User reviews

This film is the most hideous thing you can imagine. To give you an example of how bad this is, one of the reasons given why the dead are coming back to life is that the zombie king (?) was forced to cross dress as a child.

Yes, forget radiation, disease or nanotech, this time it's transvestitism that brings the dead out of their graves.

There is a scene where a car goes over a cliff. The FX brings to mind that old TV show where marionettes pilot a spaceship. The actors (?) say their line "No ahhh" while they die. This scene pretty well sums up the film.

This is a horrible, horrible film. There are not enough bad adjectives to describe it. You should see it simply because it is so horrible.

I was even IN this movie (as an uncredited extra) and I knew at the time it was going to be bad. What I didn't realize was how bad bad could be.

I know one of the cameramen and he knew better how bad it was going to be but after seeing the stunning editing job they did, he too was amazed at the appalling disjointed quality of this film. I hesitate to use the word 'film' even. And don't use the word 'professionalism' either, as jelly was spilt on at least one roll of film and things had to be reshot. Why did they bother?

I ONLY watched this movie because I have always liked Tom Savini and wanted to see what he was up to. He was OK in his previous cheesy acting roles, like Dusk till Dawn and some Romero films like DOTD and Martin. Obviously his talent lies in special FX and not in acting, but I give the guy a little credit for acting too, just because he's Tom Savini. But why Tom... why?!?!?! I am shocked that he would have been associated with a movie as bad as this... I can't imagine it was for the money. Anyway, this movie is rubbish and I don't know what Tom was thinking when he signed on. I will never get that hour and a half of my life back.

From Children of the Living Dead, I have obtained more hours of enjoyment than watching any other movie. I can watch this film numerous times, laugh at how hilariously bad it is and still find something new each time. For instance, when we get a brief glimpse inside the construction site building, why is there gang graffiti on the walls? Or, if you watch the very beginning when Savini and the sheriff are walking towards the house, you can see something from the sheriff's belt make a big shine reflection on the house. Thank you, John Russo and all your cronies for pumping out good quality garbage like this. The bad dubbing, the horrible acting, the horrible script....Oh, and that brings up the end credits. I love how in the end credits, that there is a separate credit for "Abbott Hayes is an original character by" and then they give the screen writer's name. I guess the writer was afraid that people would think that someone else came up with the idea of the great zombie villain Abbott Hayes, or maybe they were afraid that someone would rip him off and that he would become as big as Jason or Freddy Kreugar. Oh, a fun drinking game to play is to take a drink for every time you see someone with the last name "Hinzman" in the end credits. You'll die of alcohol poisoning by the time they stop rolling.

Children Of The Living Dead at time of writing currently has an outstandingly low 2.3 rating on IMDb. It's rare to see something that low but there is a story behind this weak zombie film.

Children Of The Living Dead was setup to be the next great zombie film, the stars were aligned as the cast and crew was packed full of legends within the industry and the film had a modest half a million dollar budget.

Sadly it wasn't meant to be. Nepotism ran rampant, friends and family were brought in instead of genuine talent and were given offensively high salaries. Morale was non-existent, arguments and creative issues were a daily occurrence and the end result was a terrible film that many have publicly slammed despite their part in it.

Tom Savini especially has been vocal, claiming it should have been something special but descended into something he regrets.

It has a real Romero feel to it and our antagonist is actually quite good. Sadly with weak looking zombies, terrible acting/writing and a conflicted tone the film is destined to be infamous for all the wrong reasons.

The Good:

Tom Savini

The Bad:

Gunplay is laughable

Shoddily made

Tone shifts

Things I Learnt From This Movie:

There is nothing to fear but fear itself.....and zombies

Tom Savini is a very gifted make-up artist. He is creative, twisted, and a legend in the make-up/SFX world.

How this translates into him being an actor, sliding across car hoods, doing flips, and shooting zombies still mystifies me.

To be honest though, it wouldn't matter who starred in this mess..it would still be a sloppy, amateur cheesefest trying to capitalize on the words Living Dead.

As a huge fan of Savini, I was sooooo let down by this movie that I cant even begin to express my hatred for it. It does everything wrong, ugly, and with no Savini style. Please stay BEHIND the camera Tom....please.

Avoid this like the plague. 1 out of 10

Approx 1 year ago, I rented this film......Why you ask? Because it was a zombie film, Plain and simple. When the DVD arrived in the Mailbox....(Quick Netflix Plugin)I went inside inserted the DVD grabbed some Micro Popcorn a beer and nestled in on the couch hoping to at least catch a Decent Low budget Horror/Zombie Film. What Did I get? NOTHING but an upset stomach.

Some say this film is BAD, I believe BAD is too good a word for this piece of $#!^. I read a comment on the net someone made about this film, The director responded back.... agreeing with the reviewers assessment of the film. There are many reasons this film failed, The Director noted every single one of them, and he hit it right on the nose.

If you are looking for just a simple zombie film.....RENT SOMETHING ELSE.

If your looking for an ED WOOD type film..... RENT AN ED WOOD FILM.

If your looking for a bad film...... RENT SOMETHING ELSE

Until a term can come up to describe this film..... Just keep walking by it. This is not something to add to your DVD collection just for completist reasons.

They say let's Recycle...... Well gather up every copy and let's start there.

I have suffered through some horrible horror movies through the years; The Alien Dead, Blood Diner, Lawnmower Man...just to name a few. I actually walked out of the theater on the Lawnmower Man, but I digress. I would have walked out of this abomination too, except I was AT home as this turd was a direct to DVD release. It got sooo bad about 45 minutes through I put my player on 4x speed just so I could skip over the mind-numbingly bad acting and dialogue. Abbot Hayes, the leader of the prancing dead. All this bastard does in the film is lurk in the shadows, prance, and grin/mug maniacally at the camera. He is a precedent setter though, the first queer zombie on film, oh wait Michael Jackson, never mind.

I wrote a very long review before but for some reason only my summary was up, so here goes at a second attempt. Being the dead fan I am (I have a dead trilogy website) I couldn't resist seeing this movie, even knowing that it would be pretty bad in comparison to Romero's movies. Quite simply, I was blown away. Never before (and I mean this) have I seen such a dire plot, such awful acting and such diabolical camera work. This film isn't even one of those 'So bad it's good' events, failing on every possible level. Cue 90 minutes of unbelievably bad dubbing, atrocious story lines and god-awful filming techniques. It is so hard to express how bad this film is. The film jumps forward 14 years, then 1 year and so on yet has no continuity. We do not know what is going on as each time segment has no relation to the previous one. It is criminal that this film was ever made, and the cheek of John Russo (who I would take great pleasure in torturing) to call this the 'long awaited sequel'. How can people possibly believe that this is good? Surely someone on set would have realised that they were making one of the worst films in history (and that's no lie either).

To be honest, I would go so far as to pay people not to watch this, in the vain hope that all copies would be pulled from shelves and the negatives be burnt. I can't even give this an IMDB rating of one as it simply does not deserve that kind of credibility. Atrocious.

This movie was so goofy it was quite entertaining. Most of the acting was terrible, with some of the actors obviously trying not to laugh. Tom Savini was terrific for the first part of the movie, but...well I won't spoil it for you. I would definitely like to see him get larger roles.

The movie starts out with a bunch of zombies roaming a field with the local yahoos shooting at them. The action leads to a barn where the hero of the movie discovers more zombies and shoots all of them except the head zombie. The movie then shifts to 14 years later when we learn that the head zombie is Abbot Hays, who was executed as a murderer, but the body disappeared. A crooked car dealer buys out the cemetery and starts digging up the graves to put in a new dealership. Hey, none of the locals complained about that? The movie cannot seem to decide whether Abbot Haze is the hero or the villain. Is he protecting the cemetery or just causing mayhem? It makes the sheriff into a heal and then a hero in the end. It makes the crooked car dealer's heal side kick into a hero at the end too.

Yeah, people are saying how bad this movie is, but that was what made it fun to watch, but if you want to be scared out of your wits this won't do it for you.

A good doorstop, fireplace kindling, target-practice fodder...perhaps, but a watchable movie...NO! Straight out of a high-school filmmaking class at best, this amateurish junk made me want to sue the director & writer for the 50 cents I wasted renting it. Read the worst review here and call it an understatement....Beware of this one.

OK this is not a zombie movie, how could it. in all the Romero films the zombies are driving by flesh, the main zombie like has super human strength and knowledge. i really want to know how this is a zombie film, the only up side to the film was Savini. but he was killed in the beginning, he was kicking so much but! as i recall the zombie slashed him with his claws or what ever they were. the up side about the film was the start and the (almost) end. the fighting was good i guess, the gore was OK. the most ass nine thing i saw in the film was the vary end, forgiving the fact that the good people of that town killed every zombie but the main one(in witch could laf), he just walked away ! zombies will do anything to get flesh, even march into a army of rednecks with guns.

This movie was an absolute blast. Gather round and I shall regale you with is story of how I came upon this gem of a movie. I went to my local blockbuster with my two chums and was looking at the movie Dog Soldiers. I said "We should rent this it looks either half decent or so bad it's funny." One of the employees said "No, this movie was sort of interesting if you want a really crappy movie follow me". So off we went to the vhs section of Blockbuster. He hauled out children of the living dead. He summed it up the best "You will laugh your ass off. This movie is the most terrible thing in the store. The acting is garbage, the special effects are sad, and the ending doesn't make even romotely ANY sense whatsoever...But I'll leave you to discover it for yourself." So we thanked him and off he went. We had to wait for my friends mom to rent the movie so we left it at the front desk and went across the street to get snacks for the movie. When we came back like 5 minutes later instead of the usual "hello" Blockbuster employees give you the guy was like "It was that bad you're back already?". This movie is absolutely the worst thing to be dedicated to film. The previews are a riot in themselves. I'd have to say one of my favorite parts is probably when tom savini is aiming a sniper rifle at a car and he says "Surprise" but his lips don't move That's what happens when you dubb nearly the entire movie. The acting is is like High quality porn(and that's not saying much), the special effects are retard-quality, and the story is just abso-f**k-inglutely insane. And just wait 'til the last giant battle at the diner.(tom savini plays someone else..he's the guy hucking dynamite from his car. He shaved his beard and only my friend noticed). To call this movie crap would be a compliment. But I will call it crap becuase it will encourage these movie makers to continue to produce these finely tuned laughing stocks. If it were a little less boring in the middle it would be flawless. And the big kicker here is that everything is tinted light blue. After watching the movie we checked the back of the box and "OH MY GOD IT'S MADE IN 2001!!". It looks like they used paper towel for film...this movie is a disgrace. This movie sucks, so invite over your most sarcastic friends and have a gay old time. 0.0001/10-Final Score

There is not a single facet of this film that is good, or even decent.

I had low expectations for this film, but this sunk even lower than I could have thought. It looked like the thing was shot on a camcorder. There was all of one lens used in the entire film, which gave it that nice camcorder feel. You can see the same background depth in every shot because of this. Usually you won't notice the background revealed to you in a film, but you will if there is no change at all over every single shot.

The lighting wasn't dramatic at all and it looked more like a home film than even my flick. It didn't even try to be scary... well it did, but it was so overtly done that it made you laugh more than quiver. They relied on the sunlight too much in the film and didn't attempt to compliment it with outside lighting at all. Then at night the cemetery and house settings are so obviously artificially lit, and you can even see the lights even though it's supposed to be out in the country.

The plot makes no sense at all. Karen Wolf made no attempt to explain why the hades the lead zombie abducted these kids and kept them alive. They are just sitting there when found as if just watching TV. She obviously never even attended a funeral in her life or would know that they bury people right after the funeral, not hours later. And then some grave robbers show up--somehow they knew the caskets would still be out of the ground--and one gets killed, the other is obviously miscast as an old man.

Similarly, the dialogue form the characters is mostly all small talk and you could cut half of it and never even notice. The characterization isn't there except for two characters who contrast from the rest of the others, but the acitng manages to botch up that distinguishing.

The sound is horrid. It's like they recorded on location and added the dialogue later. The lips often never move, but people are talking. If the lips are moving, they aren't moving at the same speed as the voice. The voices don't fit the facial expressions or have any real emotion to them. The zombies make groaning noises in the same way... some have their mouths open, some don't. And it's very obvious. The dialogue doesn't seem to come form any channel, and I wonder if it was recorded in monotone and from equal distance from the microphone for every character. I'm almost sure of it.

The direction was equally bad. There were close-ups where more distant shots could be used because the close-ups seemed forced and weak for the dialogue given. Then there are long shots that need to be drastically magnified to close-ups in order to give it more dramatic feeling. The way that we see the lead zombie as a zombie for the first time is like this. It's a full body shot and we can see all of this area surrounding him, and the guy doesn't seem scary at all, even though his make-up implies we are to think that way about him.

The photography complimented the direction in its ineptitude. The opening shots are tinted blue for some unknown reason--and it's very blatant and unfitting of the time of day of the shot. A yellow, orange or red tint would have looked better, especially for illuminating the zombies' faces in the sunlight. The blue tint better have been some homage to Dawn of the Dead's blue-faced zombies, but I doubt it. Even if it was, it is bad filmmaking. There should have been darker, less focal depth lenses used to make the lighting more dramatic in many, many, many scenes indoors. You would never know it is supposed to be a horror film in this regard in a whole lot of shots.

The editing and pacing of the scenes was bland. We get a little bit of drama with the music for one actual scene when the main character is scoping out his house, but the scene just up and ends abruptly, leaving the viewer to wonder "was that it?!" There's a shot where the lead zombie bites into the neck of a guy in one shot up-close, then it cuts to another shot for some unknown reason and the guy's neck is still immaculate. And when the lead character talks to his love interest while ordering coffee, she fills up his cup, then takes it away, refills, wipes the bottom of the saucer and refills his cup again... BEFORE HE EVEN TAKES A SIP!

The acting looks like they put an ad in the paper and accepted all non-SAG-eligible actors for parts without even giving them a screen test. Except for Tom Savini, of course, who even can't overcome bad script and direction to make his character seem cool, just a one-liner-spewing, macho idiot. It speaks volumes that they hired Bill Hinezman's daughter (?) for one of the more prominent zombie parts; it backs my theory up.

Like I've put in here several times, you usually don't notice when things are done correctly (ie: you don't go "that shot had great lighting!"), but you sure as heck notice when they go awry in a film, and they go awry in every scene and almost every shot. If they made a manual for showing how NOT to make a film, they would say "watch Children of the Living Dead."

. . . because that means it wasn't a total waste of celluloid.

I am a great fan of bad movies. In fact, I believe that many "bad" movies are not really bad, but just misunderstood, as I've tried to explain in my reviews of other much maligned movies such as "Robot Monster" and "Night of the Living Dead 3D." But this one, in my opinion, is not enjoyably bad, not laughably bad. Just plain bad.

The opening scenes with Tom Savini are passable. But when Abbott Hayes makes his appearance, things go downhill really fast. In fact, it quickly got to the point where I could no longer watch this movie. I felt that I had already wasted too much of my life on this piece of trash and could not afford to waste any more.

All the negative comments that have been made about this movie by previous reviewers are true. It is total garbage. For the few who enjoyed it, I say more power to you. But as for me, I wish I had read the reviews before investing a half hour of my life that I will never get back.

There is only one word to describe this film, BAD. Indeed the worst film ever made, I don't know why Tom Savini ended up taking part in such a terrible film. I am a fan of George Romero films and when I saw this movie I just wanted to cry. The movie photography is terrible, the dialog is stupid as it can be, the story is boring, and the action… what action? This movie should be banned from all the video stores and never be mentioned again, the director must never make a movie ever again please. For the producer and director… film-making is definitely not for you. Don't ever try this again. If you see this movie in the video store go to the clerk and tell him to burn the movie.

I must admit that the zombie is far from my favourite horror monster scary-thing image. But in an attempt to find the ultimate in scary films, old and new, I will watch anything to develop my ideas and get my fix.

With hindsight, I needn't have watched this one. Pointless and grossly non-developed plot, wooden characters (whether zombie-fied or not), extremely budget sets, inconsistent action from one scene (even one shot) to the next, no entertainment value (this wasn't even laughable), and definitely no horror. Not a squeak!

In truth, the credits to this film were arguably the best part. If they had been at the beginning, there may well have been a good opening to the film. All that would be needed thereafter is to change absolutely everything from then on. No, hold on, there was one good thing... the mask of the intelli-zombie, yes the living AND thinking dead... was almost quite effective. Almost. In fact, I am having trouble dissuading myself that it is this same mask that was used again, some years later, in Jeepers Creepers.

Essentially, this film is a no-watcher... and I struggle to believe that it was ever worth watching. Or making.

I rated a "2"

After years of disappearances around town, the local sheriff finds them all tied to a local legend about a ravenous zombie intent on waging war on humanity and forces the town's survivors to fight off his undead hordes.

This here actually wasn't that bad. One of the better elements is the fact that it features a main zombie who has a distinct personality and a sense of intelligence which is a nice change of pace from most zombie films, staying in the shadows while setting out a game plan and knows when to sneak up on victims. This gives it more than a typical zombie film in his behavior, and along with the rather impressive make-up work on the zombies with lots of wounds that get bloodier and more disgusting, and with their rotting, dead look and glaring fangs create some pretty imposing features and makes for an overall effective amount of zombie mayhem. Another big factor here is the action within this one as this features a rather enjoyable amount of action within this. The fact that the film starts off with a big action scene of them trying to knock off hordes of zombies rampaging through the countryside is a big plus, leading to a lot of close-calls and big action as the odds are stacked towards them enough to make them seem like a threat. Other great sequences include the great barnyard encounter as well as the big swarm encounters through town that occur in the later half which really makes for an entertaining time. Along with some fun suspense scenes of the zombies attacking the townspeople in a series of surprise attacks as well as plenty of great bloodshed are the film's good points, while this one here doesn't have too many flaws to it. The fact that it does have some really blatant obviousness in its cheapness is something to get over. The gore and wounds are hardly realistic, especially the finale bloodbath though there are plenty of obvious examples before that and allow for some pretty big examples. Aside from the low-budget, another flaw in here is that the film has a bit of a problem with pacing here, especially in the middle section. This is due to a confusing habit of changing around years, jumping around to different years at various points along the way by seemingly injecting a new scene into the film almost every time it changes scenes. It's not clear why this is done and it's purpose is a puzzling one since it could've easily done so without changing around the years around to make this as confusing as it is. While some out there will decry the new treatment afforded to the zombies' behavior and actions, it's not enough to hold it back like the rest of the film's flaws.

Rated R: Graphic Violence and Graphic Language.

The worst? Zombie Planet. I could watch about 20 minutes before I fast forwarded and just saw bits and pieces, ending up in a total 25 minutes. This movie I watched for about 30 minutes, fast forwarded, hoping there'd be a light at the end of the tunnel. But there wasn't. There was nothing good about this movie. I mean they couldn't even manage having good zombie-shooting, which is one of the easiest things to do!

My patience really, REALLY ran thin when they had some guy shooting a zombie and then another one would come, from what I saw, thin air and bite his neck.

It was just so worthless, that all who were involved in the movie (who didn't do it ONLY because they desperately needed the money) should go to prison. No joke.