Survival of the dead reviews thread

[MinionZombie]

So this is already out in UK, with no US release ever happening? I can't keep the rumors/discussions on that matter straight around here. R2 UK DVD out March 15th, with sod-all extras. Apparently the guy who did the extra features for Diary of the cut is currently editing the special features, but Optimum wanted to cash-in on the release of Zombieland (also on March 15th in the UK), which you can understand from a business stand point, but from a fan stand point it's annoying that I'll end up double-dipping to get the special features. That said, if we'd gotten it in the cinema, I would have spent almost the £7.99 the R2 DVD will cost anyway, so I'll treat this barebones DVD in that mindset. So I'd imagine the R1 DVD will have all the extras later this year after the VOD and small theatrical runs you chaps are getting.

[clanglee]

Oh well. . I guess here in the states we'll just have to wait till it releases over there and then. . . ummm. . . find a way to see it somehow. . . . but how could we possibly do that? I mean it would take some kind of strange machine that allows information to be shared almost immediately globally. Where could we find such a device? and why don't the producers ever take that into account?

[MinionZombie]

Oh well. . I guess here in the states we'll just have to wait till it releases over there and then. . . ummm. . . find a way to see it somehow. . . . but how could we possibly do that? I mean it would take some kind of strange machine that allows information to be shared almost immediately globally. Where could we find such a device? and why don't the producers ever take that into account? You could also do something us Brits have to do all the time ... import the DVD.

[clanglee]

You could also do something us Brits have to do all the time ... import the DVD. Gotta have the right kinda player for that. . . .no go there boss man. Oh I'll buy the DVD when it comes out. . .I am a completionist. But I'll be damned if I wait any longer than I actually have to to see this movie.

[MinionZombie]

Gotta have the right kinda player for that. . . .no go there boss man. Oh I'll buy the DVD when it comes out. . .I am a completionist. But I'll be damned if I wait any longer than I actually have to to see this movie. Handset hack, dude ... handset hack. Piss easy to find on Google, just type in your player model and make with "handset hack" and you'll find something, possibly on VideoHelp ... but naturally make sure any site you go to is given a clean bill of health according to Site Advisor. I've unlocked three DVD players using handset hacks, and it works a treat. In fact, it's not even a hack, it's merely a production line code.

[clanglee]

Handset hack, dude ... handset hack. Piss easy to find on Google, just type in your player model and make with "handset hack" and you'll find something, possibly on VideoHelp ... but naturally make sure any site you go to is given a clean bill of health according to Site Advisor. I've unlocked three DVD players using handset hacks, and it works a treat. In fact, it's not even a hack, it's merely a production line code. Meh. . . I'll check it out. . but I'm sure my crappy blueray player won't have that option. it's really just easier the other way. and cheaper!

[krakenslayer]

OKEYDOKIE! Survival of the Dead arrived today and I just finished watching it. I've not fully been able to digest and absorb the film yet, but I'll give you guys my initial thoughts. WOW! I had LOT of fun with it. The biggest pleasant surprise was the characters: I've read lots of reviews that bemoan the corny accents and cheese-ball dialogue (which is fair enough, but didn't hinder my enjoyment at all), but the one thing that no one ever mentioned was just how well fleshed-out the characters were. Okay, it's not like The Shawshank Redemption, but in this movie Romero spends more time properly fleshing out the characters than in Land and Diary combined. The Sergeant is, by far, the best Romero hero since Peter in Dawn. And major peripheral characters, although most are deliberately cartoonish, are nonetheless given time to exhibit their personalities and grow on us to some degree. The character development felt a lot more like that in Day, where we cared when Fisher gets his brain blown out, than that of Land and Diary where the deaths of Gordy and Motown were just emotionless events. There was also a lot more action than in Land and Diary, as expected. The action is competently handled and exciting. The CG gore was nowhere near as bad as I'd been led to believe, mostly being used to add additional blood to headshots (the Flaregun scene was the only one that looked really cheesy), and there's nothing as obvious as the Zombie Priest in Land. The underwater zombie scenes were awesome! The cinematography really stood out to me as being, far and away, the best of any Romero film since The Dark Half, and it is probably the slickest-looking, picture and lighting-wise, of the Dead series. The step up from Survival in this regard is, for obvious reasons, bigger than the step up from Night's black and white to Dawn's day-glo colours. It is a beautiful looking film. Aside from the hokey dialogue and accents, Romero really played this one as well as he possibly could have, given the constraints of finance and a short shooting schedule. It was very old school Romero, like we've not seen in a LOOOONG time, and several of the issues I had with Land and Diary have been rectified. There were a few weak points to it, but as far as I can see these are mostly attributable to the low budget (which is apparently more than Diary but a lot less than Land and Day). The film could have been longer, for a start: the pacing is excellent but there is only so much tension and gravitas that can be accumulated in an 86 minute run-time, anyone looking for an epic like Dawn, or a doomy drama like Day, is going to be sorely disappointed. The short running time affects the film in other ways: a couple of times, events occurred that seemed a little jarring, as if they hadn't quite been set up properly. Nothing as obvious or illogical as the scene with Stephen rolling on the ground with the airport zombies in Dawn, though. But this, to me, was a sign that time was tight on set. Nothing that affected my overall enjoyment though. I would also like to have seen more downward-spiralling of society in the opening, while the characters are on the mainland. Romero gives us some tantalising glimpses of abandoned highways and docklands, but I would have liked to have seen more. Three weeks in, commercial TV and 3G internet are still running (which corresponds to the period just before the opening of Dawn), so I'm assuming most people are still holed up in private homes and/or are being re-homed in rescue stations. The movie only touches very lightly on this and it would have been nice if Romero could have fleshed out the world as well as he did the characters. As I said before, however, budget was the issue here. The humour really did work for me. There are a few scenes that would have been totally stupid if I'd gone in expecting something serious like Day, but as I expected, this was Romero in Creepshow mode, and with that mindset it was a fucking blast. The comic timing for some of the set-pieces is excellent. Sitting alone, I laughed aloud more than a couple of times. And the last shot is probably the best finale scene of any of Romero's films, hilarious and poignant at the same time. I thought Land and Diary were pretty good, but I have to say that Survival is a far, far more entertaining movie than either of those. I'm struggling to resist the urge to say it was even more entertaining than Day, because it was certainly more "fun" and action-packed than Day, but comparing it like that would be misleading because it is by no means as finely-crafted, deep or "epic" as that classic. I will say this, though: Survival of the Dead is Romero on a strong upswing. No, it's not as good as the original trilogy, you're gonna have to manage your own expectations there, but it is 100% by far the best of the new films, and proof (at least to me) that Romero's career is not on an unstoppable downward spiral. If Survival can be this much more enjoyable than Diary, then I can finally allow myself to hope that his next one will be a true classic. Get out there and see it.

[MagicMoonMonkey]

OKEYDOKIE! Survival of the Dead arrived today and I just finished watching it. I've not fully been able to digest and absorb the film yet, but I'll give you guys my initial thoughts. WOW! I had LOT of fun with it. The biggest pleasant surprise was the characters: I've read lots of reviews that bemoan the corny accents and cheese-ball dialogue (which is fair enough, but didn't hinder my enjoyment at all), but the one thing that no one ever mentioned was just how well fleshed-out the characters were. Okay, it's not like The Shawshank Redemption, but in this movie Romero spends more time properly fleshing out the characters than in Land and Diary combined. The Sergeant is, by far, the best Romero hero since Peter in Dawn. And major peripheral characters, although most are deliberately cartoonish, are nonetheless given time to exhibit their personalities and grow on us to some degree. The character development felt a lot more like that in Day, where we cared when Fisher gets his brain blown out, than that of Land and Diary where the deaths of Gordy and Motown were just emotionless events. There was also a lot more action than in Land and Diary, as expected. The action is competently handled and exciting. The CG gore was nowhere near as bad as I'd been led to believe, mostly being used to add additional blood to headshots (the Flaregun scene was the only one that looked really cheesy), and there's nothing as obvious as the Zombie Priest in Land. The underwater zombie scenes were awesome! The cinematography really stood out to me as being, far and away, the best of any Romero film since The Dark Half, and it is probably the slickest-looking, picture and lighting-wise, of the Dead series. The step up from Survival in this regard is, for obvious reasons, bigger than the step up from Night's black and white to Dawn's day-glo colours. It is a beautiful looking film. Aside from the hokey dialogue and accents, Romero really played this one as well as he possibly could have, given the constraints of finance and a short shooting schedule. It was very old school Romero, like we've not seen in a LOOOONG time, and several of the issues I had with Land and Diary have been rectified. There were a few weak points to it, but as far as I can see these are mostly attributable to the low budget (which is apparently more than Diary but a lot less than Land and Day). The film could have been longer, for a start: the pacing is excellent but there is only so much tension and gravitas that can be accumulated in an 86 minute run-time, anyone looking for an epic like Dawn, or a doomy drama like Day, is going to be sorely disappointed. The short running time affects the film in other ways: a couple of times, events occurred that seemed a little jarring, as if they hadn't quite been set up properly. Nothing as obvious or illogical as the scene with Stephen rolling on the ground with the airport zombies in Dawn, though. But this, to me, was a sign that time was tight on set. Nothing that affected my overall enjoyment though. I would also like to have seen more downward-spiralling of society in the opening, while the characters are on the mainland. Romero gives us some tantalising glimpses of abandoned highways and docklands, but I would have liked to have seen more. Three weeks in, commercial TV and 3G internet are still running (which corresponds to the period just before the opening of Dawn), so I'm assuming most people are still holed up in private homes and/or are being re-homed in rescue stations. The movie only touches very lightly on this and it would have been nice if Romero could have fleshed out the world as well as he did the characters. As I said before, however, budget was the issue here. The humour really did work for me. There are a few scenes that would have been totally stupid if I'd gone in expecting something serious like Day, but as I expected, this was Romero in Creepshow mode, and with that mindset it was a fucking blast. The comic timing for some of the set-pieces is excellent. Sitting alone, I laughed aloud more than a couple of times. And the last shot is probably the best finale scene of any of Romero's films, hilarious and poignant at the same time. I thought Land and Diary were pretty good, but I have to say that Survival is a far, far more entertaining movie than either of those. I'm struggling to resist the urge to say it was even more entertaining than Day, because it was certainly more "fun" and action-packed than Day, but comparing it like that would be misleading because it is by no means as finely-crafted, deep or "epic" as that classic. I will say this, though: Survival of the Dead is Romero on a strong upswing. No, it's not as good as the original trilogy, you're gonna have to manage your own expectations there, but it is 100% by far the best of the new films, and proof (at least to me) that Romero's career is not on an unstoppable downward spiral. If Survival can be this much more enjoyable than Diary, then I can finally allow myself to hope that his next one will be a true classic. Get out there and see it. You've summed up the whole movie pretty well there Krak. I liked this more than Land, and it definitely felt more like a Romero zombie flick of the 70's 80's type. A bit disappointed at the level of gore, but budgets must I suppose. Although I love Diary, this is more like the Romero you all crave. Worth the wait imo. Thoroughly enjoyed it for what it was.

[major jay]

Do you two, Minion & Kraken, think low expectations have much to do with you enjoying it so much? I'm just curious because that always seems to be a big factor.

[chuckroast]

I watched it last night and again this morning. I must say, I thought it was even better the second time around. Waiting over a year to see this, I tried watching it with no expectations. It didn't disappoint me. I pretty much have to agree with krakenslayer's review. The cinematography was really well done. The last scene would make a great wall poster.

[krakenslayer]

Do you two, Minion & Kraken, think low expectations have much to do with you enjoying it so much? I'm just curious because that always seems to be a big factor. I think it's not so much a matter of expecting a bad film, just not expecting something like Dawn and Day; it's not an end-of-the-world epic, it focuses on one small-ish story, and yeah it's a little cheesy and rushed-feeling in places. But it's a good, entertaining movie that does most things right and doesn't overstep itself, while still throwing in enough action to keep us entertained. If you watched it without knowing it was Romero, I guarantee you'd have a blast and come out of it happy - as far as zombie movies in general go, it's awesome - but if you went in expecting Romero to come out with anything in the same league of epicness as Dawn or Day, you'd be setting yourself up for a disappointment. My list of favourite Romero zed flicks now looks like this: 1. Dawn of the Dead 9.5/10 (tied) 1. Night of the Living Dead (tied) 9.5/10 2. Day of the Dead 9/10 4. Survival of the Dead 8/10 5. Land of the Dead 7/10 6. Diary of the Dead 6.5/10 Survival is a full point up from Land, and one point down from Day, so it falls perfectly midway in the scale of awesomeness between the new and old movies. Here's hoping it's a stepping stone between them, who knows.

[Danny]

just watched it, did that feel like an extended pilot for a tv series for anyone else? if the walking dead takes off you never know. I think this felt more like a sidestory to the traditional zombie apocalypse movie. we have an established world. this is whats going on when the main characters are heading to the rich kids mansion in an rv. I really liked that. i didnt go in with low expectations since id heard no bad stuff about this one. I had heard it compared to a western, but honestly it was more like a contemporary take on the period drama. Honestly i am pretty sure from the film this isnt going to be the last george sets in this universe, probably not even the last with the same characters, like i said, this feels like a pilot, like next week we tune in again on showtime or hbo or something and next week the 3 protagonists head to some other wierd situation that just happens to be occurring during the zombocalypse. It wasnt trying to be this big dramatic thing and instead was this small movie that really worked pretty well. It feels like land but with a more certain control behind it, if you get what i mean. land always felt a little like a made for tv movie, i love it, but it felt like certain people were working on it thinking "this will make me money" whereas this was more "ive got an idea for something a bit different, heres how im gonna do it" im not gonna ramble more than i have, its not a big epic world falls apart flick like dawn or day, its a small side story that anyone who likes romero films will really enjoy, it doesnt overstay its welcome and leaves you wanting more, just like any good movie.

[MinionZombie]

Do you two, Minion & Kraken, think low expectations have much to do with you enjoying it so much? I'm just curious because that always seems to be a big factor. I think it's not so much a matter of expecting a bad film, just not expecting something like Dawn and Day; it's not an end-of-the-world epic, it focuses on one small-ish story, and yeah it's a little cheesy and rushed-feeling in places. But it's a good, entertaining movie that does most things right and doesn't overstep itself, while still throwing in enough action to keep us entertained. If you watched it without knowing it was Romero, I guarantee you'd have a blast and come out of it happy - as far as zombie movies in general go, it's awesome - but if you went in expecting Romero to come out with anything in the same league of epicness as Dawn or Day, you'd be setting yourself up for a disappointment. My list of favourite Romero zed flicks now looks like this: 1. Dawn of the Dead 9.5/10 (tied) 1. Night of the Living Dead (tied) 9.5/10 2. Day of the Dead 9/10 4. Survival of the Dead 8/10 5. Land of the Dead 7/10 6. Diary of the Dead 6.5/10 Survival is a full point up from Land, and one point down from Day, so it falls perfectly midway in the scale of awesomeness between the new and old movies. Here's hoping it's a stepping stone between them, who knows. I think Kraken's summed my view up nicely there, although on the numerical scale I would swap Night and Day. I'll blog my full thoughts tomorrow.

[RJ_Sevin]

If you cast LAND as the final chapter of this new cycle of films, and pretend that Sarge sometimes goes by the name of Brubaker, it all fits together quite nicely. Far and away George's most visually stunning movie. There are some drop dead gorgeous shots in SURVIVAL.

[CooperWasRight]

Mixed bag...Some of it is really good...Some of it is really bad. But its good to see George still can write humor... "Always have something up my sleeve" being and example of unexpected wit.