Bridge of the Doomed

Wow what the hell was that, amateur in every way imaginable. Save your time and money, it's a one a done for whoever made this. I'm actually annoyed I watched it.

The story is pointless, seems like a undisciplined low iq primary schooler wrote the script, the cinematography isn't much better. Whoever wrote the last review must've been a part of the film because it's horrible. Aside from that it's a bunch of has-been actors who have really fallen from grace to be a part of this.

Credit where credit is due, unfortunately none is due here. There was no hook and nothing to keep things in any way interesting, no coherence at all.

Another film funded through indiegogo because no one in the industry is stupid enough to give them money.

The writing was horrible. The so called acting was ridiculous. I read some reviews and I honestly have to wonder what movie they actually watched. It could not have been this incredibly ridiculous excuse for a movie. Bad script, bad bad bad acting and childlike special effects. Don't waste your time watching this absolute garbage. The acting is by far the worst part of this waste of time. I don't understand how anyone could think this was "Fun" or "Entertaining". It is neither. They may have had fun making this so called movie, but I guarantee if you watch it, you will be sad that you wasted over an hour of your life on this bad joke.

The script is rough, like no one other than the writer looked at it before they started filming. The dialog is cluncky, and much of it is pointless.

The zombie makup is decent, whoever did the SFX did a good job with the mackup and gore. The music is generic but pretty good. Where ever the movie was films was picturesque.

As a veteran, watching these types of movies is just painful. Would be so difficult to have had a military consultant on set to show you how soldiers Actually behave? The weapons dicipline is pathetic, these idiots cluster up like a JV soccer team, they maintain No type of security, they keep letting people watder off by themselves, and they all act like a bunch of college fraternity bros. Soldiers do not act like this. Stop making movies like this.

The movie tries really, really hard. I give it an A for effort. Unfortunately it just never really comes together. It's hit an interesting concept. A squad of soldiers must hold a bridge during a zombie outbreak. The zombies aren't their only problem. There's also a demonic creature that lives under the bridge that also proves to be a lethal. The movie delivers plenty of action. There are numerous battles between the soldiers and the zombies. There's also a film is also suitably gory. The acting is mediocre to bad, but I can get past that in a movie like this. Ultimately the movie lacks focus. There are several confrontations between the soldiers and a refugee camp in the woods nearby that never really go anywhere. Then there's the beast under the bridge. It's a completely unnecessary addition that never fully develops either.

Overall the movie is a decent watch for zombie fans. We've seen a lot better but we've seen much, much worse.

Lured in by a psychotronic-sounding title, I sat down for this low-budget effort and immediately got pulled up short. Now, I'm not naive enough to expect filet mignon efforts on a potted meat budget, but I did expect to have a reasonably good time without too many rough edges and seams showing to distract me from the movie. Not so. The first clue that this movie was going to be a mess was the fact that it's list of executive producers was probably longer than the cast and crew COMBINED.

Really. I lost count after 60. The movie was produced by Mahal Brothers Productions, which apparently relies heavily on crowdfunding and isn't above using the bigger donors to fill out minor roles or as extras. So, you have professional actors like Michael Paré delivering the goods next to overweight crowd funders delivering lines with all the subtle nuance of particleboard. In any other venue, this talent disparity would be fine (high school or community theater production), but in a mainstream film I do expect a modicum of professionalism; there's a big difference between a professional actor who can't act vs. A non-actor who has been shoehorned in because they contributed a few grand to the film's budget. I'm a firm believer in the old maxim about lots of cooks and broth, so I can't help but wonder what other machinations these execs did to make the movie worse than it was. A zombie apocalypse of unspecified origins is the reason we have a group of soldiers going to secure and/or destroy a key bridge. That's after we get almost 30 minutes of scenes of people belching out exposition or being massacred by zombies, little of which has to do with the bridge. Once we get to the bridge, things get marginally better, with an unspecified monster underneath that begins dispatching the soldiers. For some reason, the zombies have gotten out of the cities and are stumbling around this rural landscape, so they're a threat as well. Add in a hostile group of survivors, John Birch types who wouldn't like authority figures like army personnel anyways, and you should have enough conflict to generate interest, right? Nuh uh. This movie somehow manages to be boring even with all these factors. I have to wonder if this movie was some sort of tax write off, or simply created to fill the world with product. It's utter lack of entertainment seems to point to this.