First of all, I must say that I am more than baffled at how this movie could get to bear a title like "Day of the Dead 2: Contagium", as it is nothing in the likes of the George A. Romero classic "Day of the Dead". They have nothing in common, aside from having zombies in them. And in fact, then this 2005 movie is a slap in the face to the original 1985 movie.That being said, then of course I had to watch it, because I am a zombie aficionado. I didn't even know that it existed before coming across it by sheer random luck on a visit to China back in 2005 or 2006. I have watched it twice since then; once when I purchased it, and once in 2016, as I just had to check if it was as bad as I initially remembered it to be... And it is!The story in "Day of the Dead 2: Contagium" takes place at Ravenside military hospital, where a lethal bacteriologic weapon gets out of control and turns people into zombies. Half a Century later, people at the facility finds a closed vacuum flask which holds a mysterious container inside. Once opened, the residents become exposed to a DNA altering substance.Right, well the story was mildly adequate, albeit it wasn't anything impressive in any sense. It had the right intentions, but just lacked conviction and execution. And directors Ana Clavell and James Glenn Dudelson were just fighting an uphill battle here.The effects in the movie just scream low budget to the core. And most of the times the effects just came off as being fake and laughable. And unfortunately so was the zombie make-up. It just didn't really work out all that well. And a zombie movie suffers a terrible blow when the effects are not in place.Another thing that made the movie come off more ridiculous than it had to was the flying specks of light when the container was opened. What was up with that? It just brought the movie down to a very laughable level. As did the thing with the collective mind and shared physical trait. Why would a group of people see and feel the same things just because they were exposed to a chemical? That would mean that all zombies would essentially see all the same things. No, it was just so illogical.The acting in the movie was as to be expected, adequate enough for what it was at this level of movie-making."Day of the Dead 2: Contagium" is by no means a noteworthy addition to the zombie genre. And if you do enjoy zombie movies, then you should stay well clear of this movie, as it do no justice at all to the 1985 Romero "Day of the Dead" movie, nor does it bring anything memorable to the genre. And I just can't fathom how this movie got to bear the "Day of the Dead" title.

In 2005, Hollywood came along and remade George Romero's classic DAWN OF THE DEAD. In terms of remakes, it was one of the best ever made. Why? Because the filmmakers wisely respected what the original did and then went about telling their own version. Shortly thereafter, Hollywood came along again. Bringing with them Mena Suvari, Nick Cannon, and Ving Rhames (who had previously starred in DAWN), the filmmakers probably figured they could work some magic out of remaking Romero's DAY OF THE DEAD. When that turned out to be a big old bust, someone out of desperation chose to make a sequel to the remake. The film opens in 1968 (probably a reference to the original NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD) at Ravenside Military Hospital, in Pittsburgh. A mysterious viral outbreak has turned many of the inmates into Z-heads! The army gets called in to shoot the zombies and then bomb everything. Which begs the question, why didn't they just start by bombing and leave it at that? Anyway, a cannister containing the virus escapes then gets lost in the middle of the... desert? Excuse me, but there are no deserts outside Pittsburgh. Anyway, flash-forward 40 some years. Now a group of mental patients stumble across the cannister (which looks in relatively good shape- little rust or dents). Once back in their hospital, the cannister gets opened and... same old same old! Though it's hard to imagine, this film is even WORSE than the DAY OF THE DEAD remake. Now, don't go thinking that's a recommendation to see the first one. Both are equally excruciating. If possible, dig a hole at least twenty feet deep, drop both movies in, douse them in gasoline, burn them, and then bury them. You will have performed an exorcism worthy of Max von Sydow! And if you don't get the reference, go back and watch THE EXCORIST. A way, way better horror movie!

Okay, this I just can't believe... Whomever had the balls to take a stupid script about some idiots in a mental institute who do nothing else but nag to each other and then near the end of the movie mess around with some extras in bad zombie-make-up and slap it with the title 'Day of the Dead 2: Contagium'... should just be castrated! The zombie genre will be better off without balls like these. This flick is embarrassing. And it's a goddamn insult to Romero's complete franchise. I'll give this poor attempt at a zombie-movie two worthy points for that one orderly guy turning into a walking, talking, gut-munching, red-blooded, infected steak haché. He's one of the most wonderfully retarded zombies I've ever seen in a movie. But if you don't fancy seeing that, then please, whatever you do... do *not* give this movie a chance. Not even out of curiosity.

Going into this film, I had a lot of preconceived notions that it was going to be really, really terrible. I had inflicted some bad viewing on my friends and they, in turn, gave me this movie as payback. But, I have to admit, even as low budgeters go, I actually was interested in the plot and the characters.Don't get me wrong, this is pretty low budget. I had read this film had a 9 million dollar budget, which is totally insane. If that's the case, the director spent maybe 1 million on the movie and the rest on himself for some beach-front property.I think the biggest problem is the title. It's rather misleading and while certainly not a sanctioned, cannonical Romero film, you don't see much to connect it to the "of the Dead" series. Basically, the usual zombie-creating bio-weapon is "misplaced" and after a military shoot-out at a quasi-hospital(I like hyphens), some time passes and the installation is rebuilt as a looney bin for the seriously ill as well as people with anger issues and cutters. As you'd expect, most of the staff are huge jerks and you know who's going to get what's coming to them a mile away. One doctor has a "crew" of patients he treats using unusual methods, which are never wholly explained. Some of the patients are going to be released soon as "cured." While out cleaning up the grounds(I've never heard of the mentally ill being used as groundskeepers), one of them stumbles across the bio-agent hidden inside a thermos. It is eventually opened, and the chemical is inhaled by the doctor and his patients. But here is where it differs from the usual zombie fare. Although their bodies get "sick" and eventually shut down, they can still think, reason, and talk, plus they have a mental bond with one another. When a few of the zombies take to flesh-eating, it turns them more hideous, and they, in turn, try to force-feed the others so they will turn also. Meanwhile, an orderly is bitten by one of them(the sexy Emma) and the rest of the non-infected patients either go on to become zombies or food.I found the mental connection the most interesting concept and that some tried to remain as normal as possible while the others evolved into intelligent, non-shambling flesheaters.I'm almost ashamed to say I enjoyed this as much as I did after hearing so much negativity about it. Definitely worth a look as long as you don't try to make any connections to Romero's work.