Matcollis This Movie Can Only Be Described With One Word.

BootDigest Such a frustrating disappointment

Titreenp SERIOUSLY. This is what the crap Hollywood still puts out?

ReaderKenka Let's be realistic.

ehansen-52754 The characters are so monotone, and the acting so poor, that the zombies appear more lively and vibrant in comparison.

bowmanblue I was into zombie movies BEFORE zombie movies became cool again (some time in the early 2000s I believe when 'Resident Evil' appeared on the big screen. Therefore George Romero's 1985 film 'Day of the Dead' (or rather sequel to two classics - 'Night of the Living Dead' and 'Dawn of the Dead') was a real favourite of mine.In fact (and don't hate me for this!) even though 'Day' wasn't quite as well-received as its two predecessors, I actually liked it the most. I loved its darkness, sheer terrifying claustrophobic nature, cast, gore - in fact, everything about it. Now, skip forward a couple of decades where I'm allowed to browse the internet and I find out that - for some reason - the actual TITLE of the film, i.e. 'Day of the Dead' was never copyrighted (or something). This meant that, if I so wished, could make my own version of the film (maybe with some sort of addition-tagline just to cover myself) and not get sued. This went some way to explain 2005's 'Day of the Dead: Contagium' (don't watch it - trust me!). And possible 2008's remake of 'Day of the Dead' which confused many into thinking it was a sequel to the (quite excellent) 2005 remake of 'Dawn of the Dead.'I don't know why I watched 'Bloodline.' Maybe it's because 'The Walking Dead' is currently between seasons, or because 'Bloodlines' is on Netflix. Either way... I wish I hadn't. Although, like any good car crash, I couldn't turn it off. 'Day of the Dead: Bloodlines' has some of the worst acting I've ever seen. It also has some of the most obvious sets I've ever seen. The gore is okay, but too over-the-top for a film that's not supposed to be a 'comedy-horror' and the characters are more one-dimensional than your average daytime soap opera. So why did I continue to watch it? Possibly because I couldn't believe that someone was not just content with ripping off the 'Day of the Dead' title, but they've basically remade the original film... only much worse.Most of the original characters have been 'updated' (any by 'updated' I mean turned completely one-dimensional by second-rate actors), although a few names have been changed and/or applied to different characters. They've taken the setting, the characters, recreated the location (albeit badly in a set, rather than a real underground missile silo) and palmed it off as some sort of update. And - surprise, surprise - it doesn't work. They've even turned 'Bub' (aka the slightly more intelligent zombie from the 1985 version) into a slimy stalker, although, in the actor's defence, he's probably the best actor in this remake.If you like zombie movies - great. Just watch a different one, as you're bound to have a few in your collection. Just because this is 'free' on Netflix, doesn't mean you should waste your time on it. It really is that bad. 'The Walking Dead' will be back soon enough. Even if you think the TV show is getting stale, it's still head and shoulders over this garbage.

Platypuschow Day Of The Dead (1985) has held its ground as one of the greatest zombie movies ever made and one of the jewels on the crown of the true king of zombie movies George Romero.When it was remade back in 2008 starring Mena Suvari it understandably flopped, it had big boots to fill and failed spectacularly. For whatever reason 10 years later in what is already shaping up to be one of the worst years in movie history they decided to remake it again.Bloodline is exactly that, it's not just a cashgrab attempting to live off the originals name it is in fact an attempt at a remake. Sadly however they decided to change a great deal and that doesn't sit right with me.It follows our heroine as she lives in the military bunker alongside civilians and soldiers alike. The soldiers vs scientists dynamic that made the original so memorable has been removed altogether.They have a Bub like character, but he is an abusive stalker of our leading lady and is smarter than the rest of the zombies. Relentlessly pursuing her which is interesting but simply not Day Of The Dead.Though I don't think this is bad it certainly isn't good either. It's an offensively inferior remake of a movie that needs to be left the hell alone. All the changes to the plot have done it no favours, the pacing is dreadful, the characters are interchangeable and the "Bloodline" thing is pointlessly tacked on.The Good:Couple of nice nods to the originalLooks better than you'd expectThe Bad:Instantly forgettable charactersAwful pacingSimply shouldn't existThings I Learnt From This Movie:Being bitten by a zombie will cause a mini explosion which sprays blood upwards of ten feetDuring the zombie apocalypse while seeing people being ripped apart and while surrounded by zombies it's best to take a leisurely walk through the middle of it all and have a telephone conversation

bland-kevin67 I watched this despite my wife's protests and the ratings on NetFlix because I have seen some pretty nice flicks which were lowly rated. This one was spot on! The movie made bad movies seem no so bad. I feel bad for the actors who are trying to make a name in Hollywood but also need to make a paycheck. The movie starts out as a flashback from a scene that is never referenced in it again! The directing seemed to be so juvenile that even a high school student film would fare better. Not sure if this could be called a remake since it lacks the story line of the original and the non sensical killing was moot. I'm glad the director was kind enough to limit it to 90 minutes.