I didn't like as much of the story like some people may have but the reason I give this a 6/10 is the whole new direction they put the film in and the terrifying suspense. The filming was of the 'lost footage' type and consisted of good zombie action. This film always kept me at the edge of my seat and had those moments where you'd think you would get jump scared but wouldn't. It always kept the survival part from the first film but didn't succeed in a big plot. The plot was about a group of people which are finding some place to stay safe. This is as entertaining as maybe a filler in Z Nation maybe where they find the video camera or a DVD and is a great "watch maybe twice a year" film to sit down and just relax with your loved ones.

A good found footage horror has two things: believable acting and a believable reason for why the characters are filming. While one can believe that someone experiencing a zombie apocalypse might want to film it (in fact, I found the premise pretty interesting), there's nothing believable about the way the characters behave in front of or behind the camera in this film.

Every line feels rehearsed. The characters, especially the professor, are trying so hard to sound deep, but instead they all sound like pretentious and overly-dramatic people with no real emotions. You don't end up feeling anything for any of them, which is sad. If you don't like a horror film character, you should at least dislike them and have fun hoping for them to die. These characters just leave you indifferent.

At least the zombies look okay.

There's something faintly ludicrous about the opening shots of this 'found footage' entrance into George A Romero's entry into his 'Living Dead' series. A live news broadcast is interrupted when corpses in the background come back to half-life and start attacking those around them. To me, found footage works best when you don't see too much – the characters on screen reacting to something out of the audience's vision works very well in that style. Fully made-up zombies fit better into a more stylised, 'professionally filmed' scenario.

Things don't improve hugely when we meet a film crew, including actors playing actors playing both in front of, and behind the camera. 'Hilarity' ensures when two cast members 'have to pee', leaving the rest to view on the news reports how the dead are coming back to life. Amongst the teens, we have a uproariously well-spoken elderly ham Andrew Maxwell (Scott Wentworth) who clearly feels he's demeaning himself by appearing in the film being made. Whispering, identical horny youngsters, someone (Jason – played by Joshua Close) who films *everything* despite being repeatedly asked not to, posturing, wall-to-wall expletives – all the staples of a teen horror, and by Romero's standards, BAD. Apart from anything else, the advantages and unique qualities of the archive formula are simply not used here. The 'story' doesn't need to be told in this way, and is just a gimmick. Could it be Romero was seeking financial success by attempting to attract the youth demographic? It is explained at the beginning that, to make events more frightening, the young film-makers have added incidental music to events – and yet failed to edit out moments when (as is always the way in these things) the cameras start to fail and cut off.

Anyway, as events fail to progress, I am gagging for some cadaverous zombie to limp in and violently dismember people. When they eventually turn up, they are half-hearted, under-made-up and easily dispatched. The alleged good guys remain personality-free, rather a growing band of posers 'doing what they gotta do'. How did Romero allow this to be made? To spend so much time with these people and for not one of them to effect any kind of personality for the duration is one thing, but when the undead action is as scarce as it is here, it makes for a hugely dull experience.

Happily, the next in the series 'Survival of the Dead (2009)' is a huge improvement on this.