IMDb RATING
2.5/10
1.6K
YOUR RATING
The deceased have risen with the instinct to feed on the living as a family is trapped during a zombie apocalypse. Wales. Based on George A. Romero's classic "Night of the Living Dead".The deceased have risen with the instinct to feed on the living as a family is trapped during a zombie apocalypse. Wales. Based on George A. Romero's classic "Night of the Living Dead".The deceased have risen with the instinct to feed on the living as a family is trapped during a zombie apocalypse. Wales. Based on George A. Romero's classic "Night of the Living Dead".
Melanie Stevens
- Mandy
- (as Mel Stevens)
Johnathon Farrell
- Hess
- (as Johnny Farrell)
Ella Stockton
- Slugger
- (as Rorie Stockton)
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
In a nutshell: Community Theatre does a zombie play and then decides to film it. I must start off by saying I love bad movies. But this - I just couldn't even like it. I get it that the filmmakers tried paying homage to Romero throughout: with the funky camera angles, too close close-ups and claustrophobic, under-lit interior shots - but all-in-all, fail miserably in paying respect to the Master. Also, if the acting were any better, there might be a bit of redemption. Unfortunately, the locals that comprise the cast just don't pull it off. Run from this film. Run fast and run hard. Run just as you would from a flesh-eating horde.
Don't you just hate those reviews that say blunt things like 'This film is rubbish!'
I try to give a little more information than that, but, I have to say, that that is the crux of my review. For those ten people out there who don't know, the title of 'Night of the Living Dead' comes from the sixties zombie film, made by George Romero film and sporting the same name. The original sixties version is largely considered to be the 'start' of the modern take on the undead. This film, ie. The 2012 version where the film-makers have stuck the word 'Resurrection' on the end has NOTHING to do with the original or the official sequels spawned from it.
It is a 'homage' to George Romero's classic. Therefore it takes the best bits and tries to give them a 'fresh' new spin. And it fails.
Saying it's made on a 'shoestring budget,' would be an overstatement. I doubt they had a budget at all. The actors (and I use that term loosely) seem to be straight out of the amateur dramatics society and the camera is mainly hand-held all the way through, making it seem like your old home video footage of your holiday to Spain when you were a child.
One plus point: the gore is reasonable in the few places it's used, plus there's quite a shocking moment early on that I doubt many will see coming.
However, a couple of nice touches do not make a movie. The rest is just awful.
Don't be lulled into thinking it'll be good just because the film-makers stole a classic's title. It's just a poor attempt at cashing in on the name. If you like British zombie movies then stick to the 28 Days Later pair, or Shaun of the Dead if you want your gore with some light-hearted moments in it.
http://thewrongtreemoviereviews.blogspot.co.uk/
I try to give a little more information than that, but, I have to say, that that is the crux of my review. For those ten people out there who don't know, the title of 'Night of the Living Dead' comes from the sixties zombie film, made by George Romero film and sporting the same name. The original sixties version is largely considered to be the 'start' of the modern take on the undead. This film, ie. The 2012 version where the film-makers have stuck the word 'Resurrection' on the end has NOTHING to do with the original or the official sequels spawned from it.
It is a 'homage' to George Romero's classic. Therefore it takes the best bits and tries to give them a 'fresh' new spin. And it fails.
Saying it's made on a 'shoestring budget,' would be an overstatement. I doubt they had a budget at all. The actors (and I use that term loosely) seem to be straight out of the amateur dramatics society and the camera is mainly hand-held all the way through, making it seem like your old home video footage of your holiday to Spain when you were a child.
One plus point: the gore is reasonable in the few places it's used, plus there's quite a shocking moment early on that I doubt many will see coming.
However, a couple of nice touches do not make a movie. The rest is just awful.
Don't be lulled into thinking it'll be good just because the film-makers stole a classic's title. It's just a poor attempt at cashing in on the name. If you like British zombie movies then stick to the 28 Days Later pair, or Shaun of the Dead if you want your gore with some light-hearted moments in it.
http://thewrongtreemoviereviews.blogspot.co.uk/
I saw this movie just last night. I was expecting a repeat of so many other zombie movies, and was not going in with high expectations.
This is low-budget fare. So, no super-duper special effects! But this should not dissuade you from watching, since they did a very good job with what they had.
I liked how the story started with some people and then moved with one character, and then moved and stayed some other characters. What we get from this is learning how nobody knows what is happening. Some are running all the time (but to where?) and some are locked up in their homes (but for how long?) Everyone is scared and doesn't know what to do.
Since this is taking place in modern times, people expect to use their fancy cell phones to communicate with each other. But nothing seems to work. The government is seemingly out of the picture. The people in this movie are truly alone.
Though the story takes place in Wales, it was not relevant. A cabin in the woods could be anywhere. And someone coming to your door late at night, making noise and trying to break in, is terrifying.
A good horror movie, to say the least.
This is low-budget fare. So, no super-duper special effects! But this should not dissuade you from watching, since they did a very good job with what they had.
I liked how the story started with some people and then moved with one character, and then moved and stayed some other characters. What we get from this is learning how nobody knows what is happening. Some are running all the time (but to where?) and some are locked up in their homes (but for how long?) Everyone is scared and doesn't know what to do.
Since this is taking place in modern times, people expect to use their fancy cell phones to communicate with each other. But nothing seems to work. The government is seemingly out of the picture. The people in this movie are truly alone.
Though the story takes place in Wales, it was not relevant. A cabin in the woods could be anywhere. And someone coming to your door late at night, making noise and trying to break in, is terrifying.
A good horror movie, to say the least.
Well first of all, I don't really understand how this movie could even be allowed to carry the title "Night of the Living Dead", as it was a weak movie in comparison to Romero's timeless classic.
And how the movie have managed to score such a low rating, doesn't really come as a surprise, because this movie was nothing overly impressive. When I first heard about the movie I was thrilled, and had my hopes up. Why? Well, because of the title "Night of the Living Dead: Resurrection", it does have some big shoes to fill out, but it failed horribly to do so.
The story was simple and easy to follow, but it was rather pointless and didn't really peak at any point, and it didn't really throw any bones to the audience - in overall, a very uninspiring movie experience.
For a zombie movie, then there were surprisingly few zombies in the movie. And those that were there, weren't particularly scary, threatening or zombie-like. Apparently when you die, your eyes become shrouded by horribly fake contact lenses. That was just hilarious. The contact lenses they had opted to put into the eyes of some of the zombies wasn't even remotely anything near those milked-over eyes of the deceased - it was party contact lenses at best.
The acting in the movie was nothing spectacular, and it was clear that it was a low budget semi-amateurish movie, because it was like watching inadequately trained stage thespians trying to take their talent to the big screen.
Effects-wise and gore-wise, then "Night of the Living Dead: Resurrection" is nothing spectacular or particularly impressive. It didn't really make much use of either special effects or gore. So for all us gore-hounds, then our depraved cravings is better satisfied elsewhere.
However, for a low budget movie, then "Night of the Living Dead: Resurrection" isn't amongst the worst of low budget movies. There are far more questionable and ridiculous zombie movies out there. Just don't get your hopes up for this movie - as I did - you'll crash and burn fast and hard on this one.
I am giving this movie a 4 out of 10 rating because it was a good-hearted attempt at making a zombie movie on an amateurish level. The movie did have some good points here and there as well, but it just had set itself too far up by brandishing the "Night of the Living" title. Perhaps the movie should just have been named "Resurrection" or something else without the "Night of the Living Dead" title.
And how the movie have managed to score such a low rating, doesn't really come as a surprise, because this movie was nothing overly impressive. When I first heard about the movie I was thrilled, and had my hopes up. Why? Well, because of the title "Night of the Living Dead: Resurrection", it does have some big shoes to fill out, but it failed horribly to do so.
The story was simple and easy to follow, but it was rather pointless and didn't really peak at any point, and it didn't really throw any bones to the audience - in overall, a very uninspiring movie experience.
For a zombie movie, then there were surprisingly few zombies in the movie. And those that were there, weren't particularly scary, threatening or zombie-like. Apparently when you die, your eyes become shrouded by horribly fake contact lenses. That was just hilarious. The contact lenses they had opted to put into the eyes of some of the zombies wasn't even remotely anything near those milked-over eyes of the deceased - it was party contact lenses at best.
The acting in the movie was nothing spectacular, and it was clear that it was a low budget semi-amateurish movie, because it was like watching inadequately trained stage thespians trying to take their talent to the big screen.
Effects-wise and gore-wise, then "Night of the Living Dead: Resurrection" is nothing spectacular or particularly impressive. It didn't really make much use of either special effects or gore. So for all us gore-hounds, then our depraved cravings is better satisfied elsewhere.
However, for a low budget movie, then "Night of the Living Dead: Resurrection" isn't amongst the worst of low budget movies. There are far more questionable and ridiculous zombie movies out there. Just don't get your hopes up for this movie - as I did - you'll crash and burn fast and hard on this one.
I am giving this movie a 4 out of 10 rating because it was a good-hearted attempt at making a zombie movie on an amateurish level. The movie did have some good points here and there as well, but it just had set itself too far up by brandishing the "Night of the Living" title. Perhaps the movie should just have been named "Resurrection" or something else without the "Night of the Living Dead" title.
So many thoughts are flying through my head watching this movie, most notably how a film could be produced so poorly and approved for release. Perhaps that is the logic these days...Design a flashy cover, capitalize on a popular film title (i.e. Night of the Living Dead), and not give a damn about the quality/production of the film. I invested $20 on this movie somehow knowing in the back of my mind, that this would be a total and complete failure...and to my very surprise, IT WAS! Zombie film after zombie film, they all continue to outdo one another in terms of creating the most unrealistic, boring, waste of time. I simply cannot waste any more of my time or energy into this film, but on a final note if you want a classic zombie film, look no further than Tom Savini's Night of the Living Dead.
Did you know
- TriviaThe Village Shop in Scurlage, Swansea, was closed for filming but shooting was often disrupted by customers trying to get into the shop, believing it was still open due to the lights being on.
- ConnectionsFeatured in Fires We're Starting... (2015)
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Official sites
- Language
- Also known as
- Ніч живих мерців: Воскресіння
- Filming locations
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Gross worldwide
- $8,393
- Runtime
- 1h 26m(86 min)
- Color
- Aspect ratio
- 1.85 : 1
- 2.35 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content