Night of the Living Dead 3D: Re-Animation - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

Night of the Living Dead 3D: Re-Animation Reviews

Page 1 of 2
October 31, 2015
So this is a prequel to the second Night of the Living Dead remake. As if this series of films weren't convoluted enough as it is! It does hint towards some form of satire early on (there is a Sarah Palin and Fox News pastiche early on) and it directly references the events in 1968 and 1990 'Night' films. It has been received very poorly critically but its far from the worst horror film I've seen lately. It is mildly diverting but is very much by-the-numbers.
June 19, 2015
was really a terrible movie. everything about it
March 28, 2015
The very few zombies this movie contains do have nice make-up, but the effects are badly-done cartoonish computer blood. Other than these small features, the film is about two brothers and a few other people talking.
February 28, 2014
ok. 3D zombie action, poor script, and plot holes galore makes this side-swipe in a campy first--everything else a distant 10th Fun! don't expect anything more and you just might enjoy it! ;-))
½ January 22, 2014
A supposed prequel to Night of the Living Dead 3D, a terrible film in itself, Re-Animation is of about the same caliber: tired and cliche. It might provide an evening's worth of entertainment for a horror fan who has seen everything else, but it will certainly not leave much of an impression.
November 21, 2013
This was a perfectly awful movie. Lame plot, not enough zombie action to even shake a stick at. Lousy necrophilia zombie scene. The ONLY thing that made it worth while was this comment from Harold:

There was a zombie outbreak in Pittsburgh in 1968 and another in 1990. The one in 1990 was pretty much the same, but gorier. Pittsburgh is the zombie capital.

They also had the original Night of the Living Dead and White Zombie playing on tvs in the background.

The ONLY good parts of this movie were references to OTHER zombie movies.
½ October 31, 2013
What a piece of trash with a flair for political bashing in a Horror movie....not what I watch horror movies that for the tv, radio and news papers....not my movies. Movie moves about warp -1 with no real plot and no real direction. Seems that some people wanted to get together and waste some film and some peoples your energy and time unless you are trying to go to sleep....and watch the real thing...copies are (in this case) poor at best.
October 24, 2013
To be fair this isn't the worst zombie flick I've seen that reward goes to it's predecessor. That being said this is no way a great zombie flick. Too many things wrong with this film. First and for most, the special effects, this film relies too much on Cgi instead of prosthetic effects. One thing good about this film is the two lead actors Andrew divoff and Jeffrey Combs. Rest of the acting was terrible. The 3D sucked. In conclusion, watch the 1968 film, instead.
Super Reviewer
½ October 12, 2013
If it makes enough money chances are no matter how terrible a film is it has a chance to become a franchise. Unlike its predecessor this film is a unnecessary prequel not relying on source material of any classic film. It does match the quality of the first film entry which in the case of this series is not a good thing.

Night of the Living Dead 3D: Re-Animation is about a pyrophobic mortician accidentally exposing hundreds of un-cremated bodies to toxic medical waste. This film sits under 90 minutes yet it still feels long and drawn out. Credit to the writers for spending over an hour developing the characters, but the plot is not set into motion until an hour in. By the time it reaches the zombie outbreak it's incredibly disjointed falling flat in every aspect of horror. Character development despite receiving an hour of it makes it impossible to gain an attachment towards any character. Explanations for what caused the dead to reanimate is the generic "the government did it" excuse. Conversations lead nowhere often reestablishing character background in some occasion more than three times meaning its characters remain static. Conversations serve no other purpose than to pad out the predictable fate of the heroes killing any level of suspense. Here too much talking kills tension, interest, and suspense simultaneously. Not to forget as a whole nothing much occurs in the film. We're told of what happened in the past, but see very little occurring in the present. From beginning to end it all feels like a rough draft for a film making bad decisions on every corner. It has its own ideas, but lack the proper narrative tools to solidly hold it together.

Acting is mediocre on every front. Andrew Divoff is thankfully our lead and at least he exerts energy into a film where it's about as lively as the undead. Divoff performance is by no means any good woodenly deliver his lines, but his charisma is felt sparing the audience from another phoned in performance. So much in fact that he shoots 29 shotgun rounds without having to reload. Says a lot when even the filmmakers desperately keeps it best talent alive in a cast of uninspired actors. The make up are decent, but given the zombies appearance on screen last less than twenty minute one can't fully appreciate the effect. Shots are mostly far enough to see a clearly green screen background and rarely close enough to see the effects. Direction is uninspired, soulless, without a heartbeat, and so forth. The director present is not even felt; if you were to replace the film director with a ghost you would a more lively present behind the camera.

Night of the Living Dead 3D: Re-Animation entertainment is non existent like its 3D effect. Spending too much time talking leading nowhere and building up to the zombie attacks becoming more disappointing it ends within minutes. Just like the undead this film loses anything that would resembles what was once human.
September 12, 2013
Dark, campy, cheesy, and with Jeffrey combs? I love it!!
August 6, 2013
Just bad.... The Make Up and the 3D were okay (sometimes), but whoever wrote and directed this piece of crap got everything else wrong. And no: a few referrals to other movies don't make it a horror comedy... Not even a "C" movie!
½ July 2, 2013
Disappointing, great makeup and prosthetics, but boring. Zombies just shamble around, biting people on the neck occasionally. There's no zombie hordes or real fights going on. The main characters are depressed or stoned. Even my favorite Jeffrey Combs couldn't fix this flick. I watched about 2/3 and then I had to turn it off.
June 23, 2013
A funny film of zombies.
June 9, 2013
The very few zombies this movie contains do have nice make-up, but the effects are badly-done cartoonish computer blood. Other than these small features, the film is about two brothers and a few other people talking.
May 23, 2013
A very poor effort again even with a strong cast of Combs and Divoff. Unlike Romero's this lacks pace and relevant character story.
May 16, 2013
Boring and not scary, this prequel was not necessary nor is worth watching.
April 20, 2013
I'm not going to lie...I really wanted to like NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD 3D: RE-ANIMATION...but...NOPE. It didn't work for me. (lol) It's pretty bad. It just stayed flat for me. (lol) Most of the zombies looked cheesy and the acting was blah. Only thing I did like was - old skool actors Andrew Divoff and Jeffrey Combs. They were cool..OH...and the chick having sex with tha dead dude. THAT was different. (lol) I really wouldn't waste your time on this one people - UNLESS you're into SERIOUS B-MOVIES. (like me) Don't let the title of the movie fool ya.
½ March 11, 2013
Night of the Living Dead: Reanimation (Jeff Broadstreet, 2012)

To put it kindly, Night of the Living Dead: Reanimation has been savaged on the Internet, with just a 3.1 rating on IMDB. I think it suffers from the same disease that pummelled the stupid-yet-oddly-entertaining 2008 Day of the Dead "remake"--"it's not canonical!" Which is absolutely true, and I will warn you right now I'm about to give Jeff Broadstreet a pass on something I castigated George Romero for in Land of the Dead (and I'm giving Broadstreet a pass because this isn't a canonical film in the NotLD universe). But let's face it: given the average quality of the canonical films that have come out in the past ten years, culminating in the loathsome Survival of the Dead, well, I'm really starting to prefer the movies not made by George A. Romero. And this one's got something truly special, albeit in the cheesiest of ways: it's Wishmaster's Andrew Divoff squaring off against Re-Animator's Jeffrey Combs. You're talking about a recipe for cheesy greatness here! And while I will be the first to tell you this is a low-budget (despite the 3D-and I should note for the record I saw it in 2D), amateur, labor-of-love kinda film, it's not even playing in the same city, much less the same zip code, as Survival of the Dead, and it is immensely preferable.

Plot: Gerald Tovar, Jr. (Divoff, taking the role Sid Haig played in the 2006 Night of the Living Dead 3D) is the only funeral director in Hinzmanville, PA. (Yes, that is the level of inside-jokey humor to be found in this movie, and you know what? I loved it.) He works there with his Aunt Lou (Geppetto's Melissa Jo Bailey), aide Dyeanne (The Lost's Robin Sydney), and general handyman/stoner Russell (Redemption's Adam Chambers). Gerald has himself a small problem for a funeral director: he's pyrophobic, and so every time someone has wanted a body cremated since he took over, he's just kind of... stored it. At the same time, he's kept up pappy's old business of taking in medical waste (a government contract, of course!), and he doesn't burn that, either. A couple of weeks ago, they delivered something that, when combined with the corpses, started having nasty side effects. But the zombies-and as a side note, the funeral home is not the only place the zombies are popping up (in fact, we are told in a TV clip the characters are watching that the Vice President of the United States is a zombie!)--are far from Gerald's only worry. His younger brother, veterinarian Harold (Combs), has turned up looking for money. He's not happy with Dyeanne's work, and has just hired recent mortuary school grad Cristie (Lakeview Terrace's Sarah Lieving) to replace her. Some whistleblowers are sniffing around, having got wind of pappy's side business. You know, that sort of thing. Oh, and Russell keeps getting the workers stoned...

Yes, it's stupid. It's gratuitous in at least one scene (Dyeanne, it turns out, seems to be based on Karen Greenlee, which is the only way I can say that without spoilers; wikipedia the name if you want to know more without seeing the film), which paves the way to a scene that rivals the girl-on-girl kiss in Land of the Dead for sheer gratuitousness. But again, this isn't Romero-canon, it's Jeff Broadstreet making a loose sequel to an even looser remake that parts ways completely with canon. So you want to throw in a gratuitous sex scene? Go right ahead-I mean, you've already stuck a pot-smoking zombie in less than two minutes previous.

I don't mean to imply this scene is synecdochic of the entire film. It's an anomaly, though not too much of one; there's a lot of stuff that's in here just for laughs, or just for nostalgia purposes (the first TV clip we hear Aunt Lou watching is Chilly Billy's news report towards the end of Romero's '68 classic), that does nothing at all to advance the film's admittedly paper-thin plot. (But come on, save the original Dawn of the Dead, what was the last zombie movie that did have a plot? White Zombie?) When you're making a movie that's basically plotless-and even worse, derivative-you've got to work on points for style, as David Gilmour once said. And I'm not entirely sure what Jeff Broadstreet was slipping into folks' drinks when he was making this movie, but he managed to coax performances out of these folks I haven't seen in dogs' years-or ever seen. The last time I remember liking Jeffrey Combs this much was The Frighteners (1996). Divoff? Never been this good. Same can be said for Sydney, though she's been around much less time. If she keeps throwing out performances like this one she's got a very bright future ahead of her. In fact, all the principals here are very good, though some of the minor characters could've used some... okay, a lot of... work. Specifically, Denice Duff, a mainstay of the Subspecies franchise, portrays a Sarah Palin knockoff who never rises above one-dimensional parody. Imagine what Broadstreet could have done with a character like that had he attempted to build in some classic-Romero-era satire. But when Broadstreet is on, he is on. Combs and Divoff's first face-off, when you're not quite sure whether Gerald is going to welcome him back into the family? That's very good stuff, right there. If the rest of the film had been of that quality, we would have had a minor gem on our hands. Instead, we got a watchable movie with a number of missed opportunities, a number of surprising performances, and a lot of, in my estimation, undeserved brickbats being tossed at it from all comers. ** 1/2
March 5, 2013
This is a waste of your time. The storyline isn't bad but who gives a flip about that??? It is all about Zombies....the Kill.....the fight to survive. The first hour is pretty void of any munching and once it gets going, the movie is over. Death Count is less than the fingers on my hands. This isn't even cult classic worthy.
½ March 4, 2013
NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD 3D: RE-ANIMATION. It's a loose prequel to the previous movie and it's better. Andrew Divoff stars as a mortician (played by Sid Haig in the previous movie) who cannot bring himself to cremate corpses and so he stores them (hundreds) in a locked basement. They are exposed to toxic medical waste and as you would expect, they rise from the dead. This is a much more understated film that takes its time. Not a whole lot happens and the film focuses much more on Divoff's character dealing with his predicament. Divoff is surprisingly good, delivering an unexpected performance unlike any of the roles he's known for. Combs is also good and the pairing of these two is thanks to some clever casting. While little zombie action actually happens, the gore is certainly an improvement on the last movie and it's handled with enthusiasm for the genre. I really enjoyed the film, more than the other one, but felt let down as some of the self referential gags thrown in. The events of Romero's first 3 entries in the series are referenced as known outbreaks from the past and yet the previous movie lead us to believe that this universe was outside of Romeros... and to contradict these known outbreaks Combs asks whether the re-animated corpses are fast moving or slow... upon learning they they're slow he refers to them as "Romero Zombies". I get that its a tongue in cheek nod to the audience but its distracting and removes the viewer from an otherwise decent story.
Page 1 of 2