IMDb > Day of the Dead (2008) (V) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Day of the Dead
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Day of the Dead (V) More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Interleaved...
Reviews from users who voted this title less than 4.5.
Reviews from users who voted this title less than 4.5.
Page 9 of 15: [Prev][4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [Next]
Index 142 matching reviews (256 reviews in total) 

0 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Only if you REALLY love bad zombie movies

2/10
Author: sergio-arauzo from Spain
2 September 2014

One of the worst films I have ever watched with an absurd plot full of holes. Just comparing this film with any George Romero film (even the weakest), Resident Evil, 28 Days after or any other good zombie film is offensive. This film has only one thing: The name, which is used to attract Romero fans to this very bad film. We can see zombies with very Cheap make up, I am pretty sure you can see better ones any Halloween. Action scenes are really awful and boring. The actors do not fit in their role. I like Mena Suvari in other films, but she does not fit in her role. You can enjoy some of the dumbest dialog lines of film history, and the story is full of inconsistencies in characters actions, again and again. I mean, it is not just that they are dumb, a lot of characters in horror films are dumb. It is that they are not consistent, they do one thing and the next minute they are doing the opposite for no reason. In addition, yes, they are really dumb. Trust me, there are hundreds of better ways of spending 85 minutes.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

Avoid

2/10
Author: koomy from United Kingdom
16 November 2010

I was a bit hesitant to watch this but I liked the modern remake of 'Dawn of the Dead' so thought I'd give it a go as I was interested to see a modern take on the original's plot.

Despite the name, this film has nothing to do with the original.Instead you have the standard 'army sealing off a small town' plot, but despite a miscast Mena Suvari as a army general(!) and annoying stereotypical black guy it still looked like it had potential. This all disappeared as soon as the zombies turned up. There seemed to be no internal logic; is it airborne or passed on by bites?, why does everyone change at the same time?, why do people go from normal to covered in open sores in a split second?, why are zombies not only running but jumping about like the modern version of vampires?

By the end it was like watching a film based on a video game, and a bad one at that. Avoid.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

Dead id dead...

2/10
Author: poe426 from USA
11 April 2008

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

There was a time when it seemed that Miner would develop into a director of note. His half-baked "remake" of DAY OF THE DEAD lays to rest, once and for all, any such notion. Dumb is dumb, and bad film-making speaks most eloquently for itself. It boggles the mind to think that someone given all the tools (not to mention a proved blueprint and a competent behind-the-scenes crew) could screw up so badly. The "talent" (the on-screen players) are a big part of the problem: whatever their respective talents, acting ain't one of 'em. To a man. I've seen Public Access shows better than this. (In fact, I've written and directed some of them, myself.)

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

NOT a new ROMERO remake

2/10
Author: MovieWiz66 from United States
29 March 2008

I don't know why this is listed on Romeros page. I guess because he is given some credit on the original script. Still,I was,as usual,very dismayed at the overall quality of this film. I guess once you are used to Romero..nothing else comes close. Zombies don't run,don't think and don't use weapons..LOL. Still,the movie was at least watchable but barely. If you are totally bored and are in the mood for a zombie film and cant find a Romero,Fulci or 70's Italian zombie flick,then this will do..LOL. In a pinch it is OK. I do not,however,plan to buy this to add to my collection. The acting is a bit overdone and the film just sort rumbles along without really giving you the apocalyptic feel that most good zombie flicks seem to do. This just seems to be mindless shooting,violence and gore..which will probably appeal to the younger generation as most seem to think that is what constitutes a good movie these days. Hint for new directors or wannabe directors: There is a part of the movie that is called character development that is what makes us really relate and care for the people in the film..this film has none. Thank you.

Was the above review useful to you?

75 out of 117 people found the following review useful:

A Disappointing Excuse For A Romero Remake

3/10
Author: Stephen Romain from United States
14 February 2008

Like many of you, I got really excited when I heard about this film. After the incredibly good effort that was the Dawn of the Dead 2004 remake, this film is an extremely cheap attempt to cash in on the name. It's extremely important to keep in mind that this film it's not a remake as much as it's a by-the-numbers zombie/infected flick with a fancy name on it.

The film stars Mena Suvari and has a short cameo by Ving Rhames. While I'll watch anything with Mena Suvari in it - even "Loser" - this is a stretch. While Suvari does a decent job with a flat, lifeless (no pun intended) script, the other actors are incredibly stiff, awkward and unconvincing. Rhames plays basically the same character he played in the Dawn of the Dead remake, although he only appears for the first 15 minutes or so.

The film itself is extremely boring and the action and special effects are haphazard. I can honestly say that I've never felt so bored during an action sequence before. The "climax", if you can call it that, runs on for about 5 minutes more than it should. Even worse, the film doesn't even attempt to redeem itself by being a tad funny.. it tries, but fails with flying colors. The script is absolutely ridiculous, not even making relative sense in the world of the film.

If you've ever wondered what "vegetarian" zombies eat, feel free to watch this movie. If you want to see a new spin on Romero, wait for Diary of the Dead to come out in wide release by the man himself. I'm giving this one a three for Mena Suvari alone.

Was the above review useful to you?

8 out of 11 people found the following review useful:

Day of the Dead

3/10
Author: Scarecrow-88 from United States
8 April 2008

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

A zombie virus, which signs are flu-like symptoms leading to severe nose bleeds with those infected having worm-like organisms which attack the brain cells(..created by biological scientists for the military), is spreading like wildfire through a little town in Colorado, and a small band of immune survivors try to outlast the raging, leaping, balletic hordes in pursuit of fresh meat.

Military soldier Sarah Bowman(Mena Suvari, who deserves better avenues for her talent)must find a way, along with fellow soldiers Salazar(Nick Cannon, the stereotypical black dude speaking gangsta and hip-hop, so that this horror film could somehow pull in the African American demographic)and amiable vegetarian Bud(Stark Sands), to escape the town hospital littered with zombies attacking their family members and medical personnel. While bodies pile up and the zombies feast feverishly, Sarah's brother Trevor(Michael Welch)and his hottie Nina(AnnaLynne McCord)find a radio station with the massive DJ(Ian McNeice), and a married couple, Mr and Mrs Leither(Robert Rais & Christa Campbell)holed up inside. Attempting to contact anyone across the airwaves, Trevor and Nina find a bloody napkin meaning that someone inside the station with them is infected with the virus. Sarah, Salazar & Bud, along with the sneaky, untrustworthy Dr. Logan(Matt Rippy)who might have knowledge on the cause of the zombie outbreak, will flee into the streets from the hospital in the hopes of finding a vehicle to drive..Logan informs the crew that he arrived in a taxi, lying because he actually has an SUV(..for which he drives off in leaving his mates to fight off a group of zombies coming straight at them). Behind the wheel of a jeep the three will appropriately hear Trevor's cries across the radio..if they are to make it through the night, they must find shelter, with one appropriately located in an abandoned Nike factory, which might just hold a secret facility for certain scientific personnel studying a biological weapon.

Not a remake in the slightest to Romero's film, Miner's uninspired, cliché-ridden zombie film lacks any depth whatsoever. Much of the bloody carnage happens hidden from the viewer. If a victim is attacked, zombies form a collective group over his/her body where we can not see the flesh eating. This particular film is heavily dependent on CGI effects which often fail to convince, and certainly lack the quality of Savini and Nicotero's make-up grue. The sequences which were the most groan-inducing to me were when Molotov cocktails were used to set fire to them. Many of the scenes where bullet-fire destroy zombie skulls CGI fails to generate the same shock value the squibs have on exploding heads and torsos in Savini's gore effects. To be honest, Miner's film, like "Resident Evil:Extinction" will find a nice home on the Sci-fi channel where these kinds of films are made for cable all the time. I can see why this film never got a wider release..it simply fails to present anything worth noting. I think the only audience, a forgiving breed who love their sub-genre faithfully, this might find are the zombie fans. Ving Rhames is wasted as Captain Rhodes, although he gets some "zombie time". Stark Sands tries hard with Bud, somewhat modeled after Bub from the original Romero film, but this film fails to generate in that respect as well. Miner has some moments, particularly the hospital slaughter where the zombie go on a rampage, and Suvari tries, but this film is simply a failure.

Was the above review useful to you?

15 out of 27 people found the following review useful:

what an absolute pile of s***

3/10
Author: Brad Tyler from United Kingdom
13 February 2008

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

i am one of the most forgiving viewers when it comes to horror, i actually like really bad films. however, when a film tries so hard to be serious, but winds up being one of the most ridiculously awful, messy pieces of garbage ever committed to film, i have to give it 1 star! why?, no WHY? was mena suvari and ring rhames in this? how did that even come about? it defies all belief, just like zombies running up walls and ceilings! the dialogue is a joke. for example (in one scene involving the "friendly zombie" bud.. (anyone who had even seen the original day of the dead (which so happen to be my all time favourite horror film btw!), will know his name was bub! not bud!) anyway...

nick's character: "why is thriller over here not trying to eat us?" pointing at the "friendly zombie" sat next to him in the jeep

mena's character "he's a vegetarian"!!!

OK, that is not even a joke, it's a serious line not played for laughs, as earlier that character told mena he is in fact a vegetarian, and if that was meant as a joke, the direction was SO bad it certainly didn't come across that way. i can honestly say there is not a single redeeming feature with this film, not one. again, not usually my style or place to say, but in this case, i really hope steve minor is never allowed near a film set again. as for the producers. with such turd-shaped gems as creepshow 3, day of the dead 2 and now this piece of garbage under their belts. i hope they come to their senses and realise they should NEVER, EVER attempt to produce a film again. it was like some bad 80s US soap with zombies.. laughable! i'm not gonna waste any more time talking about it. AVOID AVOID AVOID!!! seriously!

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

What's Romero got to do with anything?

3/10
Author: Coventry from the Draconian Swamp of Unholy Souls
26 October 2008

Zombie movies are more popular than ever since the beginning of the new Millennium, and we particularly notice an undeniable revival of George A. Romero's legendary trilogy of the dead. The Man himself released two more genuine sequels to his own franchise ("Land of the Dead" and "Diary of the Dead", which can't live up to the older movies but are still very much worth checking out) and no less than two of the three original classics already received modern makeovers. Actually, they aren't prototypic remakes to be honest. Zack Snyder added a lot of personalized style and ideas to his interpretation of "Dawn of the Dead" in 2004 and, well, to link this straight-to-video reworking of "Day of the Dead" to Romero's legacy would be blasphemous and a complete disgrace. This isn't a remake of the brilliant 80's milestone, but a mundane and inconspicuous splatter B-movie that simply needed an eye-catching gimmick in order not to dive into oblivion straight away. So what they did here was steal the title and borrow a couple of story elements from Romero's film (like the obedient zombie and the underground laboratory), but otherwise this is just a lame and uninspired zombie movie like there are thirteen in a dozen nowadays. Nearly the entire population of a small Colorado town overnight becomes infected with a hideous virus that causes their bodies to rapidly decompose and inflicts an insatiable hunger for human flesh. The army is called in and young soldier Sarah Bowman, who's from around the area, discovers a link with scientific experiments that took place in an abandoned factory nearby. There's absolutely nothing original about "Day of the Dead", unless you consider a vegetarian zombie to be innovative. To me, that was simply the most ridiculous and embarrassing moment of the entire movie. The CGI-effects look horrible and this is yet another film that doesn't comprehend that zombies need to move slowly in order to look menacing! The rotting cadavers here run faster than African athletes and, for some reason, they can even walk upside down on the ceiling! I mean, were they actually trying to make the movie look stupid? Just trying to imagine Mena Suvari as a hard-boiled and stern army girl is already impossible and, even though his name parades on the DVD-cover in thick bold letters, Ving Rhames' role as Captain Rhodes is hardly more than a cameo. That was perhaps the biggest disappointment of all, since the Captain Rhodes character of the original movie is one of the notorious "bad guys" in the history of horror. This is by far the worst thing Steve Miner ever got associated with. Otherwise he's the respectable director of several modest competent horror movies, like "Friday the Thirteenth Parts 2 and 3", "Warlock", "House" and "Lake Placid".

Was the above review useful to you?

15 out of 28 people found the following review useful:

What a waste of time

3/10
Author: kaput450 from United States
26 April 2008

I give this piece of crap a 3 for cool head explosions and the big fat DJ guy. Otherwise this is a huge waste of time. No zombie rules are followed and everyone gets zombified way too quick. I had to keep watching it until the end because it was so rediculas. I did not like anyone in this movie and it would have been great if they all died. I have to keep saying things about this to make the quota but please avoid this show at all costs. My favorite quote in the movie was "Bleach kills almost everything" Everybody who has ever seen a zombie movie knows that bleach will not cure a zombie. Low rent piece of junk. I want my free rental fee back. Thats how bad it is!

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Bad on so many levels...

3/10
Author: dunxy from Australia
17 October 2008

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Well i must say that the original day is one of my all time favourite movies of all time, i never thought this current "re-hash" was ever going to come close, just as i didn't expect the recent dawn re-make to be up to scratch, it was however infinitely better than this.

I truly found myself coming very close to using the FF button during this movie as i found it that boring and poorly made. To summarize.

1.The spider man like behavior of many of the zombies, plain retarded.

2.The instant a person enters the "zombie state" they look like they they have been dead and decomposing for weeks, this happens in mere frames! 3.Overuse of very poor quality CGI.

4.None of the gun sounds are close to realistic,i don't know if they are using uber low charge blanks or what, but all the weapons sound like cap guns.

5.Un-millitary like behavior from supposed soldiers.

6.Un realistic weapon physics,most notably full automatic firing of an ak-47 like gun (pilfered from gun store) with one hand fully out stretched arm, try that in real life... Of note do they even sell fully automatic rifles like this in gun stores int he USA? They also managed to get an UZI from same gun store, i don't live in the USA but I'm pretty sure they are not sold in gun stores.

7.I have to mention the lack of ANY visible substance coming from the "missle engines" after they break the ends off, i think somebody forgot to add these effects in.Rapid release of any highly compressed gas will be visible.Nore is there any audible sound again WRONG.

Even a very poorly made re-make of the original movie, or the original full script (which i hoped is what this movie would have been) would have been a whole lot better.I cant think of anything positive at all about it.

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 9 of 15: [Prev][4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Ratings Awards
External reviews Parents Guide Plot keywords
Main details Your user reviews Your vote history