dholliday The first few minutes were promising: the documentary tone and the determined family looking after their zombie son seemed to set up a coming apocalypse or at least brutal family tragedy.Well, we did get that tragedy and apocalypse yet nothing about the 'film' changed...it continued its boring-as-hell documentary style, sometimes switched to 'cinema' style (tho' it was filmed exactly the same way).Lots of things wrong with this utter waste of time: people talking into the camera, constantly, is simply dull.no sense of how to use music...it was all over the place.very poor sound effects. As with the music there's no UMMFF!roly-poly choreography. Your average kid playfights with more conviction than the 'fight' scenes offered up here.cheap-looking zombie masks...you see better at Halloween parties.no sense of drama or pacing at all. Certainly no sense of horror.the attempts at humour probably looked witty on paper, but it just didn't work. It was all too self-aware.extremely poor camera work & uninspired lighting. Random focus and constant irritating shaking to hide the lumbering 'action'. I use cameras myself and could've guaranteed a more engrossing experience: you need to consider the angles, lighting, choreography and timing the camera movements, not to mention solid sound mixing and editing.the one single attempt at shock-gore fell so awfully flat.the only definable character was the mother, and she was only playing a two-dimensional mother archetype.The actors themselves displayed at least a modicum of ability, certainly competent enough to be in a far better film, but there were too many of them. The 'gangster' characters were especially pointless.For a budget of 100k you can do a lot more, better to go for less cheapo make-up and fewer cast members, and focus on the cinematography with a good editor. See "Rammbock", which had a similar budget.. It's not great but good enough to showcase directorial talent for future projects. 1 point for the idea, but there's nothing else to score it, making this probably my only 1/10 film, and teaching me a valuable lesson not to impulse-buy titles I've never heard of from the cheap bins.

Meg Gherson Awesome! A different take on the Zombie Genre! You find your self immersed in the story, wondering what you would be thinking if you were part of the crew filming this family. Also seeing it from the perspective of the family and what caring for a "special" family member would entail, can you even imagine? Makeup and effects for this movie were top notch, and they should be congratulated for their creativity in creating such horror! There is a humor here that compliments rather than detracts from the mood of the film, in a way it is more shocking to hear such normalcy in such a bizarre predicament it really speaks to the human side of us. Perfect movie for summer viewing, in the dark, with popcorn and a flashlight. The actors were the embodiment of their Parts (no pun intended), I can't imagine any other actor playing the mom, Geraldine McAlinden is fantastic! Congratulations to the Director for his different Point of View! To the Writers for the fantastic story, and to the cast and crew for a job well done! A must see!

Paul Magne Haakonsen It should be said that the approach to the zombie genre seen in "Portrait of a Zombie" is indeed new and innovative. However, that doesn't necessarily make it great.The movie had potential, and if it had a bigger budget the movie would indeed have been so much more than it was. I must say that "Portrait of a Zombie" turned out to be a rather ambitious amateurish project. But it was still enjoyable enough for what it was - and for what it turned out to be.The storyline in "Portrait of a Zombie" is about a family that have a zombie at home, their son Billy. The neighborhood is in uproar and the family still treats him as being alive and still being their son.Story-wise, then there were aspects to the story that were alright, but in overall, it wasn't memorable.What really needed more detail, work and better execution was the make-up and effects of the zombies. It was basically just make-up added to people's faces, and of course they committed the ultimate flaw here; forgetting about the neck and ears. So the face had make-up and special effects applied, while the neck and ears were left in proper skin tones. It is just such a bad mistake to make.The gun effects in the movie were just atrocious, and the movie would have fared so much better if they had opted not to have guns in the movie at all. If you are going to do guns, at least have them done right.And the way that Billy was moving just didn't go well with me, it looked like a crippled duck trying to dance break-dance. It was just awful.The acting in the movie was actually good, given what the actors and actresses had to work with.But for a movie of this production value, I will still applaud director Bing Bailey for managing to get this on its feet and turn it into what it was. If you enjoy zombie movies, then "Portrait of a Zombie" is definitely worth watching a single time, because of its unique approach to the zombie genre. However, just don't get your hopes up for a next Romero movie in the making.

pierrotfilms I saw this film at CineQuest film festival last week. I'm not much of a horror/zombie fan - but I found this film really worked for me. It's a clever take on the genre.(spoiler) The use of the documentary crew enabled the filmmaker to examine various cultural issues in the film. It's this angle that elevates it above a mere 'meat eating frenzy'. It was clever, funny, relevant and yes - horrifying in turns. The production values were above average for a small indie-budget. You can tell every penny they had went up on the screen.If you are a fan of horror, zombie or 'mocumentary' films - don't miss "Portrait of a Zombie".