Night of the Living Dead (2014) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
15 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
4/10
A great effort from an up and coming indie crew!
ScreamQueer7 November 2014
Warning: Spoilers
Let's start this off by saying Night of the Living Dead is my absolute favorite film of all time. I'm really open to the idea of remakes because, if they're good, they're merely paying homage to the original material while also drawing well-deserved attention to the original source material. If they're bad, they merely make the original feature seem all the more awesome. I love seeing different artists interpretations of classic cinema but also have the tendency to be very honest with my feelings toward the final product.

Savini's '89 remake was pretty good, but some of his choices downplayed the intense sense of claustrophobia exuding from within the farmhouse, as well as the ever-developing suspense that develops throughout the film. And let's be real here... some of the acting was a bit over the top. ("DAMN YO-YO'S!!!") Night of the Living Dead 3D is an insult to the classic. End of story.

Let's start THIS review off by acknowledging the fact that THIS take on Romero's masterpiece is EXTREMELY low budget. Let's just get that out there. We are talking Blatantly no budget. From the acting to the actual house to the camera work, it's very VERY indie. BUT, these guys took on a mighty task. They attempted to remake a groundbreaking piece of cinema. That's admirable (and downright friggin' ballsy) and you need to at least tip your hat to what was clearly a LOT of hard work, passion, and dedication.

First off, there are some OBVIOUS improvements in their craftsmanship after their first feature "New Blood Rising". That should always be the goal of the indie film-maker. Improve your craft. These guys definitely achieved that. While the camera-work in this is still rough (lots of focus issues and almost every rule of standard film-making is broken at one point or another), it still doesn't look at all as basic as their last attempt. That's an awesome achievement.

The acting is certainly indie, with a lot of stumbling over lines and confusing dialogue that at times appears to be improvised. That may not be the case but merely due to the actors inability to memorize, but the muddy deliveries often take away from what could be rather suspenseful moment. The female lead is probably the strongest of the performers due to her ability to display convincing emotions. She's also very pretty, which (lets be real) is important in this genre. She has a great look on camera and, with a little more experience, could probably take on a bigger production. There are a few truly weak performances but, when working with such a small budget, this is to be expected.

One of the bigger issues I had with the product is (and I've mentioned this a few times but I feel it needs to be directly acknowledged) the blatant lack of budget. The costuming on all of the leads as well as the zombies appears to be provided by the actors themselves which at times looks cheap and uninspired. Also, the gore effects are really quite amateur. Toward the end of the film there is a fake bullet-hole effect in which the entire seam in the prosthetic is blatantly obvious. When dealing with such a classic, people will have HIGH expectations in these areas and can be EXTREMELY judgmental if you don't pull them off. You can't just go at this material and not expect criticism. Tis the nature of the beast.

Where I DO offer some MAJOR kudos is in the direction. The writer/director made some really risky choices in adjustments to the original storyline and I think that's pretty respectable. When viewing a remake, unless it's initially a scene-for-scene re-imagining, you should still want to be surprised and frightened. You don't want to see the EXACT same thing you did in the original. That's pointless. There are a lot of twists and turns here that should really shock even the most die-hard fans and leave them wanting to view up through the conclusion of the film.

At the end of the day, indie film is a tough field. When working with no budget, you have to make exceptions in certain areas to compensate for things you simply cannot pull off. These guys really put a LOT of hard work forward and, while the final product really wouldn't appeal to much of a mainstream audience, fans of indie cinema will probably really appreciate their efforts! I can't wait to see what these guys can pull off in the near future and ideally they can raise some proper funds to help expand upon their visions.

As I said, indie cinema is a ROUGH business. But, if you have enough drive and passion to not just take on a project but to FINISH IT as well... THAT truly deserves recognition and some genuine respect.

Good job guys. Keep on doing what you love and expand upon your budding talents!
7 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Utterly horrible
forgottentenadia17 January 2015
My first review, to warn potential viewers.

As a very open-minded and experimental movie watcher (especially after a few beers) I find myself watching trash quite often. Trashy movies can be done well, unfortunately this is not.

The acting is horrible, the only one who seems like he is not just reciting some lines off of a page is Gad Holland as Ben. 1 Star for him.

The sound editing is horrible, some scenes are extremely quiet and you crank up the volume just to have your ears blasted off in the next scene by somebody screeching right next to the microphone.

Overall this seems like a project done by students of a movie academy, not an actual movie as such. I have seen better things done by hobby filmmakers. I am also very surprised by the rather positive ratings here on IMDb, perhaps only staff and relations rated this movie so far, who knows?

Recommendation: don't watch it, even Uwe Boll's movies are better than this
8 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Avoid this useless and poorly made remake
theromanempire-127 January 2016
I watched it online out of curiocity as there is no DVD available yet and i was glad that there was no DVD so i saved money and watched it for free online.

1) this was exactly the same as the original only it failed in every way.

the actors acted badly the music was newtral and the movie had none of the magic the original had.

2) Really when u have seen the original u have seen it all and try to make another one trying to do it like the original was done it makes no sense.

romero did a little miracle back then.

this is not easy task and i don't think anyone can make a remake as good as the 1968 original was.

Even the great savini 1990 remake was very good but still nowhere near the original and that remake was the only really worth remake to own together with the original....(1998 version is not essentially a remake)

3) this amateur effort is not worth it and is as bad as the latest NOTLD Resurrection movie was and as bad as mimesis movie also was.

Even the mediorce 2006 3-d remake was better than this crap which just tried to use the original's formula but failed in every aspect.

Conclusion

So avoid it and let's hope the new announced sequel to the romero dead movies will resurrect the franchise to it's former heights.

we don't need those cheap and bad imitators.

we want the real thing.
4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Another Craptastic Remake
mhorg201815 March 2018
Bad. Bad. Bad. Bad. When will 'filmmakers' with no talent, no original ideas and little to no acting experience give it up? STOP REMAKING NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD! All you do is piss off the fans and embarrass yourselves. I know that it takes very little to make a zombie movie (which is why there are so many damned bad ones out there), but how about at least trying to come up with an original idea? I hope this never gets released on DVD because some poor deluded fool will end up paying for it!
7 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
You've Got to Be Kidding.
Jonny-ironica21 January 2015
Unfortunately, a long-standing grave mistake with the original Night of the Living Dead was the accidental failure to copyright the prints, thus putting the film into public domain to be remade. Fortunately, it took quite a long while before people used this as an excuse to churn out things to the general public so horrible that no one should want to see them. But it seems that beginning with the 2006 3D remake, the Night of the Living Dead story is going to become a piñata for terrible "filmmakers" everywhere to ruin.

*This* particular "film" takes that idea and doesn't just destroy the story, it runs it into the ground with poor directing, acting, writing, editing, sound mixing, etc. Now I have nothing against an amateur film company that wants to make a name for themselves by experimenting, growing, and eventually satisfying movie-watching audiences by the dozens(maybe hundreds if they can put up something that can hold with great indie-classics that never got mainstream attention they deserved). However, this film shows such disrespect for George Romero's masterpiece that everyone involved owes a written apology to everyone involved with the original, starting with Romero. They have taken a horror icon's beautifully flawed masterpiece and turned it into a steaming pile of... yeah, you know what I'm saying.

Then even further than insulting the original and it's team, people involved with this film have taken it upon themselves to write positive reviews for the film on IMDb and rate it fairly high in order to promote it as something worth watching, no, worth PAYING to watch. That should count as theft with how horrible this film is, and I am incredibly happy that I did not pay to see it. And not only do they insult the original, they insult the noble remake in 1990.

Everyone knows the Tom Savini version from 1990 was an amazing effort to add something new to the original while staying true to the spirit, the ideas, even the flaws of the original. Whether people genuinely liked it or not, it held its own as something that at least had the utmost respect for it's source material.

I sincerely hope the people responsible for this remake are not benefiting(or even making their budget back) with any amount of money. Everything they do make from selling this should be doubled from their pockets, refunded to the movie-watchers they ripped off and sent to Romero himself.

Avoid at all costs. And if you find a copy lying around somewhere, burn it.
16 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
My Review Of "A Night Of The Living Dead"
ASouthernHorrorFan1 November 2014
Shattered Images Films home-grown horror remake of the classic "Night Of The Living Dead" retells the zombie story with a few alterations to Romero's original tale. It is an ultra low-budget film shot in black and white and stays pretty close to the original story without being an exact reproduction. The plot takes place during a visit to see their wife and mother's grave, placing Jerry and his daughters Melanie and Barbra at the beginning of a zombie apocalypse.

The story arc manages to hold together pretty well from start to finish, unfortunately there are times when it gets weak due to dialog and inconsistent story elements that fail to build the suspense or keep the film moving forward. Mostly this is due to some of the cast's inability to stay on point with their lines and clumsy dialog.This is home grown horror so a lot of the errors are expected, but not always forgivable, "A Night Of The Living Dead" does have some pretty effective moments as far as creating chilling scenes and an overall chilling atmosphere. Not to mention several of the cast give good performances.

The special effects are ultra-cheap in "A Night Of The Living Dead" and due to camera angles and time spent focusing on the effect, are ineffective and do more to harm the scene. Not all the scenes that use special effects are a fail, some are very effective and create genuinely creepy moments. Thankfully I didn't see any CGI effects, so the use of practical effects are greatly appreciated.

A plus for the film is that the zombies being shot in black and white are acceptable in design and effect. They stay pretty basic much like the original and several other films that it spawned that keep the zombies simple. The soundtrack and sound effects are work in "A Night OF The Living Dead" by staying pretty simple and used with precision. The music creates a since of emotion that elevates several scenes to higher-quality moments. Kudos.

Overall, "A Night Of The Living Dead" misses at creating an original retelling of the film because too much of the Romero film is present when it comes to scene set-ups and structure. The acting is pretty low quality with the exception being the few actors that do offer quality performances. This is a no budget horror film and at times really shines, unfortunately the amount of line flubs from some characters and inconsistent use of practical effects drag the director's intended vision down.

The good things about "A Night Of The Living Dead" are the fact that it is shot in black and white, plus it does alter some of the original film so that at times it does feel genuine and more like fan fiction than copycat. The zombies are acceptable – thanks to the black and white filming choice, and I enjoyed the added characters and location used in this film, with the exception of too much down time inside the home that the real owners obviously refused to sign off on scene damage like busting windows or actually boarding up windows.

All that said, fans of homemade, home grown horror and ultra low- budget will like the fact that "A Night Of The Living Dead" offers a better quality story than most home-grown zombie films out there. And for this particular production company this film rises above some of the companies previous works. The added characters, and black and white keeps "A Night Of The Living Dead" from completely failing, and at times creates some pretty effective moments.

Fans of indie horror that are used to films with larger budgets may not enjoy this one because of the lower quality of effects and dialog issues. It does offer an original ending to the story that is intense so I enjoyed that aspect of the film. Just be prepared and know that this is an ultra low-budget horror when you set down to watch it. I am 50/50 on this one because I enjoy the home- grown/ultra low-budget side of indie horror, I just prefer a bit more originality than what this "Night Of The Living Dead" offers, you know-something that I haven't seen before.
8 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Worst acting of all the remakes
Conejeto17 January 2015
Non existent special effects and not entertaining must mean by all the rave reviews that the new generation has to make one of their own liking and will swear allegiance to it's success. Ridiculously bad, start to finish. Oh sorry, the stream at the end did a good job of portraying a stream that is true, I give 2 stars for that. Ten lines of text require that I waste more time in addition to the time already wasted watching this flop of a low budget remake. Any so called interesting twists were far out shined by the horrible stiff acting and character development. Just stick to video games if you're not going to make an enjoyable escape from reality. ten lines.
7 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
So bad on so many levels.
jaywynn-119-929643 June 2019
Shockingly poor film. Terrible writing, lighting, sound, and as for the acting. O...M...G. I want my 79 minutes back.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Not that good
DarylJGittings4 October 2023
I was excited to finally be able to see Chad Zuver' "A Night of the Living Dead".

Up until this evening, I had only been able to view the trailer. Being a fan of the Ohio independent horror scene, this film had a couple of actresses that I'm a fan off.

A Night of the Living Dead starts out pretty strong, but goes downhill pretty fast. A family goes to the cemetery to visit their Mother's grave site. One daughter Barbra (Melissa Zahs) is attacked and killed, as is her boyfriend Johnny. The father and other daughter escape to a nearby house with a group of others to try to hold up against the zombies.

This is certainly not Chad Zuver's best effort. I'm only giving this five stars for Melissa Zahs. She did a great job in her film debut. Kayla Elizabeth is good too! Otherwise I didn't care for the movie.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
You'll have fun
detroitfriendly201412 November 2014
A Night of the Living Dead (2014) 6 out of 10.

You'll have a good time watching this remake of George Romero's 1968 Night of the Living Dead. Big thanks to Gad Holland for making the movie really enjoyable. He was absolutely hilarious. Loved the character change from the hero Ben from the original to this Ben. I really like Kayla Elizabeth and Lisa Marie as well.

Don't go into watching this, with high hopes. Don't expect high budget or the exact same movie like the original. This movie is a lot different, but in a good way. Overall, you will literally have a great time with this movie. Acting is decent, the story is compelling and keeps you interested. I really liked the zombies, it was a great throwback to the original. The makeup was on point.
6 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Interesting take on the original
mcdawg67776 November 2014
After seeing all the other remakes. I really thought I seen it all with the Night of the Living Dead name. After watching "A Night of the Living Dead". I can really say I was totally surprised at the twists. I didn't see any of those coming and I am thankful to see something new.

Before seeing this, I thought it was just going to be some cheap remake and ruin the Night of the Living Dead name. But it was different and I really enjoyed it. Without question this is the CLOSEST remake to the original. One of the biggest negatives I have with the movie was, that it showed its low budget. I'm not sure how that can be corrected, but something needed changed.

The story is interesting and plays off the original. I'm not going to give out to much. But the new twists involved in the remake keeps you entertained. Especially the characters involved. I loved Gad Holland as Ben. He was one of the biggest highlights of the entire movie. Didn't expect to see that from the character at all. The other actors did a fine job. I wanted to see more of Lisa Marie and Sarah Thomas. This isn't the first movie I've seen with Lee Godwin and Kayla Elizabeth together. Their movie Frankenstein was just god awful. Don't even waste your time watching that movie. But they have an intriguing chemistry between the two of them. Kayla does have one dramatic scene that will give you goosebumps. I did like Rebekka Daniel's character Melanie. Something did seem off about her character though.

You will literally be BLOWN AWAY by the ending. I had to watch the ending three times and I still didn't see it coming. Outstanding job with that! Also loved the old style zombies.

Besides the indie look to the movie. There isn't a whole lot of negatives against the movie. I wish the gory effects were done a little better. Those two are the only things keeping this movie from a 10. I really had a blast watching this.
11 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Not great, but better than others
jbbuckeye199522 January 2015
this is my first ever review on IMDb. So please bare with me.

George Romero's Night of the Living Dead is one of those classic movies that will never fade away. The movie still holds up all these years. Since there will a problem with the title, the movie is a part of public domain. That means anyone can make their own version of the movie. That is exactly where A Night of the Living Dead comes into play. I do respect anyone willing to make a movie, if its original or a remake. So I am not here to bash the company or anyone involved in this movie. I am just giving out my opinion.

A Night of the Living Dead is a low-budget remake from independent director Chad Zuver. Now I've looked through his bio and seen that he is fairly new at directing. I haven't seen his other work before. But I am going to be completely honest here. I didn't think he did a bad job with this. NOTLD is a very slippery slope that the fans will never like any remake if Romero isn't involved in it. Since that is the reason why the 1990 remake gets so much attention. With this new remake, it IS better than some of the other remakes. 3D and Origins were god- awful. But this one is a lot better than those two. Even though this one doesn't have professional actors or a high Hollywood budget. This showed a different take on the story and even though the execution wasn't flawless. You see exactly what they were trying to do. There is something new added onto the story, that you haven't seen before, in any of the other remakes.

I agree with another reviewer. Any remake does do the original one an injustice. So I do have to give them fault for that one. It might have been a mistake to make this movie. But I'm not going to punish the people that made this for that mistake. I will not say this movie is trash, like other reviewers. Because it is far from trash.

Overall, I wasn't bored or disgusted by this movie. I did enjoy some small bits here and there. That does including the acting. I really enjoyed Sarah Thomas as Helen Cooper and the new characters from Lisa Marie and Kayla Elizabeth.

If you are a die-hard fan of the original movie. You are going to hate this movie, because you are so dead set on the original.
4 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Is this a worthy remake?
stubanker85051 November 2014
I am a major fan of Night of the Living. This was one of our main movies we studied at University of Kansas. I have seen every single Night of the Living Dead. I absolutely hated Reanimation 3D. That was such a terrible movie. I was a somewhat skeptical of this movie. I'm not really a fan of low budget independent movies. But I bought the DVD, because I'm a huge fan of the franchise. Even though the movie had a very low budget. I think it was around $2,000. I LOVED THE MOVIE! I had a great time watching this movie. You will see a lot of new things, that took a lot of guts. I really couldn't believe the twists that hit you during the movie. You get SOMETHING NEW! How about that? You get something brand new to a remake. The movie does scream indie, but it really adds to the movie. It has a certain charm, that you don't want to turn away. I don't know any of the actors, but no one knew any of the originals either. The acting was pretty impressive. Rebekka Daniel was OUTSTANDING! The role seemed off with her though, but I really enjoyed her performance. Gad Holland was a new style of Ben, but he was a great as the role. This is a different Ben, not the one you are used to. The other actors were fantastic as well. Sarah Thomas really came off like she was Marilyn Eastman from the original. She was pretty good.

I've never seen any works from Chad Zuver before, but I think I'm jumping on that bandwagon now. He did a really impressive job with the movie. He surprising made a worthwhile remake. This isn't anything close to the original or even the 90s remake. But in my opinion, this was the best remake since Tom Savini. Even though this a totally different movie than the 1968 one. You still see some touches of the original. Gotta respect Chad Zuver for that. If you are a fan of the original movie. You will really enjoy this movie and appreciate it, compared to the original. It was truly like watching a modern day telling of the original.

You will enjoy this movie!!
9 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Well done a remake
dealwzimmer26 October 2014
I am an absolute fan of the original Night of the Living Dead. It is one of my favorite movies. I am also a fan of the 1990 remake as well. Then remakes started to come out of the woodwork. Everyone started to remake the movie and they just started to get worse and worse. Then I heard a local director in my area, was making a new "revision of the movie". I checked it out at their premier and I was overly impressed with the work. Chad Zuver, who directed the movie did show off a lot of the original's style. But he also included a new twist into the story. The twists were amazing and gave Night of the Living Dead fans something new to see. You WILL be blown away by the ending. You don't see it coming at all and took me by surprise. The movie does have a low budget and I'm not faulting the movie at all for it. The story and drama keep you entertained in the movie. You really felt the drama involved in the house. The acting was up and down on some levels. Rebekka Daniel, Gad Holland (UNBELIEVABLE AS BEN!!), Kayla Elizabeth, and Sara Thomas were pretty good in their roles. Kayla Elizabeth is without a doubt one of the best actresses I've seen in the area. Her emotion literally pulls you into the movie. One of the biggest hit/misses on the acting part was Lee Godwin. He was great in certain spots and wooden in others. I wish he showed a lot more emotion in his role. But overall the acting was fairly good for a small time movie. With the lack of a budget, the movie did have some creative ways for their gore scenes. I was truly impressed with their special effects.

Overall, Toledo's Night of the Living Dead is a pretty good remake. A lot better than some of the mainstream others. Chad Zuver is a very talented director. He told an amazing story and it showed on screen. Someone in Hollywood needs to give him at least one chance of a movie with a decent sized budget. Everyone needs to see this movie at least once. Don't compare it to the original. Just sit back and enjoy the movie. You will have a blast.
9 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
This is very scary
jacobjohntaylor130 November 2016
This is a very scary movie. Nigh of the living dead (1968) is scarier. Night of the living dead (1990) is also scarier. Dawn of the dead (1978) is also scarier. Day of the dead is also scarier. This is a lot better then Day of the dead 2. That movie is awful This is also a lot better then Night of living dead (2006) that is an awful movie. Better the Night of the living dead re-animated that was an awful movie. It is also a lot better then Night of the living dead (2009) that is an awful movie. It also a lot better the Dawn of the dead (2004) that is an awful movie. This movie has great acting. It also has a great story line. See it. It is very scary. It has great special effects. It is a must see.
0 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed