IMDb > Darkest Day (2015) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb

Reviews & Ratings for
Darkest Day More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 3:[1] [2] [3] [Next]
Index 23 reviews in total 

53 out of 62 people found the following review useful:

Well worth avoiding

1/10
Author: JDtheBigGuy from United Kingdom
7 June 2015

One of the worse films I have seen in a long time. It was so bad that I just couldn't watch it through to the end.

At best the actors were mediocre and mostly well below average but the script certainly didn't help them.

The filming appeared like it was done on a home video camera and there were constant out of focus errors. If the shaky camera was on purpose they massively overused it. It also looked like the camera man/woman didn't know how to work the camera and was having a fit the whole time they filmed.

The rip off of every idea from 28 days later was obvious. I have seen better produced, filmed and acted home movies.

Was the above review useful to you?

35 out of 37 people found the following review useful:

Holy Crap

1/10
Author: tendought from United States
13 August 2016

AVOID this "movie"... The makers did a lot of work to give their endeavor a boost in rating. At the time writing this review 57% of all voters rated it a 10... 248 fake accounts!? I am a big fan of walker/zombie flicks and I watched a lot. Darkest Day belongs to the worst kind: amateur-cinematography, "actors" who can't act at all. No budget. No story. I guess even no script. No nothing... If u want to waste money and/or lifetime this movie is for you. If you don't want to get ripped off just skip this piece. It's even hard to fill the 10 lines demanded for reviews cuz this movie doesn't deserve that amount of work.

Was the above review useful to you?

28 out of 36 people found the following review useful:

Boyle And Garland Should Sue

3/10
Author: Theo Robertson from Isle Of Bute, Scotland
9 June 2015

Oh a zombie apocalypse ! Just what the world needs - not . You can understand why they're popular with low to no budget film makers because all it needs to take one is a small handful of extras , a quiet morning to film on some deserted streets and you've got a movie , one that you've probably seen a dozen times and were probably bored by the second , third or fourth time

So what's so different about this one ? you may ask and in reply all I can say is not much at all . If you've seen Boyle and Garland's 28 DAYS / WEEKS LATER there's very little new here . In fact the story starts with a young man waking up on a beach and the entire early segment is structured exactly like the beginning of Boyle's film on a mis en scene level except it's set in Brighton instead of London . Even the music is similar to 28DL . The only time the film goes its own way is in an inferior manner where the uninfected do illogical things like have a house party ! I know Brighton has a reputation for hedonism but this is too much on a credibility level . It also copies the illogical plot turns of 28 DL where a wimpish middle class student is able to kill battle hardened squaddies with his bare hands . I know Britain's military reputation has plummeted after Iraq and Afghanistan but you'd think a soldier would get the better of a student once in a while

Searching on the internet I found out DARKEST DAY cost less than £1,000 to make , was shot over a long period of time . In other words it's a labour of love Unfortunately as an audience member I am under no obligation to love any film . It might have worked better if it had a bigger budget , a more developed screenplay and a better cast but you could say that about most films that aren't Hollywood blockbusters

Was the above review useful to you?

25 out of 31 people found the following review useful:

Worst film ever

1/10
Author: digger01 from United Kingdom
8 June 2015

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I just don't know where to start with this... The script is terrible the acting is worse and the cameraman must have been drunk, half the shots are out of focus, I think they were looking for a shaky camera effect to cover the bad acting but all it did was make me dizzy. To say the acting was bad would be an insult to the term 'poor', the lead Dan played by Dan Rickard, kinda held it together but only just however they didn't receive any help from the script. In essence, this is nothing more than a zombie based movie poorly executed, its been done over so many times to the point where its boring. Personally I think if a classroom of 6th graders, armed only with their cell phone's could've achieved a more realistic production.

Was the above review useful to you?

21 out of 24 people found the following review useful:

A truly awful film

1/10
Author: neil-29353 from Ireland
23 June 2015

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Never has a film inspired me so much to come on-line and write a review. An absolute garbage film

Not sure if this is a spoiler alert but trust me nothing could spoil this film - just in case... spoiler alert!!!

Clearly a rip off from 28 days later but thats OK... The zombie genre is saturated now and its hard to be original - I'm actually OK with a little plagerism and remakes but people puuulease

The script was appalling. The acting even worse. None of the characters were any way likable...in fact I was rooting for the Zombies. After 5 mins...and had I been the lead character would have gladly gone back out onto the street to meet my demise rather than spend a minute with these other "characters". Seriously bad acting... like jaw droppingly "are these people getting paid for this bad!"

Look I could go on and on because it was so poor. I can't honestly believe it made it into a DVD and the filmmakers were actually happy to release this abomination. Did they not watch it back?

All I want to do is for those who are going to the DVD shop and see the cover "British Horror at its best"... warn you - put it back on the shelf and run away. Time would be better spent cutting your hair with a cheese grator than watching this garbage

I rarely turn off a film but after an hour - an hour of my life wasted - I turned it off and aghast at really how bad this could be.

Don't watch it - you have been warned!

Was the above review useful to you?

17 out of 19 people found the following review useful:

a student made film

1/10
Author: kjjames81 from wales
14 August 2016

I try not to write a negative review but this time i feel that i must. Where and how this film got over 5 in a review it must be the people that made it have done the voting. One of, no scratch that the worst film i have watched in such a long time that i felt the need to write a review. Firstly it looks as if it was made by some university students who had to make a film for their drama class, the acting was bad, the story was okay, the filming itself, half shaky cam was totally off putting. Let's just say that i am glad i didn't pay to watch this film, if i had bought it or rented it i would have been really cheesed off but as it was free, i still felt robbed and wanted a refund. Don't waste your time on this film.

Was the above review useful to you?

7 out of 8 people found the following review useful:

A boy wakes up on a beach... Terrible film, avoid at all costs.

1/10
Author: dillon18992 from UK
15 August 2016

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This is a blow by blow review though the first hour is basically the silliest 'fast zombie' movie I've ever seen. The protagonist, who is barely 20 and has a weak, slender build later manages to overpower a soldier armed with an l86(a2?), that's right, he manages to push the barrel up, disarm the soldier (who I'd assume is spec ops and would instantly go for his sidearm or knife), wrestle him to the floor (despite being about half his weight) then strangle him to death then strangle him to death, then runs off ignoring the fact that there's a rifle and lying on the floor right beside him. To summarise the first hour of the movie, this boy (and I mean it when I say it) wakes up on a beach with amnesia (overused) and runs after two people, he shouts for them to wait and despite the infected only really screaming comically running in this the guy out of the two attacks him anyway and then subsequently gets killed. He and the girlfriend? Of dead guy run back to a house filled with hipsters and one self proclaimed hard lad who won't shut up about his biceps. Eventually his (sister? seriously none of this is telegraphed at all to the audience, you're left to assume and hope you're right) somehow (maybe I'll find out in the last half hour of this movie) gets infected and after being taped up, then freed by her brother? Runs around the house trying to kill everyone until they throw her out a window. Now the option of leaving the city and going out to a house in the country (rather than sitting drinking beer until you pass out while playing nice loud music in the middle of a zombie infested city, throwing food at each other and generally getting on like zombie food rather than 'survivors') was on the table in the first 20 minutes but "it's a bit of a hike" despite the roads being filled with cars the only time they leave the house is when they're starving, to go to a supermarket half a mile away when there are houses all around for looting, even when the protagonist takes a rucksack of food off a random dead girl he's scolded with "don't do that, it isn't right" well gee, not like it's zombie apocalypse. It's also worth mentioning that the cameraman is terrible and doesn't seem to understand depth of field, for example; when two people are talking one will be in focus and the other will be horribly blurry. Maybe they wanted this 'unique art- style' but you use depth of field to isolate a character or characters, when there's a dialogue of two people, both should be in focus. So, the hipster squad; chased by a wholly inept military who decide to use a sonic device to lure the zombies out to chase the hipster team down (yet don't seem to use any military tactics like staggered reloads so everyone ends up out of ammo at the same time) or on their fallback position they hadn't rigged any clay more (this whole spelling correction thing drives me crazy when using actual words!) mines prior so naturally the soldier's 'cunning plan' (reminds me of the 'cunning plans' in Blackadder) completely backfires and most, if not all of them get eaten, when they could have just fallen back and flipped a switch. They have Chinooks, they have some expensive sonic zombie horde truck but not basic training or tactics; it's like they were made stupid on purpose, which is probably the case because they're outsmarted by 19-25 year old's at every corner, none with any sort of survival training. Even when the hipster squad decides to light a fire and stay outside for the night all of them go to sleep instead of setting watch schedules. Personally they'd be dead 10 times over if they weren't so amazingly 'lucky'. As well as that, even though the military have choppers, amazing sonic technology zombie horde trucks; they don't seem to have any sort of IR camera (which you can buy as an add-on for your phone for gods sake!) as you could pick up a group of hikers and differentiate from zombies on high res IR rather easy.

Yet another one of the hipster squad has died, from a half amputated hand; something that bears mentioning is that the hipster squad don't know how the virus spreads and seem to be immune so at worst this one guy would lose his hand, not his life. It just seems like the developers are throwing twists in to 'make it interesting', sadly this isn't working, it just makes the film seem sillier and sillier as I watch it. The skinny protagonist decides to split up from the hipster squad, surrenders to a soldier as he was given a prototype vaccine and may still be an infected carrier blah blah same old BS is on the ground, still manages to overpower another spec ops soldier; again ignores his rifle and then as the hipster squad magically arrive at their country house he manages to magically tel-e port (Good job spelling correct, maybe you should pick up a dictionary; both clay (no space) more and tel-e (no space, no hyphen) port will be in it, or you know; since reviews are moderated allow 'spelling mistakes' if someone check-boxes them and penalise users who abuse that system) to the beach where he started out, despite it being a two days walk. On this beach he sits down, contemplates life and then walks into the water (with no stones in his pockets) until he is completely submerged, apparently killing himself, when he could have just been shot in the head literally one and a half 'film minutes' ago. Cut to credits.

I want my hour and a half back, this film is a terrible copy of 28 days later with a bit of a twist.

Was the above review useful to you?

7 out of 10 people found the following review useful:

Neither Great nor Bad Zombie Film

5/10
Author: Claudio Carvalho from Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
17 September 2016

A young man called Dan (Dan Rickard) wakes up on a beach with amnesia. He wanders through a derelict town and stumbles upon a couple. Out of the blue, the man called Ben is murdered by a crazy man and Dan and the woman called Lisa (Christianne van Wijk) flee. She brings him to a house with survivors and he befriends the group: the leader Sam (Chris Wandell), Kate (Samantha Bolter), James (Richard Wilkinson), Stephen (Christian Wise), Will (Simon Drake), Adi (Adrienne Wandell) and Satch (Simon Bennett-Leyh). Meanwhile the army is taking over the town. Soon Adi is infected and their friends are forced to kill her. When a group goes to a supermarket to scavenge supplies, they stumble upon the army and Dan and Lisa escape together. But a sniper kills Lisa and Dan subdues and kills the soldier. He finds a wanted note with his photo in the pocket of the soldier. Why is the army hunting Dan down?

"Darkest Hour" is neither a great nor a bad zombie film as most of the reviews indicate. It is an entertaining low budget movie, with deficiencies in edition and camera work, but that can be disregarded considering it budget. The action scenes with shaking camera are annoying and unnecessary. But the story is good and the performances are not bad. My vote is five.

Title (Brazil): Not Available

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 3 people found the following review useful:

What a complete stinker! Absolute GARBAGE.

1/10
Author: kingslandbungalow from Cowtown, Alberta
31 August 2016

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

The poster for "Darkest Day" says it all - "British Zombie Horror at its best" - if this is a separate genre then there's no hope at all!

The movie blatantly rips-off 28 days movies - the main character awakes after an apocalypse with no memory of what has happened or how he got there. It's so blatant I can't believe the movie was green-lighted - but then again looking at the credits it seems to be a vanity/conceit piece for the main actor (who I think is the director too). This explains why the main actor is soooo wooden and the directing total crap.

Characters seem to behave in unpredictable and unlikely ways, stare at the camera, overact or underact and are essentially unbelievable.

There is an amazingly ineffective army, an amazingly over-effective character who single-handedly beats up a whole hoard of zombies, dumb characters who get over the death of their friends and family in a heartbeat, and loads of really bad special effects. A character also seems to die from a broken arm for some reason...

At the end the main character kills himself for no real reason - I only wish he'd saved us all the time and done it in the first scene of this turd of a movie.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Very decent movie

9/10
Author: negi-63202 from England
25 October 2016

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This movie was obviously made on a very small budget that was probably spent mostly on digital cameras, fake blood and all the cans of beer the characters drink in one of the first scenes, Darkest Day is a plucky if hardly original British zombie film. Like so many other films and TV shows involving an undead menace, it focuses on the group dynamic among a group of so-far uninfected strangers, although this iteration goes somewhat against convention by having all the survivors be students in their twenties instead of a more heterogeneous mix of ages and types. This project was overall very decent and had good dialogue. Nevertheless, bits of it, like the editing, are pretty great, and the use of Brighton and the South Downs makes for a refreshing change of location.

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 1 of 3:[1] [2] [3] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Ratings External reviews
Official site Main details Your user reviews
Your vote history