YouHeart I gave it a 7.5 out of 10

Lumsdal Good , But It Is Overrated By Some

Benas Mcloughlin Worth seeing just to witness how winsome it is.

Sienna-Rose Mclaughlin The movie really just wants to entertain people.

trashgang This is a perfect example of a flick that had many promotions but failed at the box office. I have even seen a article of 2 pages in an old fangoria concerning this flick, so go figure out. The picture in Fangoria were okay and made me think, it's going to be bloody. But I was wrong. Not that it was badly shot, it was all done in a proper way but it takes too long before the zombies arrive. The zombies themselves looks really okay and the effects used as they are dismembered are also really well done. It's even a bit funny with a hacked off hand keeping attacking ones throat and one soldier being killed by the remains of a slashed arm of a zombie. But as I said, it takes too long before they actually attack. The supernatural effects are out dated. The idea was okay and can be related to 2000 maniacs in some ways. It never had a proper release and is only available on ex-rental NTSC VHS.

Vomitron_G I remember seeing this one as a kid but failed to remember much else from it. Now I know why: Not much happens in it. The only few merits it has, are the neat ghost story concept (Return of the Civil War Zombies) and some commendable attempts at creating atmosphere (mainly with the use of lighting and fog). Too bad the rest of the film is a dud. It's like it wants to, but can't, really.The zombies appear to have cool make-up effects, but it's hard to tell because you hardly get a good look at them. It sort of plays out like a supernatural slasher movie in the woods. The teenagers here are simply replaced with a bunch of military soldiers in training (or something). Either way, they all still act like teenage boy-scouts. A lot of them do get killed, but never in exuberant ways. THE SUPERNATURALS might still be worth a watch if you fancy this type of typical 80's stuff, but make sure to lower your expectations.I really wanted to like this film a bit more, this second time around. But it just remains a flawed movie. If it would have had at least a slightly higher pace and a bit more memorable death-scenes, I would have been more forgiving. Now, I'm just very sorry.

insomniac_rod I didn't like this movie although the premise is really good. These post-war zombie movies are very popular and this one is very decent. If done correctly, this movie would have the status of a respectable zombie movie. The cinematography is really good and plays a key part in the most important scenes, for example, the ending.The f/x are really are cheesy but work for the movie's purpose. Still I can't recommend this movie for it's visuals... in fact, it's a boring movie with a lot of wasted potential.Watch it only if you get it for free. I catched it on late cable many years ago and I can't say that I regret about it, but I wouldn't watch it again!Try "Stryker's War" for a more entertaining movie in the likes of this one.

Joseph P. Ulibas Supernaturals (1986) is a terrible film. There is nothing about this film that is entertaining or worth watching. This film is so bad that if your t.v. is stuck on one channel and this movie comes on I have one word of advice for you. READ!!! Get a religious tract from your next door neighbor because it'll be far more entertaining than this garbage. Why did they even bother making this trash. It's a bad movie. Not even bad movie lovers would want to waste their time on this rubbish. A group of brain dead soldiers go out playing "army men" on some sacred battleground and learn the hard way that "The south shall rise again!" What happens next? Who cares unless you have some big brass ones and want to find out for yourself. This video has a bad case of tape rot. If you play it in your V.C.R. your tape heads will have to be replaced. Please avoid this movie like the plague. It ain't even worth it. Bad movie. -F