Rise of the Zombies (2012) Reviews

• Just awful

  gs202012-10-28

  What more can I say about this travesty? The only reason I started to watch this drivel was because of the fairly good cast. Good actors all in other movies and TV shows. However, in this they are wasted. It just goes to show that even with qualified, trained, experienced, talented actors, if the words, direction, art direction, special effects, editing etc aren't there, nothing can save the movie. I'd like to point out here that these people had good producers, a good editor and everything else one might expect to make a good movie except a writer and a director so the blame has to lie with them. Lyon, the director, really is just a hack and has a string of just terrible efforts to his name. The writer, Keith Allan is most likely guilty of having too many irons in the fire. I suppose that might explain it but there is also the possibility that it is all the director, at least in this case. As an example, I give you a large caliber semi-automatic handgun in contact with the neck of a zombie, the gun goes off or at least we here the noise of the gun going off but it doesn't re-cycle and it produces no hole in the neck of the zombie. Sort of like a kid with a toy gun yelling "bang bang" with no other effect other than the zombie falling down. I actually laughed at the zombies that clearly had on masks instead of make-up as well.I could go on and on about the plot holes and illogical actions the story had the actors engaged in but it would just be a waste of your time and mine. It really and truly is something to avoid unless one enjoys seeing how awful something can be and still get produced. It wouldn't have been so bad if it were tongue in cheek or had some humorous bits or something but it took itself oh so seriously. I do feel bad for the actors because when they are working they have no idea generally that the thing is going to turn out so badly I'm sure. I guess they really needed the money or they thought the same thing anyone else would have thought; that someone would really have to be inept or crazy to waste a talent pool like this thing had.

  More

• It Features Flat Performances And Adds Nothing Really Original To The Standard Zombie Storyline

  sddavis632013-07-09

  From the very beginning of this movie I found myself wondering about the title of all things! "Rise Of The Zombies." It suggests that the movie is going to be about the beginnings of a zombie plague - how it happened, where it came from. But no. Actually, from the very opening scenes of the movie it seems pretty clear that the zombies have already risen! They're pretty much in control and there don't seem to be all that many survivors. Over the course of the hour and a half, we do find out that it probably started with an infected water system, and that it's pretty recent. One of the characters is pregnant, and she says she got pregnant at a party two months before. So, since people probably haven't been partying much since the zombie plague started, this whole thing must have happened in less than two months. But that's not the focus of the movie. Not at all. Those are just snippets of information that come out. So, yes, strange choice for a title. With this being set in San Francisco (although the plague seems to be worldwide, or one assumes that there would be rescue missions) what survivors there are have holed themselves up on Alcatraz Island. So that's a bit of a twist: a high security prison becoming a sanctuary. Unfortunately, it seems that even Alcatraz isn't a very secure sanctuary. Every now and then zombies come wading ashore and have to be killed. Now, I've never looked it up, but I assume that the water depth between San Francisco and Alcatraz is more than 6 feet (ie, more than the height of your average human being - or zombie - or it wouldn't have been much of a prison) which suggests that since the zombies don't appear to be the type to enjoy boating they must be able to walk a fair distance under water. OK. Why not. It makes it harder to find a real place of refuge, thus increasing the hopelessness that's always at the centre of a zombie movie. Aside from that little twist, though, there's not a lot of originality to this. The zombies are zombies. They're the undead, re-animated corpses controlled by a virus of some sort with a taste for the flesh and blood of living humans. Got it. Seen it many times. The cast features a collection of fairly well known faces, although mega-stars they're not. People like Mariel Hemingway, LeVar Burton, French Stewart. They're all in this. A couple of others. Faces and names you know, in other words. Unfortunately, though many of the faces are familiar, the performances weren't great. Hemingway was probably the most front and centre as a scientist who takes a group from Alcatraz back into the city to try to find the lab where an antidote to the virus was being worked on. She didn't really grab me. Burton was given the most opportunity for a character the viewer could sympathize with. He stays behind on Alcatraz while Hemingway's group goes into the city and others go off in search of rescue, and he keeps two living zombies (or is that a contradiction?) locked up to experiment on as he looks for a cure. The attempted heart-wrenching is that one of the zombies he has locked up is his own daughter. Still, I would have to say that my reaction to most of the cast is that they were less than convincing in their roles; unenthused about playing them perhaps? So, really, what you have here is a mediocre movie that adds nothing original to the zombie genre, and rather flat performances from the cast. Not a winner, in other words. (3/10)

  More

• Better Than Most Films from The Asylum

  Michael_Elliott2012-10-28

  Rise of the Zombies (2012) ** 1/2 (out of 4) Semi follow-up to ZOMBIE APOCALYPSE has a group of survivors living on Alcatraz island but being forced off when the zombies make it through the water. The survivors then decide to try and locate a scientist who they believe has came up with a cure for the zombie epidemic. Yes, here's another one from The Asylum but it always shocks me that so many people go into these films expecting a good movie. I mean, we know their history, we know the film is starting on SyFy yet people still expect to see a George Romero film for some reason. Personally speaking, when I watch these movies I hope to at least be entertained (by good or bad things) or that the film at least offers something you don't normally see. I'm starting to wonder if people go into Edward D. Wood, Jr. films expecting the work of John Ford. Anyways, this film here certainly doesn't offer much that you haven't already seen but for the most part I found it to be entertaining for a couple reasons. One is that the gore factor has really been turned up and it's to the point where these made-for-TV movies are getting away with more than what theatrical slashers could back in the 80s. One sequence shows a doctor ripping off and cooking his own flesh so that he can feed his starving zombie daughter. There's another scene where a woman must perform a C-section to help save a baby but the really outrageous stuff happens after this. There's also the non-stop gore of zombie bites and zombies getting their heads blown off. The story itself offers up a few interesting ideas but of course none of them are ever fully developed. Mariel Hemingway, Chad Lindberg and LeVar Burton are the latest celebs to get down with The Asylum and all three actually turn in very good and believable performances. So, is RISE OF THE ZOMBIES going to make people forget NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD? Not at all but hopefully people won't come to this thinking it's going to.

  More

• Worst movie I have seen in a long long time.

  Thom-132013-07-04

  I marked spoilers, but I can't actually imagine any comment could spoil this film. I watched it and it kept getting worse and worse and stupider and stupider which is quite impressive considering the starting point. Since, most of you won't make it to the end, there were a couple of humorous editing/writing/directing (not sure which) gaffes at the end. They finally reach this illustrious doctor they have been searching for and he lets them know there is a helicopter on the roof and they much go up. However, the helicopter is in a parking lot at the first level of the building. Watching the fight scenes is laughable, but not in a particularly good way. You watch someone shoot at center of mass and the head explodes. Then someone is frantically firing at all points from behind and between 2 or 3 other people. It was interesting to watch a film where the director decided acting, writing, editing and directing would have been a distraction to the plot. in the discussion of the film, there is a list of commentary on "What I learned from this film". Read that, it is much more entertaining than any aspect of the film. Even if you spend 90 minutes reading that.

  More

• This movie has absolutely no redeemable qualities. None!!!

  dvisner2013-06-23

  How anyone could attempt to put some sort of positive spin on this rotting can of garbage is beyond me. I, like several others, gave it a chance because of several cast members, but even their performances were atrocious. It was painful to see the chief engineer of the Enterprise used in such a meaningless role. Several of these actors are capable of putting in good solid performances, but not in this flick. Wow! What a complete waste of talent. At times I even wondered if this was some sort of attempt to be funny, like Neil Hamburger, but like him it wasn't. This is the sort of film that has you constantly looking over your shoulder because you're horrified someone might actually catch you watching.

  More