disinterested_spectator
Though there is no such thing as karma in real life, there is plenty of it in the movies. In a typical movie, the good are rewarded and the evil punished, each to the extent that they deserve. In some cases, however, movie karma goes a little overboard, and people are punished way in excess of what little faults they may have, and that is what we have in this film.When the movie starts, a couple is having dinner, with the husband, Sam Sherman, saying grace. He makes a semi-blasphemous remark about how God let their baby die. Uh oh. Sure enough, he must be punished, and instrument of death is his own wife, Sally. She goes all zombie on him and kills him with a fork. Zombies don't usually use weapons, however, so this is our first clue that this is not your typical zombie flick.Actually, just before the baby died, Sam and Sally were having an argument. He criticized her for not changing the diaper on the stinking baby, and she said it was his turn to do his part and change the diaper himself. So, maybe that's it. Sam is being punished for sexism, imagining that diaper changing is woman's work.But there's more. Sam had left his pistol on the table where the baby could get to it. As a result, while Sam and Sally are arguing, the baby puts the barrel in his mouth and pulls the trigger. And thus we have to wonder if Sam was punished for being negligent in leaving a handgun around where a baby could get to it.It turns out that the baby was adopted, and the baby's birth mother, Laura Childs, is being besieged by zombies, whom she manages to fight off or, in some cases, kill with the help of her boyfriend Jack or the sheriff. Her roommate gets killed, probably punishment for making a move on Jack. A sheriff's deputy is killed as punishment for being a jerk. And so on. When her own mother turns on her and is put in an insane asylum, she notices Sally Sherman, whom she knows to be the adoptive mother of her baby, is also a patient. Laura slips into her room, and Sally tells her that the baby's ghost is inhabiting people as a way of inflicting punishment on those who wronged him, and Laura is big on his list of those on whom he wants to inflict vengeance.You'd think Laura would get credit for having the baby and giving it up for adoption instead of aborting it the way her previous boyfriend wanted all along. Well, said previous boyfriend does get punished for that, right after the ghost baby inhabits the body of the woman he was bitch-banging and lets him have some axe in the face. But Laura still did her baby wrong by not keeping him, so he is still after her as his main target.Somewhere along the way, we find out that a fanatical Christian couple were the baby's first adoptive parents, and when Child Protective Services took the baby away, this first adoptive mother cursed it. Actually, the movie is thick with Christianity, and we regularly see crucifixes hanging on the walls of the rooms of different characters in the film. And thus it is that while ghost baby is going around wreaking death on those who wronged him, we sort of get the feeling that some of these people are being punished for excess of religion.Anyway, Laura's mother escapes from the insane asylum, and, finding Laura at home, tells her that the ghost baby just wants his mother. But then ghost baby inhabits Laura's mother again, and Laura has to handcuff her to the oven. Then Jack comes over, and he gets possessed by the ghost baby too.But now Laura knows what ghost baby really wants. She tells him to come to Mommy, lays him on the floor and has sex with him. So, spiritually speaking, she has sex with her own son, through the body of her boyfriend, resulting in impregnation. Talk about returning to the womb. Anyway, it does the job. Ghost baby is satisfied and he waits inside his mother to be reborn.It looks as though everything has ended happily, but I have to wonder what movie karma thinks about incest.
terrible2
Titles can be so misleading, but I for one, was glad that "Rise Of The Dead" was not just another low budget zombie flick, but instead a well thought out horror experience from Ohio.Director William Wedig piles on the dread factor that the writing team of Jeff and Josh Crook have layed out for him in this seemingly no budget film about possession and things that go "Thud" in the night... Most films with the words "Of the Dead" in the title means: "Zombie" but Wedig has something else in store for his unknowing audience. This is a well crafted, though provoking, blood bath of a film with solid acting and cinematography through out. Stand out performances by Erin Wilk and a rather comedic turn by producer / actor Chris Ferry make "Rise Of The Dead" a worth while viewing pleasure for fans of the genre. The story itself, paints a vivid picture of how bad things happen to bad people, but does it with a flair not normally explored in this type of film. The gore is honorable, and of course the nudity is always present to reel in even the most frigid viewer. "Rise Of The Dead" is a sign of good things to come from Ohio, and the future of horror in general.
franky-stone
I just finished listening to the commentary on this (non-zombie but rather spirit/ghost possession) small little film and I have to say that this thing is quite a freaking achievement! With a total budget of 20 thousand dollars and a crew willing to work basically for free they were able to make this movie, which not only cuts together, it looks completely professional! And has lots of death and murder! Not necessarily some of the best scenes I've ever seen from a horror film but damn: This thing is glossy! It even has a super creepy, twisted and completely original ending (which you'll just have to watch to find out what I mean). In any case, it's creepy and weird but makes total sense for the story (the first kill is specially good and creepy and if anything this scene and the last one make this movie worth watching. There's also a good scene in a church where a women gets her head crushed with a statue of the virgin mary. It's messed up.).I don't know how many of you out there actually are indie filmmakers yourself but I've had friends who have made 20 thousand dollar films before and they are usually just un-watchably bad. Bad sound, bad acting and bad cuts tend to plague these super-low budget films but this one seemed to gloss over and past those issues to deliver a very watchable, coherent and driven story. Say what you want about the film sucking, being boring, poor production value or whatever other problems the film may have, but don't take for granted that most movies you see are shot for well over 2,000 times this budget (and that's only a 40 million dollar movie, not the giant $150 million dollar movie that blockbuster's like Transformers cost).I'd recommend this film to anybody who's interested in independent cinema (the film was independently produced with the name Tantrum, which I think suits the film way better, and then sold to Lions Gate for distribution), anybody who's interested in seeing new ideas and scenes in the horror genre and anybody who likes a good old fashioned horror flick complete with all the elements to make for an extremely entertaining Saturday night.
plunderer-dailylink
The movie wasn't bad for a B-movie. I have definitely seen far worse! The acting wasn't too bad (minus a few of the actors) and the story actually had promise.However, the description is all wrong, as others have stated. This is NOT a zombie movie!!! There is no flesh eating and no brain munching!!! Without giving a spoiler, my only other problem with the movie was how they ended it. Not only was it creepy-gross, but it seemed like the writers couldn't figure out how to make a conclusion! The BEST scene in the movie was when the preacher was giving his sermon (I won't go into details). If there were a category for best supporting actor in a B-movie, that guy should get it.
