House of the Dead 2

i seen house of the dead 2 on sci fi last night and i have to admit it is much better the part one. The zombies look pretty good. unlike the old one the zombies are believable on this one. you don't see zombies jumping around at like 10 feet int he air. The story line isn't that bad and the acting is moderatly good. It is just a shame that it didn't go to theathres. it could have probably did better then the original.

on the the main story of the movie. a scientist makes a zombie girl thru his experiments and she escapes and starts biting people. an outbreak happens and the movie goes of from there pretty entertaining. all in all i would defetily recamind this movie to people who are bored at home on an Saturday. i would have to give this one a 5 out of a maximum of ten.

My friends and I were in the mood for a really, really bad movie today. We weren't sure whether to rent 'Sasquatch' or 'Vampires vs. Zombies', but somewhere along the line we decided on 'House of the Dead II'. Obviously, we weren't expecting anything more than B-movie schlock we could point and laugh at, and that's exactly what we got. Better than the first one (as if that counts for anything!), House of the Dead II is an ultra-cheesy gorefest that will satisfy hardened zombie fans, but will turn off most mainstream movie watchers. However, the fact that you're actually on the internet, reading reviews for the movie 'House of the Dead II' means that, most likely, you are already a hardened horror/zombie fan, so you'll probably like this. It has all the 'zombie movie' goods: gore, decapitation scenes, naked chicks, gunfire, etc. Don't expect anything more than that and you'll have a decent time.

The original HOUSE OF THE DEAD was a joke! An insult to horror fans worldwide. Uwe Boll is and forever will be a hack in the Directors chair. There is no style or merit to his work. It is all plain, dull and over-the-top in a way that does not represent a keen and penetrating eye for Cinema.

With that said...HOUSE OF THE DEAD 2 raises the bar...slightly. The story seemed to be put together better and had a focus in mind. Borrowing elements from previous zombie flicks like DAY OF THE DEAD, 28 DAYS LATER and countless others...HOUSE OF THE DEAD 2 did not break any new ground. It did, however offer a story that was not painful to watch.

I'm a zombie-flick fan. =) I'll admit that readily, but it took me several months before I finally saw this movie because I was so utterly disappointed with the first one. In the first movie they had these incredibly annoying, flashing video game-sequences or something cut into the movie - probably to save money since that way they only had to make half a movie.

None of that crap here thank god! This was actually a pretty decent horror movie - with zombies! I say decent but for a zombie movie it was pretty darn good. The special effects were better than average for a zombie movie, so was actually everything about this movie. Even the zombies stagger better in this one than usual! The story has a good pace with plenty of "plot" and action through-out the movie, and the acting was surprisingly good. And with that I mean that some of the actors were actually really good and the others decent!

My verdict is that this movie is in no way a future classic by any means, but it is a decent horror movie and as far as zombie-movies are concerned - definitely a trend-breaker in the sense that it falls into the "decent"-category as a whole. Ususally zombie-flicks are either really good - or quite the opposite. So if you are looking for a decent horror movie or a good zombie-movie - see this one. But avoid the prequel at any cost...

First of all,I didn't see the first film cuz I saw a review of it and it looks completely awful.I saw the sequel and man I was very surprised:I liked it.Tons of action with no BS like slow mo,shaky cam,or jump cuts(Yes I'm looking at u Taken 2).I liked the two leads Ed Quinn and the always gorgeous Emmanuelle Vaugier.They kicked a$$ and they were likable.It does have some problems:Some characters are disposable and there are some stupid moments(no spoilers here).Anyway,its not as bad as some people say and it should've been in theatres unlike the first one.A $6 million production?The money is on the screen.It looks a lot better than a lot of films with 10 times that budget.It was entertaining!