Swamp Zombies!!!

There are good zombies movies and there are bad zombie movies. "Swamp Zombies" fall into the latter category. The DVD cover actually looks promising enough, but once you start the movie, that illusion vaporises like dew in the morning sun.

The story in "Swamp Zombies" is fairly much average for a zombie movie. Experiments were being done on corpses, and for some reason the corpses come back to life, hungry for human flesh.

But the acting in "Swamp Zombies". Wow, that baffled me. I have rarely seen anything like it. Most of the performances put on here were well below average, with forced, halted dialogue and performances that you never really bought into. Most of the people seemed like they had just memorized their lines and were stumbling through to put them out there. It was painful to watch. I am not sure why, but apparently it was a big deal to Brain Dead Films to have Brian Heffron, Jasmin St. Claire and Dan Severn on the cast list, but those people can't act!

There is a good enough amount of gore in the movie, and that is actually the one thing that the movie have working for it. But it is hardly nowhere enough to make it interesting.

The zombie make-up, well it was almost non-existent, was nothing interesting. Most of them looked just like ordinary people. So nothing to come here for.

Sure "Swamp Zombies" is an ambitious project, and hats off to Brain Dead Films to do this. But the movie never rises beyond an amateur attempt at making a movie. I am sure there are fans out there for these particular types of low-budget movies. I, however, am just not one of them. I don't mind low-budget movies, but this was just too uneventful and too plain.

The makers of Swamp Zombies clearly had ambitions. Filled with a large cast and a number of locations (yes the low budget favorite woods are used but we also have a lot filmed in a hospital with plenty of extras walking around).

But that doesn't make Swamp Zombies good. I saw the 2 hour cut which is interminably boring. The audio is all in-camera and changes between shots.

The zombies, of which there is way too little are just some people with some blood splattered on them. It would have been awesome to get some mucky-living dead coming out of a swamp, but theres not even a swamp in Swamp Zombies. Its just a forest. Theres also a few scenes at a beach.

Little gore, a surprising amount of nudity, and too much talking. This was director Len Kabasinki's first feature, he has gone on to make 16 more films as of 2022, including a sequel which is mercifully only 75 minutes long.

Awesome movie, exciting fight scenes, professional editing, award winning music, great acting, crystal clear sound, brilliant script...oops sorry i made some spelling mistakes there. Let me correct them.

awesome = awful, exciting = hilarious, professional = dreadful, award winning = random horrid, crystal clear = sound crew were on vacation, brilliant = diabolical.

I think the only reason there were not goofs listed for this movie is that there would be so many it would crash IMDb servers.

I read it was originally 3 hours long and they cut it to just under 2, i think they needed to cut 2 more hours out of it.

Yeah it was low budget but you don't need budget to write a script, it just didn't have one. It seemed to be just an excuse to show some breasts and then kind of throw some Zombies in it too.

All that aside you still have to sit through all 2 hours of it just because it was so funny, it wasn't listed as a comedy but you couldn't help but laugh at it.

It's type of movie guy would watch with a bunch of drunk friends (Please drink responsibly).

This film is bad. No question about it. But rather than just criticize the film for its faults I thought I would also point out some of the good things about it and explain the reasons for some of the flaws as well. For example, most of the actors were amateurs and it showed. However, this was an ultra low-budget production and as a result hiring top-notch professional actors was definitely out of the question. So the director, (Len Kabasinski) had to make do with whatever was available. With that in mind, I actually thought some of the scenes were somewhat adequate, particularly those involving "Dr. Phillips" (Shannon Solo) and to a lesser extent some of the scenes with "Lillian Carter" (Jasmin St. Claire). Unfortunately, these barely average scenes were few and far between. Likewise, the script was actually okay. It was the way the other actors delivered their lines that left me less than impressed. Even so, as bad as the acting may have been, the fight scenes were much worse. Yet instead of minimizing them the director chose to present one after another. Of course, the fact that he was one of the characters in the film ("Jack") who was involved in several of the fight scenes might be a key reason for this. Regardless, they were still pretty awful. Ditto the makeup for the zombies. Anyway, having said all of this, I believe that this movie could have been salvaged if it had focused more on Dr. Phillips and Lillian, put more emphasis on makeup and minimized physical combat. It didn't and the final product suffered accordingly. So, while allowances could be made for the lack of financial resources available, the fact remains that this movie could have been better in spite of it all. That said, while it isn't the worst zombie movie I have ever seen, it was certainly bad enough.

I have a hard time believing that this movie was made. That means that the crew/cast actually read the script and decided, "sure, let's produce this!" The writing is terrible, the acting is worse, the special effects are a joke, the cinematography was most likely preformed by a child, and the editing is so bad that I can't believe even Brain Damage would accept such trash. This isn't fun bad, this is not worth your time to even make fun of bad. I love zombie movies and this is a disgrace to the entire genre. If the filmmakers know what is good for them, they would stop making the world suffer through their terrible monstrosities and go to work in another field.