Weakest of the Evil Dead films.
921743
Evil Dead II: Dead by Dawn (Sam Raimi, 1987)

Dead By Dawn is one of those films that makes you ask the question "remake or sequel?" over and over again while you're watching it. Raimi has changed the rules a bit from the first film in this one, but kept Ash, leading to the viewer's almost constant confusion.

In this episode, Ash and his girlfriend Linda (Denise Bixler) head up to the cabin that everyone (except, it seems, Ash) remembers from the original film. Ash discovers the book and the tape player, which again, everyone (except, it seems, Ash) will remember, and does exactly what he shouldn't do. With the expected consequences.

Intercut with this are scenes of Annie (Sarah Berry, who would later surface in the lovely CHUD II), the daughter of the guy reading the passages aloud on the tape, who has a vapid boyfriend, a need to get to the cabin, and the other pages of the book, which (conveniently) contain the spell to send the evil back where it came from. Of course, we end up with everyone at the cabin, waiting to become zombie food.

Dead By Dawn is by far the weakest of the three Evil Dead movies, but it's got its own charm; it's kind of The Evil Dead Meet the Three Stooges. It alternates between awful and hysterical. And it didn't have to be awful; it was immediately obvious from the first half-hour of The Evil Dead that Sam Raimi knew a camera lens from a plate of spaghetti, but either a good deal of the comedy here falls flat, or Raimi did portions of this film as a rush job (a quick skim of the list of goofs at IMDB gives the latter impression). It's also, obviously, meant as (perhaps its primary reason for being was) setup for Army of Darkness, a far superior film, and it has a great deal of archival value based on that. But as a standalone film, it's not all that great. **
39922
Sam Remi'es Evil Dead is a landmark film not just for its violent contant. (and when I mean violent content I mean it)But for its low buget quality, humor and apsoultly brillent photography. This film as set the standerd for all cult films. The DVD is good even theo I got the one that dosent have any goodies. The only goodies that are good is a brand new tranfer thats really all I care about. Because everthing thats on the other DVD you can easly find off the internet.
 WARNING: This film is rated NC-17 for extremely graphic prolonged gurosume violence including A extremely graphic rape scene (by a tree) extremely strong graphic gore, disturbing violent images,strong graphic violent images,graphic gore images,and strong language. this violence is bad and this film is for adults only.
2272442
This movie is very slow.  There are suggestions of things to come but they never really develop.  It seems to want to be an "artsy" movie, but fails both at that and as a horror movie.
2143691
This film, while entertaining is the worst film in the series to date. I really hope we get another in 2015 with Michael in it, seeing how at the end he escaped his tube. We see the hybrid daughter of Michael and Selene, who is the target of the lycans. Overall it is a film that fits the series, but lacks in story compared to the rest. It will grow on you I have to say.
2300271
Platoon of the Dead (2009)
 I often wonder why some Zombie flicks get made and this is one of them.  Platoon of the Dead has John Bowker as the director, the producer and the script writer.  Bowker has directed other low budget flicks and had a hand in various way in several other movies.  He has worked on enough films in enough different jobs that we should consider him to have plenty of movie knowledge.  I am sure that he does.  He hired a couple of experience actors to work on Platoon of the Dead which shows some movie smarts.
 Tom Stedham plays one of the support roles, that of an army sergeant.  He has vast experience in the movies with over 40 film credits.  Arianna Albright, also in a supporting role, also has over 40 film and TV credits.  Why these two did not receive the starring roles I cannot fathom.  Instead, Chris Keown, an actor with only a single movie credit-this one-received the role of the army officer in charge and Michele Mahoney, an actress with a very slender resume, got the primary female spot.  Mahoney has some skill as an actress but Keown apparently just happened to be around when filming started.  Amanda Bounds never utters a word.  The other actors have no noticeable skills for this kind of work.
 The sound is good, better than many cheaply made Zombie films but nearly everything else is horrible.  They use toy guns for the main players, toy Star Wars guns in fact.  They look like toy Star Wars guns.  They shoot rays in pulses that look and sound like the blasters in Star Wars.  They even have a logo visible that denotes their Star Wars origin.  Enemy soldiers are armed with regular contemporary fire arms that also shoot pulsed raysfrom shotguns and AR-15s.  The private has a combat tunic with the emblem for a major on the collar.
 This is a Zombie film with some kind of a demonic connection which is never very well presented.  The Zombie attacks consist of poorly made up people rushing the living in an unconvincing manner followed by absurdly bad munching.  Sometimes stuff happens that isn't connected to the rest of the story in any way at all.
 But there must be some kind of a market for this dreck that makes it worthwhile for even people who know better to make it.  The same basic people who made this made another horror flick a few years later using Tyler David (the private who cant act), Amanda Bounds and Michelle Mahoney again.  In the new film Bowker wrote the script and co-producer, co-writer and second unit director Joe Sherlock from Platoon of the Dead directed.  The same people just mixed up a little in other words.  Im figuring that in order to have the will and the wherewithal to make film #2 they must have made some money on #1. But you do not have to watch this un-rated one hour and 22 minute one and a half brain Zombie flick.  I did it for you.
253147
Okay, so let me get this straight, just because they took the title of the original George Romero film it gets to be based on it? I have seen the worst of the worst when it comes to Zombie flicks as I am a huge fan. Just as an idea, House of the Dead is, in my opinion, the absolute worst Zombie film ever. Why? Heavy duty budget and not even a small bit of the film looks like it was spent on the movie itself. Plain and simeple. Now, taking that logic, let's look at this train wreck of a film.

First of all, the characters in this film have the names of the characters from the original, and that is about where the similarities between the films stop. I so wanted this to be a good film. The "Remake" of Dawn of the Dead, while not really a remake, was at least okay to call Dawn of the Dead as it at least had the idea of the film taking place in a mall surrounded by Zombies and a group of people trying to survive a Hellish Zombie outbreak. As for this piece of crap, the only part of the film that takes place underground, supposedly, is the very end. Sarah is now an Army recruit, Dr. Logan, nicknamed "Frankenstein" in the original, is now a serious bad guy, Bub is also a member of the army who becomes a Zombie but will listen to Sarah because he is in love with her(?), and lastly, let's get to Rhodes. In the original film, you hated him. Joseph Pilato made himself a cult icon in horror for his portrayal of Captain Rhodes. His sharp tonged lashings and over the top paranoia made him the real bad guy in the film. His insanity was scarier than the Zombies this group of Scientists and Army outfit were trying to survive. Ving Rhames as Rhodes is horrid. I am sure it has nothing to do with him as an actor as he has been damn good in everything else he has been in, but this script so waters down this character, you really don't know what a jerk he was in the original.

The great things about the George Romero Zombie films is that the Zombies are not the center of the story, the people in the situation they are in are. I do have respect for Steve Miner in some regards as I am a huge fan of his film "House" but he really should have done something else with this film. The story is weak and ill conceived along with the dialogue, the acting is just bad, the special effects are not the greatest, and the zombies themselves are just rotten, and not in a good Zombie flick kind of way either. Really, if you want to see "Day of the Dead" go get the original and enjoy an excellently done Zombie film that is worth watching. Stay away from this garbage,, it really is that damn bad.
4754494
I was truly disappointed with this film.  I have come to expect more from Rob Zombie's movies, and this movie just didn't deliver.
4879608
First off, I am a fan of Zombie films and Ving Rhames but I found this movie lacking in several areas.  At 18:07, you can obviously see a guy casually walking in the background (...obviously not a zombie.)  The CGI affects, acting and editing made me feel like this was a B-movie at best.
4871174
I don't know this is like watching the chainsaw massacre series. when ever there's a remake and then part 2,3,4 and lord knows how many others. they just lose that eerie thrill.

It becomes repetitous you know? a group of ppl comes into an unknown area and then runs into some sick murderous creatures that kills about half of the cast and then you have to flip a coin on which person will live to the end.
THATS LAME NOW, CAN THESE DIRECTORS MAKE UP SOMETHING ELSE?
2372931
a film that was almost never made because of legal actions between romero and russo over the living dead name that thankfully was resolved and we get the classic 80's zombie film that has everything a zombie film should have . gore punks rock music acid rain running zombies talking zombies nude zombies real body organs as well as skeletons some funny scenes.

but the sequels suck really bad 2 was comedy 3 was romeo/juliet of the dead 4&5 were the worst and ruined the series only way to redeem the series is a remake or a direct sequel to the original bringing back the surviving cast members

it's partytime do you want to party again!
4103676
When all hell breaks loose towards the end of 'ZOMBIE', it's a hard film to beat in terms of it's perversely fun and thrilling 'undead-mayhem'. That's why it always pains me to sit through the  first two thirds which don't have much to recommended them. I do love the darkly effective synth score, and the opening in New York waters rocks, but much of the time is spent focusing on uninteresting characters, and therefore the film barely holds my interest. For every great shot of a Zombie emerging from the earth(love that one p.o.v. shot from a Zombie's eyes as it rises, dirt spilling away from it's view) there are several minutes spent with unattractive, uninteresting characters discussing things. It's not too much to ask that a low-budget exploitive Zombie-thriller have more than just sadistic gore scenes to recommended it(that eye/splinter scene still makes me wince). 'Night of the Living Dead' and 'Let Sleeping Corpses Lie' both have fleshed-out(sorry) characters to care about and root for, and Z-grade entries like 'Zombie Holocaust' and 'Nightmare City' are more even in their pacing. I guess I'm a little demanding when it comes to Zombie thrillers as I find them to be some of the most entertaining and comic-book-like in the Horror family tree, and I just think that Fulci's 'ZOMBIE' could have and should have been better.
4781999
The sequel to 'Resident Evil' has more actions, to be sure, but the film itself is done with less creativity and originality, repeating what you have seen in other better films featuring the un-deads, or zombies.  (The timing of the release is worst for we have seen recently 'Dawn of the Dead.')  And as to the actions, some must be really good -- I say 'must' because many scenes are poorly directed and edited, with a camerawork that shows the director doens't know how to create exciting fighting sequences, whether they are martial arts or bullet shootings.

Sorry if I sound harsh, but don't say I am missing the point.  I know the film is based on a Capcom game, and I know the story is only an excuse for the heroine Alice (Milla Jovovich who returned from the original) who must fight against a lots of zombies, in Racoon City which always looks like Toronto.  I'm not complaining about it.

Anyway, the Umbrella Corp. very strong company cause the infection of deadly virus that spread all over the city (which has only one bridge to access there), and it should be contained immediately.  Many citizens are turned zombies, who attack the following hapless people -- Beside Alice, tough (suspended) cop Jill (Sienna Guillory, 'Love Actually'), soldier Carlos (Oded Fehr 'The Mummy'), small-time crook LJ (Mike Epps, 'Friday'), newsreporter Terri (Sandrine Holt).  Plus you see Dr. Ashford (Jared Harris) and Major Cain (Thomas Kretschmann, 'The Pianist') who controls the military operation ruthlessly.

If you can ignore the numerous plot holes and inconsistent logics, 'Resident Evil: Apocalypse' has serious problems with it.  As I said, the fighting sections, which should be the biggest feature of the film, suffer heavily from the inept editing that use too many fast cuts and slanted camera.  Milla Jovovich, physically fit, is fine as the fighting heroine, but the camera fails to capture the essence of her, which was so eloquently shown in 'The Fifth Element.'

To make matters worse, though Milla is as beautiful as ever, the film's confusing (and unfocused) plot somehow refuses to use her to the full.  In fact, you don't see Alice on screen for considerable time, as the film heavy-handedly introduces other characters into the story.  And the way it does is so confusing that you find the film repetitive -- see how many times you have to see some people biting others, which causes inevitable results.  Many have already seen the consequence in the original, so once is fine.  Twice is unnecessary.

There are good things, though.  Sienna Guillory is a standout as the strong-willed police officer, whose acting is perhaps better than the star Milla Jovovich.  Perhaps her roles was cut short (especially the earlier part) because some of her behaviors in the opening parts look too adrupt.  They should not have done that (if they did, I mean).  And Mike Epps gives us a few moments of genuine laughs, which are always welcome to me.

But as a whole 'Resident Evil: Apocalypse' is a bit disappointment, because of its recycled ideas and mediocre actions.  What if Paul W.S. Anderson (who wrote the script, but went to direct 'Alien vs Predator') directed this?  I don't know, but perhaps, just perhaps, made it more effective than Alexander Witt, who was the second director for pefectly choleographed 'Pirates of the Carribians.'
4393130
Sorry but I don't feel this is the best of the Hammer Frankenstein series.  That honor belongs to REVENGE OF FRANKENSTEIN.  I even found CURSE more satisfying.  The film starts with the mad Baron, wearing an ugly mask, decapitating a critic of his work.  Considering he had been sort of heroic in the previous film, where did this Baron suddenly come from?  The writing in this series was very inconsistent.  The Hammer DRACULA series is much better overall.
  Anyway, the movie seems more interested in a look at society's evils and less on the Frankenstein legend.  All the Baron does is transplant a brain from one man to another.  The man who created life and transplanted souls is little more than a mad doctor in this film.  And having Frankenstein rape the woman was totally out of character for the Baron, thrown in by the producer.  None of the actors wanted it used.
  True it has all the famous Hammer expertise.  It looks very atmospheric and gothic, is well acted and directed.  But it left me wanting to see a real FRANKENSTEIN movie.
1349727
I love classic horror films, but this movie just didn't deliver.  Only five or so minutes of this movie are worth watching, and I hardly ever find myself saying that sort of thing about any film.
1917861
After learning of their existence, the humans have set out to destroy all vampires and werewolves, save for a few specimens that they plan to use for biological testing. Selene, the vampire death-dealer, awakens 12 years after being captured to discover that she now has a daughter, a vampire/werewolf hybrid who is the last of the Covinus line. Together, they are the only hope for survival for their dying breed! 'UNDERWHELMING' is a better title for the third entry in this struggling series, which places action and special effects ahead of story and character in another pointless chapter. AWAKENING is the least favorable of any of the sequels, boasting the worst looking computerized creatures yet in a tiring display of cartoon violence. The mythology between the two clans that once captivated audiences seems like an afterthought now as the direction of the series becomes increasingly unclear. The addition of teen star India Eisley as Eve seems questionable in a hard "R" Horror film, especially if she is to become the focus of future entries. Kate Beckinsale may look good in black, but she phones in another emotionless performance as Selene. Mns Mrlind and Bjrn Stein successfully maintain the same style and tone as the other films, but their eye for action is found lacking. While UNDERWORLD: AWAKENING may not be the end of the series, another sequel like this will surely bury it.

-Carl Manes
I Like Horror Movies
1002823
It's another bad zombie movie. Compared to the majority of thhe others, the only difference here is the main character is a female. The plot is the same. The action scenes are not engaging. Special effects  are so so.
4938799
Very boring horror movie that has Keanu Reeves playing a Sam Spade like occult investigator who helps a police officer in death of her twin sister. The story sounds simple enough but it get convoluted in all the supernatural happening that is going on and the screenplay really does not bother to explain itself in those occurrences. The special effects are good but some of them are repetitive and some visuals are not that well done. The acting is decent for a movie of this kind with Rachel Weisz proving once again to be one of the most versatile and talented actresses of her generation. Her performance is actually too good for this film because it demands a better showcase than this film. Her character is strong enough to hold this film by herself but with the inconsistent writing that is in the screenplay, she is reduced to carrying Keanu on her shoulders while he is trying to figure out on which film he's in. Which leads to the film's biggest problem and that is Keanu Reeves himself. He's miscast in the role of John Constantine and a better actor would have been able to show more of his sides than Keanu was able to do. Keanu just comes a cross as a jerk and that would have been alright if he at least showed some humanity but Keanu can't balance that out and he just comes across really bad. A better actor would have done more but with Keanu, you really can't expect much and you don't get anything here. That hurts the creditability that this movie had for the main character and it hurts the way you see the movie as a whole. The direction lacks focus and some scenes don't hold well with the whole film.

Worth a rental for Rachel Weisz's great performance and some of the special effects but not worth owning