Stevecorp Don't listen to the negative reviews

RipDelight This is a tender, generous movie that likes its characters and presents them as real people, full of flaws and strengths.

Matrixiole Simple and well acted, it has tension enough to knot the stomach.

Zandra The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

Bezenby I'm really getting burned out on modern day zombie films, so here we go with yet another walking dead film that sometimes is good, but for the most part falls into all the usual traps that drag these films down. Munch munch, argue argue, dwindle cast, dwindle, drama here, gut munch there, textbook doggy.A bunch of hugely unlikeable people survive a blast of some sort in Reno and find themselves surrounded by the living dead. There's our hero (I've forgotten his name), waitress Tori (who is really annoying), a tiny magician, and a jerk. At first thing go quite well for the film as these folks try and survive various zombie attacks, but far too soon into the film it becomes obvious that we're going to get a lot of bored folk trapped in a building surrounded by the living dead. Remember that bit in Dawn of the Dead where the characters gain power over the shopping mall and realise that all those material goods mean nothing spiritually when you're under siege by zombies? Well, that happens here too, within the first half an hour.Eventually some other survivors crop up, armed to the teeth, and there's some bickering and double crossing and what not. You've seen it hundreds of times before. Reamins doesn't do anything new really. They should have kept up the zombie attacks and kept down the interpersonal drama, because when these folk go toe-to-toe with the zombies, it's fine. When they're shouting at each other, you can't help but wonder how much time you've got left before you can switch it off. The stop start nature of the film really drags it down, despite some subtle humour and the introduction of super powered zombies.I'm gaining nothing from watching films like this now. If anyone knows of any recent zombie films that actually do anything new – give me a shout.

lkrl Not bad. I too, am familiar and enjoy the Zombie genre, but am totally unfamiliar with the comic book series of the same name. Having said that, there were a few zombie surprises, a couple of good scares and a handful of humorous moments. Romero quality? No. But we can't have 50 Romero's can we? The movie did well with castings, but seriously the depth of this didn't require any big names for attraction. I had a few problems with the 'extra' actors--someone maybe even called them 'locals. Zombies typically don't make eye contact while they eat your fingers--they don't have eyes--At least eyes capable of showing any emotion. If you are going to ask an audience to believe in your zombie world, then stay in character and make them act like zombies--instead of local actors working in rubber proths. The newfangled zombie has found some speed, (see I am Legend), and this is less threatening actually than the slow cadence of death moving in quietly enmasse. The lead did a fine job of holding zombie world things together, his older Heath Ledger appearance gave him away as an Aussy in American clothes right off the bat, though he handled it fairly well with only the occasional slip. Not a movie to pay for in the theatre, but for sure a good DVD/Blue Ray renting.

joe blow Cliché zombie movie setup. Something goes wrong unleashing the zombie plague on humanity with only a few survivors. The plot for this movie was not original, but it had a lot of potential. The acting was poor especially at times where it was suppose to make the audience feel emotion. There was no character development at all, and there were moments were the CGI was awful. I'm a lover of zombie movies, so I was able to bear with it and hope it would get better. It did not. It felt like a made for TV movie, and I would have to compare it to a Syfy movie. Transition from scene to scene for the most part did not flow smoothly. What really put the nail in the coffin were the same mistakes that most horror films make. 1) Unwarranted sex (or almost sex). 2) One of the main characters does something that makes no sense. At one point one of the characters decides to leave their gun on the bed and check out another room. To no one's surprise they is attacked by a zombie. 3) The o'so overused ending where they make it out, but at the very end before the credits there is a little something to let you know that it isn't over yet. It got a 4 from me, because it helped that it was a zombie movie and it had some entertaining moments.If you have an hour or so to kill with nothing to do or anything good on TV watch it. It is not boring, but it misses all of the little things that make a movie good and will have you asking why a lot.

deadlybreathe I would normally ignore a flick with so many bad reviews but I made an exception in this case and I'm glad I did. Film overall is far from being a good Hollywood masterpiece, but it's fairly enjoyable.The poor aspects of the film would be make-up, cgi and more then just a few mistakes in the plot and zombie behavior. Sure the expectation of standard zombies shouldn't be based on Romero's films, but I personally believe he's created an excellent character that other filmmakers should look up to.The acting wasn't as bad as others are saying. And the main characters seemed good and well fitting in. Dunno if a choice of Lance Reddick as an actor for the film did it any good as in my opinion a random and unknown guy would have blended in much better.The film didn't feel overstretched and throughout the 90 min feature new events constantly took place which made the film interesting.I've given it 6 out of 10 as it's so much better then an average B rated low budget zombie film.