Survival of the Dead
2010 Directed by George A. Romero
Synopsis
Death isn't what it used to be.
On an island off the coast of North America, local residents simultaneously fight a zombie epidemic while hoping for a cure to return their un-dead relatives back to their human state.
Cast
Studio
Genres
Popular reviews
More-
I found a review I've wrote of this movie, back in 2010 if I'm not wrong, in my old blog and decided to translate it, without adding or removing anything, no matter how silly or stupid, only pointing mistakes, absurds and funny things I've wrote back then. I will use [OP] to point Original Parenthesis in the text.
In the last 28th day (probably december of 2010, can't say for sure), we were blessed ("blessed") by George Romero with another zombie movie. Survivor of the Dead (Survival of the Dead), the sixth Romero movie with this tematic, and the second part of the new "...of the Dead" franchise, with the original franchise being composed by Night, Dawn, Day and Land…
-
Finally forced myself to watch this. The reason it took me so long is that after all the bad reviews and having not forgotten about Diary of the Dead, I just didn't want to link any more bad memories to George A. Romero. It's incomprehensible that the same man that gave us Night of the Living Dead and it's three sequels also gave us this (yes I have love for Land even). It just finally got to me that there was a Romero zombie movie that I had not seen and it was just somehow wrong.
I don't regret watching it though. The story was ambitious for the budget, but it was also quite ridiculous at times. No mater... my love for Night through Land won't be effected by this.
-
Review from my VOD column "This Week on Demand"
The latest in horror legend George A. Romero’s zombie series, begun in 1968 with the genre classic Night of the Living Dead, Survival of the Dead has the appearance of a film made by a man who never saw that original, let alone made it. So far distanced from everything great that Romero once represented, this latest instalment is a criminally unfunny—it tries desperately to be a comedy—bore with painfully poor performances and dialogue one might scold the undead for scripting. Loosely concerning an old turf war between feuding families of alleged Irish heritage—the accents certainly don’t fit—it’s entirely lacking in the social subtext which made Romero’s earlier works such rich…
-
Romero attempts at doing a zombie film (interestingly his first which is a direct sequel, of sorts, to a previous film) borrowing from the western genre which sounds kinda cool, the problem being it's so poorly written and utterly dull it just amounts to a waste of time. The idea behind it is pretty interesting and some of the western-inspired shots are nice but it never escapes from the poorly underwritten script or cheap visual effects; the cgi is beyond dismal and the practical zombie effects make it genuinely hard at times to distinguish the living from the dead. I watched it twice over two nights, the second time with the commentary on to see what Romero actually thought of…
-
Time to retire George. Do not waste your time with this hunk of zombie shit.
-
The latest in Romero's 'Living Dead' franchise tries to be a weird mix of zombie horror, family drama and western, but just ends up being kind of boring and unoriginal, with none of the social satire that made the previous films exceptional. Intelligent zombie plot goes back to being stupid. A zombie riding a horse? Really?
One thing that George Romero did get right, throughout the whole of the movies, was sticking to the slow zombies. They are so much more suspenseful and so much scarier than the fast zombies from REC, etc.
Recent reviews
More-
I found a review I've wrote of this movie, back in 2010 if I'm not wrong, in my old blog and decided to translate it, without adding or removing anything, no matter how silly or stupid, only pointing mistakes, absurds and funny things I've wrote back then. I will use [OP] to point Original Parenthesis in the text.
In the last 28th day (probably december of 2010, can't say for sure), we were blessed ("blessed") by George Romero with another zombie movie. Survivor of the Dead (Survival of the Dead), the sixth Romero movie with this tematic, and the second part of the new "...of the Dead" franchise, with the original franchise being composed by Night, Dawn, Day and Land…
-
From the man who brought us the horror classics Night of the Living Dead and Dawn of the Dead, and one of my personal favourites Day of the Dead, comes this load of confused rubbish that's more unintentional comedy than horror. Famously what made Romero's zombie films stand out was the social commentary bubbling beneath the surface, but in this film it's just shoved in there as if to tick a box and comes across as forced and ridiculous.
The characters are all either 2 dimensional or have confusing mood swings and choices, making it incredibly difficult to connect with any of them at all.
This film also contains a scene where our "hero" shoots a zombie with a flare gun and then proceeds to light his cigarette off of its flailing, burning corpse. Make of that what you will.
George, when did it all go wrong?
-
A group soldiers seek shelter from the zombie apocalypse on an island and get caught up in a feud between two warring families. Sixth film of George A. Romero's "Dead" series shows that he still has the creative knack to make a good old fashioned zombie film.
-
I've been a big fan of George Romero's Dead films over the years. As for his newest film, Survival of the Dead, I enjoyed it. Survival was pretty much bashed in all of the reviews I read for it, however, I still found it to be a good and entertaining zombie flick. My biggest issue was the dialogue; much of it seemed hokey and at times very unnatural. Beyond that, I was a fan of Survival of the Dead, but I don't think George needs to make any more Dead films. He probably will, though. Maybe one last epic zombie film simply titled ...of the Dead. That could be bad ass.
-
Review from my VOD column "This Week on Demand"
The latest in horror legend George A. Romero’s zombie series, begun in 1968 with the genre classic Night of the Living Dead, Survival of the Dead has the appearance of a film made by a man who never saw that original, let alone made it. So far distanced from everything great that Romero once represented, this latest instalment is a criminally unfunny—it tries desperately to be a comedy—bore with painfully poor performances and dialogue one might scold the undead for scripting. Loosely concerning an old turf war between feuding families of alleged Irish heritage—the accents certainly don’t fit—it’s entirely lacking in the social subtext which made Romero’s earlier works such rich…
-
“Survival of the Dead” takes place just a few days after the original Night of the Living Dead, after the dead began to walk. You learn there is an island, named Plum Island, near Delaware. On Plum Island there are two families that have always ran it, the O’Flynns and the Muldoons, and they have never seen eye to eye. Now with the dead walking and trying to eat the living, they disagree with each other even more. The O’Flynns believe every zombie should be killed immediately, while the Muldoons want to “save” the zombies by locking them up and waiting for a cure to be discovered. The Muldoons also hope they can teach the zombies to eat various animals…
-
Of the two more recent Romero zed flicks, this is the stronger partner, not being quite so hamstrung as Diary... was by its' first-person faux-camcorder appearance. Even so, it's a long way off his best....
-
Nowhere near as bad as its reputation suggests, this superior follow-up to Diary Of The Dead is mostly a fun ride with some truly barmy twists and neat gore gags. If Bruno Mattei had directed in 1983 rather than George Romero in 2010, it could have a reputation as a minor cheesy classic. Alas...
-
Romero attempts at doing a zombie film (interestingly his first which is a direct sequel, of sorts, to a previous film) borrowing from the western genre which sounds kinda cool, the problem being it's so poorly written and utterly dull it just amounts to a waste of time. The idea behind it is pretty interesting and some of the western-inspired shots are nice but it never escapes from the poorly underwritten script or cheap visual effects; the cgi is beyond dismal and the practical zombie effects make it genuinely hard at times to distinguish the living from the dead. I watched it twice over two nights, the second time with the commentary on to see what Romero actually thought of…