Review: Rise of the Dead.

It’s bad enough when you’re just trying to find some great, good, mediocre entertainment and you have to deal with the crap they put out these days.

But NOW you have to deal with outright fraud.

The synopsis on the back of the “Rise of the Dead” DVD:
“In the sleepy small town of Dudley, Ohio, a terrifying future awaits. Laura Childs is under attack by the undead, and not even those closest to her can save her form the evil forces at hand.”

Right above that, it says in bold type: “A Frightening Zombie Thriller”.

Not far below that, there’s a picture of a horde of creepy zombies.

Sounds like that might be good. Either this is a good zombie movie or a crappy low-budget zombie movie… but either way its about zombies so I’ll probably enjoy it.

Only its not, and I didn’t.

Either the above synopsis was written by someone who never actually saw the movie, or written by someone who intentially took a “liberal” definition of “undead” just for the purposes of snaring zombiphiles like me.

The “undead” in question is just one ghost…ONE GHOST… who goes around possessing random people, not for the purposes of carnage and mayhem, but because he has a specific list of people he wants dead. The possessed people are not dead (or undead), and can be stopped just like any regular living person. No zombie horde. No people trapped in malls. No rotting, animated corpses craving the flesh of the living.

I rented this because I wanted to see dead people walking (or running) around eating living people, who then get up and walk around eating other living people. What I got was one ghost with a grudge. I want my money back and I want these filmmakers sued for misrepresentation. And I’m only half-joking.

Okay, okay… NOT a zombie movie, but other than that, how was this film?

It was decent. The concept (who this ghost was and why it wanted these people dead) was nothing I’d seen before. The plot and script were just okay. There was a lot of potential for suspense and creepiness that they just let slip through their fingers merely due to bad implementation. But they managed to hold onto juuuuust enough to keep me watching even after I realized I’d been had like a budget whore on the first of the month.

A lot of what goes on here is psychological, but the story didn’t really put it together properly like a good mind-screw movie should have. The whole “this thing could be anyone, anywhere, at any time” angle was presented, but not sufficiently explored to its full dramatic effect.

So lets add it up:

+8: The ending was surprisingly disturbing for an otherwise low-to-mediocre movie.
+5: Good concept.
+5: Naked babe with an ax!
+3: Some very nice T&A.
+2: That one cop was funny.

But:

IMMEDIATE FAIL: Zombie movie with no zombies.
-10: Too much unused potential. It’s like the writers didn’t realize what they had until the end.
-5: Some plot holes needed to be filled in.
-3: Because all religious people can put curses on people just by saying it three times, right?
-2: Excessive drooling.
-2: No special effects. None. Unless you count the drooling.

Don’t worry about the numbers, they mean nothing. End Result:
If you want a zombie movie, this isn’t it.
If you want a ghost movie… there are much, much, much better ones out there. Some (very) nice tits and a creepy ending are not enough for me to recommend this one. Plus, they lied to me, so screw ’em.


3 Comments

  1. udgang99, December 29, 2007:

    “+5: Naked babe with an ax!
    +3: Some very nice T&A.”

    I HAVE to see this one !!!

  2. DarkIcon, December 30, 2007:

    Now I know what to get you next Christmas!

  3. udgang99, December 30, 2007:

    what…? A naked babe with an axe? Yes, please, I would like that very much! :-)

Leave a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.