Dear God what the hell were they thinking? Let's take the final instalment of a trilogy, the first two parts of the trilogy have already been re-made successfully by keeping very close to the originals, and give it a completely different story! Instead of a small unit of military men and scientists trapped in an underground bunker occasionally testing on zombies we have a small town turning into zombies by some weird virus. However as bizarre as the dead coming back to life is it's nothing compared to the dead climbing on ceilings upside down and running about and leaping 20-30 feet in a single bound all done with the brilliance of a "my first cgi kit" seriously the cgi in this film is awful. If you can't do it well then don't do it! the gore is very poor indeed and the casting is incredibly poor with Danny Cannon stopping just short of saying fo'shizzle at the end of every sentence because he's a bad ass gangsta pimp army man. this is nothing short of an abortion of a film and should be ignored by all fans of the genre.

When I started watching this movie I was a tad worried, it being a remake of one of my favourite zombie movies of all time, however, I found myself kinda enjoying it. That is, until the zombies came out to play. Really, what were the cast and crew thinking when they were making this? Nothing was done well, even the presence of Mena Suvari could not save the movie from the dregs of shoddiness. Bad CGI, wooden acting, zombies with super-human abilities, a lazy script and clichéd characters all contribute to make this "remake" a mess. I mention remake that way because it bears very little similarity to George A. Romero's dark, violent, claustrophobic 1985 film. The nods to the original include character's names, one line spoken by the main character and the last 20 minutes being set in an underground bunker.

Day of the Dead opens with four teenagers in the woods doing what any teen in a horror movie would be doing. Meanwhile, the army have got the city quarantined due to a flu outbreak (although we know it is so much more than that). Corporal Sarah Bowman (Mena Suvari) is put in charge of three younger soldiers (although one disappears after a minute introduction). She takes one of the them, Bub (Stark Sands) to pick up her sick mother and take her to the local medical centre. Along for the ride is her younger brother Trevor (Michael Welch) and his girl Nina (AnnaLynne McCord). When they arrive at the hospital, all hell breaks loose when the virus is unleashed and turns most of the town into zombies. From here on the movie is a standard action/horror flick with the survivors going from one place to another trying to find shelter.

First things first, the zombies in this film are stupid creations. I do not know who thought that zombies should be able to not only run, but climb walls and ceilings, jump out of two-story windows without damage, drive cars and shoot machine guns. These were like super-zombies that for some reason decayed massively when they turned, but lost no strength. No explanation was given for these zombies except for the fact it was a biochemical weapon (surprise). Not only were the undead unbelievable, but they were CGI...and bad CGI at that. I have never seen so much digital blood and gore, it was poor and only added to the straight-to-DVD feel. The entire cast were bad, Mena Suvari looked like she just needed the money as her performance was dull and by-the-numbers. Nick Cannon should never be allowed to act, but he was not assisted by the dumb script with some appalling one-liners ("by the power of grey skull"?) and rather confusing scenes of civilians becoming master gunman in mere seconds.

Basically, this is a bad movie whether you consider it a remake of Romero's film or a standalone zombie flick. It is not even "so bad it's funny," it is just bad. Sure, it is not the worst movie ever made and it is fast paced enough to never become boring, but there are so many other zombie movies out there that Steve Miner's Day of the Dead should be at the bottom of the need-to-see list.

½/5

Remake of George Romero's original "Day of the Dead (1985)"… no way! How could you. Well I'll admit, I didn't mind Steve Miner's superfluously clichéd straight-to-DVD b-grade take, but it's far from a traditional scene by scene/scenario remake with the film only sharing the same title (even though most of the zombie action centres around night time),featuring zombies (who bestow very impressive psychical abilities like sprinting, leaping and thinking) and having a character named Captain Rhodes (played by the commanding Ving Rhames in nothing more than a support role). Really that's it, but also shares some common similarities to Romero's 1973 'The Crazies' (which a remake is on the horizon),as it features the US army posting-guard in a virus-infected small town turning the locals into blood crazy zombies. I don't seem to share much of the hate towards it (maybe hearing a lot bad things before hand to work in my favour as I didn't have expectations for it),although I agree it does have some dumb plot devices (mainly centring that of certain zombie soldier, but is it any worse than the 'Bub' creation in the original film?),but despite that and its formulaic patterns. I remained easily engrossed.

The talented Meni Suvari is agreeably sincere in the central role, but does feel a little miss-cast. Her turn is better than what the stereotypically thin material (and there's no social commentary here) and lazy script ("It's complicated") offers up. The performances are mediocre at best, but some do standout more than others like Nick Cannon as a macho gun-tooting soldier with a smart attitude, Stark Sands as the clumsy private and Ian McNeice as the town's radio DJ. As for Ving Rhames, he's wasted in what ends up as a nothing part for such an infamous character.

Director Steve Miner's orthodox, if tight handling is broken up by kinetic editing; flash camera tilts that keep on the move and jerky action placement (where surprisingly random stages manage to hold a certain amount of chaotic tension). At least the story gets right into it and at only 80 minutes it doesn't seem to sag much… well towards the end its persistent style wears thin and the ending was feebly done. Now the blood-soaked gore… naming its self under day wasn't good. While having moments of bloody carnage and some decent make-up FX, it's rather watered-down with over-the-top CGI taking over the show. The CGI wasn't bad, but it's no substitute for latex.

Sure it doesn't come close to the 'Dead' franchise (and as it stands it better off as a stand-alone),but for cheap, quick brainless entertainment it's adequately done.