Barb and her brother Johnny arrive late for the burial of their aunt -- and walk straight into a nightmare,with zombies... Barb flees the cemetery and is rescued by Ben, a local college student. The two seek refuge in the nearby farmhouse, where the laid-back residents aren't remotely prepared to have their lives turn into a nightmare.....It's only an hour and fifteen minutes long and Sid Haig is int, so I thought to myself 'why not?'. Its short and it would be funny to spot where all the 3D should have been.It starts off okay, we have references to the original Romero version, and the zombie action kicks off almost instantly. And then there more references to the original, by way of showing the original on TVs scattered across the movie, and this continues throughout..The film soon becomes tiresome, very quickly. We get the usual trope characters, nudity for no good reason, and really poor performances.Even the 3D parts are pointless, as there are hardly any in the movie. One saving grace is that I didn't see it in 3D, that would have been the iceberg on the proverbial cake.Of all the Romero remakes and sequels, Day of The Dead 2009, and Survival of the Dead included, this has to be the worse one I've ever seen.Really pointless, and a waste of time, even at this short length.

I watched the remake of George Romero's 'Night of the living dead' this morning and I certainly wasn't expecting much because I had read some reviews on it and judging by the 3.4 rating that it got, I wasn't sure I was going to like it.As soon as I saw that Sid Haig or 'Captain Spaulding' from the famous 'House of 1000 corpses' and 'The devils rejects' which I personally thought were two of the best films I've ever seen, I wanted to see it. I loved Sid as Captain Spaulding and I thought if he acted as well as he did in the 'The devils rejects' and 'House of 1000 corpses' then I would be satisfied. And I was. Obviously he wasn't as good in this as he was in the other two films but he still managed to make me laugh.Anyway, I'm not here to review Sid Haig's acting, I'm here to review the whole movie as a whole. People are saying that the acting was awful, I thought that the acting was good, they weren't going to win any awards or anything but it certainly wasn't terrible. I did not watch this film in the cinema so I did not see it in 3D. I've heard that the 3D was pointless so I'm not too disappointed to of not seen it in 3D. The effects weren't very good because the film had such a low budget and the gore wasn't very realistic. The film had a few flaws, such as there wasn't very much zombie action which I was a little disappointed about seeing as I am a big fan of blood and guts in horror films! Overall this is not a bad movie and I would definitely recommend it to any fans of zombie/horror films, it was fun to watch and it made me laugh in parts but it also had some saddening moments, which I'll leave to you to find out if you decide to watch this flick, and I definitely think that is worthy of a 7 and not the ridiculous 3.4 it's been given!

When I saw John Russo's raping of Night of the Living dead, laughingly released as the 30th Anniversary edition, I sat back, shook my head, took the VHS out of my machine and tossed it in a corner thinking, "No one can possibly screw up what is a classic film ever again." Wow, was I wrong. I saw this horrendous abortion of a film in 2-D, since it was released to a movie theater within 500 miles of where I live. Luckily for any theater, since I would certainly have demanded my money back. This was a horrid, terrible, stupid movie. How can anyone sit around and go "Yeah, we made a winner here." This, along with Dawn of the Dead 2: Contagium and Day of the Dead (2008), should all be taken, piled up and burned, the better that no one ever remembers them ever. They should be erased from the collective memory of humanity, yes they are that bad. Acting, bad. Story (Laughable) Bad. SFX. Bad. Even the momentary nudity from an obviously enhanced woman was bad. Just do yourself a favor. Watch the original or the 1990 remake and avoid all this garbage. Your brain will thank you.

Anyone who views this movie expecting a remake of George Romero's 1968 classic is sure to go away disappointed. Apparently the creative minds behind this film wanted to do a remake of the obscure 1950s film, I Bury the Living. But the producers, wanting to make the product more marketable, decided to turn it into a rip-off of the Romero film. Under the circumstances, I can understand the disappointment of many reviewers and the low ratings.However, if a viewer is willing to accept this film for what it really is -- a movie about the living dead that merely references the Romero film from time to time (as in the opening credits) -- he or she may be in for a pleasant surprise. Although it will never end up on anyone's 100 Best list, and I can't honestly call it a good movie, I did find it to be an entertaining, "not bad" movie.The premise is actually quite different from the Romero movie. Instead of being a worldwide plague threatening to destroy humankind, this zombie outbreak is limited at first to the mortuary of "Junior" Tovar (Sid Haig), who cannot bring himself to cremate the dead people whom he's embalmed. So he simply leaves them lying around the mortuary. Over a period of two years, the corpses begin piling up and eventually become infected with a mysterious virus that gets into his embalming fluid. They then begin to come alive again. At first Junior manages to control the problem with his trusty shovel, but it soon gets beyond his control.The main action takes place in the house of a local pot farmer, where the stoned-out characters are watching a broadcast of Romero's "Living Dead." They initially fail to comprehend the gravity of the situation, as a frightened young woman who has escaped from the zombies at Junior's mortuary seeks refuge in their house. The fact that the owner is engaging in illegal activity explains his persistent refusal to call the police. The house is finally overrun by zombies, and the remaining survivors flee with Junior (who has joined them and explained the source of the zombie outbreak) back to the mortuary. Then it turns out that Junior has been keeping a secret that threatens the lives of the other survivors.Some reviewers have called this the worst zombie movie ever made. I wonder if they have seen some of the stuff I've seen. In my opinion, it's head and shoulders above such Italian-made crap as Zombie 4: After Death and Zombie 5: Killing Birds. The question that I ask after watching such movies is: do I feel that I have just wasted 80 minutes of my life or do I feel like I've been entertained? And . . . would I consider ever watching it again? Thus far, I've seen this movie twice and have felt entertained both times. If you want to see a decent retelling of the George Romero film, then watch Tom Savini's 1990 remake. If you're willing to settle for some mindless entertainment with plenty of zombie action and some gratuitous nudity to boot, then you may want to check this one out.