Calling all zombie fans....<br /><br />One user has said this is the best zombie film since Planet Terror. Might be right as there has not been another since Planet Terror has there? or at least one with a moderately half decent budget.<br /><br />Let's take this from the point of view of a what most people will want to know who like zombie films and hail George Romero as the master....is the film any good and how is Day of the Dead re-imagined from the original.<br /><br />Remember when the DOTD remake came out and most of us all spat at the idea saying what a travesty? I for one thought I was proved vastly wrong. Zack Snyder took the basis of the original and re-interpreted the idea in what turned out to be an excellent film, on it's own merits. Good characters, good story, gore and a decent run time with a very nice budget. Let's not forget that DOTD remake revived mainstream zombie interest! Since then though it's been slightly down hill with some poor further attempts released. Even Land of the Dead wasn't that great (mainly due to studio interference) <br /><br />So now we have Day of the Dead. Not really a remake of such but more a cash in to get our zombie juices flowing and gain interest. Let's make one thing clear, the only thing this has in common with the original is a few character names and zombies...and a military presence. Nothing further. This film is not a remake or re-interpretation, so don't get your hopes up.<br /><br />Now, there are a fair few out there who didn't like the idea of running zombies when DOTD remake came out. If you didn't like that then you'll hate this. Not only do the zombies run they: <br /><br />Jump - leap - run through windows - play dead (??) - drive cars - understand what's being said -(most importantly) THEY CAN CRAWL ON CEILINGS!! <br /><br />Maybe someone thought this would be a great idea but I have this to say to that person....NO NO NO NO!!!!! <br /><br />I keep referring to zombies. I find it difficult to see the zombies as 'zombies' though. They are more like crazed maniacs. Think 28 days later (which was not a zombie film people!). Also, remember how in zombie films zombies look how they do because they are rotting or because they have been eaten? Not really the case here. The virus (or whatever) turns people, makes a change at DNA level and makes their faces all strange and horrible looking.<br /><br />The casting of this film is wrong, everyone is young, apart from Ving Rhames (why did he decide to have any part in this?). The cast don't have much to work with via the non-existent script and hence everything has a slightly diluted and cheap feel to it. There's plenty of gore but I honestly couldn't give a toss because I'd lost interest in the film after 30 minutes and just wanted to watch everyone die.<br /><br />If you're going to watch this you MUST remember that this is not a remake and not a re-interpretation. This is a cash in, nothing more. It's no wonder the film has been sat on the shelves of the studio for a year now. They shouldn't have bothered releasing it.<br /><br />In an ideal world, the impatient cash hungry studios would have waited for Zack to finish 300 and then signed him on to the project. I think Universal (or whoever had them) sold the rights on....probably because Zack wasn't available and they knew the movie would be crap.<br /><br />We can now only hope and pray that George brings us back to where we should be with Diary of the Dead. If not, I fear the zombie revolution has come to an early end....again.