Suffering through this movie is worth it if you have seen the first one. It's just all around bad but the twist at the end makes it all worth it.
15 Reviews
Great twist at the end.
13Funbags25 August 2019
They are just meerkats
nogodnomasters14 May 2019
Warning: Spoilers
I am embarrassed to admit it, but I recognized by the ending, this was a prequel to" Zoombies." Poachers break into a game preserve to capture animals. Jezel (Terra Strong) has created her own tranquilizer to sedate the animals. We know it creates zombies because it is fluorescent green in color. Animals go crazy and the park rangers must team up with the poachers to survive.
Sad dialogue and acting. KD (Jumarcus Mason) was a terrible character I wish they had killed early. CG animals. Reminded me of a 1960's "Crispy Critters" commercial.
Guide: No swearing, sex or nudity.
Sad dialogue and acting. KD (Jumarcus Mason) was a terrible character I wish they had killed early. CG animals. Reminded me of a 1960's "Crispy Critters" commercial.
Guide: No swearing, sex or nudity.
Oh please, for the love of all zombified animals out there...
paul_haakonsen18 May 2019
Well, the 2016 "Zoombies" was hardly a masterpiece in any sense, and fairly much came and went without as much as a groan or taking a bite of the zombie genre. So it was no surprise that the 2019 "Zoombies 2" pretty much did the same.
I stumbled upon this The Asylum production by sheer random luck. I have seen the previous movie, so of course I would also see this sequel. However, I can't really claim to sit down to watch it with much of any hope or expectations to it.
Turns out that it was as one would assume a zombie sequel would fare. Yeah, it was worse than the predecessor, and that leaves little to be said actually.
The storyline in "Zoombies 2" was straight forward, for sure. But it was essentially a pointless and incredibly mundane and generic storyline, one that has already been seen before many, many, many times over in other zombie movies. So don't get your hopes up for anything grand here.
The acting in the movie was adequate, if you take into consideration the type of movie it was, and the fact that The Asylum was behind this movie. However, I can't claim to be able to put my finger on any single performance that stood out amidst the others. So it was fairly bland and non-distinct.
For a zombie movie, then "Zoombies 2" was incredibly bland and actually downright boring. The zombified animals were horrible to look at, and it was painstakingly clear that it was just poorly animated CGI that looked like something you'd find in a 1990s computer game.
I gave up just about 20 minutes short of reaching the end of the movie. I was ready to have one of those atrociously fake and horribly animated zombie animals come and claw my eyes out. The movie was just not worth the effort.
I stumbled upon this The Asylum production by sheer random luck. I have seen the previous movie, so of course I would also see this sequel. However, I can't really claim to sit down to watch it with much of any hope or expectations to it.
Turns out that it was as one would assume a zombie sequel would fare. Yeah, it was worse than the predecessor, and that leaves little to be said actually.
The storyline in "Zoombies 2" was straight forward, for sure. But it was essentially a pointless and incredibly mundane and generic storyline, one that has already been seen before many, many, many times over in other zombie movies. So don't get your hopes up for anything grand here.
The acting in the movie was adequate, if you take into consideration the type of movie it was, and the fact that The Asylum was behind this movie. However, I can't claim to be able to put my finger on any single performance that stood out amidst the others. So it was fairly bland and non-distinct.
For a zombie movie, then "Zoombies 2" was incredibly bland and actually downright boring. The zombified animals were horrible to look at, and it was painstakingly clear that it was just poorly animated CGI that looked like something you'd find in a 1990s computer game.
I gave up just about 20 minutes short of reaching the end of the movie. I was ready to have one of those atrociously fake and horribly animated zombie animals come and claw my eyes out. The movie was just not worth the effort.
Zoombies 2 deserves a mercy head shot
sim-sean16 June 2019
Completely dead
TheLittleSongbird25 May 2019
Have made no secret in the past of intensely disliking, and even outright hating a lot, a vast majority of The Asylum's (near-universally maligned for good reason) output, though there is curiosity as to whether they are capable of making something good and compulsive about their output's badness. Admittedly, The Asylum do have a small group of watchable films and the occasional (big emphasis on that word) above average one, unfortunately outweighed by the lacklustre at best and often dreadful films they churn out.
Did not care at all for the first 'Zoombies' film, but it wasn't a complete waste of time. There is far worse around. Sequels are notorious for being rarely being on the same level and seldom better (with exceptions of course), and 'Zoombies 2' is definitely the inferior film. Though it is a case of the original not being a good film to begin with, so not much was expected when seeing it out of curiosity and being intrigued somewhat by the concept.
The least bad asset of 'Zoombies 2' is the scenery which did have a little atmosphere that was lacking everywhere else, and sadly it was wasted by the rest of the production values being so bad.
All the acting is sub-par at best and dreadful at worst, the first 'Zoombies' had two decent performances whereas this has none. They do have to work with bland and irritating characters, with the film making little effort to do anything with them let alone develop them, and dialogue that is both insipid and cheesy with a constantly awkward flow. As well as the doesn't-even-reach-workmanlike, actually pretty pedestrian, direction, that fails to give any urgency or tension.
Both are severely lacking in the story. So is the suspense, fun and thrills. Really liked the concept and it is sad that they had something that seemed different and clever on paper, but was executed so predictably and by the numbers. The action is unexciting, random and confused, with some haphazard editing, while the scares, fun and suspense are not there in any shape or form and the film is instead predictable, dull and overboard dumb.
Unfortunately, the titular characters fare no better. They exude very little menace, fun or coolness. They didn't to me have much personality and were used pretty poorly. Best not mentioning the deplorable look of them, the visual asset that comes off the worst in a film where only the scenery is acceptable.
Overall, terrible. 1/10
Did not care at all for the first 'Zoombies' film, but it wasn't a complete waste of time. There is far worse around. Sequels are notorious for being rarely being on the same level and seldom better (with exceptions of course), and 'Zoombies 2' is definitely the inferior film. Though it is a case of the original not being a good film to begin with, so not much was expected when seeing it out of curiosity and being intrigued somewhat by the concept.
The least bad asset of 'Zoombies 2' is the scenery which did have a little atmosphere that was lacking everywhere else, and sadly it was wasted by the rest of the production values being so bad.
All the acting is sub-par at best and dreadful at worst, the first 'Zoombies' had two decent performances whereas this has none. They do have to work with bland and irritating characters, with the film making little effort to do anything with them let alone develop them, and dialogue that is both insipid and cheesy with a constantly awkward flow. As well as the doesn't-even-reach-workmanlike, actually pretty pedestrian, direction, that fails to give any urgency or tension.
Both are severely lacking in the story. So is the suspense, fun and thrills. Really liked the concept and it is sad that they had something that seemed different and clever on paper, but was executed so predictably and by the numbers. The action is unexciting, random and confused, with some haphazard editing, while the scares, fun and suspense are not there in any shape or form and the film is instead predictable, dull and overboard dumb.
Unfortunately, the titular characters fare no better. They exude very little menace, fun or coolness. They didn't to me have much personality and were used pretty poorly. Best not mentioning the deplorable look of them, the visual asset that comes off the worst in a film where only the scenery is acceptable.
Overall, terrible. 1/10
Pretty stupid
draftdubya7 April 2021
VIEWS ON FILM review of Zoombies 2
burlesonjesse515 May 2019
Warning: Spoilers
I gotta admit, I like the title (Zoombies is a combination of "zoo" and "zombies". Duh).
"You're a bad mama". Therein lies the problem. "We are leaving". Ah, that's a nod to Aliens from 1986. "The animals are going crazy!" Uh ya think? These are quotes from my latest review, Zoombies 2. "2" is a sequel to 2016's Zoombies. I've never viewed the original Zoombies but I'm thinking that's perfectly fine. I didn't plan on seeing it anyway.
So OK, here's the uneven gist with "2": Cartoonish wildlife in the form of zebras, pythons, porcupines, rhinos, hippos, and aardvarks turn into witchcraft corpses and then attack various humans in a faraway jungle (the gophers in Caddyshack and the anacondas in Anaconda got nothing on these toothed, untamed creatures).
Clocking in at a choppy 84 minutes and distributed by The Asylum (they're responsible for those Sharknado flicks and the inspired 2006 vehicle, Snakes on a Train), Zoombies 2 only occasionally pushes the envelope the way other zombie pics do. "2" is Roger Corman-like and low-budgeted. "2" is perfunctory Cable watching at 4 am. "2" is akin to 1982 John Carpenter on holiday. Finally, Zoombies 2 is pure camp so I guess you'll have to light up the S'mores, pitch a tent, and keep the home fires burning.
With the fake, CGI-enhanced Zoombies 2, director Glenn Miller lets middling to bad acting, dialogue-d grandstanding, and timeline-skewed editing spill onto the screen (how could one character have a bloodied, scratched up face and then be totally camera-ready in the next scene?). His "2" minus a hefty amount of scares, is like a direct-to-video version of Critters, Ghoulies, and dare I say, Jurassic Park (ugh). Add a musical score that was meant for a better film (thanks Christopher Cano and Chris Ridenhour) and some cheesy opening credit titles and Zoombies 2 gets a generous "two" star rating.
"You're a bad mama". Therein lies the problem. "We are leaving". Ah, that's a nod to Aliens from 1986. "The animals are going crazy!" Uh ya think? These are quotes from my latest review, Zoombies 2. "2" is a sequel to 2016's Zoombies. I've never viewed the original Zoombies but I'm thinking that's perfectly fine. I didn't plan on seeing it anyway.
So OK, here's the uneven gist with "2": Cartoonish wildlife in the form of zebras, pythons, porcupines, rhinos, hippos, and aardvarks turn into witchcraft corpses and then attack various humans in a faraway jungle (the gophers in Caddyshack and the anacondas in Anaconda got nothing on these toothed, untamed creatures).
Clocking in at a choppy 84 minutes and distributed by The Asylum (they're responsible for those Sharknado flicks and the inspired 2006 vehicle, Snakes on a Train), Zoombies 2 only occasionally pushes the envelope the way other zombie pics do. "2" is Roger Corman-like and low-budgeted. "2" is perfunctory Cable watching at 4 am. "2" is akin to 1982 John Carpenter on holiday. Finally, Zoombies 2 is pure camp so I guess you'll have to light up the S'mores, pitch a tent, and keep the home fires burning.
With the fake, CGI-enhanced Zoombies 2, director Glenn Miller lets middling to bad acting, dialogue-d grandstanding, and timeline-skewed editing spill onto the screen (how could one character have a bloodied, scratched up face and then be totally camera-ready in the next scene?). His "2" minus a hefty amount of scares, is like a direct-to-video version of Critters, Ghoulies, and dare I say, Jurassic Park (ugh). Add a musical score that was meant for a better film (thanks Christopher Cano and Chris Ridenhour) and some cheesy opening credit titles and Zoombies 2 gets a generous "two" star rating.
dire
fewsternoble18 May 2019
Slightly better than the first
XpocalypseSurvival5 March 2021
Same basic premise as the first movie: zombie animals run amok.
Like the first one, the setting is good and I think the actors did a fair job with what they had to work with. The science still makes no sense, but the story in this one made a little more sense. The CGI is equally poor.
What makes this one a tick better is that there were at least a few interesting animal attack scenes, one of which thankfully saw the demise of a truly obnoxious character.
Like the first one, the setting is good and I think the actors did a fair job with what they had to work with. The science still makes no sense, but the story in this one made a little more sense. The CGI is equally poor.
What makes this one a tick better is that there were at least a few interesting animal attack scenes, one of which thankfully saw the demise of a truly obnoxious character.
not suprised
moonnight07218 May 2019
Its from asylum so from the get go you all ready know its going to be terrible. acting,story,CGI. everything is a typical asylum movie. all they know what to do is doing knockoff bad copy of good mainstream movies. but i guess some people like that kind of bad taste. i would give it a 0 but sorry to say its not an option
Zoombies 3?
o-680911 March 2021
Absolutely Crap!
sampuckett-3275720 August 2019
This movie is a like a knock off of Rampage or something of that sort. It is absolutely revolting, everything except the vehicles and the people looks like something out of a video game or photoshoped! Would definitely not recommend!
Simply Awful
shiner31010 October 2021
There's no way around it. This is one terrible movie.
Special effects are laughable and incredibly cheap looking and unconvincing. Actors do their best with a terrible script. The women are pretty and they wear tight clothes that show lots of cleavage. So if you're a 12 year old boy that can't access porn on your computer, I guess you might like this.
Special effects are laughable and incredibly cheap looking and unconvincing. Actors do their best with a terrible script. The women are pretty and they wear tight clothes that show lots of cleavage. So if you're a 12 year old boy that can't access porn on your computer, I guess you might like this.
Same premise, another disappointment.
Dougx_FDS16 May 2020
Warning: Spoilers
What is the story, the plot, and how are the dialogues?
In the first 6 minutes we see a good performance and dialogues, but when the 3 hunters are surrounded by meerkats, they mistakenly start to develop the story, with a plot twist that everyone expected haha.
But you even remain interested, until the dialogues and digital performances of 'The Asylum' begin.
Some excelled with great successes and some mistakes of the actors, especially the actors Jarrid Masse, Jonathon Buckley
and Erica Sturdefant.
The worst are not the actors and actresses, but again the animals that are poorly made and have their behaviors very inconsistent with that of zombies.
But the scenery is really beautiful like 'Zoombies'.
Final remarks: A film to pass the time, even though I have positive thoughts about the film, we cannot disagree that it is bad in certain aspects, for example the animals themselves that are badly made in relation to the year the film was made. released, we could not expect something like 'The Lion King' (film of the same year), because the budget has a huge difference. The performances are not as bad as some people criticize, remembering that the script did not help the actors and actresses to act so well. On paper it was a beautiful premise, but badly executed!
Final remarks: A film to pass the time, even though I have positive thoughts about the film, we cannot disagree that it is bad in certain aspects, for example the animals themselves that are badly made in relation to the year the film was made. released, we could not expect something like 'The Lion King' (film of the same year), because the budget has a huge difference. The performances are not as bad as some people criticize, remembering that the script did not help the actors and actresses to act so well. On paper it was a beautiful premise, but badly executed!
THE MOST UNDERRATED MOVIE OF 2019
arashasgul2 June 2019
This movie is a masterpiece. People hates this movie because of "zombies". But in my opinion.... THIS MOVIE IS SO AWESOME! AT LEAST DESERVES 6. EVEN THE DEATH SCENES.... CREATORS Y'ALL ARE THE BEST THEY ARE JUST SOME ZOMBIE MOVIE "Haters" THAT RUINS EVERY GOOD ZOMBIE MOVIE LIKE THIS. ACTING IS AWESOME. CGI ISN'T THAT BAD. AN UNDERRATED ZOMBIE MOVIE FRANCHISE
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
