Customer Reviews

Days of Darkness

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(6)
3 star:		(5)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(5)

 

 

I can honestly say that i had no real hope for this film. Most of the horror films to come out in recent history have been... disappointing. So, i started this movie with no expectations other than turning it off after the first ten to fifteen minuets.

what i found was something fairly original, calling itself on most of the cliches that it couldn't avoid and doing everything in it's power to overcome its' obvious budgetary restraints.

for fans of zombie films, this should be a real breath of fresh air, done in the style of a Romero film.

The cover art was deceptive, as it usually is with these low budget zombie movies.. The description on the back was a total fake out, it sounded like it could be a good movie.. But behold, all we got was another serving of crappy budget, zombie comedy slop. It wasn't funny, it wasn't entertaining, it was just pure stupidity. I wanted to watch this one with a crash helmet on my head, so I could repeatedly bash my cranium against the wall while screaming why, why, why!!!!!

If only God loved me enough to send a real meteor smashing through my TV set durning this one, I would have had plenty to be thankful for on the following Thanksgiving.. But all I have now are the Nam-like flashbacks of another zombie movie that was total blasphemy to the genre...

This is by far one of the worst movies I have seen in a really really long time. Wow, I can not believe that something like this has even received any good comments. Horrible dialogue, poor character developement, and shotty effects. I think we did the same level of quality movie when I was in high school. In short, it's 85 minutes and $15.00 I'll never get back.

Ok, so if you are looking for a zombie movie to watch just to watch, don't grab this one, Dawn of the Dead (orig or remake) is my favorite. I watch zombie movies cause i like them and eventually want to make them. This one is one you can learn from. They are in an isolated location the whole time, no big sets or lots of extras. Its done cheap and effective. Yea the story is shoddy, the acting even worse, the fight scenes are comical, the dialogue is crap. But educational wise its interesting. The lighting is good considering where they are filming. In "Zombie Night" they were in a warehouse of some sort and the lighting was done horribly. This one had a good location but the way they had the perimeter set up was totally unbelievable. The cause of the outbreak was ok, i mean its a zombie movie. And what prevents it is cool, simple. Again, I watch zombie movies to see what has been done, I liked this one for its simplicity; the story, acting, and dialogue needed work.

Where's Donald Sutherland and Leonard Nimoy?



1) ACTING: I felt that for a low / no budget indie, the acting wasn't really all that bad. A lot of times, the acting sets the tone for a movie, and if it's not all that good, that really puts the viewer in a mindset where he / she possible might not give the movie a chance. The actors here aren't going to be winning any Oscars anytime soon, but they were okay.

2) PRODUCTION: First things first: I have to comment on the script. While watching this movie, I had this overwhelming sense of Deju Vu...similar scenes in different movies from the past kept running through my mind. Not that I was insulted by this, but I found it to be kind of distracting, as I kept wondering while viewing different scenes if I had seen it before. With the many plot devices that were in this movie, I don't really know if I can say that this is a "ZOMBIE" movie. It's more like an attack from outer space that also includes zombies. I really felt like I was watching yet ANOTHER unnecessary version of 'Invasion of the Body Snatchers. Too much "alien invaders," and not enough "zombies."
Additionally, the characters were kind of stock. I know it is difficult to have characters we haven't seen before, but it seems like there is always a "set" group. I think that this made it difficult for any real character development. The filming was fine, the mood and the tone of the movie was okay, and there were no real lighting issues.
The gore was good, but sadly, very minimal for a "zombie" movie. Now, I'm not asking for the gore /blood quantities of the Italian 1970's zombie flicks, but in a zombie movie, there should be a good amount of blood and gore.

3) ZOMBIES: A mixture of shamblers and runners (for the minimal time they are on screen). The zombie make up is almost non-existent, as they seem to be just covered in blood. Not even the "pale face, raccoon eyes" make up is here.

4) THE CAUSE: Alien Micro-organism infested comet from outer space.

5) NUDITY: None.




FINAL: While I don't hate this movie, I really can't praise it, either. I wanted a zombie movie and got a science fiction movie. If I wanted to see 'Invasion of the Body Snatchers' again, I would've rented it. It wasn't a bad movie, I felt that it just wasn't a zombie movie. It was very reminiscent of Romero's 'Night of the Living Dead,' with all the human drama, but with a sci-fi twist. As a zombie movie, not real impressed. As a science fiction alien invasion from outer space movie, not all that bad. While I have my reservations regarding the director / writer, if he decides that his next movie will be a ZOMBIE movie, I'll be there.


RATING: 2.5 out of 5

Bizarre premise, even for a zombie movie. A comet falls to earth and parasitic organisms use human bodies to procreate, thus turning them into zombies. The thing is that they use male genitalia to put the eggs in them. It is up to a group of survivors to figure out what is going on. The movie, although not that bad, is merely a collage of different films: Day of the Dead (Divimax Special Edition), Species (Collector's Edition), I think the even stole from Stardust (Widescreen Edition)! (champagne scene at the beginning). The acting is ok for a B movie and even the cinematography makes the movie more interesting. The movie was ok, nothing original, but at least it was somewhat entertaining. It really did have a bizarre concept for the zombies though.

The DVD is lacking in the Special Features.

After about 10 minutes I was like ah nuts...another cheap knock off movie, but what we found was a really original, low-budget, with cool original horror and sci-fi effects. It had the nut case survivors, zombies, alien type monsters gestating inside, flesh eaters, brain-suckers all rolled into one with gore in the appropriate places. It was really a surprisingly entertaining movie and I love science fiction so I'm sometimes hard on movies. I wouldn't pay $10 to see it at the theatre but watching late night in a darkened room with your kids, it does scare the bejeezz out of you in several places. Recommend to rent and view!!

Terrible, terrible, terrible! Not even worth one star. Don't waste your money. This is a low budget backyard movie. Bad acting, Bad film quality, bad story line. You'd have to pay me to watch this flick.

This is a very funny film about a meteor crashing into the earth and suddenly zombies appear!
***spoilers within***
after the meteor crashes to earth a young couple stumble upon a zombie (hilarious) and then they meet up with a group of survivors in a old military microwave station (abandoned?) and discover the dead are losing pieces!! some really Private Pieces! and there is something replacing the part that fell off!!!
what a unique take on zombies and as I stated it's very funny between the cheezy B movie acting and the sad makeup effects however this is still an amusing and entertaining film that I think most Zombie fans would like.

4 stars for creativeness
4 stars for humor
3 star acting
1 star extras (just trailers)
Overall: 4 stars for a unique zombie story, hilarious writing (the porn queen's statement in the beginning is just PRICELESS!) but overall I would say rent this unless you own every zombie flick there is. regardless if it was good or bad.

*Features*
4x3 letterbox, 5.1 dolby, trailers

Buy it here.
Days of Darkness

I'm beginning to think that so-called "Zombie Movie Fans" merely make that claim to give credence to their penchant for panning every movie they come across. I grant that there really is such a thing as a "Golden Age" of zombie movies; and that virtually everything that's come after - save the first wave of zombie comedies - is mostly a poor copy of, say, Romero's or Bava's or one of the other masters of the genre's ground-breaking work (although even Romero failed to make the grade among zombie fans with his latest - and far more original - entires). Consequently, I long ago stopped asking if such and such a new zombie movie is as good as "Night Of The Living Dead" or "Demons." And guess what happened? By not trying to make ridiculous comparisons to the masters' works, I was able to appreciate each new entry on its own merits.

"Days Of Darkness" is a good zombie movie, with a unique take on how it all came about. In fact, it's one of the few zombie movies that actually dissects how these flesh-eating mutants came to be. True, we don't really need to know that in order to enjoy the film; but it's not entirely irrelevant. Nor is the acting anywhere near as bad as some reviewers insist. I mean, come on: zombie movies are not Shakespeare or Ibsen or Chekhov. What level of acting would you expect from characters whose entire reason-for-being is to keep from being eaten? How do you think real people would react if being hunted by an army of zombies? Would they go into a Hamlet-like soliloquy or rage like King Lear against the unfairness of it all? Of course some actors just happen to be first-rate - like Woody Harrelson. But I seriously doubt if this film's budget could have induced Harrelson to join the cast.

Bottom line: take the movie you're watching at face value. This one held my attention and kept me guessing who would survive and who wouldn't. That's enough for me to enjoy the movie. If it's first rate I want, I'll watch an adaptation of a Thomas Hardy work. But if it's merely entertainment, something like "Days Of Darkness" fills the bill just fine.

Oh, one last thing: most reviewers who pan these lesser zombie movies like to think of Sam Raimi as the real master of the entire horror genre. Well, I don't. To me, his "Evil Dead" series doesn't hold a candle to Romero or Bava at their best.