kristianoye-705-990690

14 June 2013

Worst Movie Ever

If MSTK3 were still on, this movie would be a great season opener orending. I only paid $1 to rent the movie, but I want that $1 and mylife back. I am actually thinking I should destroy the DVD withoutreturning it just to save some other poor soul from experiencing theagony of watching it:* The story was predictable as you might expect * The characters were a-sexual and lifeless. * The story went absolutely nowhere * You end up wanting to kill the characters before the zombies becausethey are absolute morons! * The story claims to be based on a "cult classic" book... it was ane-book that was downloaded 500,000 times... but it was free and it tooka few years to be downloaded that many times. * Made me physically ill

odynyork

14 June 2013

Very original...not a actiongore fest

This Zombie Film was great. It was very unique and creative. The basicpremise is a airborne virus spreads over the world and within hoursonly a select few "IMMUNE" people are left alive with everyone elsedead where they fell. After a day or so about 3 dozen folk havegathered together wondering what to do now that everyone but them aredead. After another day or so the dead begin to get up a slowly,plodding around until they bump into something and they turn andmindlessly wander off in another direction. Despite the horror ofseeing dead rise, they seem harmless. However 3 of the survivors takethis as a sign to get the hell away from the city and the hundreds ofthousand walkers. They spend the rest of the movie venturing of intothe countryside and find a farm. But they have visitors there too. Therest of the movie is suspenseful horror as the dead begin to react tosound, get more aggressive etc. All the while the group of 3 shell upin the farmhouse and venture into towns to get supplies. This movieclocks in at about 2 hours so it has more time to develop character anddread. There is always the danger of the dead, but if you're lookingfor gore and gunfights this is not your movie. It is not an actionmovie or splatter fest but rather a realistic portrayal of whatsurvival would be like if you were one of the last alive on earth. Themakeup work on the dead is very realistic and superb…there is no CG orbad effects here There is even a 15 minute scenario where one of thethree goes into a town and runs into a lonely man named Philip (playedby David Carradine from Kung-fu and Kill Bill Fame) Philip howeverwon't leave because his "sick" mum can't come along. For suspensefulHorror or Zombie fans tired of the paint by numbers gore fests thatalmost every Zombie film seems to follow…Please try this movie…It istruly great.

04 June 2013

SHES NOT DEAD. SHES SICK.

This is slow developing zombie story. In fact the zombies, or walkers as they are called, are slow developing acquiring motor skills and aggression over time. After an unexplained viral outbreak kills off most of the world's population, a handful of survivors hold up in a building. With supplies running low, some decide to venture out. A group of three opt to go to the country to become "hippie farmers." Another couple decide to live like kings off the fat of the land, party in the White House and at Graceland.That is pretty much it. Zombies are attracted to noise and lights. David Carradine has a minor role. It is an okay zombie film that has been oversold as something wonderfully unique. What was that dream thing in the middle of the film?Parental Guide: F-bomb. No sex or nudity.

04 June 2013

Sheesh what happened to the zombies? They all forgot they were zombies.

This review is from: Autumn (Amazon Instant Video) Not much of a horror movie really. The fact that the zombie first start out as little "pet me" creatures was novel. But it took too long, in fact 7/8th of the movie before the zombies wake up and start acting like zombies, but then the movie is over... Oh well, at least it kept the non-zombie actors safe. Outside of that there is not much tension to get the movie plot revved up to be an action movie nor a horror movie. It was more like a "Once upon a time movie, when all world fell asleep and woke up zombies except a few". Could have done alot more with this movie and since the director did not want to have mean zombies, he or she could have saved the movie by taking it down a humorous avenue.

merrydown

30 May 2013

An unfortunate choice by a couple of well known actors...

Autumn fails on so many levels that it is hard to know where to begin,so let's start with the successes: The zombies are fairly believable.The decay and blood splattering isn't overdone, I suppose the zombieshaven't had long to decay. The first 20 or 30 minutes of the movie mademe feel slightly nervous. I won't speculate as to why but it may nothave been because the scene was set well...The film as released has so many failings. It is like a very poorworkprint. The editing is badly timed, not at all sharp. Sometimesscenes hang like something is about to happen and nothing does. Thisdoesn't build tension, it just makes you raise an eyebrow.Dream sequences are so badly signposted that you are not sure if youmissed something or if the sequence is a dream or a bit of unassociatedcutaway. The quality of the cinematography and lighting is very patchy.It's almost like they are trying to add comic book effect to somescenes, although no other elements enhance or correlate with this andso it just looks badly done.The plot is so overdone now that it is a genre all of its own. 'Plaguehits world, people turn to zombies, a few don't, zombies chase and tryto eat them.' The only variation in the genre really is if the peoplebeing chased survive or die. I've already forgotten what happened atthe end and even at the time it wasn't too clear what the motivationswere and what occurred. Really you need to tell a story within a genre,not just sketch the genre out badly.The movie is unpacey, unoriginal and uninteresting. There's nothingoriginal. The movies really doesn't even make a point in the absence ofa story. If someone told me that the writer had read 'I am Legend' andwatched a few zombie flicks then made this film in the following twodays I wouldn't be surprised. It is derivative in a very mundane way.There's not really even a main character to flesh out, just 3 or 4characters that come in and out of scenes and shots looking numb. Thereis no passion about the film, no emotion that you can empathise withand very little solid acting. Why Carradine and Fletcher starred in it I do not know. But I can'tbelieve either of them needed the money that much... Fletcher is thebest of the bunch and if he'd have had some good lines to say or somegood action to take part in he would no doubt have put in a decentshowing. As it is I suspect the direction was lacking and he comes outas transparent rather than actively bad (unlike the terrible 'mockney'second male lead). Carradine isn't very good. It's hard to know whetherthe director or actor are to blame.The sound is worse than many student movies I have seen where all theaudio was from the on camera mic. Some sentences are barely heard orfade in and out. This sort of thing is only vaguely acceptable when therecording is supposed to be gonzo or at least hand held and effectsmask some words. Even then it would be annoying, but understandable.The whole film is like someone was told zombie flicks could be madewell on a budget and didn't realise that they still had to have aselling point and some production values.I wanted to like this movie but I couldn't.

29 May 2013

Do not buy!!!

This review is from: Autumn (DVD) If you loved the book, you will hate this movie. This movie will ruin your image of this book forever.

25 May 2013

Simply excellent of its type.

The one-star-giving reviewer, Melody, is not wrong that there is not much action in "Autumn," and if your main reason for wanting the DVD is because you're a David Carradine fan, don't bother--he has a tiny, pointless cameo.BUT. If you're a fan of whip-smart zombie movies (although the word is never used, come on, they're freaking zombies already, not "meatcoats"), like 28 Days Later (Widescreen Edition)and Pontypool, and you have more patience for nuance and sophistication than our young reviewer friend did, then "Autumn" is extremely rewarding. It's light on the scares and heavy on horror...the emotional, psychological horror of death and of the dead. The way the dead start off inanimate, immobilized (as the dead should be) and gradually, gradually gain the characteristics of the zombies we know from the Romero oeuvre and his imitators is the masterstroke of the film, allowing tension to ratchet up slowly. And for a low budget film, "Autumn" boasts some exquisite camera work that only fleetingly becomes so creative as to be annoying. Now don't misunderstand: "Autumn" is not "Citizen Cane." It is a ZOMBIE movie, at its heart. But even though it has many of the elements familiar to the genre, the approach is fresh, and the emphasis on psychology rather than mere viscera elevates "Autumn" well beyond what the genre usually produces. I'd go so far as to recommend "Autumn" to someone who I don't think would typically enjoy zombie movies, and I would only say that of perhaps three other such movies (aforementioned two, plus Shaun of the Dead).If you demand zombie hordes ripping out the entrails of entire populations, not for you "Autumn." But if you can appreciate apocalypse on an intimate level, similar in some ways to "The Road," then the existential dread within "Autumn" might be just your thing.

hopla68

25 May 2013

yet another indie with too much padding, boring and too long

and we have yet another winner in the never halting parade of moviesthat waste valuable time.What do we have on the table, yet another virus kills almost everybodyand leaves the few survivors stranded and on the run. The latterbecause the dead come back to life.Ah well, I saw the poster and against better judgment I gave it a shot,for around 30 minutes and then the worn down fast forward button camein handy. Nothing really happens in this movie, within minutes everyoneexcept a few are dead, this is shown by a couple of people vomitingblood interlaced with scenes with leaves dropping. I can just imaginethe brainstorm session that went into that one. Trying desperately tocome up with an arty beginning..subtle yet gripping.Yawn, oke well, after a couple of days the dead come back to life,dwindle about and to nothing. The survivors talk a lot, dwindle aboutand do nothing. A yawn inducing scene have them capturing..uhm..guiding one of the zombies indoors where the survivors are to examineit, where it does nothing but bump into furniture.Somewhere in the movie David Carradine is hiding, poor guy and whilefast forwarding I saw some scenes of zombies besieging a house and somerunning about, but trust me, you gave up way before that.Pretentious, overlong, boring, no budget crap. Don't waste your time.

Yahya Adada

21 May 2013

The ZERO was invented for this movie

There is absolutely nothing, and I mean nothing worth more than zero,except a 7/10 for 7 minutes of David Carradine. I waited with my sonfor even one scene that might redeem our pitiful time that was stolenfrom us minute by minute. All the ingredients of the movie are rottenincluding acting, location, scenery, script, music, direction. I wish Ican say the special effects were awful, but there is none. I evencouldn't tell in which country the events took place. No matter how lowthe budget was, I believe it is too much. I do tolerate many lamemovies sometimes out of curiosity, but this one was intolerable. DO NOTEVEN THING ABOUT IT, if you value your time and self esteem.

20 May 2013

Decent Zombie Fare

AUTUMN is one of those films that takes some getting used to. I liked the slow animation and build up of the zombies themselves. The "artsy" camera work was a bit to be desired and came off like a made for TV movie or student film. The acting was passable, and the plot was interesting. I really enjoyed the film once but will likely not view it again unless it is with friends. David Carradine's part is small and under used. It is not his best work. He seemed to be put in the film to just have a "big" name and to simply exhibit "gross" behaviors. His part could have been so much more. (By the way, I really like Carradine and respect much of his work.) I just think that his part was poorly written and it did not inspire his best acting. All in all, AUTUMN is worth seeing if you are a zombie fan....once.

heraclitus_flux

11 May 2013

If you place any value on two hours of your time, RUN... DO NOT WALK TO THE NEAREST EXIT!

If there is any justice in this world, this title will never disgracethe filmography of the late David Carradine.I don't know what massive gambling debt or sexual blackmail was used toget this film made, but nothing short of the pain of death would forceme to sit through this sh!t again! This film has all the quality of an Elementary School A/V ClubProduction... except that any prepubescent child capable of maintaininga C grade average would have destroyed every print of this garbage forfear of never working in film again!Watching this movie is as painful as a colonoscopy without lube while abull-dyke squeezes your balls, and a fat, pustule-laden toothlessmeth-whore drags her skanky toe-jam greasy-cheese stuffed toe-nailsacross a slate chalk-board, while Paris Hilton sings a Celine Dioncover track of an Inuit throat-singer with laryngitis while Britneysings backup and Bruce Willis plays mouth harp.If you are morbidly curious about David Carradine's last moments onfilm, you'll have to fast-forward through the first half of this tripebefore he briefly appears and chews a few minutes of screen-time beforehis demise. Skip it!

mofukr

11 May 2013

Absolute Garbage!

I am generally a fan of zombie flicks, many of which are low budget andmost of which will not be regarded as cinematic masterpieces. Thisfilm, however, is the worst piece of garbage that I have ever seen. Iknow that phrases like this are used too liberally on IMDb, so believeme that I am using the phrase as appropriately as possible.The sound engineer must be deaf. The director (if there was truly adirector) should permanently resign himself from film-making. Theactors although terrible should probably not be blamed because thesense is that the script and directing sealed their fate before thefirst line of dialogue was spoken.The editing is horrendous. It's so bad that in many parts of the movie,you can't really tell what's going on because of the atrociousscattering of clips.There really is no excuse for this piece of rotting manure. Budget isnot the issue. I could make a better movie than this for the price of aused lawnmower.Skill and talent are the ingredients that are missing from the start.Money can't buy those and unfortunately for those involved in thisfilm, they will never possess either.

11 May 2013

HORRID

I cannot believe the good reviews on this film!!! I simply cannot believe it. If I had made this train wreck of a movie I would be thoroughly embarrassed to say I had anything to do with it. Starting with the cinematography, it is HORRIBLE, very bad home video cheap digital look to it and that's not all, the acting is ridiculous, I like B movies but this is unbelievable, let's just find anyone who can attempt to act and put them in our movie, yay! Then there is the story, BORING. Zombies? Wow zombies that bump into you, Ooooh scary!. I cannot believe someone paid money to just poop this piece of waste out. If this is what people are into today it is a sad sad day. Do yourself a favor and don't even rent this for a dollar as there are hundreds of other movies to enjoy that are actually GOOD.

joaniovino

11 May 2013

A giant load of crap in a small package

This film was so terrible I could hardly believe it. This is the second Canadian-made zombie film I've ever seen, and theother one was horrid as well, however, Autumn is more boring. The sound is so unprofessional. I could have done better with my cellphone camera. I've already wasted enough time watching it, I'm notgoing to waste much time reviewing it. But I was so annoyed at the lowquality piece of crap that I actually signed up for an IMDb accountjust to warn others... STAY AWAY.How in the HELL this thing got distribution is utterly beyond me.Here are all the good things in the film that fit inside that one, tinystar I gave it.- Pretty Canadian nature shots- David Carradine- occasional make-up successSorry. It really is just awful.

16 April 2013

viruszombie flick

This review is from: Autumn (DVD) autmn is a zombie movie for the most part.it has seemed to have copy the style of movie like a few days later.everyone in this towm gets a virus and dies except a handful of people.some venture off to find a more secure place from where they are staying.the people who died from the virus come back to life in a zombie state.the zombies start off slow and stupid,but as time goes by they become more violent.will the band of survivors make it?watch and see.david carradine has a small part in it.

j_fblake

15 April 2013

Movie is more for David Moody fans

If you've read any of the David Moody books the "Autumn" series, thenyou'll most likely appreciate this movie.The movie is based on David Moody's first book "Autumn" (total of fourbooks to date) and it did a great job of staying true to the maincharacters and the storyline. Most movies I've seen that were based onbooks end up being a hack job; the director gives their interpretationand loses the essence of what the book was really about (any fan ofStephen King would agree).Yes, the acting could have been much better and the editing was quitechoppy, but the story itself remained intact. The movie was slowbecause the first book "Autumn" was slow.The "Autumn" series is another approach to the zombie culture and thebooks are much more plot and character driven than they are atdelivering blood, gore and the end of the world apocalypse scenarios.Bottom line, if you've read and enjoyed any of the David Moody books,then this movie is worth the rental. If you haven't read any of hisbooks, then maybe 28 Days Later or any George Romero movie would bemore up your alley.

31 March 2013

Ive been waiting for this movie for so long...

Autumn (Steven Rumbelow, 2009)It should be noted, first, that while David Moody's Autumn quartet has become a self-publishing success story (including netting Moody a publishing contract with St. Martin's, who are slowly re-releasing all his stuff) and singlehandedly sparked an explosion in small-press zombie literature, the books themselves aren't all that great. Yes, they're loads of fun, retool (if not reimagine) the zombie paradigm nicely, and ask a lot of interesting questions in a meta sort of way. But they're not terribly well-written. Still, great movies have been made from mediocre books (think The Silence of the Lambs here). So I held out some small hope that Steven Rumbelow would take the first book in the series and turn it into some sort of minor masterpiece. More fool me.Autumn is the story of a small group of survivors who are left behind by some sort of fast-acting plague that wipes out billions of people in the space of a few heartbeats. While the novel focuses on one band that gets together in a school building and then splits off into different groups, the movie, after paying token lip service to the school bit (five minutes or thereabouts, it's a much larger portion of the book), focuses on one splinter group from the original mass: Michael (Kick-Ass' Dexter Fletcher), Emma (Lana Kamenov in her first screen appearance), and Carl (British TV character actor Dickon Tolson; American audiences may remember him from a recurring role on the sitcom Growing Pains). There's tension in the group, as there was in the larger group, and it gets worse when the billions of corpses struck down by the disease get up and start walking around...This is, in many ways, the basis for every post-Romero zombie movie, though Moody, in his novels, was very interested in shifting things around to make it obvious he was questioning the conventions of the genre. (Most interestingly, perhaps, Moody's zombies do not crave human flesh.) Rumbelow, on the other hand, adapting Moody's novel, feels the need to high-five a number of zombie films, most notably Romero's original Dawn of the Dead. These two things do not necessarily have to live in exclusivity; Rumbelow's zombies don't eat people, either. But it's kind of synecdochic of the way this adaptation goes; wherever Moody zigs in the books, the movie zags, and we end up with a conventional zombie flick.Not that this would necessarily be a bad thing; conventional zombie films still have a lot of mileage in them, as recent movies like The Mad and Dance of the Dead showed nicely. And these days having no budget is no excuse to make a bad movie, either (think DeadBirds or Lockout as an example of a stellar microbudget release). So what is this creature I have before me? It's a movie where a pretty darned good cast was picked up (including David Carradine in a small but memorable role), put in front of the camera, and wasted. There are some decent performances here; both Carradine and Kamenov are at least competent, though the zombies are more animated than anyone else in the film. Problem is, those performances don't connect to anything. Sticking with the bigger-picture aspect of the book might have helped this a bit, but I think a lot of things were short-circuited by the seemingly minor changes Rumbelow made (for example, the zombie makeup, which is really good, but doesn't belong in this flick; when it's obvious that the zombies are zombies, some of the confusion scenes just plain don't make sense--including the climactic one). The end result is a confusing mess that could have been a really good movie, but is instead one to avoid. * ½

tim-1419

31 March 2013

Deep and dark. Excellent!

The zombie stuff is just the backdrop for the main plot(s) Darkcharacters whose secrets are flushed out by the rotting flesh of thezombies. Grim, wry humour and social satire. David Carradine treasuresthe living corpse of his long dead mother. If only his character hadbeen called Norman!! (coming mother) Shades of Psycho I could seeelements of my own dark side hung out and pointed at by the un-dead.It's clear this film has been misunderstood, a great shame and aninjustice for the actors and crew involved in this. I thoroughlyenjoyed this film from start to finish. Get a cold beer and let thefilm take you where it will. Recommended viewing for Brit-Horror fans.

epoc3000

29 March 2013

Why this movie sucks

This movie sells itself as a zombie movie. It's listed under the genresHorror/Thriller and its tagline is "Silence is your savior".The whole problem is that they are NEVER in danger. The zombies are notreal zombies as we would expect them to be. There are several sceneswith the main characters just walking past crowds of Walking Corpsesthat do them no harm.During the whole movie, a movie that sells itself as a Horror/thrillerzombie movie, there is only ONE kill. A dog. Other than that, only oneof the main characters and only ONCE gets *attacked* and gets nothingbut scracthes. And very superficial ones. Not one drop of blood. I'vegotten more injured playing with my cat than the main character gotbeing attacked by dozens of ZOMBIES.So, where exactly is the Thrill? Where exactly is the Horror? Whysilence is your savior? Savior from what, if the corpses are notattacking? They are only drawn by sound, but once they are at yourdoor, all they do is annoy you. They didn't manage to break a singleglass, or a door, or anything. They are the weakest, most harmlesszombies ever! All they do is bark and walk around! I'm sorry, but thosemain characters wouldn't have survived 10 minutes if those WalkingCorpses were any real threat to them.Now, if this movie had tried instead to sell itself as a drama, or avision of what life would be if you and handful of other people werethe only survivors in a world with walking rotten corpses that posed nodanger to you at all, THEN it would have been an AVERAGE movie. Becauseeven that wasn't explored to its potential.So, this is most horrible attempt to make a zombie movie ever. Unlessyou don't call it a zombie movie and remove it from the horror/thrillergenres since there is none of that in it(except for the poor dog, thatis).

29 March 2013

Bloody and gory

A minute into the movie everyone began vomiting big globs of blood everywhere. Blood, blood, blood for 5-10 minutes. I didn't get any further then that - had to shut it off. There wasn't even any story info to grab onto as to why this was happening. Boring waste of time.