Too much of everything

Really Surprised!

Good story, Not enough for a whole film

A film with more than the usual spoiler issues. Talking about it in any detail feels akin to handing you a gift-wrapped present and saying, "I hope you like it -- It's a thriller about a diabolical secret experiment."

It was inevitable that someone was going to cross the so-called war on terrorism with zombies. As it turns out, they decided to mock homophobia in the process! "ZMD: Zombies of Mass Destruction" is the sort of movie that will only get viewed by people who have decided in advance that they're going to like it. The plot - amid a zombie apocalypse in a small town, an Iranian-American girl (who everyone thinks is Iraqi) gets assumed to be a terrorist, and a gay couple is about to come out to one of them's mom - sounds like something dreamed up by someone with too much time on his hands. But more than anything, I get the feeling that it's fun to play zombies.The movie is no "Shaun of the Dead", but makes no pretense about what it is. Janette Armand sure is a fox.

I suppose this film's major 'plus point' is that it has tried to call itself some variation of '.... of the Dead.' The title 'ZMD: Zombies of Mass Destruction,' refers to the loosely-alluded premise that this particular zombie outbreak is some form of terrorist attack. But then who cares how zombie outbreak start? We just want to know one thing: what's the gore like? And, in ZMD's case, it's actually not too bad. Yes, it's a B-movie, but then 90% of zombie films are, therefore you're probably not expecting a 'mega-budget' epic of a movie. So, this does manage to deliver – it's pretty horrific and what little budget they have is used well on some nice/gruesome zombie and victim kills.ZMD also has another unusually plus point for a B-movie – the central characters are actually pretty different (remember, we're talking horror B-movies here). We have a girl of Middle Eastern descent and a gay couple. And this worked. Their originality made them quite likable and easy to root for.But it's not all good. What starts out pretty excellent sort of stalls midway through the film. Even though the main characters are good, those who they meet aren't. It's like the writers wrote the characters into situations which separated from the main threat element, i.e. the zombies, so they had to introduce all sorts of nut-job characters to pose a new threat.Plus the film isn't that original. It seems to borrow elements from at least five different zombie films. I counted the basement lock-in from Night of the Living Dead, the boarding-up-the-church from Return of the Living Dead, the situations of Shaun of the Dead and the tone of Braindead.It's a pity the overall story isn't a little more focus. I was really enjoying the first act, only to find myself getting a bit bored during the second half. Overall, the end kind of drags the whole thing down. What could have been an excellent little B-movie ends up being only just about watchable because the story meanders about the place of its own make. Pity. Still worth a quick watch if you liked Peter Jackson's Braindead and you're a fan of gore.http://thewrongtreemoviereviews.blogspot.co.uk/

ZMD is interesting if not scary, and amusing if not laugh-out-loud funny. Kevin Hamedani makes some valid points for the Progressive, tolerant viewpoint, while other points are made less persuasive by the cartoonish exaggeration of Conservative stupidity.There are several shots where the side of a zombie's head is blown away, and I'm not sure how Hamedani and crew did those so well, given the obviously low budget. There's also an eye that pops out fairly well. On the other (severed) hand, each time a face, or portions thereof, is ripped off, the results look more like a face beneath layers of strawberry jam than a skull that's missing part of its cozy.Armand, however, has screen presence and acting ability. The consensus on the message board of her IMDb page is that she is "really hot," a "babe," and has charisma, provided that "charisma is a code word for hotness."Why you should see it You feel that any self-respecting zombie connoisseur must see all available zombie movies, in order to name, with some authority, both the "best zombie movie ever" and the "worst zombie movie ever." You're a Progressive who loves to see Conservatives made to look foolish and then devoured. You want to see a hot babe shoot zombies in the head.Why you shouldn't see it You're a Conservative. You're more into vampires. You're sensitive on the subject of cannibalism, given the awkward events of this year's family reunion. --from my review at www.1man365movies.com

This is your typical zombie film, but compared to a lot of other zombie films, I would have to say that this one really stands out from the hordes (pun intended). The basic premise of the story is something like this: A woman running for mayor, a homosexual couple trying to come out of the closet, a father and daughter from Iran (not Iraq) come together with a band of religious folk during a zombie outbreak. There's a lot of room for hilarity, and a lot of room to send a message in this basic premise. Of course, it never really gets there, but it does play with the possibilities. In many ways, the film kind of leaves me with blue balls, because I really felt upon watching it, that this could be awesome. It could've turned out to be extremely funny, and a zombie classic to stand right up there alongside Shaun of the Dead. Sadly, that is not the case, as the film simply doesn't go as far as it could've gone. One of the biggest pluses is that the characters are extremely well-written, and come across as pretty nice people. In fact, one of the biggest pitfalls of B-movies is that the characters don't seem like real people, but rather machines to be put out for torture. These characters actually seem like people, and that's a massive plus.In terms of the cinematography, this film looks pretty good. If you're expecting 28 Days Later, Dawn of the Dead remake-like blood, guts and gore, you'll be disappointed. There are some special effects, but there aren't a ton of them. I don't think they had the budget to make the special effects a huge thing, but I certainly do think that with the budget they had, this film looks pretty damn sweet. Good cinematography, good editing - overall pretty well done technically.All in all, it's a film with great potential that doesn't quite live up to its potential. The story could've used some tightening up, and if they really tightened up the script and got a stronger theme out of it, this film could've been a low budget classic.