It has been three weeks since a zombie outbreak sent the world into shambles. Three weeks since the dead began walking the streets, wrecking havoc on all those possessing body heat and a pulse. Three weeks since survival transgressed from a game into a lifestyle. Though you would expect everyone to be working together, attempting to shed the world of the walking dead, an island just off the coast of Delaware is split into two sides, forcing an unwanted standoff between the town's two most heritaged families.
Survival of the Dead, the sixth film in the popular franchise by zombie expert George A. Romero, is the first to serve as a branch off of a previous film - in this case, Diary of the Dead. The feature takes a minor supporting character from Diary, Nicotine Crocket, and follows him on his own path as he works to survive the new elements that have become our planet. His trek takes him to the questioning island where he finds himself involved in a heated battle between two keynote town's people who can't decide what to do with those rising up around them.
Alan Van Sprang, who plays Colonel Crocket, is the lone acting presence within the entire film. Otherwise, each character is presented with little emotion and rarely a shred of talent. I fully understand that zombie movies are never known for their acting, especially when it comes to George A. Romero's low-budget frightfests. However, I was expecting a lot more from this cast, and I sadly walked away empty handed - or in my case, laughing at the ridiculousness of it all.
But with that said, I will compliment Romero for changing up his setting a bit. Instead of a city, mall, or home, viewers are taken to the countryside, where forests, rivers, and horses are the name of the game. Barns are a constant presence, used for their stables and barrack-like quarantine zones, and the rough edge of a ranch hand makes for some evil looking zombies.
It takes a good thirty minutes before we are greeted with a serious number of zombie characters, and by that point, I had settled deep into my seat, awaiting what looked to be the worst film of the franchise. Luckily, things progressed towards the end in regard to the number of head-shooting incidents, allowing for some laughs and jumps to accumulate along the way.
However, the film still had a long way to go in terms of overall enjoyment as its story proved to be its most incomplete aspect. Attempting to accomplish too much, Romero tried to integrate two separate stories into one. As a result, the premise seems unorganized and random as it progresses towards its inconclusive finish - there is just something about the whole zombies not eating humans thing that really didn't sit well with me; especially since it is said that the final answer will never be known. Why introduce something that you never plan to reveal?
Overall, the film isn't horrible, and zombie fans might find it interesting. Some classic death scenes helped to lighten the spirit as I patiently watched on, though the story was a bit too much to be overlooked. I am a huge zombie fan, especially when it comes to George A. Romero, so maybe I was expecting too much from the small budget film. But seeing as I enjoyed all his others in the franchise, and was really looking forward to this type of story, I have to admit that I am not sure that the three film deal is such a good idea. Hopefully, a stronger premise will serve as his follow-up, regardless of which direction it chooses to take. But nevertheless, it is Romero, and it is zombies, so Survival of the Dead is definitely something that you must at least check out.
