Survival of the Dead is garbage – I rate it Red Blood — and it is on my List Of Zombie Films To AVOID.
What’s worse than that is that it clearly had a chunk of money behind it — not loads, but more money than many zombie films — which in my mind was money that could have been split to make at least 2 other cleverly-made lower budget better films.
The Core Problem — No Story
My impression of Survival of the Dead is that someone — maybe their name was George — had a stack of admittedly clever zombie gags written down and sitting in a pile. This person wanted to use these in a film, but didn’t otherwise know how to pull it off — which frankly is what they should have done and just left well enough alone. However, they got together with their buddies — possibly there were a few beers in the room, possibly a few too many — and they had a brainstorming session that amounted to… “Okay, we’ll use the military ’cause that always flies in zombie films — oh, and to help it sell, everything Irish is popular right now, so let’s throw that in too!” Having concocted a shoddy story-line they got their funding and started rolling.
My guess is that’s how Survival Of The Dead got its start. But what, no gratuitous possibly-future-famous Z-film breasts to further sell this potboiler?!? I like bad film, but in this case I would prefer that whoever green-lighted this project read my review: don’t waste your company’s money and don’t waste the audience’s time.
The Story — Lacking Though It May Be
Zombies have taken over the world. A ragtag band of soldiers roams the countryside to scavenging to survive. The unit is intrigued when they hear of a safe haven on an island off the coast of North America. Expecting to find a paradise, they instead find the island is torn apart by a wannabe Hatfield–McCoy family feud. One family wants to exterminate the zombies while the other thinks everyone can peacefully coexists with their undead relatives hoping for a cure to return their relatives back to their human state.