Survival of the Dead (George A. Romero’s) (limited)
| release date | May 28 2010 |
| studio | Magnet Releasing |
| director | George Romero |
| writer | George Romero |
| starring | Alan Van Sprang, Kenneth Welsh, Kathleen Munroe, Devon Bostick, Richard Fitzpatrick, Stefano Colacitti, Athena Karkanis |
| rating | R |
| tagline | Survival isn't just for the living. |
| site | survivalofthedead.com |
| trailer 1 | Trailer #1 |
1 Comments
Clearly the weakest entry in the Dead-saga so far. A surprisingly weak story, a mediocre cast, too many boring moments and some terrible CGI. Sure, there’s some great atmosphere and the zombie scenes are mostly pretty great but overall it’s just an average zombie-flick that anybody could have done. I think finally it’s time to retire Mr. Romero because I don’t wanna be disappointed by you one more time.
One word~ Fail!
Do not be scared off by the negative reviews!If you are a fan of George Romero’s zombie movies, you have to see this! This movie is not perfect but lets get real, none of his films are. They all have their flaws but that doesn’t mean that they’re not good films. This movie doesn’t deserve all the shit that it’s received. The CGI is cheap looking sometimes but it didn’t bother me as much as I thought it would and some of the kills are really cool. The zombie makeup is nothing special but these corpses are fresh, I don’t expect to see another doctor tongue walking around in this film. The practical effects at the end were spectacular. The things that bugged me the most was the score which has been a problem in his last three films. The acting for the most part is pretty good. I don’t like Devon Bostick and he bothered me but other than him, I liked the cast. This is a fantastic entry in George Romero’s legendary series. Keep it up, George!
Folks… This move was wretched. A waste of time. I don’t understand the lure to Romero’s work anymore. The bad acting, mediocre effects and horrid writing has hit a new low with this one. Dinny, you are delusional. Truly, truly horrible. The worst made yet. Land of the Dead was the only decent recent flick he’s made, the others have been embarassments to the genre.
If you liked Diary of the Dead, you should be able to tolerate this. It could have easily been a better film, but it suffers from two severe flaws:
CGI kills that take you right out of the movie, and…
…a truly abysmal music score. I think the music score fucks this movie up far worse than any CGI could ever hope of doing. It sounds like a poor mans Danny Elfman doing “Pee-Wee’s Big Adventure” knock-off music. It certainly sucks all tension and atmosphere right out of the movie.
However, having read completely negative reviews, I was definitely more pleased than I thought I would be after seeing this. The pacing is decent, there’s awesome, creepy locations and the gun fights, though extremely cheesy, are quite enjoyable.
Lower your expectations and you might enjoy it, more than likely you’ll find it better than Diary as well. But not even close to Land.
This thing was actually a lot more fun then I was expecting it to be. The acting is B-level at best. The CGI gore didn’t bother me as much as I thought it would. Ok, the flare gun part was stupid. At least that guy lit his smoke with it so I can look past the crappy effect on that one. It’s not like there was a huge budget to work with. Yet, I still gotta give the 70 year-old dude some credit. It has some cool @$$ gore effects going for it right from the get go. The lead actor (from Diary) surprised me with his skills. I hope he gets more work after this. Look, if you hated “Diary” like most of the world did, don’t give up on George just yet. Give this one a shot. If only for the gore filled ending.
Meh!
George is just having a little bit of fun with his living dead. Don’t take it so seriously and you might just have a laugh with him and the inexplicable Irish accents and Saturday morning cartoon-type gags.
Well nobody can complain about other people ruining a George A. Romero movie any longer. Romero has managed to dish out one of the worst zombie films I have seen in the last couple of years. Survival of the Dead is mindless and has very few redeeming qualities. Do not waste your time or money on this film unless you are a hardcore zombie fan with time to spare.
Call me crazy but i loved . if you did or didnt thats cool… but dont tell me its worst than diary…. please tell me how?
i love this movie. it has inteligence, badass fun and one liners, zombies, gore, western! if the movie was not made by Romero people in this site will be praising it.It
We will never get the old Romero films back(Night,Dawn,& Day), but there is nobody else that captures the essence of the living dead like him. I kinda like this one a little better than Diary, the whole can we live with the dead concept was interesting. And as expected there is a lot of great zombie violence. If you liked Diary, I think you will be satisfied with the entry as well. But think NEW Romero.Overall another worthy entry in Romero’s Dead series.
All I can say is what the hell is all the fuss about? And I mean that in the best way possible. The film has been released overseas for quite a while and has shown at various film festivals in the last year. In that time, I’ve heard reactions across the entire spectrum, from people saying it is better than Land and Diary, to people who say it is somewhere in the middle, to people who say that Romero should quit while he’s three movies behind. Today, my wait ended and I finally watched Survival of the Dead.
I saw Land of the Dead the night it hit theaters in 2005 and I enjoyed it quite a bit. I found it high concept, with low character. I felt like the film could have used about 15-20 minutes worth of character development and it would have been perfect. Alas it was not. I saw Diary of the Dead, the night it hit Boston theaters during its limited theatrical run. I was excited about the concept, because it was so different. And after the hollywood-ized Land of the Dead, Diary seemed a refreshing change. And it was… to its detriment. Romero crafted for us a batch of annoying teenagers; the youtube generation, if you will. The problem is that most of the people who grew up loving Romero’s zombie films are NOT of the youtube generation. It was sort of like watching your little cousins play in the pen on Easter Sunday. Annoying as shit. That said, the film isn’t terrible, but I shutter to think of it as part of the same franchise as Night, Day, and Dawn.
So finally, Romero’s sixth zombie film, Survival of the Dead. The first thing that struck me about the film was the uniqueness of the characters, in typical Romero fashion. The Sarge is a badass, on the level of badassery as Ken Foree’s Peter character in Dawn of the Dead. We see from the opening sequence that he’s had about enough of seeing his friends and fellow soldiers die. That’s really all we need to know. When we meet the Muldoons and O’Flynns for the first time, we get a similar taste of what they’re about. The O’Flynns want to destroy the zombies and the Muldoons want to save them. Pretty basic, but it does the trick. Though we like O’Flynn, we can see right off that he is a cold-hearted bastard. The only character I could do without is the indy kid, who seems a holdover from Diary of the Dead. He looks a bit out of place, but he detracts very little from the experience.
The other massive difference between this film and the last two is the amount of fun Romero has with the audience. He’s clearly had a blast coming up with new and creative ways of dispatching the undead, and though the CGI is pretty terrible at times. There were moments of such lighthearted fun that I found myself laughing out loud. There was a scene in particular involving a fisherman who catches a zombie. It was absolutely hysterical, and certainly no more out 0f place than the pie-fight in Dawn of the Dead.
Perhaps the reason this film has garnered such a negative reception is that it is not scary. I say it isn’t meant to be. Dawn of the Dead is barely a horror film. Day is pure science fiction. The human drama is what makes them special. This has been evident in the best of Romero’s Dead films. Zombies are simply a catalyst for Romero to show us what people are really made of. I felt that simple fact was lacking in the last two films, but he nailed it beautifully this time around. And that theme is carried all the way till the closing shot of the film, which gave me a chuckle and a chill. The world depicted in Survival didn’t seem overrun with zombies, but that wouldn’t serve the story anyway.
The thing I liked most about the film was the production design and cinematography. It didn’t look as gloriously “Hollywood” as Land of the Dead, but it looked professional and believable. It had that independent spirit that Day and Dawn had. It’s the first honest-to-God sequel that deserves to stand with Romero’s classic trilogy. The question I keep asking myself is, what the hell is wrong with you fans? What didn’t this film do that you were expecting it to?
I think we’ve glamorized Romero’s original trilogy over the years. They are cult classics, sure, but they are low budget films and it shows. This isn’t a bad thing, in fact the low budgets are what give the films their charm. I haven’t felt that charm in a long time… until today. Survival of the Dead is a film made by same filmmaker who made Night of the Living Dead, Dawn of the Dead, and Day of the Dead and it FINALLY shows. Thanks, George.
Obviously thrown together with little thought to capitalize on the “zombie craze”, Survival of the Dead is a slap in the face for horror fans with even an inkling of taste. Don’t get me wrong, I love zombie films and I love Romero’s original trilogy, but this is not a good film by any stretch of the imagination.
This is a well-made film. The script is probably Romero’s best since Day of the Dead. The acting is also top-notch in the major parts, especially Ken Welsh as the patriarch O’Flynn, who carries the film, and Karkanis as the lesbian guardsman. Technically, the film looks great too (though I am no expert in this regard).
The purpose of the film isn’t to scare, though it has it’s share of jumps. The stated theme is old conflicts that won’t die, even while the world goes to hell (O’Flynns vs the Muldoons). But to me, the more powerful idea was how families and communities interact with death. For the O’Flynns, death is the end, and the dead must be removed from the community. The Muldoons believe there might be a chance at life afterwards, and the dead must be kept alongside the living. So you have a political and religious conflict that extends from the top of the community right down to the individual (O’Flynns daughter is revealed to be a twin, with one alive and one dead). This is a “meta” horror movie.
The film starts with a relatively conventional armed team vs zombies/looters scenario, then moves to what is essentially a pastoral western. This is a risky move (who watches westerns anymore?); but personally I thought Romero pulled it off, as the communal conflict on the island is mesmerizing in places. Here all the family conflicts (both inside and out) come to a head, with the zombies seeming to embody the released aggression.
All-in-all, I would rank it after Night of the Living Dead, and Dawn of the Dead; though I would probably find myself watching it more than Night because it is more of a full-bodied movie.
Simply pathetic…I was embarrased for GR. Maybe it will serve as a good base for a remake. Seems all that Romero movies are good for.
not a bad movie, but it was lacking zombie action though…it seems as if Romero (god) wanted to focus more on an actual story than any zombies…
Romero should stop making movies if he’s going to make them like this 1. Simply sucks. I know the zombies got smarter in Land but this is just ridiculous
(here is my review from my blog)
George A. Romero’s Survival of the Dead (2010)
Written & Directed by George A. Romero
Starring Alan van Sprang, Kenneth Welsh & Kathleen Munroe
Run Time: 90 min.
The Godfather of zombie films is back again in his 6th installment of his living dead series. There is something that stands out to me with Romero films that differ than other horror movies and imparticular other zombie films. Most zombie films go two ways. Number 1, they are low budget films with people looking to have fun with special effects and trying to make a buck, or Number 2, people who try to use the Romero name, throw a lot of money to the movie and make it about shaky cameras and fast zombies. Romero does neither of these and that is one of the reasons why he is my favorite director and one of the main reasons I have gotten into film. All of Romero’s films, including his zombie films, are a about a theme, a subject along with social commentary being put in the middle of it with the actors put in the film to fill the gaps and the special effects added for the fun factor. Night of the Living Dead came out in the 60′s and was the civil rights struggle staring right at you, Dawn (78) was consumerism at it’s finest etc etc etc. In Survival of the Dead, Romero addresses religion, evolution and man’s issue with holding on when he needs to let go. Survival opens up with a few remaining members of a military group traveling to try to find a safe haven, on the other side of the world on a small island called Plum, two Irish family’s fight to control the island. The Muldoon family is very religious and fight to keep the zombies alive because they believe it is god’s word to keep them around after they have returned from the dead. This family keeps the zombies, shackles them and makes them repeat a familiar task they had in their life (IE: tying a zombie mail man to a mail box and watch him put the same letter in the box over and over) while the O’Flynn family thinks that the zombies must be killed as soon as possible. The heads of each family are bitter rivals and finally Patrick O’Flynn, the head of the family, is forced to leave the island along with some of his followers. We than see the military men run into a group of straglers in the woods who try to attack them. The Military men fight them off and a local boy joins up with them. The boy tells them about a video he has seen over the internet of a family who can take you to safety. The family turns out to be O’Flynn family who use the Military to head back to Plum Island. We than get a battle between two opposing view points where we witness people struggling over their own personal beliefs and the need to hold on to them. Survival also deals the the evolution of the zombies much like the real evolution of man over the years. In his earliest zombie films, the living dead just moved slow and are brain dead, but he shows us that in the evolution of his series of films, zombies can learn and evolve into something more. Survival isn’t a comic book romp like Dawn of the Dead, it isn’t the gore fest that Day of the Dead is, it isn’t even the big budget story that Land was or the innovated movie of Diary. Survival is a low budget story of man, and zombies happen to be around it. Don’t be discouraged though, there is enough action and blood to keep the gore hounds happy, imparticular a man fishing only to reel in a zombie which was very well done. Don’t go into this movie thinking your getting a over the top faced pact zombie remake or rehash that has come out so often over the years, it is another vision of the master, who at 70 years old, still proves he has a lot to say.
Average Movie Ticket Price- $10
“Survival of the Dead” Ticket Price Worth- $8.00, a Medium Buttered Popcorn & Small Orange Soda along with some skittles if you can hide them in your pocket
This movie was awesome in every aspect other then the cgi. I think many people should take it for what it is and that is a low-budget good story.
I walked into Survival of the Dead hoping for the best and expecting the absolute worst. While I hold the first three movies of what used to be called the “Dead Trilogy”(so much for trilogy) up very high, it would be fair to say that the last two(Land and Diary) made me lose a good amount of faith I had in Romero. Land felt like an extravagant gorefest that didnt have the great character developement that both Dawn and Day had, and Land also had many other things wrong with it (John Leguizombie anyone?). Diary, was about 1200 times worse, it was awful, and that is putting it lightly.
So, absolutely hating the last two, like I said I was expecting the worse. What I got was a refreshing, fun movie, that felt similar and new to the Dead series at the same time. The acting was good(except for the annoying boy who seemed to have horrific dialogue), and the western feel to it added a lot. I liked how the colors weren’t muted like most horror movies these days, and it felt more cinematic than many recent scareathons.
My only big complaint is the lack of practical effects. Save for a couple scenes, the great days of Savini/Nicotero seem to be long gone, replaced with CG that is pretty bad at times. It makes me wish Romero would’ve spent a little more money and went to the old school way.
All in all, a good movie. Could’ve been better but could’ve been a hell of a lot worse.
-J
One of the worst zombie movies I have ever bothered to lay eyes on and the fact that its a Romero pic makes it real real bad. The acting was so corny and yeah I get the Hatfields and Mccoys concept but really give me a break. George A. Romero’s movies used to scare me and thats what I loved about them but the last 3 movies were lackluster and he really just needs to stop and let someone else take over the genre. Though not as bad as Diary Of The Dead-it was just as shitty. Watch it if you’re bored or just don’t watch it at all because its jut not worth much.
George A Romero please just stop. At this point in the game you’re just embarrassing yourself. I remember when the name George A Romero was practically synonymous with awesome, and anything was his name attached was guaranteed to be pretty damn cool. But now every time I hear he’s planning to make a new movie I just roll my eyes in disgust because I know it’s going to be yet another cheap hack job, milking the now massively oversaturated zombie genre to death. I’ll warn you ahead of time, this review is going to be spoiler heavy, but honestly this movie sucks so bad I don’t even care to try and avoid them. There you’ve been warned.
As much as I hated Diary of the Dead, I think the story in this one might actually be worse. The entire movie is about Plum Island, a refuge from zombies a couple hours off the coast of Delaware. I’m not clear how an island so close to the mainland is really much of a safe haven since they even have a sequence in the movie that has zombies walking on the bottom of the ocean, and in Land of the Dead they crossed a river to get to the city, so I’m thinking a few might show up on the beach, but I could be wrong. Anyway, the island is populated by the families of two Irish dudes, the O’Flynns and the Muldoons (and nobody else, can you say inbred?). They hate each other for some unexplained reason, and apparently everyone else on the island is OK with taking sides. When the zombie “plague” hits even their island the two men (Patrick O’Flynn and Seamus Muldoon) disagree on how to deal with it.
The O’Flynns (intelligently) want to shoot the zombies in the head because they realize there is no saving someone once their dead (or undead in this case). The Muldoons on the other hand (in a display of idiocy unrivaled in horror) decide they should keep the zombies alive to try and “cure” them. The funny thing is, you find out later that the Muldoons aren’t trying to cure them, but instead trying to teach them to eat other animals instead of people (and constantly shooting them when they don’t perform up to their standards), as if that’s an actual solution to the zombie plague. And by “teach” what I mean is putting a zombie in a pen with an animal and waiting for it to eat the animal. Maybe it’s just me, but I’m thinking that teaching style is not going to be very successful, and at one zombie at a time, they’ll be at it for a loooooong time. Anyway, the Muldoons outnumber the O’Flynns, so the O’Flynns get banished from the island.
That’s it, that’s the backbone of this story. How is this a story that is in any way worth making a movie about, much less as the 6th entry in a long running and revered (until more recently) series? It isn’t. I thought Diary of the Dead was fucking terrible because it just retread what we’d already covered in the vastly superior renditions of both the original Night of the Living Dead as well as the Tom Savini directed 1990 remake. What reason was there to go back and do it again, something hundreds upon hundreds of imitators had already done in their shitty zombie movies? Oh wait, I know, so that George could try and “modernize” it with a bunch of bullshit fake “technospeak” about computers and YouTube internet culture, two things he clearly knows FUCK ALL about. Let’s not forget jumping on the “reality” horror bandwagon. Ugh.
Anyway, at least this one is a real movie. The only other redeeming quality here is that this movie is tied into Diary of the Dead (having SOME sort of an ongoing mythology makes it somewhat more appealing to me). See in Diary of the Dead, the bus of teenagers the movie follows gets stopped at this military roadblock and the soldiers end up stealing all their shit. Makes sense, it’s the exact type of thing that would happen if a military unit went rogue while the shit hit the fan worldwide. Well in this movie we actually follow said military unit who are apparently a bunch of swell guys, and girl (who is a really lame lesbian “tough girl” stereotype, complete with randomly inserted female masturbation scene with zero bearing on the plot). You know, not to be a dick or anything, but I hate to break it to you ladies: when you have a unit of military guys who’ve gone rogue and are traveling the countryside stealing from everyone they meet and killing anyone who resists in a lawless post- apocalyptic world filled with man eating zombies, the girl becomes their rape slave, lesbian or not.
So anyway this group of soldiers ends up finding this wise cracking kid who also happens to be a crack shot with all forms of weaponry even though he clearly has no military training. He does a lot of mouthing off to the military guys for no reason even though they saved his ass (probably literally) from these redneck guys they killed for no real reason. Strangely they don’t kill him, which annoyed the hell out of me. But then George takes it one step further..continued at
http://www.sweetooth0.com/movies/survivalofthedead.html
I just saw this last night. I can see why someone would give this a bad review– but personally, I felt this was definitely a step up from ‘Diary of the Dead’ and in many ways it was better than ‘Land’ my gut tells me that this will play out like ‘Day of the Dead’ in terms of it being a movie that wasn’t received well in theaters and then gained more and more respect as it aged.
Thanks, MD. It’s good to see a horror site that actually has some decent knowledge of movie making, story telling and can even offer solid critique of some of our beloved heroes such as Romero. That’s why BD stays head and shoulders above the rest of overly opinion centered sites that speak the “critic” lingo but really don’t know what the fuck they are talking about. I actually read on a once reputable horror site the following in regards to this latest Dead entry: “we have a movie that is (arguably) one of the best in the series.” Bullshit. While you might like it. Enjoy it. Or whatever…this was not a good film and you point out all the reasons why. Thank you.
Survival of the Dead
6/5/2010
George A Romero is the undisputed father of the zombie movie that started in 1968 with “Night of the Living Dead”. Now with “Survival” his sixth “of the Dead” movie, they seem to loose more relevance and purpose with each sequel. The early films were smart, gory and actually scary. While now they are just redundant and uninspired. His zombies have failed to be in least bit scary or menacing. With all the zombie movies out there you really need to have a great idea or spin to really have a decent shot at a good film. Zack Snyder’s “Dawn of the Dead” remake certainly injected some much needed life into the genre (pun intended, sucka!). Along with the two “28 Days” films, it has spawned the now age old question of weather you like your zombies fast or slow? I know Romero wants to make a buck and he certainly has the right to, but the “dead” films have more than runs its course.
Time for Romero to retire.Another zombie movie with plenty of filler.
i think people are a little too hard on this film. it may be possibly the worst entry in romero’s dead movies, but it was still a fun movie to watch.
I think people are definitely more than a little harder on this movie than it deserves. I love all the dead movies (not so much Diary, but it holds a special somewhere with me) and this one is no exception. He’s really taken a step back up, even if we did have more than a couple CGI kills they were creative and he still used some practical! Think about it.. He goes from Land of the Dead (Awesome) to Diary of the Dead (Meh, but I’ll watch it if it’s on) and then back to this (Good, nowhere near the greatness of the first 3 but definitely almost on par with Land) so, let’s just hope he continues to advance. With all the awful zombie films we get these days….
This is certainly the least exciting of George Romero’s zombiemovies, but a bad Romero zombieflick is still a great deal better than most zombieflicks out there! In short: entertaining, but not great!!
You’ve done it again, Romero. You’ve made us question how you could create something like Dawn of the Dead, but still be capable of shoving this garbage down our collective throats. More details here:
http://thewolfmancometh.com/2010/06/13/survival-of-the-dead-2009/
just a massive waste of talent… i just don’t get why this one got made…. paycheck? to pay for funeral arrangements of a close family member?
This movie is about as bad as it gets for pros.
skip it.
I dont know, I kind of liked it. A little slow, not enough carnage and without any heavy handed commentary whatsoever, but my friends and I all had a good time with it. MULDOON!!!
Sue me… call me a Romero fanboy… but I saw this in a theater will a great crowd and had a blast.
LMAO… this was the funniest out of them all. Some good gore. I liked it. it was cool thats all.
George A Romero is back with his new zombie film ‘Survival of The Dead’ and while it doesn’t even come close to the greatness of Night, Dawn, and Day, and this is definitley his weakest of the series, but overall, it’s still a solid and very entertaining zombie film. It’s got some good gore, especially towards the end, and I actually really liked some of the characters too. If your a big zombie and Romero fan, like I am, then you should definitley check this one out, just don’t expect anything like his original Dead trilogy, and you should be just fine. it’s fun, very entertaining, and it’s got some pretty good zombie carnage and gore too. I can’t wait to see Romero’s next Dead film!
Horrible characters, bad CGI gore and worst of all, just plain lazy.
Romero needs to retire.
I think Geoge A. Romero set out to make a comedy/zombie movie. As a zombie movie, it wasn’t bad. But as a comedy, that didn’t balance out well. This movie is littered with flaws, no doubt about that. But it was quite entertaing. Kinda slow sometimes but the zombie carnage was great. They could’ve dumbed down a bit on the CG gore, but sometimes it worked very well. All In All, If your a George A. Romero fan and you shut your mind off for an hour and a half, this could be a very fun, bloody zombie movie. A little underrated.
Shame on all of you for talking bad about this movie. Diary Of The Dead, now I can understand the hatred of that movie. I thought it was pretty good but not great. Survival Of The Dead is awesome though. Yes it overuses CG a little bit but to be honest it was original and I enjoyed it. I reccomend seeing this movie if you consider yourself a zombie fan.
The idea that there would be people determined to save the dead and trying to train them is entirely plausible and makes an interesting story. I love Romero, so I was biased going in and enjoyed the ride immensely!
I don’t know why this has gotten so much hate. I actually liked it a bit more than Diary, and I would place it on about the same level as Land. One thing I was expecting to be horrible was the CGI, but even that (besides a select few shots) wasn’t that noticeable.
Bring on the next Dead Film Georgie!
This is one of the worst films I have seen in a long time. I can’t figure out how he settled on the idea that the inhabitants of the island should be Irish – and then managed to get, quite possibly the *worst* Irish accents in the film!?
That was pretty sloppy, but the whole “story” is lazy, pointless and comes across as having been made up as they went along. Not a whole pile of it makes sense and the acting is *terrrrible*.
I just had to see it, because I am a fan of the series (I actually thought Diary was OK), but this really diminishes the value of the franchise.
I can only assume the proceeds of this venture are going straight into a retirement fund for himself and his family – and fair play to him. But this is particularly offensive to anyone who has enjoyed his work previously.
Now – gotta find a good film to block out having sat through this!!
It was allright. I liked the zombie kills but I would have liked more variety. The story was pretty cool. The CGI was a little cartoony when the zombie got a fire extinguisher to the mouth.
Romero has done so much better. It felt like there wasn’t much effort put into the look of the zombies. If your gonna come with a mediocre cast and little to no storyline, at least make the zombies look dead. This movie was still somewhat entertaining and worth a watch for die hard Romero fans. The characters were not too bad, but they had a hard time deciding their lead roles. If anything, it puts the classic “Dead” installments on a pedestal.
I heard some bad things about this movie, but I have to say it was a lot better than I was expecting. It was nowhere near as good as his classic trilogy, but it was better than Diary of the Dead. It had pretty Fall scenery and some decent gore scenes. The plot takes place three weeks after the dead return to life. On Plum Island, there are two feuding families. The O’Flynns kill the undead, and the Muldoons want to keep the dead around until a cure is found. A few National Guardsmen reluctantly team up with Patrick O’Flynn and try to survive on the island without running into zombies or Seamus Muldoon. If you love George A. Romero and his zombie movies, you may enjoy SURVIVAL OF THE DEAD!!!
George Romero can do better don’t be fouled don’t buy this movie it fu**en sucked!
this is diffently not his best films. this movie sucked sorry George we all know u can do better
Stinker of a story, terrible dialogue, and tons of crappy CGI blood and kills. It seems as if every kill shot is CGI blah. Some real gore towards the end was actually refreshing after so much of the computer rendered effects–sucks so bad. One scene involving a flare gun and a zombie impression of the Human Torch is especially poor and laughable. With humor that falls completely flat and characters that are impossible to give a damn about, this zombie movie is a plodding mess to be avoided.
eh…wasn’t a big fan of this one, though the violence/gore remained good. the story wasn’t very entertaining and it remained boring pretty much all the way through. liked Diary of the Dead and Land of the Dead both better than this one sadly.
This chapter was just mediocre compaired to the first 3 movies. Romero can do better.
The movie is a waste of time it was just talking, I wanted to see the zombies and the horror.
A few original zombie kills, but come on Romero… wtf is going on? How do you go from Land Of The Dead (excellent) to this and that p.o.s. handheld zombie flick you made? I really don’t understand.
Pass on this unless you’re a zombie fiend like me and can’t help yourself.
The worst Romero zombie flick yet.
This was more of a comedy than a horror film.It had some good kills in it.I’d say this is Romero’s weakest Dead movie.But I still enjoyed it.This had some cool idea’s but some parts were to cartoonish and odd.I’m going to buy it to support Romero.Hopefully he makes one more masterpiece to make up for this film.Still this is better than most of the Mainstream horror flicks.I give it a 7/10 just for the Sea-captains accent alone!He made feel like I was watching a Scooby Doo episode.