War Of The Dead - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

War Of The Dead Reviews

Page 1 of 2
January 4, 2015
Boring and plodding. War of the Dead has a neat concept and is full of ideas that sadly, go nowhere. For a zombie movie, it is surprisingly lacking in gore and actual tension that a zombie movie should bring.

Acting is ok, but nothing remarkable. Most of the movie is too dark to see effectively what is going on.

And guns never run out of ammo.
June 28, 2014
An all out Nazi bloodbath, throw in the fact that there zombies and it's one of the best films EVER!!!!
½ December 17, 2013
Standard horror fare
½ November 23, 2013
War of the Dead (Marko Mäkilaasko, 2011)

I was all set to love this movie-a Finnish knock-off of Norway's first, and best, Nazi zombie flick, Død Snø, that also happens to star Invincible's Jouko Ahola. How could you possibly go wrong? Well, in quite a few ways, as it turns out. This is depressing, because War of the Dead wanted to be a better movie than it is, and it almost, but not quite, succeeded. In fact, it might be possible to make a case that Paul Campion's The Devil's Rock, released the same year, is exactly the film War of the Dead wanted to be, but didn't quite get there.

Plot: An American platoon, deep in the middle of nowhere (the accents sounded kind of Austrian to me, one synopsis tells me they're in Russia, another one says in the Carpathians-how does that even make sense in WW2?), comes upon a platoon of the enemy, ambushes them, and wipes them out. Everyone's happy. Well, except the guys on the other side of that firefight, they're pretty pissed. So what do they do? Get right back up and start eating the erstwhile victors. Obviously, things are not what they seem in this little corner of the world, and our hapless survivors find themselves tasked with a much more important mission than the simple wiping out of a bunker...

Any number of good ideas to be found here, but none of them actually come to fruition. I suspect an overzealous editing hand was involved in at least part of this, as in the last third or thereabouts things get incoherent now and again; all the setup and pacing disappear into action scene after action scene, and it struck me on a number of occasions that there should have been stuff in between the bullets flying and zombies stomping and all that sort of thing. By the end I was wondering if everyone involved hadn't simply given up and decided to release whatever came out of the editing room. A depressing thought, but the only hypothesis that made any sense in my head-at least, it made more sense than the actual movie did. I'd love to see the shooting script to find out what was actually supposed to happen. * 1/2
½ September 3, 2013
Un bon petit film de zombies nazis.
June 28, 2013
poor directing and horrible plot. many of the characters were unnecessary not to mention the invincible american who could never die
½ May 31, 2013
Very little character development. Lots of gunfire but surprisingly very little gore. Storyline and plot were fairly weak. It felt more like an action movie with zombies rather than a horror movie with zombies. Considering the budget was only $1.8 million, they did okay but if you were expecting a combination of Saving Private Ryan and Dead Snow, this is not it.
½ May 8, 2013

Here's a new one, tree climbing undead. Mostly forgettable.
May 5, 2013
This is not top of the class but it is good fun for what it is...for fans of the genre.
May 1, 2013
Lots of gun fire. Little plot (Netflix)
½ April 29, 2013
It wasn't bad, it just couldn't decide what it wanted to be. Was it a supernatural Nazi film? Hard bitten grunt WWII movie? Zombie flick? Add to that confusion a slow plot, bad CGI FX, and a ending that feels like they just ran out of time and unfortunately, it won't satisfy fans of any of those genres
April 28, 2013
No plot, no gore, no thanks.
April 24, 2013
Ya wasn't very good movie kind of boring movie sure had lots of action but just couldn't get into it that well
March 17, 2013
"Like an episode of Band of Brothers with zombies" says the quote on the front of the DVD case. Overstating it somewhat, I'm afraid. At least this film has a plot and - shock horror! - Nazi zombies! Cue the usual excessive number of head shots and, intriguingly, an equally excessive number of fistfights with zombie Nazis. Yeah, that was an odd thing to acclimatise to. Zombies look good, there's a bit of production value but it's not nearly amusing/serious enough for it to be rated any higher - the main issue here is the script, it's trying to be Outpost but falls well wide of the mark. I'm happy to report however that this is another film with a Rickman-style plummet from a vast height, so I can't really grumble too much.
½ February 18, 2013
If I remember correctly, this movie had some characters in it. I just don't recall them being in any way different from each other or likeable. Average plot, but really let down with the lack of being able to show any interest in the characters.
½ February 15, 2013
I just saw this film last night and felt that it was a very interesting and well-made slant on zombie films. While it didn't have as much gore and "brain munching" it did hold up well, and seemed to actually be more of a WWII film with zombies layered over it than a zombie film that took place during WWII. Not that is a bad thing, especially as by now, most of these zombie films seem to be just knock-offs of each other. This one was different, and that makes it well worth watching.
Super Reviewer
½ January 30, 2013
Shoot first, develop plot later.
January 20, 2013
Lacking In Any Real Scares Or Gore
½ January 16, 2013
I won't pretend to know anything about Nazis zombie films, but what I do know is that you need a plethora of scares and gore to be successful - unfortunately War of The Dead had neither...it also missed the mark by being too ambitious, too emotionally uninvolving and far too over-dramatic for the undead genre.
Page 1 of 2