Subject: I have found a DVD that I think you would enjoy
|The Quick and the Undead |
Actors: Clint Glenn, Toar Campbell, Dion Day, Nicola Giacobbe, Brian Koehler
Director: Gerald Nott
Genres: Action & Adventure, Westerns, Horror, Science Fiction & Fantasy
Eighty-five years ago, a viral outbreak turned three- quarters of the population into the walking dead. Those who survived had to take up a new trade. That?s how the hunt began? For lone bounty hunter Ryn Baskin (Clint Gl... more »
Similarly Requested DVDs
Member Movie Reviews
Jefferson N. from BLAIRSVILLE, GA
Reviewed on 2/7/2012...
A viral outbreak has killed 3 out of 4 people on the Earth and made them into zombies. Yep, nothing new here, folks...You've been there and done that. Now, about a century after the outbreak, the world has been reduced to...Old West towns!?!! Yep...you heard me right. The amusing thing is...the cities look like the just shot the film on an old backlot. I'll give them credit for the idea of a "zombie western", but come on. Towns might be rundown, but they would still look like modern towns gone to pot...I don't think everyone would say: "Hey, let's make things look like the Old West just for the heck of it...because it would be cool." If this had been set in some parallel world version of the Old West...or gone the route of Cowboys and Aliens and had the film set in the Old West with zombies attacking, it might have been easier to digest. But, they didn't and it comes across as very stilted. There are a myriad of other problems...the actors are not very good and it's hard to get into the characters. This came out during the beginning of this curren glut of zombie movies and it's got the same flaws as most of them...lots of gore, but no characterization. What made George Romero's movies work was the social commentary as well as the fact that even though his characters might not have pages of dialogue, they acted human. These spaghetti western escapees make the zombies look smart and interesting. They're as cardboard as characters can be. It's not totally unredeeming...there are some interesting concepts of why some zombies are fast and some aren't...the fresh one's muscles still work so they can run, and the rotting ones can't move as fast...but that's about it. If you just want to see a lot of walking around on ghost town sets and zombies getting their brains blown out, *sigh*, then give it a look. But if you like some characterizaton with your zombies, look elsewhere. In fact, go watch Romero's Dawn of the Dead and wax nostaligic about the good old days of zombie films...Oh, wait, the ones from the 80's sucked too, other than George's. *sigh* Filmmakers...let the zombies lie in peace again for a while.
1 of 1 member(s) found this review helpful.
Interesting concept... Poor execution
Garry Robinson | Easton, Maryland United States | 09/17/2007
(1 out of 5 stars)
"Firstly, I would like to say that I would rather be EATEN by zombies than EVER watch this again!
If it were the last film on Earth I would personally burn it and go read a book.
As stated before by others, the concept is quite interesting. But the overall execution of the story simply fell flat on its decaying face.
It felt as if the acting was being done by high school students. High school students with no talent that is. The actors were wooden and lacked any interest in their characters.
I didn't care much for the special effects, but I did like the concept of the dead moving at varying rates of speed depending on their stage of decay.
If they had taken this good concept and, instead of placing it in a retro-future western shoot'em up, placed it in the actual wild west of the 1800's than maybe they could have pulled it off... MAYBE.
Quick and the Undead? I wish it were quicker.
Jason | Backwater, Alabama | 01/06/2009
(2 out of 5 stars)
"Biological warfare leads to the creation of a landscape littered with zombies roaming the land. An unidentified man gives himself an experimental injection with the hope of virus immunity. Bounties are paid to hunters for killing zombies; payments are based upon appendages collected at the kill site. Sounds like a great premise, right? Too bad the movie ruined it.
This movie is from A to Z bad, here are a few examples:
Acting - Not a single cast member utters a convincing line; they're horrible.
Blood - B should have been for budget, because neither ketchup nor koolaid is a convincing alternative for blood.
Cast - They're atrociously untalented, with preposterous accents and absolutely no tangible emotion whatsoever.
Direction - It's all over the map and disorganized.
Filming - Aside from one or two decent scenes, the whole thing gives off the feel of a high level high school AV club production.
Lighting - Dark and amateur at best, there are scenes in which some color scheme is attempted, but it never accomplishes what the director wants. And I think they fell in love with the color blue for some reason.
Makeup - Put on by a blind transvestite.
Protagonist - A cross between a weather-beaten desperado who carries his gun in a guitar case, and a poor man's Hugh Jackman from Van Helsing
Settings - The settings are essentially someone's backyard and one or two low rent properties.
Zombies - Aside from the soundtrack, the zombies were the only redeemable aspect of the movie.
Pass on this one unless you want to become a zombie in the little over an hour this movie will sap from your life."