Surprisingly incoherent and boring

So much average

There is definitely an excellent idea hidden in the background of the film. Unfortunately, it's difficult to find it.

This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.

There's something faintly ludicrous about the opening shots of this 'found footage' entrance into George A Romero's entry into his 'Living Dead' series. A live news broadcast is interrupted when corpses in the background come back to half-life and start attacking those around them. To me, found footage works best when you don't see too much – the characters on screen reacting to something out of the audience's vision works very well in that style. Fully made-up zombies fit better into a more stylised, 'professionally filmed' scenario.Things don't improve hugely when we meet a film crew, including actors playing actors playing both in front of, and behind the camera. 'Hilarity' ensures when two cast members 'have to pee', leaving the rest to view on the news reports how the dead are coming back to life. Amongst the teens, we have a uproariously well-spoken elderly ham Andrew Maxwell (Scott Wentworth) who clearly feels he's demeaning himself by appearing in the film being made. Whispering, identical horny youngsters, someone (Jason – played by Joshua Close) who films *everything* despite being repeatedly asked not to, posturing, wall-to-wall expletives – all the staples of a teen horror, and by Romero's standards, BAD. Apart from anything else, the advantages and unique qualities of the archive formula are simply not used here. The 'story' doesn't need to be told in this way, and is just a gimmick. Could it be Romero was seeking financial success by attempting to attract the youth demographic? It is explained at the beginning that, to make events more frightening, the young film-makers have added incidental music to events – and yet failed to edit out moments when (as is always the way in these things) the cameras start to fail and cut off.Anyway, as events fail to progress, I am gagging for some cadaverous zombie to limp in and violently dismember people. When they eventually turn up, they are half-hearted, under-made-up and easily dispatched. The alleged good guys remain personality-free, rather a growing band of posers 'doing what they gotta do'. How did Romero allow this to be made? To spend so much time with these people and for not one of them to effect any kind of personality for the duration is one thing, but when the undead action is as scarce as it is here, it makes for a hugely dull experience.Happily, the next in the series 'Survival of the Dead (2009)' is a huge improvement on this.

I don't understand why this movie enjoys such a vast following with cameos from the greats of horror. This movie was so poorly acted. We made fun of it the entire time thinking it would eventually get better.The pace of the movie is slow. Not in a "slow burn" way, just in a way where we spent the whole time wondering if it was a joke. The main character, Deborah, was either written so poorly as to be completely unconvincing, or just acted terribly. We expect a lot from our zombie films, especially from someone as prestigious as Mr. Romero, but this was just so upsettingly bad. The very end of the film has the best moment in it, and I won't describe it so it doesn't ruin anything for someone who might still want to give this one a go, but it is too little too late. In my opinion it's not a good use of your time.

The Zombies which rated this movie after DOTD remake or other "action" zombie movie/TV series viewpoints just don't get the point. Romero isn't after entertainment in this movie. This is a very metaphysical movie. Why filming this in handcam style? Because it is said in the movie several times that nothing happens if it hasn't been filmed. This is a philosophical discourse at least since Jean Baudrilard (spiritual father of the Matrix movies). Who in the new internet-television civilization believes anything if it hasn't been filmed and is been watched on youtube or television? This movie is compressed themes which Romero handled over his previous films in 95min runtime. Romero fans who actually have put a thought on Romeros films will very much appreciate it. It feels like his previous filmthemes put all together with a new theme which I described above and actually asks an uncomfortable question. If you grew up with Walking Dead, World War Z or Dawn of the Dead remake don't waste your time...

A group of college students from the University of Pittsburgh are filming a horror movie in the forest when they hear of an actual zombie epidemic on the radio. So, instead of a horror film for class credit, the main cameraman, "Jason Creed" (Joshua Close) decides to record a documentary for human posterity. Granted, this is not the best zombie movie George A. Romero has ever directed. The acting was uneven and the pace was rather slow throughout the movie. Likewise, the ending was also disappointing for a couple of reasons. First, the story was told by "Debra Moynihan" (Michelle Morgan) in the past tense which tended to take away some of the surprise value. Second, the decision to eliminate one of the characters by having her simply drive off could also have been handled better. It almost seemed like they were short on film and had to end the movie as soon as possible. Even so, I will take an average zombie movie like this one by Romero over some of the current low-budget zombie films on the market any day.