UNLIMITED STREAMING
WITH PRIME VIDEO
TRY 30-DAY TRIAL
Home > Horror >

Re-Kill

Re-Kill (2015)

October. 16,2015
|
4.9
|
R
| Horror Science Fiction

Five years after a zombie outbreak, the men and women of R-Division hunt down and destroy the undead. When they see signs of a second outbreak, they fear humanity may not survive.

...

Watch Trailer

Cast

Similar titles

Reviews

nikola17
2015/10/16

everyone is a gore bloody zombie fan of movies full of violence there is many many many good ones out their besides this garbage movie. its badly made film so badly like they made movie into a commercial add they cant keep it simple like normal fun action horror zombie film they don't the all movie half of it turns in out to be commercial, Re-Kill is How to waste Scott Adkins talent in film i love Scott Adkins so much their is other many movies he has made many movies way better then this trash everyone watch's this movie just for Scott Adkins killing zombies OK fine but the thing is he is not lead role of movie he is just short cameo in film sadly he is wasted for noting if writes or director got him as lead actor then everyone would liked it a lot more. This movie was suppose to have been out 4 YEARS ago. WTF happened? did they change Plot changed into different actor or character with Scott Adkins to someone as lead role. there is moments of violence and action gore zombies all that but what really makes me upset is in film the add commercials to movie jeez they DON'T NEED TO MAKE NEED IT IN THIS MOVIE. god i am so annoyed with movie its just annoying besides Scot Adkins their is another actors Veteran B-movie actor Bruce Payne ("Passenger 57", "Highlander Endgame") is almost wasted (because there really isn't much for him to do) although he gives arguably the most memorable performance in the film as the religious zealot of the squad. like Winston(Bruce Payne)main villain in Passenger 57 he sucked in this movie badly as lead actor i am like why could they just get Scott Adkins as lead or wait He's not getting the roles he deserves! He should be a much bigger star just like Jason statham who gives a dam scoot deserves better for his role another actor i liked who is good (Jesse Garcia) Omar Hernandez is good character and actor OK i didn't mind seeing him in this film with Scott. film is little bit fun shooting at zombies, blowing them up "Re-Kill" plays like an R-rated version of the TV show "COPS", following an elite squad of QUASI SWAT soldiers in a contaminated zone, fighting off seemingly endless hoards of zombies aka "ReAns" (short for Reanimated). The opening of the film is exciting, FULL of blood, bullets and gore. Since it plays like a TV episode, every 15 or so minutes commercials like low budget version of Starship Troopers meets 28 days later Zombie Apocalypse repackaged into reality show, but unfortunately also with overdose of shaky cam bull crap film i have noting much to say about this movie reason is i haven't watched the all film is because it sucked, its pointless, time waster Scott Adkins noting really in it for him he is SO SO wasted badly in film even i got upset with film i just think is very overrated its film i never recommended to anyone

More
ericrnolan
2015/10/17

I want to give "Re-Kill" (2015) more than a 5 out of 10 rating. I do. It's an ambitious post-apocalyptic independent zombie film that earnestly and unpretentiously tries to give fans of the subgenre everything they're asking for: great action, decent makeup effects, gore, good scares and lots of creative world-building, all culminating in a nifty little sci-fi subplot that isn't stupid and isn't too forced.There's a wealth of fun ideas here — the original story was obviously developed by people with a love for zombie tales. We follow a "COPS"-style reality-TV program documenting a"Re-Kill" unit, a squad of specially trained commandos who repel brushfire outbreaks during a global, stalemated war between the living and the dead. They "rekill" the "re-ans," this universe's slang for re- animated dead.We see the entire program, complete with commercials from this fictional world: PSA's to encourage people to have sex (in order to repopulate the world), and drug companies opportunistically pushing drugs for PTSD and depression. My favorite was an ad for a Desert Eagle sidearm marketed to protective mothers, "for the children." We get wicked-cool peeks into a fairly detailed fictional world, including the activities of the police, the military, the media and civilians.This would have made a fine book series, in the manner of Max Brooks' "World War Z." Or it would make a terrific TV series … like a far faster paced and more expansive equivalent of "The Walking Dead."Tragically, though, this movie's execution is too often lacking. The acting is sometimes poor (but not from the always awesome Roger Cross, who you and I know as Curtis Manning from "24.") The script has problems. And worst of all is the absolutely unnecessary shaky- cam directing. This movie could have been a fantastic action-horror flick … if only we were able to see the action a little better. The style of shooting here was a disastrous creative decision.Oh, well. It's still a fun watch for hardcore zombie fans.

More
irelands-the
2015/10/18

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.

More
jackmeat
2015/10/19

My quick rating - 6,3/10. Nice to breath some fresh air when it comes to the tired zombie genre. Sure the apocalypse has already happened so very little background needs to go into it but from there the movie follows a team of soldiers in a reality style TV show to eradicate the zombies. Sounds fun, right? It is but not full on action at all times. Slight drawback that is easily filled with the highlight of this movie. The reality style of the camera work is great but the star of the show is the wacky future commercials done in the same vein as Starship Troopers, Running Man, etc. The whole feel of this movie as just so well done that the plot of finding out the secret behind the walled in part of the city was a backseat to it. Our stars did fine (notably Scott Adkins) in acting for this type of movie and also overacting when needed. Along with this, the gore is there for all fans to enjoy as well. One fun ride to be had with this one and just a bit more action along the way (even if stretched out for the sake of over-indulgence) would've been just fine for this critic. Still well worth the wait and look forward to watching this movie again.

More