Bezenby This one can hurt. A lot. For instance, the credit sequence gives quite a bit away. For one, count how many times that name Bill Hinzman appears. Also, notice that insistent piano score. Get used to it, because it's near enough constantly playing for ninety minutes. Also, if you've watched Night of The Living Dead, then you've already seen this film.You know that zombie in Night of the Living Dead? The one at the start? That's Bill Hinzman, and he's here making Zombie Nosh, acting, filming, producing, making soup, darning, fondling nudie actresses, saying 'yaargh', ripping off better films, editing, employing chronic thespians, wearing make-up, and staggering. He would do so again with the acute angina causing 30th Anniversary Edition of Night of the Living Dead, and Children of the Living Dead. Here, however, he manages to redeem himself (slightly) by realising that zombie films need loads of gore and violence, and thankfully Zombie Nosh manages not to be the hideous pile of goat ordure that it initially reveals itself to be.A group of 'teenagers' are on a hay ride and end up in the country. After establishing that they are all a bunch of chugnuts, and ugly too, Bill Hinzman rise up from a grave and starts killing everyone, turning them into badly acting zombies. In normal films, the 'teenagers' would be the focus of the film, but here 90% of them are wiped out and the film just moves on to the next bunch of new characters, wastes them, then moves on again, etc etc.That's about the gist of it, really. However, there's loads of gore, acting so bad it has to been seen to be believed (especially the 'aoh! moi gawd! bit), ineptitude all over the shot, plagiarism ahoy, and an ending that'll have you non-chalantly switching off the DVD player and going to bed, like most nights (?). I dunno. It's worth buying, to be honest. It's never boring.

geminiredblue 1968, America was in upheaval. The Vietnam War was, sadly, in full swing. Atrocities were shown on nightly news. Riots were taking place in the streets. Crazed, lone gunmen were killing people from towers. Given the time and situation that our country was going through, perhaps it was inevitable that Romero's classic NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD is thought to be a product of that era. Not only that, but it was made entirely independent from any major studio, in Pittsburgh of all places! Not in California or New York! Nonetheless, the groundbreaker changed the face of horror as we know it. 1988, the Vietnam War has ended but trouble brews in the Middle East. The Cold War is winding down. Dead teen flicks were all the rage during the late 70s and 80s. Perhaps it was inevitable that someone would come along and try to remake Romero's classic. While a remake would come several years later, I believe this was a first attempt. The basic story is the same, and even features a few of the same cast members, S. William Hinzman as the lead zombie (again.) What's different is the sensibility. Where the original worked by building up the suspense to a near claustrophobic pitch, this movie wants to achieve it, but never quite reaches that level of terror. In fact, most of the movie isn't terrifying at all. Good make-up and special effects can't make up for paper-thin characterization, poor acting, and bad dialogue (not to mention ill-timed humor.) The movie's main focus seems to fluctuate between young actresses uncomfortably taking their clothes off and over-the-top gore. Halfway through, the movie seems to repeat itself. The movie opens with a party of young people (college age I think, though they act like high-schoolers) and halfway through, the survivors of the first party stumble upon another party of young people. Oh, and the music is SO DAMN ANNOYING! You're not even given a single second where the music isn't played over and over and over again! The same music played over and over and over again! Can you sense my annoyance?! Nice try guys, but we've seen it all before. As a remake or a sequel, it sucks. For a better remake, please refer to NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD (1990.) As an unintended comedy, it's wonderful!

Tom Jeffrey This film was written, directed, and produced by S. William Hinzman, whose one claim to fame was his memorable role as the cemetery zombie in George Romero's Night of the Living Dead. This film might well have been titled The Further Adventures of George Romero's Cemetery Zombie, because that's essentially what it is -- except that it lacks even a trace of the talent that Romero brought to his masterpiece.Once Hinzman's zombie rises from his grave early in the movie, the film becomes a non-stop killing spree punctuated with numerous scenes of gratuitous nudity. Now I am far from being a prude, and I appreciate gratuitous nudity as much as the next guy. But this film went too far, in my opinion.Admittedly, some of the killings are interestingly executed (so to speak) and the gore effects are pretty good for a film this low budget. The acting is at times painfully amateurish, but according to the documentary that accompanies the Shriek Show DVD, the actors were paid only $25 a day. As the saying goes, "you get what you pay for."The first and last part of the film are reminiscent of Night of the Living Dead -- victims trapped in a farmhouse surrounded by zombies; local yokels rounding up the zombies and shooting them. The middle scenes involving a family in their home preparing to go trick-or-treating and a Halloween party with a bunch of costumed drunken "teenagers" are somewhat more interesting and original.This film is the definitely least interesting of the three films on Shriek Show's Zombie Pack 2, the other two being Zombie Holocaust and Burial Ground. It is, however, watchable, and the gore effects should please hard-core zombie fans who know exactly what they're getting when they watch this kind of movie. I found the documentary in the Extras section to be more interesting than the movie itself, as it explains how many of the effects were done and includes numerous humorous anecdotes about the making of the movie.All in all, not a great movie but o.k. as part of a three-disc set.

poe426 There are some downright amazing fx here when one takes into account the budget (or lack thereof). Nor is the cinematography bad. The music, which reminds me more than a tad of John Carpenter's score for DARK STAR, is likewise good (the soundtrack is made available among the extras, a really cool thing to see)(next time I need a soundtrack for one of my Public Access epics, I'll know where to find it). The storyline, however, is weak, as is the execution. Still, I've seen worse (much worse). For fans of teen slasher films, there's the requisite T&A (Hinzman is very much in tune with the times- and his target audience), but the very best thing about FLESHEATER is the cameo by Vince Survinski. As soon as he appears on camera, we know what's going to happen and Hinzman doesn't disappoint us. All in all, a sorta kinda fun time was had by all.