from the screen. Or is it a nugget of original thought that's actually somewhat provoking? Naw... It's probably ripped off from something else.

If you're thinking of renting Zombie Night, do yourself a favour. Skip the video store. Pick up your video camera. Grab some fake blood and old clothes. Find an old school or a garage or a field. Shoot your own movie. You'll have a far better time.

Just don't make the same mistake that they did and try and SHOW IT to anybody.

The Cover is About as Good as it Gets

[saiyan9286 · 1/10 · 17 January 2007]

Okay, first of all, notice how all of the other reviewers who gave this movie a good rating are either: A) From Canada (where the movie was made) or B) Helped work on this movie or the second one ? Seriously, this movie was God-Awful Beyond Belief. Makes House of the Dead look like the greatest movie ever made !!! It is just the worst ! The acting: terrible. The editing: worst !! And here's what's also stupid. Zombie victims just give up so damn easily. If they get touched by a zombie, they just simply fall down and let them take them !! And let me talk about the boobs.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm a man, so I like seeing boobs. But when it comes to bad horror movies, it is nothing more than a poor attempt at getting guys to pick this crap off the shelves and say "Hey dude, let's get this one! Looks like it's gonna suck, but there is nudity !!" My God !!

DO NOT RENT THIS MOVIE !!! YOU WILL BECOME TWITCHY, EMOTIONALLY SCARRED, AND TEMPORARILY RETARDED !!

wow, really bad.

[lagoonguy · 1/10 · 28 April 2007]

OK let me start by saying that i APPRECIATE a 'bad' low budget movie, if it has effort. I mean i had a Public Access Show in Atlanta GA in 1999 where people sent me stuff (for you kids, Public Access is how you got stuff played before YouTube), and even though the movies were cheap and low budget and technically 'bad', it was for that type of genre. If they had sent me this movie to play on Public Access, i would've shown it. But Public Access is as far as this should ever get.

I can't believe this made it to national distribution. Acting is god-awful. all the way around. Editing and plot are terrible; all of a sudden you might be thrown into a mass zombie attack which lasts 2 seconds, then everyone is safe and sound again talking about how dangerous everything was. The plot is disastrous. the ubiquitous bad guy in the group (and the group keeps growing/shrinking mysteriously with no explanation) murders one of the girls in cold blood, and the good guys, in revenge, rather than killing badguy outright, decide to punish him by sending him to the zombies. of course the dude who sends him to the zombies never returns but butthole badguy survives. Then the movie ends with a lame salute at a 'butch cassidy & the sundance kid' ending. really, really bad movie.

Funny

[thebeautiful7 · 8/10 · 3 October 2006]

I am a huge fan of B-grade movies, my hubby doesn't understand. Anyways my favorite part in the movie, and my sister and I watched it over 30 times. the scene is where the main characters are in the basement together, and Derrick keeps on complaining and said what a pile of horse sh*t it was that they couldn't leave the room cause it was too dangerous. Dave snaps back at Derrick and says " Would you mind keeping your language around, down around my child"? and Derrick mimmics him. I thought that has the funniest scene, EVER!!! You have never seen a mistake like that in any movie, it was priceless!!!!!!! I really thought the movie was hilarious, especially Derricks character, and he got on everyones nerves, but they still welcomed him back every time.

Entertaining low-budget zombie opus

[kannibalcorpsegrinder · 7/10 · 5 February 2018]

Out on a family road trip, a crisis in the world involving an outbreak of dead people returning to life as the result of radiation from the nuclear devastation plaguing the rest of the world traps a small group inside a bunker and forces a desperate attempt to get away before falling victim to the zombies.

This here wasn't that bad of a film. One of the better aspects to this one is that it has quite a solid pace here since there's a huge amount of action in here. That comes mainly from the different waves of attacks in here leading to lots of confrontations that are fun, from the first missions just to get into the shelter and the ensuing food-run that ends in disaster due to the large swarms that appear out of the darkness. The attacks much later on, with the zombies swarming over the compound and taking on a rather calculated plan of attack as they manage to force them into defensive positions while they are making an offensive march against them, are really great as well as the main sequence out in the attempt to leave their compound to get to the second shelter where the creatures pick off the most survivors and the final chase to get out of the bunker that leads into a series of woodland-based attacks are all energetic and creepy, due to the night-time setting and trying to see everything through flashlight power. Even the battle in the second shelter is quite fun with the horde coming in and taking out the different members of the group that breaks through the barricade and manages to get to the scattered group which has plenty of fun action. The opening, with the worldwide reports of damage and destruction, give this a great feel, and with the huge, global feel to it, it has a much bigger and creepier feel. The other big plus here is that there's such a huge amount of blood and gore in here that features both the violence against the zombies and humans which is really nice. These here are the film's good points as it did have a few problems with it. The fact that it's so low-budget does hurt it since there's really no way to get around certain factors like it's cheap and quite terrible-looking gore and shots that tend to be subject to the condition that they were shot in, fading in and out at opportune moments and much more in here that gives away the fact that it's really cheaply done. All of these here pop up throughout the film on a continual basis, especially the gore since it's pretty bloody, and these here can make for some troublesome viewing by those who aren't that into its style of film. Its other main flaw is the unneeded side character that constantly throws the group into danger for no reason and holds up the pacing from the zombie attacks which is the main point. Also a little damaging is the constant clichés that normally pop up in a zombie film, mainly the one where no one can get along and the stupidest decision actually turns out to be the one that saved everyone, but those are so universally-used it's not that damaging as the other flaws.

Rated R: Graphic Violence, Graphic Language, Nudity and a mild sex scene.

Another saddening failure...

[exquisitelyempty · 1/10 · 7 June 2008]

I love low budget horror films, I really do. I mean, any time most people buy or rent such a movie, they think before they even reach for their wallet, "Oh, my my my...this is going to be bad." But folks, brace yourselves...it gets worse.

The only reason I gave this movie a star is so it reflects negatively on the movie's rating, as opposed to posting no stars at all. We don't need anymore civilized human being to be subjected to such horrible films. Everyone else has accurately depicted just how terrible the plot, acting, effects and everything else is, so there's no need. The only thing you need to know before watching this is it falls right in line with all the other low budget failures that have been flooding the zombie genre lately. "If we try and put excessive amounts of gore in here, maybe no one will pay attention to every other flaw that graces this dung-pile." It doesn't work that way.

And you totally know anyone who left this movie a positive rating had to be people that were in on making the movie. Especially since it's the first few comments. They even disguised one user as someone from Los Angeles, CA! Smoothe move, Canadians.

Not the worst horror film

[moviemanic07 · 10 January 2006]

Okay. Just follow me for a minute... It seems there's an off-screen nuclear war and now human-hungering zombies are overrunning the world. (I don't remember reading about this phenomenon after they dropped the bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but I'll give them the benefit of the doubt.) Okay, now we meet a married couple with a kid who are driving home from a couple of at a remote cabin where, conveniently, there was no television or radio. When they turn on the car radio they listen to various television broadcasts (!) about the war and the zombies. Then the war breaks down and they decide to hide in a building, and... and... who cares.

I was predisposed to hate this movie because it began with an arty graphic treatment of a poem, which seemed inappropriate to the subject matter of the film. I didn't recognize the name of the poet. Then the credits began, and lo-and-behold, the poet was none other than one of the producers of the film: Amber L. Francis. Now, I'm thinking that this, rather than just being a backyard production, is a pretentious backyard production. However, at the end of the film, you discover that Ms. Francis, who was also a writer and actress in the film, died after the production. My condolences. Now, I understood the poem, and, in retrospect, I found it very poignant and moving. It was the best thing in the film.

I hadn't reviewed a film in a while on the IMDb, but, as I was watching this film, I knew I had to return. I couldn't wait to tear this thing apart. Now, out of respect for the late Ms. Francis, I will resist the urge. In fact, now I will actually try to compliment it.

Good things:

1. Some of the gore wasn't bad -- compared to films of a similar budget level. 2. The picture was in focus more often than it was out of focus. 3. Having the zombies only come out at night was a unique twist on the normal Romerian zombie world-view. 4. It wasn't the worst horror film in the world -- that would be "Ax'em." 5. The poem was touching (in context).

Canadian shot-on-video zombies

[Leofwine_draca · 4/10 · 30 March 2017]

ZOMBIE NIGHT is a Canadian reworking of the zombie legend, shot on video without much in the way of insight or originality. In fact this film, which tells of a group of survivors banding together after they are assailed by a zombie outbreak, is very much a Romero copy and the zombies in it are even blue-skinned.

Unfortunately, this film suffers from all of the usual problems associated with the indie movie genre, namely wooden acting and terrible production values. There's a lot of gut-munching gore on offer here for those who enjoy that sort of thing, but the storytelling is very basic and simply consists of place-to-place movement, travelogue-style. However, I did find this a little more engaging than most zero-budget films, even though it's clearly hampered by the all-too-obvious budgetary constraints.

do not buy or rent just say no!!!!!!!!

[gokudeanglo · 1/10 · 9 November 2005]

with out a doubt it was the worst movies i have ever seen the only thing good about it was nothing i got (i.b.s.) irritable bowel syndrome from this movie. everything you could think passable is wrong with it, it scared my brother and cousin. they can't even play resident evil if you come across this movie in you video store keep fear away. and i fear for the people that want to see the 2nd one. i think who every wrote and directed this film should go to film school. this is a cheep, cheesy and corny movie. the acting was dull and the filming was crappy i can't Evan begin to go into details about that. this movie was so bad i drank my self in to a coma for a few weeks. just trust me as a big fan of zombie movies stay away.

What Were These Guys Thinking ?!?!

[tyler_hamilton_1986 · 1/10 · 25 March 2007]

CHIM CHIM the Video Monkey ([e-mail]) says "That Dave Francis, writer/director, really knows his zombie stuff." Man, who are you trying to kid here ?!?! This was by far the worst zombie movie I have ever seen !! And I hate the fact that the creators of this movie pretend to be someone else and get on here and give this movie 10 stars. I don't even know if I wanna give this poor excuse of a film any stars at all.

Okay, first of all: The acting, GOD AWFUL. Who the hell casted these nobodies, Helen Keller ?!?! The location was crap too. The movie is supposed to take place in a post-war ravaged world, right ? Gee, never would've guessed it what with the cars passing by in the background on a freeway.

I am not gonna blame the budget whatsoever on why this movie was crap. Hell, George Romero made a movie with less, and look how great he is. And that's another thing, the script sucks because all it did was rip off Romero.

And another thing that's kinda lame is the fact that the zombies only come out at night. I will admit, it's something a little new with the zombie genre, but the fact is that it makes the zombies less threatening, so that sucks !

Okay, and get this, the bad guy, Derek, he keeps screwing people over and he even kills a girl, and the "leader" of the group, Dave, lets him go. Okay, if i were Dave, I would've shot him in both kneecaps and let those zombies eat them. AND WHERE THE HELL DID ALL OF THE OTHER CHARACTERS COME FROM ?!?!?!?! God, I wish Dave Francis would just give up on film-making, but no ! He's making a sequel. He better get it right this time.

So I understand that someone died during post-production, now I'm sorry for this loss, but seriously, don't use that as an excuse to pass off this movie as a good B-Movie. This was an F-Movie, all the way ! 1/10 ... though it deserves a -10000 / 10 !

...the middle of a movie...

[devisisedicius · 4/10 · 23 November 2005]

I am a fan of zombie movies, so I picked this up, knowing it wasn't going to be another Dawn of the Dead. I watched this movie today, and I feel it did what it was made to do, kill time. The zombies don't look that bad, and the gore was nice. The plot is simple, after many of the world's empires nuke the crap out of each other, zombies start springing up. Those who survive meet up and try to survive longer. Now, enough about that, on to the movie. The acting is well... meh, the characters are rather dull, but over all the movie's not a waste of time. It doesn't feel like a whole movie though. The beginning just cuts in after the zombies spring up, the characters know too much about what to do, and the ending just seems there. Many of the characters are just there, never given a name or background, and the number seems to always change. Over all, I feel this movie is a good way to kill time. 4/10

Begins with an S and ends with a HIT

[gtha-2 · 1/10 · 20 July 2006]

How can you start off a summary about a movie that lacks every single element of entertainment and abandons any structure of coherence? The only positive thing in this horrible film was that there were three pairs of boobies that coincidentally were on the three best actors in the film (!).

The film starts out pretty much like the last guy summed it up. A guy (Mark) who looks around 50 is with his girlfriend of roughly one year (Amber), who looks around 20, and his daughter (Emily). Now, in an event to get Emily and Amber to bond, Mark decides that a post-World War III vacation to a cabin in Nowheresville (a.k.a. CANADA) is relevant. During this time (keep in mind, time is a subjective matter in this film, there is no feel for time in this movie. The only real instance we are 'some-what' presented with a feel is when a still shot of the school/warehouse/prison/business building is darkened using Photoshop for night and re-lit for day)a virus has changed FIFTY MILLION PEOPLE WORLDWIDE!! into zombies. This staggering number, of course, has crippled every government military across the globe, leaving marshall law in effect.

Conveniently, about this time, Mark's car breaks down and thus the humor ensues. We are introduced to the vague character of Dave, who unfortunately at this time, his kid (who looks roughly the same age as his wife) becomes stricken with Zombieitis, then gives it to his wife, who in turn must be shot by Dave, the only time in the film where Dave's acting is above sub-sub-SUB-par.

Dave, assuming the leader role, gathers presumably ten or fifteen guys (the number keeps changing), one of whom is Derek, the REBEL of the group. Derek, constantly giving members of the party the one fingered salute, eventually is kicked out, then returns, then leaves on his own will, returns again, shoots a woman in the stomach so the ridiculously slow and idiotic zombies can feast on her, and is finally strung up to a tree whilst the group takes turns punching him in the balls (while zombies surround them) That's pretty much the basic plot line for this excuse of a movie. Dave is the WORST leader in the modern film era constantly making horrible mistakes as his idiotic sidekicks maintain their loyalty, the black guy forces a quirky British accent, and people must be trained for a shooting 'stance'. Their brilliant barricade is nothing more than a few empty milk cartons that are eventually removed by Derek!!! and his bald friend.

This movie sucks. My ears bled as a man stricken with the disease yells "I BEAT CANCER, I CAN BEAT THIS TOO" and people seemed oblivious to the idea of memorizing lines. Four or five times people began stuttering and the director simply allowed, probably assuming that's how people naturally talk.

Horrible!

[renaldow · 1/10 · 18 November 2005]

I love zombie movies. Even bad zombie movies are entertaining. Or, so I thought until I saw this movie. It was horrible. Badly acted, a script that makes little sense, bad editing, and audio that isn't even matched up right. There's not really much else that can go wrong with the movie.

The time line of the movie makes little sense, but thats OK because the script is so bad, the characters are so poorly done and the execution of the film is so bad that you'll be screaming for someone to hand you the remote before one more minute of this cliché ridden, badly written waste of disc space goes by. I threw my DVD away after watching it.

Avoid it at all costs.

Coudn't even finish it

[kennethsorling · 1/10 · 17 April 2007]

You don't really appreciate mediocre actors until you've seen some godawful ones. And there are plenty of them in here.

That's okay, though, see, because everything else about this movie is just as godawful. I'll have to second the other reviewers' acrimonious bashing of this film, and offer the following additions:

Fans of horror movies quickly become inured to bad movies, since bad movie makers all too often start out in this genre. But nothing can prepare you for badness such as this.

Everything about this movie is amateurish! Not even 'good' amateurish; you won't get any Blair Witch vibes here. It's so amateurish that you can safely defy anyone involved to _spell_ the word; I've seen kindergarten school plays with better writing, better production and better acting than this. And that is the feeling you get when you watch this; that it's some high-school student film project which got misplaced and by some horrible freak accident wound up on the shelves of the video store. It's so bad it isn't even funny.

When I saw this a few months ago, some emergency (such as the need to clip my toenails) prevented me from finishing it. So I don't know how it came out. But I simply cannot be arsed to find out. This is 20 minutes of my life better spent watching infomercials.

Yeeech!

A must see for zombie fans!

[krunksgirl · 8/10 · 6 July 2005]

Zombie Night proves to be a fun, campy and overall entertaining zombie movie experience. The special effects and makeup are absolutely incredible and well worth a true fans time in checking out. If you are a true zombie fan, you definitely will not be disappointed in the gore. Many of the effects will blow your mind, they really are very well done and as much as I hate to be cliché, there are several scenes that leave you with the feeling of "wow, how'd they do that?". If you get your hands on a copy of the DVD (which BTW looks so cool!), it's also worth checking out the special features which include a "making of" documentary. This movie was a lot of fun to watch and it is very exciting to see this caliber of zombie gore in a Canadian made indie film. I understand that Zombie Night 2 is in production. I am looking forward to this sequel and seeing what else David J. Francis and his crew will give us in the special effects domain.

Zombie Night

[earthdancedaph · 7/10 · 6 June 2007]

I just watched and reviewed this movie for a horror web site. I loved this movie!!Remember this is an Indie Horror, so have an open mind. Consider, locations, and budgeting etc. The makeup was excellent, storyline good, pace excellent, background noises/music good. Editing needed some work, but this is "A diamond in the rough". I want to own this movie, I want to discuss this movie with other Horror fans!! I will stick up for this movie (especially as a zombie genre fan) and I am not a Canadian or a part of the movie..darn!! Zombie survivor film, set in the aftermath of WWIII a lot of the story is inferred. Very post apocalyptic horror subject. Acting is slightly stiff, but on a scale with other Indie zombie horror this is at the top of the mountain. The survivors are trying to avoid the flesh hungry ghouls facing overwhelming odds.

Worst movie of all time?

[nickwins89 · 1/10 · 22 November 2006]

When I saw this movie at the store, i expected it to be half decent, but it turned out to be the worst movie I have ever seen in my life. The storyline was as murky as it could get, characters seemed to just pop up out of nowhere and be put into the plot. There were dozens of people who never even had names, lines, or any significance.

The breasts were sub-par and the acting, horrible. The gunshots sounded like cap guns, and we never got to see a mere glimpse of Amber's hot bod. This may seem superficial but as it applies to this movie it is a viable point.

The only redeeming quality about this movie is the character Rick, who like many of the other characters just showed up out of nowhere. Rick was the most bad ass character in the whole film, he took charge of the situation and forged a path to victory. Too bad he was killed, because the writers (even though none are credited... surprise surprise) cannot think up a good story.

The other best part of this movie was the EXPLODING ZOMBIE LEG. Not only did Derek get that shotgun inexplicably, but apparently the zombie whose leg Derek shot wasn't actually a zombie, but a cyborg (which explains the sparks).

I feel like I need to take a shower, wash my eyes with bleach, and watch a good movie after watching this despicable attempt at anything coherent.

This movie was written by four people who wanted this movie to be good.