Re-Kill movie full length review - Entertaining, unique take on the genre, with an Achilles heel.
Compared to big-budget block-busters, I'd rate this lower, but compared to B-rated movies, I'd rate it higher. Thus I give this a 5.
Pros: · Really, quite a good story · Remarkably good acting for such a low budget · Well done zombie action (I'm not even that into zombie movies) · Despite its short runtime, viewers get to know and like some characters.
Cons · Deplorably shaky camera work · Excessively zoomed-in while in close-quarters · Never-ending ammo · Too short (see additional comments)
Comments: I actually enjoyed this movie, and that's saying something. To put it in perspective, if you've seen World War Z, I'd rate this movie about on-par with that one despite its significantly smaller budget. That said, I'll pick apart some of the glaring issues for me:
The never-ending ammo didn't have to be a detractor. They simply could have solved that conundrum by having each member of the various team carry a whole lot of ammo, and show plenty of re- loading scenes. Logically, each team member should have had the same gun, and thus could have shared ammo. This would have been a convenient way to build intra-team personality dynamics. The teams could have coordinated their firing vs reloading time, and it would have added to the excitement. Viewers WANT to see the team work as a team, like a solid tactical unit. They missed an opportunity for that; as it was there wasn't much team dynamic - it wasn't a mess, it was just not there.
The shaky camera is really totally inexcusable, and will really upset a lot of viewers. It was worse than Blair Witch. In many cases, the scenes really didn't warrant the bad camera work, it was unnecessary and wasn't logical. Certainly, in some scenes where the cameraman is, for instance, trying to escape a zombie rush, you could expect some shenanigans. It's clear that it would have been more entertaining if the whole movie was recorded with Go-Pro cameras. Heck, I could have done a better job with a cell phone camera! There are plenty of scenes where the director chose to use non-cameraman cameras, viewing a zombie rush from close-quarters for example (when we know the story-line cameraman is not actually that close). With this logic, they could have safely chosen more panning shots, overhead shots, and other artful angles, with the end result of a more watchable film.
The length of the film was quite short, but the story was good enough that they could have fleshed it out even further. They could have added an X-Files-esque twist or added some additional walled- compound details. They did touch on this idea in some of the faux advertisements, so it would have been a logical addition.
The ending was abrupt, and a bit of a letdown. In my opinion, they should have gone a little "Hollywood" at the end, but I do understand why the ended the way they did. Overall, I'd give the ending a solid 5/10, but all the ingredients were there to have given it a spectacular ending. I think that was a missed opportunity.
Conclusion: It's a fun enough movie for zombie fans, and for those who are open to something that's a little lower budget. I wouldn't spend a lot of money to go see it, though.