BoardChiri Bad Acting and worse Bad Screenplay

Tayloriona Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

Sabah Hensley This is a dark and sometimes deeply uncomfortable drama

Fulke Great example of an old-fashioned, pure-at-heart escapist event movie that doesn't pretend to be anything that it's not and has boat loads of fun being its own ludicrous self.

Bezenby In fact, the scariest thing about this film is the names 'Bill Hinzman' and 'John Russo' appearing in the credits. If you've sat through those new bits they filmed for Night of the Living Dead, or their own sequel to that film, Flesh Eater, you know you're in a for a bumpy ride.We open with a posse/police force wasting a whole bunch of zombies just like the end of NOTLD and Flesh Eater, plus Tom Savini quipping and diving around the place like an action hero (pretty badly). He gets wasted by a zombie called Abbot Hayes, who then spends the next seven to fourteen years doing nothing at all.After this long, pointless interlude Abbot gets the hump when a student has a chug on his mum's grave and the next thing you know the kids are wasted, then back up again as zombies, and from then on things get even more boring and uneventful.The main problem with this film is that it's crap. Flesh Eater was also crap, but fun to watch, gory, and hilarious. This one not so much. The story stop starts all over the place, the characters spit out crappy quips, and Abbot Hayes does nothing at all. Nothing! The Majorettes sounds good though - might have to seek that out

GL84 After years of disappearances around town, the local sheriff finds them all tied to a local legend about a ravenous zombie intent on waging war on humanity and forces the town's survivors to fight off his undead hordes.This here actually wasn't that bad. One of the better elements is the fact that it features a main zombie who has a distinct personality and a sense of intelligence which is a nice change of pace from most zombie films, staying in the shadows while setting out a game plan and knows when to sneak up on victims. This gives it more than a typical zombie film in his behavior, and along with the rather impressive make-up work on the zombies with lots of wounds that get bloodier and more disgusting, and with their rotting, dead look and glaring fangs create some pretty imposing features and makes for an overall effective amount of zombie mayhem. Another big factor here is the action within this one as this features a rather enjoyable amount of action within this. The fact that the film starts off with a big action scene of them trying to knock off hordes of zombies rampaging through the countryside is a big plus, leading to a lot of close-calls and big action as the odds are stacked towards them enough to make them seem like a threat. Other great sequences include the great barnyard encounter as well as the big swarm encounters through town that occur in the later half which really makes for an entertaining time. Along with some fun suspense scenes of the zombies attacking the townspeople in a series of surprise attacks as well as plenty of great bloodshed are the film's good points, while this one here doesn't have too many flaws to it. The fact that it does have some really blatant obviousness in its cheapness is something to get over. The gore and wounds are hardly realistic, especially the finale bloodbath though there are plenty of obvious examples before that and allow for some pretty big examples. Aside from the low-budget, another flaw in here is that the film has a bit of a problem with pacing here, especially in the middle section. This is due to a confusing habit of changing around years, jumping around to different years at various points along the way by seemingly injecting a new scene into the film almost every time it changes scenes. It's not clear why this is done and it's purpose is a puzzling one since it could've easily done so without changing around the years around to make this as confusing as it is. While some out there will decry the new treatment afforded to the zombies' behavior and actions, it's not enough to hold it back like the rest of the film's flaws.Rated R: Graphic Violence and Graphic Language.

Toronto85 Children of the Living Dead is one of the cheapest looking horror movies I've ever seen. Sure, it's low budget, but I have seen better movies filmed on a lower budget then this one. This doesn't even try to be good. The lighting is pretty awful, the acting is terrible, and the story fails to make much sense.In 1987, a zombie attack hit a small town in Pennsylvania. The movie doesn't explain how it happened or if it affected the entire world as well. Abbott Hayes is one of the zombies, he was a rapist in the town sometime before. He is the lead zombie of the movie. Somehow the zombies (including Hayes) were all killed, and fourteen years later all is right with the world. The zombie character Hayes is actually one good thing about the movie, he is very creepy looking. There is a group of teenagers that die in a car wreck. After their funeral Abbott bites them, therefore turning them into zombies. So the story goes that all these years later, a construction crew digs up an old cemetery to build some sort of property over it. They decide to relocate all the bodies to a mass grave rather than another cemetery to save money. When they open the coffins however, the bodies are all missing. Of course zombies start to roam the town again and it's up to a young couple to save everyone.Bad acting usually comes along with horror movies, and most of the time adds charm to them. But in this case, it was just over the top cheese from almost everyone involved. I don't know who actor Philip Bower (Joseph Michaels) is, but he should never act in any move ever again. I laughed throughout all of his scenes. Same goes for most of the cast. Sam Nicotero, who plays the owner of the motel, is an exception when it comes to the acting. He was the only likable character for me. The gore in this is decent. The zombies outside of Abbott Hayes aren't anything special. Nothing we haven't seen before. The major failure outside of acting, is the story. It is never explained how the zombies came to be. One minute there are no zombies, and then all of a sudden night falls and multiple zombies are roaming the town. It just doesn't make sense.I would skip this one unless you are a zombie fanatic. Even hardcore zombie fans will be disappointed. Abbott Hayes is a good villain and the filming location is good for a zombie movie, great atmosphere. Other than that, it isn't very good at all.2/10

nightshade_44637 This film is absolutely terrible! I have a great affection for zombie films, but this one was a real stinker, it's only real value is as an example of terrible writing and acting. The plot isn't clearly thought or carried out,and the actors are rather wooden. I think the best part of the whole film is actually the five minutes or so at the beginning of the film, where Tom Savini does a small role and is then quickly killed by the main zombie.It's really unclear here just how Abbot came to be a zombie and why it takes so long for his zombie army to unite for the final battle at the end of the film. I was able to laugh my way through half the film, but after a while losing track of the drifting storyline and tiring of it's lack of quick momentum I grew bored of even that.