Subject: I have found a DVD that I think you would enjoy
|Day of the Dead |
Actors: Ving Rhames, Mena Suvari, Michael Welch, Pat Kilbane, Nick Cannon
Director: Steve Miner
Genres: Mystery & Suspense
Nick Cannon, Mena Suvari and Ving Rhames star in this horror film based on the George A. Romero classic zombie film. A mysterious virus has infected the small town of Leadville, Colorado, and the military is brought in to ... more »
Similarly Requested DVDs
Travesty to see one of Romero's classic titles treated in th
Jenny J.J.I. | That Lives in Carolinas | 05/21/2008
(1 out of 5 stars)
"I honestly don't want to waste my time with this but I too have watched this film. I do enjoy George Romero zombie flicks and after watching this I thought this was a joke. More disappointed actually cause all I got was some rookie director coming up with a 'remake' of one of the master's well known title and jacking it all up. A rookie in the sense of trying to capture the dark, gritty, viciousness of the zombie epidemic as envisioned by Romero in his earlier films. Steve Miner has directed episodes of Dawson's Creek, (which explains some of this film's truly boring dialog and Ken and Barbie type characters) and Smallville (which has effectively turned Superman into a soap opera).What Miner has done here is show us that he can capture all of the plot lines, and zombie behavior previously shown in a dozen zombie flicks, put Mena Suvari (of American Beauty) in the lead and make a horrible horror movie.
While this film might appeal to young folks who don't understand the art as developed by Romero, those who do will undoubtedly turn away from this one after the first half hour. It only takes that long to get an idea of the poor characters. Suvari plays an army Corporal (who carries a gun with no bullets. Why even pull it out?) Ving Rhames has a small part, perhaps wise enough to not stick around. Suvari's character is remarkably calm in the face of danger despite her seemingly bad decision making. The rest of the cast are like refugees from a Dawson's Creek episode. Nick Cannon (Mariah Cary's husband) plays the part of the bad a.., machismo Army Private, and while not giving a particularly good performance, due in part to the horrible script, Cannon does manage to bring some charisma and toughness to the character.
The zombies seem to do extraordinary things one moment (like crawl on ceilings and run real fast-like the Dawn of the Dead remake), but when it comes to attacking the lead actors they seem inept. This picture doesn't do any justice to the zombie film genre. It ranks down there with the very low budget. The title was used to possibly draw attention to it's existence, nothing more.
Awful, needless remake
N. Durham | Philadelphia, PA | 03/14/2008
(1 out of 5 stars)
"You knew it was coming. After the surprise success of Zack Snyder's surprisingly good Dawn of the Dead remake, a remake of Day of the Dead didn't seem all that far off from happening. Well, now it's here, and it is indeed an awful, needless remake of George Romero's flawed 1985 classic. The zombie outbreak is caused by a virus that gets passed around like a cold, which is a nice twist in itself, but really doesn't get used to its full potential. The zombies themselves do all kinds of crazy things, from crawling on walls and ceilings to leaping around like Spider-Man. It should be noted that Day of the Dead isn't scary one bit either, and a majority of the gore effects (mainly the CGI head shots) are pretty bad, and the acting (from Ving Rhames, who is not reprising his role from the Dawn of the Dead remake, as well as Mena Suvari and a barely watchable and annoying Nick Cannon) is atrocious. There was potential here, with veteran horror director Steve Miner (Friday the 13th 2 & 3, Halloween H20) and writer Jeffrey Reddick (the Final Destination films) at the helm, but alas, Day of the Dead is an awful zombie remake that is a waste of film more than anything else. Alll in all, if you're a fan of the original or in zombie fans in general, you'll probably check out the Day of the Dead remake regardless, but don't say you weren't warned."
Dave. K | Staten Island, Ny | 04/09/2008
(3 out of 5 stars)
"First thing I wanna say is what the hell is up with the cover art? It just might rate as one of the very worst I have ever seen. There were others and all were bad, but the one they went with is easily the worst.
Don't go into Day of the Dead expecting a remake of the George Romero classic. This is a remake by name only; about the only thing the share in common are some zombies, the military and a couple of characters from the original. Most of the characters are created for this movie and the whole plot completely different. Day of the Dead 08 is only a remake by name only attempting to cash in on the success of the Dawn of the Dead remake and Romero's Dead flicks.
Day of the Dead is entertaining in how bad it was. Most of this will probably be lost on the audience since most of us won't be able to help, but compare to the two. As a remake Day of the Dead is a travesty of a film and complete insult to the original. But as a stand alone movie it's actually fun in how bad it is. I was able to put the original out of my head and take the movie for what it was; a silly zombie flick.
Day of the Dead features zombies that run, which is common these days, but they also are able to jump put windows, crawl across ceilings, climb over gates and also even use weapons. If anything Day of the Dead is more of a remake of Umberto Lenzi's Nightmare City. Those two have more in common than this does with the original Day of the Dead.
The screenplay was written by Jeffrey Reddick and it actually wasn't too bad, while most of his characters lack any depth, the script does have some fairly good moments. Again judging things on its own and not comparing to Romero's Day of the Dead, the script isn't too bad. It has elements that work and some that don't. So far I've liked Jeffrey Reddick and while this is easily his weakest script honestly it wasn't so bad. It does follow the typical Hollywood movie with the comedy aspect and some jokes were about 10-years too late, but overall it's an entertaining screenplay. Not great, but entertaining.
Director Steve Miner got his start in 1981 with Friday the 13th Part II and the following year did the 3rd installment. At the time Miner got his start there were many filmmakers just starting out in the horror genre and some others who may have been around for 10-years or more were at the peak of their career and making some of the best films of their career. So I suppose some filmmakers are bound to be left out in the cold and it seems Steve Miner was one of them. One thing that does surprise me is that isn't better known. He directed the first Friday the 13th with Jason as the killer and the first with Jason to get his Iconic mask.
Steve Miner seems to have gone back and forth between feature films and TV episodes. I do enjoy some of his work mainly his two Friday the 13th movies, but the problem with Steve Miner, which is good for Hollywood is he has no style of his own. Most of his films are just following the basic formula of another filmmaker; which also helps him land jobs when you need a quick cash in Steve Miner is the man to go to. If only he injected more of his own style in his work I think while he may not go down as one of the greatest horror filmmakers he would have had a much better career. He's shown flashes of originality, but he still does it by the books.
Steve Miner was the wrong choice for Day of the Dead; it lacks originality at every turn and he never manages to build any suspense or tension. There were a few scenes that could have worked better, but the zombies just roam around like a bunch of shuffling idiots. I assume Day of the Dead was meant to be a little campy, but it was just too much at times, thus killing any chance for a legit attempt at any suspense. The pacing of the movie is pretty good there is enough happening to keep the viewer from getting bored and while there were flaws with the script, with another director I do feel this could have been a lot better, not great, but better. But what we get is a movie that is rather bad, but entertainingly bad. Visually the movie is also weak, while it doesn't suffer from shaky cam syndrome the shot selections are kinda poor and sometimes it's tough to make out what's happening and the flashy editing doesn't really help matters.
Despite my comments I do enjoy some of Steve Miner's work in particular the two Friday the 13th movies he did. Most of my comments here were negative, but I do enjoy his work and I know he could do better. Not sure what went wrong on his part, but I do like some of his work, he just lacks originality.
The acting was fairly decent; none of the major cast members are bad. They put in good enough performances; the strongest coming from Mena Suvari as Sarah. Some say she didn't have the military persona down, but regardless I thought she did well and is the saving grace of the movie. Ving Rhames gives his usual tough guy performance and does well in a rather small role. Nick Cannon as Salazar while giving a fairly good performance is just damn annoying; his constant one-liners really aren't that funny with the exception of maybe one or two.
There is plenty of gore, but the problem is most of it is CGI, which is really annoying. Some of the CGI was fairly decent, but most were bad. Some of it looks like something you'd seen on Playstation 2. Even good CGI I'm not really into, but when it's poor it makes it even worse. Steve Miner is an old school guy I'm sure he could have been more creative and had some simple, but effective deaths instead of the poor fake looking CGI.
Day of the Dead was originally meant for a theatrical release, but ended up going direct to video, which isn't much of a surprise. Everything about Day of the Dead is DTV, but with that said I will admit to enjoying it. Again as a remake this is a travesty and an insult, but as its own movie it's sort of fun in how bad it is. Most reviews for Day of the Dead will be quite poor and honestly I understand why and I'm not even gonna attempt to defend the movie.
But with that said I did enjoy Day of the Dead as its own movie, because again outside of a couple of things this is a remake by name only. If you can view it as just another zombie movie you just might enjoy it a little bit. Sure Day of the Dead is rather bad, but it can also be fun."
It's not the worst but it's not even the best.
A. Escolar | 03/15/2008
(3 out of 5 stars)
"When I watched this movie, I was already forewarned how bad others think this movie is from the trailer was released until the time I watched it.
The movie tries so much as to re-vision the original Day of The Dead and incorporate the added thrills of 28 Days Later and the Dawn of The Dead remake. It would've been an okay movie if not for the gimics they put in to try add the scariness factor of the movie, instead of being scary it ended up weird.
In my opinion, it's not as bad as many zombie movies out there. Though, I prefer not to categorize this movie as a zombie flick, since it's more like a viral frenzy thing like that of 28 days and 28 weeks later. I must say that this movie is far better than what Uwe Boll could come up with, and the likes of Day of The Dead 2 and Return of The Living Dead 4 & 5.
It would've been a decent film if not for the wall crawling bit. Probably these were unused shots from Spiderman and Aliens films (those scenes would be great if they made a marvel zombies film on spiderman). It still boggles me how a legless zombie could leap so high.
The CGI of the movie was poorly done and the movie could be better without it. With proper angles and suggestive measures the scenes will be a lot better without involving the CGI bit.
The last 5 seconds of the movie is so corny kind of 70s TV horror shows that the filmakers try very hard for one last scare. It's so obvious and really degrades the movie.
The DVD covers should be replaced by the first poster released early 2007 though it's very clearly seen that the design was a rip off from Land of the Dead, it's still better than what is now being sold to the public. Honestly, the cover depicts on how the critics would rate this film and how many customers might feel after watching it.
If they only stuck with George Romero's formula it would've been an okay film."