dmdb I only write reviews of movies with low rating, which actually are not that bad. Give them a chance!I must admit I expected more, the casting is cool, as well as the story taken from the original, but... something went wrong. Zombies are bad, really, really BAD. Now imagine MJ singing this in his Thriller zombie costume! That is probably the only thing I don't like. When you watch a remake, you already know what will happen, and you expect to see that old story again in some new form, like other 'modern' films... this one had a potential for that, but failed. Zombies shouldn't be so fast, and camera in those parts is bad, too. I blame producers for this, instead of giving money to Ving Rhames and Mena Suvari, they should have gave it to someone who knows how to create and shoot zombie-fight scenes. Then the movie would be cool even without known actors.I watched it only because I like movies about apocalypse, and if you imagine it like that - it is watchable! I was able to watch it to the end. All craziness caused by zombie outbreak is 'realisic', so I can't regret watching this.5/10

Spikeopath A town is infected with a virus that turns the populace into flesh eating creatures. A hardy band of survivors fight to stay alive...Regardless of comparing it to the Romero film that shares the same name - since not all remakes suck - this is just a bad film. OK! It can maybe be argued that the makers here tried to reimage Romero's zombie formula, by having the zombies here be supernatural in style, rage like in execution, and the gore is impressively shed. But sadly the characters are uninvolving and annoying, with actors either sleepwalking through their roles (hello Ving Rhames), or badly miscast (hello Mena Suvari).It's a drunken one night stand of a movie, it looked like it might be fun at the time, but come the morning there is just headache and shame. 3/10

sergio-arauzo One of the worst films I have ever watched with an absurd plot full of holes. Just comparing this film with any George Romero film (even the weakest), Resident Evil, 28 Days after or any other good zombie film is offensive. This film has only one thing: The name, which is used to attract Romero fans to this very bad film. We can see zombies with very Cheap make up, I am pretty sure you can see better ones any Halloween. Action scenes are really awful and boring. The actors do not fit in their role. I like Mena Suvari in other films, but she does not fit in her role. You can enjoy some of the dumbest dialog lines of film history, and the story is full of inconsistencies in characters actions, again and again. I mean, it is not just that they are dumb, a lot of characters in horror films are dumb. It is that they are not consistent, they do one thing and the next minute they are doing the opposite for no reason. In addition, yes, they are really dumb. Trust me, there are hundreds of better ways of spending 85 minutes.

TheMarwood Steve Miner has never been a great director, but even his lousiest work is basically competent. This version of Day of the Dead is incompetent and looks like it killed his big screen directing career. The $18 million budget must have gone to someone's pocket, because not a penny of it is on screen. Calling this straight to video quality would be wrong, it's syfy channel TV movie quality. Was funding pulled during production? Was Miner fired? There has to be some explanation for the shoddy work on display. The acting is almost entirely terrible. Mena Suvari does her best to maintain her dignity and AnnaLynne McCord proves to have none. Besides McCord's rear, there's nothing of value in this stinker. Avoid.