GUENOT PHILIPPE My main question is: Where are the brains here? the screen writer's one, or the director's? This film is another REC, CLOVERFIELD, BLAIR WITCH and so on rip off, that's all. It may keep some teen audiences under fear and terror, but certainly not professional moviegoers as me. As another comment said, I am not surprised that the zombies died of hunger; no more brains to eat. No brain in this stupid story. A good time waster although. You can let your own brain in the locker room, at home or in your car. You won't need it here, and not because of the zombies presence...There were wagons, tons of this kind of crap since the late 2000's and TWENTY EIGHT DAYS - WEEKS - LATER.

Krome This is a movie so irredeemably lousy, the only reason I feel inspired to put up a review is to try and save somebody else the time and cash which could be better spent on something more worthy.Feeble acting, weak "plot" and scene after scene of watching unsympathetic characters doing things which make you shout, "you just wouldn't do that"! at the screen - it's an endless, joyless piece of junk.As a student film done by teenagers, this would be fine. As something made by adults, it is an insult to its audience. I won't repeat all the points made by the other reviews - but simply add another voice to the chorus saying:DON'T BOTHER WATCHING THIS RUBBISH

Leofwine_draca Zombie films have been all the rage in the past few years. George Romero has returned to the fold, making new entries in his long-running "living dead" series; different countries have been putting their own invigorating spins on the genre, like Spain's sublime REC. THE ZOMBIE DIARIES is a distinctly British spin on the genre, but sadly it turns out to be an almost worthless exercise in box-ticking that had the potential to be so much more.First off – the false advertising. The DVD box shows a scene of gun-toting survivors battling a huge horde of the undead as London burns. It looks like some big budget mayhem is due, in the same vein as 28 WEEKS LATER. Once you begin watching the film, you quickly realise the budget is in the same region as THE BLAIR WITCH PROJECT – i.e. this is a shot on video film with a handful of actors and never more than half a dozen zombies on screen at once. I didn't mind the budget constraints too much, as at least realism is often heightened in such productions.And, indeed, the film starts off on a strong footing. The zombie outbreak is vaguely explained with just the right level of detail, and there's mucho atmosphere building as a quartet of documentary filmmakers find themselves in a seemingly abandoned rural farmhouse. All the locals have vanished, and just what is making that thumping behind the bedroom door? The answer is utterly horrifying and genuinely scary, an exceptional bit of well-directed shock that promises so much more than what comes later. I could even forgive the poor acting.Unfortunately, the film then proceeds to fall apart. Utterly. One of the biggest problems is the stupidity of the script, which is aimless and derivative. For some nonsensical reason, the film cuts between different groups of survivors and we never get to know or care about any of them. Stupid non-linear twists are made which make trying to piece together what's going on even more of a chore, and one that's frankly not worth bothering with. For the rest of the film, it's just seeing people shooting zombies. Oh, and there's a twist in which some of the survivors turn out to be bad eggs themselves – like we haven't seen that one done before.I didn't have a problem with the lack of budget or scope. The special effects are pretty good, even if they have a Halloween-party look to them. The actors are diabolical, but that's a flaw that's easily overlooked. It's the pointless, plot less story that drags this one down, and the need to repeat endless boring "action" sequences. The film should have stuck with the initial characters and perhaps presented an under siege NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD scenario instead – that would have cut down on budget costs and could have been genuinely tense, if derivative. Instead, THE ZOMBIE DIARIES turns out to be one of the most disappointing zombie films in recent history.

Matt Kracht I was expecting an action movie, but this is actually one of those stupid "found footage" movies, where producers pretend that there's a reason for some character to be filming every little argument that goes on between them and their friends. That just makes absolutely no sense at all to me. Why the hell would someone randomly film the countryside from a moving vehicle? Why would you choose to hold a camcorder, rather a rifle, when you're facing off against the legions of hell? I'm just completely baffled.At one point, a character weakly explains, "I'm documenting everything, because this could be important". OK. That makes some minor amount of sense to me. First, this character is part of documentary film crew. Second, the "zombie apocalypse" or whatever has just begun, and any information could actually be somewhat useful. Third, the character seems like a lazy, whiny, useless person who wouldn't be doing anything else, anyway. However, what does he document? He documents his friends bickering. He documents the ground, as he runs. He documents everything *except* useful information.Eventually, the movie abruptly skips ahead a month, with a different group of survivors. They, too, have a useless person who helpfully documents every argument they have. However, he doesn't have the explanation of being part of a documentary film crew. He's just some guy with a camera, who inexplicably records random crap, while not helping out in any way. At this point, I started to lose interest in the movie.Finally, we're introduced to a third group of survivors. You're not going to believe this, but they also have a camera-obsessed member. Who are these people, and where are they coming from? Where are they finding all these cameras? Why do their friends tolerate this behavior? Why aren't they kicked out, when it's obvious that they'd rather stand around, documenting everything, rather than helping out? It's a mystery, and not one that the movie makes any attempt to explain. Anyway, the movie takes a rather strange detour in this story, switching subgenres without much warning. The zombies are nearly forgotten, though they do get a bit of lip service here and there. I won't ruin the twist for you, but it's really not much of a twist, if you're a zombie movie fan. Zombie movies have always been primarily about social dynamics (especially the original Night of the Living Dead and its remake), but the whole "zombie apocalypse" thing seems almost incidental to this movie, like some sort of background noise that could easily have been removed, without changing much of anything.For what it's worth, the zombie effects are pretty tolerable, but almost everything else is terrible. The characters are rock stupid, the dialogue is boring, the acting is generally poor, and the writing is bland. I'm sick of low budget zombie movies where people mindlessly mimic the most basic elements of George Romero's movies, without injecting any creativity or insight of their own. I prefer slow zombies, but does every zombie movie need to have shuffling, mindless undead who chomp on the living? No! Try coming up with your own ideas for once. As much as I dislike the whole "fast zombie" movement, at least they managed to bring some original thinking to their movies. I fail to see why these very fresh zombies would be moving so slowly -- or even why they'd bite the living. It's never explained. It comes across as lazy, unoriginal fanfiction set in the Night of the Living Dead world. That might work for some people, but it doesn't work for me, especially when the rest of the movie is poorly done. I could forgive a bit of unoriginality, if the rest of the movie were worth a damn.