Return of the Living Dead: Necropolis - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

Return of the Living Dead: Necropolis Reviews

Page 1 of 16
Super Reviewer
½ May 22, 2011
Necropolis...a great name for film title but I'm afraid the franchise has lost its impetus with this next installation. Again naughty people are trying to use the deadly toxic gas to reanimate the dead and use for military weapons but once again it all goes wrong and the undead run amok...oh geez.

We are now firmly in B-movie land with this one, the acting is quite terrible from all members including Peter Coyote and the plot is just a rehash against a different backdrop. The only thing going for this is the well done makeup effects which is just as good as the previous films and makes the film better than it deserves to be.

These films are all about the cool hands on makeup effects lets be honest, and they all deliver consistently. This is the one thing these sequels manage to pull off despite the fact they rehash everything else. In that aspect they just about hold your attention if you're a monster/gore lover but the rest is usually pants.

Nice idea and design for the undead Terminator style soldiers, a small plus point in a sinking film. One has to ask ones self how many more of these can they do? they are clearly trying to utilize every possible backdrop for the zombie outbreaks, I guess a desert setting will be next, haven't seen that yet.
Super Reviewer
½ October 29, 2013
Complete and utter garbage, Return of the Living Dead: Necropolis is generic horror tripe. The story is idiotic, there's not a decent performance among the cast, and the production values are awful. It's pretty clear that the film is using the title "Return of the Living Dead" in name only, as it doesn't follow the style or continuity of the series. The zombie action isn't that bad, but the story is so pointless that it doesn't really matter. Return of the Living Dead: Necropolis just screams low-budget horror, and on that count it doesn't disappoint.
Super Reviewer
½ September 21, 2008
This one was pretty interesting. The zombies were faster and more scarier in this horror flick.
June 12, 2012
quite puzzled by this one as to how the money was given to the film. Great makeup and effects, horrid casting. Great production, horrid writing. Great locations and set, horrid waste of time. Honestly, if I had the money they were given for this film I would have seriously thought it through abit more as it took them 17 years to think about it since part 3, and this was the best they could do. Really?
½ April 24, 2012
Low budgeted, and the story is dull. It's about as unserious as the first film but lacks the comedy. The zombies still want brains but many are intelligent in this movie, and they can be killed by a bullet to the head, which is new to this franchise. The characters are boring and many elements of this film were bad.
December 25, 2011
Yet another terrible movie. The production values in this movie were flat out terrible, they ditched everything they had in the first few films. The thing that made me the most mad was that now the zombies can be killed by damaging the brain. Which in every other zombie movie is correct, but not the Return of the Living Dead films. In the very first film they touch on this subject for about 30 minutes about how damaging the brain does nothing and even chopped off body parts continue to live. But, they abandoned that in this film. The actors were awful, and the set design was terrible too.
June 12, 2007
I will give them credit for have a few references to the films from he beginning. I will also give them credit for making cool zombies. I will then give one more piece of credit to the fact that they referenced an old joke from the first movie. But that is it. Other than that, the movie was not that good. The first half of the film was just boring with bad dialog. The second half had the action and it was decent. The story made sense, but was not really focused on in the movie. One thing that really made me mad as a person who loves zombies. The zombies in this film could be killed by getting shot in the chest. That ruins the whole thing. Now they did have different type of zombies. Ones that were bitten were really smart, could even talk if they were only bitten a little. Then you have stupid zombies. Then there is another type of zombie that does not make sense at all, but you will have to watch the movie to see them. The cast was half and half. Some could act, others needed to die sooner in the film. I love the Return of the Living Dead movies and this one was not a good add on to the others.
½ August 6, 2010
This entry in the Return of the Living Dead series wants to become something more than a mere sequel by projecting itself into a future in which zombies have been contained by the intervention of a particular company--for a better version of the same story, see the film Fido. Hence, Return of the Living Dead plays as a dystopian future in which zombies have been eradicated but are secretly being used to develop super weapons by the US military. Of course, our old friend Trioxin manages to get released and infect everyone. Necropolis is an entertaining but stupid and ultimately unnecessary film.
½ July 6, 2010
About as scary as Scooby-Doo with zombies. Sure Daphne is hot, but you never get to see her tits, so really, what's the point in watching?
May 17, 2010
You know, I really don't expect much out of zombie movies. You basically go into these knowing what to expect, but every now and then, you get one that manages to redefine what horror really is. In this case, horror is the 88 minutes of awfulness that is this film. Horrible dialogue, worse acting, and the assumption that the viewers themselves are as brain-dead as the zombies in the film. That ailment would be about the only way any form of entertainment is going to be had, unless you're a fan of an incohesive storyline, nonexistent direction or 20-something year-old teeny-boppers who couldn't act their way out of a wet paper sack. In fact, I'll go so far as to say that on the steaming pile of crap that the zombie film genre has become, this one is squarely at the top.

Director Ellory Elkayem should be tried for crimes against humanity, because that's exactly what this film is. In my opinion, he's managed to even usurp laughingstock Uwe Boll for the title of the world's most incompetent director. I'm sure some will say, "But it's just a zombie horror movie, you knew what it would be going in." Sure, that's true, but that just goes to show how this movie takes awful to a whole new level.You can tell that this is squarely aimed at a teenage, young adult audience (you can tell from all the "Extreme" content and the "metalcore" soundtrack), but knowing that just makes me ask this: Are the youthful really so dumb as to be entertained by this? I surely hope not...
April 24, 2010
Inconsistent with the O'Bannon's original zombie in the first Return of the Living Dead. Why do the zombies die at all, let alone when shot in the chest a few times? Why do the zombies tear people apart instead of just eating the brains? So many flaws so little time.
½ March 4, 2010
This entry in the Return of the Living Dead series wants to become something more than a mere sequel by projecting itself into a future in which zombies have been contained by the intervention of a particular company--for a better version of the same story, see the film Fido. Hence, Return of the Living Dead plays as a dystopian future in which zombies have been eradicated but are secretly being used to develop super weapons by the US military. Of course, our old friend Trioxin manages to get released and infect everyone. Necropolis is an entertaining but stupid and ultimately unnecessary film.
January 5, 2008
a good movie.i didn't like the fact that they made the zombies so easy to kill when in the first 3 they were unkillable but it was still a good movie.
April 10, 2008
And another franchise bites the dust. Having claimed all sorts of fame and glory from directing the academy award movie Eight-Legged Freaks, Ellory Elkayem tackled the Return franchise by creating this dull and stupid film about the government still trying to work with the deadly trioxin gas, using various people as guinea pigs and it's up to a renegade squad of 30 year old high schoolers who couldn't act their way out of a plastic bag to stop them. All sorts of zombie action and machine gun tomfoolery ensures and isn't enough to make this film memorable at all. Hated it to know end. Guess what though? Ellory was directing back to back return of the living dead films! Hooray. Peter Coyote is utterly wasted in this film as the evil uncle, but hey, he lives, so maybe he can cause more trouble in the next one.
½ February 15, 2008
The worst zombie movie ever made. The characters were dumb zombies even dumber. I wasted 2.50 on this peice of crap. The only good thing about this movie is the soundtrack. Storyline really sucked. I do not recommend this movie. George Romero had nothing to do with this movie s hame on the plot synopsis.
½ November 27, 2007
loved this back then because it scared me stupid...but now its like i can watch it and nothing happens. lol
August 3, 2014
While the premise of this was decent, Necropolis was the bottom of the Trioxin 5 barrel. The way to kill zombies has changed, there is no logic, and since when do zombies hold regular conversations and even taunt people?

Anyway, this is horrible. Could have been quite good, but illogic, and bad acting just ruin everything.
Page 1 of 16