Night of the Living Dead

Shockingly poor film. Terrible writing, lighting, sound, and as for the acting. O...M...G. I want my 79 minutes back.

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.

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.

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.

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.