Diary of the Dead (2007)

62% of critics liked it
(128 reviews)
42% of users liked it
(25,527 ratings)

Horror icon George A. Romero effectively hits the "reset" button on his hugely influential Dead series with this scaled-back look at the zombie apocalypse as told from the perspective of a student filmmaker who sets out to shoot a low-budget fright film, but instead captures the breakdown of modern… More Horror icon George A. Romero effectively hits the "reset" button on his hugely influential Dead series with this scaled-back look at the zombie apocalypse as told from the perspective of a student filmmaker who sets out to shoot a low-budget fright film, but instead captures the breakdown of modern society at the decaying hands of flesh-eating ghouls. Jason Creed (Joshua Close) and his crew are shooting a mummy movie in the Pennsylvania woods when media reports begin pouring in about the dead rising from their graves to feast on the flesh of the living. While self-centered star Ridley (Phillip Riccio) beats a hasty retreat to his family's fortified mansion halfway across the state, the remaining cast and crew are forced to fight for their lives despite having no weapons to speak of, and only a wobbly recreational vehicle in which to seek shelter. Immediately recognizing the gravity of the situation and outspokenly skeptical of the media, determined director Creed decides to use his own camera to capture the real story in a documentary entitled "The Death of Death." Now, as the group attempts to fight their way to safety, the skeptics will all watch as their greatest fears become reality, and the realists will attempt to process a nightmare that modern science would pass off as impossible. ~ Jason Buchanan, Rovi

Play Trailer

Rating, Runtime: R, 1 hr. 34 min.
Directed By: George A. Romero
Written By: George A. Romero
Genres: Mystery & Suspense, Horror

In Theaters: Sep 8, 2007 Wide
On DVD: May 20, 2008
Studio: The Weinstein Company

Critic Reviews

Desson Thomson, Washington Post
We want to high-five Romero for finding new ways to off his lifeless marauders.
James Berardinelli, ReelViews
Not only the most satisfying motion picture Romero has made in a long while, but one of the best of his career.
Manohla Dargis, New York Times
It's clever, or at least clever enough to keep you going and interested from start to finish. It just isn't scary.
Colin Covert, Minneapolis Star Tribune
It's a shame to speak ill of the dead, but Romero leaves us no alternative.
Dana Stevens, Slate
Hardly top-drawer Romero. In fact, it may be his worst zombie film yet. But even bad Romero is a far sight more interesting than the coolly sadistic guts-porn that currently passes for mainstream horror.
Peter Howell, Toronto Star
Romero turns his no-frills production into an asset.
Kelly Vance, East Bay Express
Not the best but certainly far from the worst of Romero's series of accounts of an epidemic of dead people coming to life to eat the living.
Rob Gonsalves, eFilmCritic.com
In Romero's apocalypse, the brutish and soulless hold sway, and that's just the humans.
Fernando F. Croce, CinePassion
Trenchantly implicates the media into the ongoing apocalypse that in previous Dead chapters already included family, capitalism, the military, class divides
Dennis Schwartz, Ozus' World Movie Reviews
A sly but low-level zombie movie for the YouTube crowd.
Marc Savlov, Austin Chronicle
It's rough around the edges, dirty in the middle, and stained through with a sort of nihilistic humanism that ultimately unsettles more than the lurching undead themselves.
Steve Ramos, Screen International
For Romero, someone who still retains respect and admiration for previous work, Diary of the Dead points to the realization that it is time to close the door on zombie movies and move to other horror subjects.
Jonathan W. Hickman, Entertainment Insiders
Once again the master of the independent genre film manages to bring something fresh and worthy to the table.
MaryAnn Johanson, Flick Filosopher
I hate to say this -- partly because I don't want it to be true and partly because it's such a terrible pun -- but could the zombie movie finally be dead?
Cynthia Fuchs, Common Sense Media
Gory zombie movie raises questions about media.
Austin Kennedy, Sin Magazine
Everything that CLOVERFIELD did right, this does wrong.
Karina Montgomery, Cinerina
Diary of the Dead, even for zombie diehards like my little group (we watched Shadow: Dead Riot, for pete's sake), was not very good at all. I mourn.

Read all 17 critic reviews

Critic ratings and reviews powered by RottenTomatoes.com

Fresh (60% or more critics rated the movie positively)

Rotten (59% or fewer critics rated the movie positively)

Featured Audience Ratings

Zach B

As of now, one of the main types of horror films that are taking reign as being the main ones made are the 'Found Footage' genre. In case you do not know, found footage is a genre that is a horror film that is filmed like a documentary on a certain event; characterized by… More
As of now, one of the main types of horror films that are taking reign as being the main ones made are the 'Found Footage' genre. In case you do not know, found footage is a genre that is a horror film that is filmed like a documentary on a certain event; characterized by shaky cameras. Examples include Cannibal Holocaust, The Blair Witch Project, and Rec/ Quarantine. Diary Of The Dead is George A. Romero's take on this genre with his famous zombies and what is created is a film that is not terribly smart, but entertaining to say the least with a great political backdrop like most of his films have. Now, the direction of this film, as I have said, is different than the other films in the '... Of The Dead" franchise. With the use of shaky cameras, it gives more chances for scares that, in some ways, actually work and become effective. With the production quality, the only thing that really has improved are the gore effects which there are plenty of (as you can tell, it is not best to watch this if you hate gore). Some times it looks cartoonish and at times it looks good. So, that is a mix bag. Now we have the characters that try to survive this entire ordeal. For the most part, the actors were one dimensional with constant arguments over filming this epidemic and, to be honest, that did take away from the film a bit. The score for this film, unlike most recent horror films, actually works with creating the suspense with the film. There were a couple times here and there that I think it should have been different, but it is not that much to complain about. Now, finally, how good the allegory for this story was. Like with all of Romero's zombie films, there is an underlining message. Here it has to deal with people's usage of the internet and how dependent we are. The use of this allegory, and how it works with the zombies, I feel got the point across, but I doubt most others will get it. So, overall, my main opinion is this: to the general audience, this will be a rather unintelligent but fun zombie film to watch, but try looking for the underlining themes and understand what is really being said. A little fun fact: look for the cameos of Stephen King, Quentin Tarantino, Guillermo del Toro, Wes Craven, and George A. Romero!
Coxxie M

At the end of the movie, the surviving girl asks, "are we worth saving?" and the movie answers its own question by including the scene in which "the world's luckiest aspiring horror filmmaker" gets to tape his girlfriend while they are debating the meaning of… More
At the end of the movie, the surviving girl asks, "are we worth saving?" and the movie answers its own question by including the scene in which "the world's luckiest aspiring horror filmmaker" gets to tape his girlfriend while they are debating the meaning of death and the two other guys are taping him taping his girlfriend. you know like, just incase someone spills fresca on his tape, then its ok cause they gots extras, bro. so my answer is, "eat us, spare us, save us, but please use a video camera with decent HD quality to tape it with."
Carlos M

Romero seems virtually incapable of following the language of modern horror films using the fake documentary style. The subjective camera is too steady and aseptic for an amateurish recording, the dialogue is unbelievable and everything else is just a pathetic embarrassment.
Conner R

I don't know what George A. Romero was thinking here. It was like a bad version of Cloverfield. It didn't look amateuristic at all, just corny. There were about two interesting characters and way too much cgi effects for zombies that could easily have been done with just… More
I don't know what George A. Romero was thinking here. It was like a bad version of Cloverfield. It didn't look amateuristic at all, just corny. There were about two interesting characters and way too much cgi effects for zombies that could easily have been done with just make-up. I'm happy that it's not really in continuity with the other Of The Dead series because it sticks out like a sore thumb.
Jeff "

Diary Of The Dead is George A. Romero's latest Zombie nightmare. Much like Land Of The Dead, Romero tried something different. This time, he tried to do a documentary style zombie film. The camera work is similar to Cloverfield and The Blair Witch Project. I don't understand… More
Diary Of The Dead is George A. Romero's latest Zombie nightmare. Much like Land Of The Dead, Romero tried something different. This time, he tried to do a documentary style zombie film. The camera work is similar to Cloverfield and The Blair Witch Project. I don't understand why this film got so many bad reviews. In a time where the Horror genre lacks originality, at least a few directors manage to turn out some good, original films. George Romero is one of them. Diary Of The Dead is a very good zombie film, filmed docu style and puts you at the centre of the action. Diary Of The Dead has plenty of thrilling moments and it has everything you'd expect from a Romero film, hell any good horror film for that matter. Enjoy!
MisterYoda ?

What is it with the classic directors; Spielberg, Carpenter, and now Romero, that they seem to produce such abysmal drivel as they get older? Dennis Leary once joked that Elvis should have been killed young so that people only remembered him at his best. If that was true, then Romero… More
What is it with the classic directors; Spielberg, Carpenter, and now Romero, that they seem to produce such abysmal drivel as they get older? Dennis Leary once joked that Elvis should have been killed young so that people only remembered him at his best. If that was true, then Romero should have joined him before this dross was made. Like reality TV, these stupid home movie within a movie offerings are popular at the moment, probably because they're cheap to make. Blair Witch has a lot to answer for. If Cloverfield left you cold, this movie will give you rigor mortis, with its aimless plot, its set-piece action, and its massively, completely unimaginative, by the numbers encounters. To say that the basic premise of this film is ridiculous, is a huge understatement - and I'm not talking about the zombies either! Even if you accept that the film is set in a world where zombies can exist, I simply refuse to accept that anyone would tolerate the lead character constantly filming instead of helping his friends to survive. In the real world, I think it would be a dead cert that one of his friends would either have fed him to a zombie, or at very least, smashed the hell out of his camera to re-engage him with the real world.
A.D. V

I don't know if it's the whole documentary feel or the SOV gimmick or the fact it's not anywhere as gory as his previous efforts but it just doesn't feel like a Romero film. Or maybe its just the fact it sucked unlike any other previous Romero film.
Dead A

"I told you dead people walk slowly"... This camera movie idea is getting old. And the zombie thingy is like oldest. This was no near a good movie. But at some point it was okay.
Cassandra M

I have always admired the films of Romero and there can be no doubt that he is the godfather of zombie films. Alas, i think he should have finished his zombie career with day of the dead. Land of the dead certainly wasn't a bad film and this is far from the worst i've ever… More
I have always admired the films of Romero and there can be no doubt that he is the godfather of zombie films. Alas, i think he should have finished his zombie career with day of the dead. Land of the dead certainly wasn't a bad film and this is far from the worst i've ever seen but the step down is none the less noticeable. The modern cinematic world owes a lot to Romero but it's clear that the modern cinematic world has moved on from him. Lets start with the main problems(and ignore the million little ones):- 1. An idiot who keeps filming even when he or his friends are in danger (at no point does the brilliant idea of putting the camera down occur to him) 2. A narrator that appears to have edited the film so that it looks polished and yet who chooses to leave in the moments when the camera goes off or turns black 3. A narrator (and editor) who thinks incidental music should be added for tension (imagine those who filmed 9/11 doing the same and you will arrive at the same tasteless nature of this) 4. A narrator (and editor) who wishes for us to witness her rotting corpse family attack her (journalists may pretend to put journalistic integrity before emotional involvement but this is perverse) 5. An allegory for the war in Iraq (we aren't being given the full information etc) that needs to be endlessly repeated. 6. The notion that they needed to film everything to show the world the truth (like walking zombies wouldn't do it for most people) 7. Romero getting the opportunity to remind everyone that he thinks zombies should be slow (and reminding us again and again) This isn't an absolutely awful film by any stretch but in relation to the history and reputation of Romero, it is alas.....somewhat of an embarrassment
Phil H

Yet another boring, unscary and totally unneeded zombie flick hurrah!! Yes I admit it is a clever twist to have it done like its really happening ala via a handheld cam and like all zombie flicks by Romero it is eerie and well made, BUT its just ANOTHER zombie flick, it seems to be… More
Yet another boring, unscary and totally unneeded zombie flick hurrah!! Yes I admit it is a clever twist to have it done like its really happening ala via a handheld cam and like all zombie flicks by Romero it is eerie and well made, BUT its just ANOTHER zombie flick, it seems to be all Romero can do, enough all ready, we get it, you like zombie films jesus. He made some crappy zombie flicks along time ago and seems to think thats a license to make even more of the same, nooooooooooo STOP. To be honest as I said it is well made and some of the zombie deaths are cool as usual. The whole thing does take time to get going and the end sequences inside a mansion with cams looks very much like the Resident Evil computer game, not bad but not original either. The cast are the usual screaming teens who get popped one at a time till only 2/3 remain (one character looking very much like a young version of the Half Life computer game main character) and yes Im afraid its an open ending for yet more of the same, NOOOOOOOO. Lets leave this bloody zombie rubbish alone now please, yes the zombies win, yes the world must obviously surcome to the zombies, thats where it all seems to be leading in Romero's films and yes we all know how zombie flicks go now. Hopefully the last.
E.J. B

Of all the first-person handheld camera movies (Blair Witch, Cloverfield, and Redacted), Romero's Diary of the Dead is easily the best of the lot. He has made a solid horror film that raises concerns about the now. Like his previous films in the "Dead" series, which… More
Of all the first-person handheld camera movies (Blair Witch, Cloverfield, and Redacted), Romero's Diary of the Dead is easily the best of the lot. He has made a solid horror film that raises concerns about the now. Like his previous films in the "Dead" series, which attacked or expressed concerns about the state of the times that each entry was released, Diary concerns itself with the human need to document stories. Think journalists in Iraq, and I'm pretty sure you're along the same lines that Romero is thinking. Romero shows it as both a selfish and a selfless act, showing how it can aid others experience what others have experienced, but also how the documentarian hopes that his/her actions will bring fame and recognition. Using a great post-modern film-within-a-film technique, and embracing the currents You Tube and my space trends, Romero occasionally stumbles in his execution of ideas, but nonetheless succeeds in pulling off what a horror film, namely what a zombie movie should be doing, and that is making a perceptive social comment while scaring the shit out of you at the same time.
Stephen M

It always amuses me when the potential victims in horror movies seem to inhabit a world of their own, blissfully unaware of even the concept of the particular nasty that is out to get them, until they're running away from it, screaming. "Vampire? What the hell's a… More
It always amuses me when the potential victims in horror movies seem to inhabit a world of their own, blissfully unaware of even the concept of the particular nasty that is out to get them, until they're running away from it, screaming. "Vampire? What the hell's a vampire? They drink blood!!! You're pulling my leg, right?" After intermittently shouting, "Shoot it in the head, you idiot!" at my TV screen for the first half hour, I can only assume that the characters in Diary of the Dead have collectively never seen a zombie flick, which is doubly amusing since they're supposed to be film students making a horror film. Unlike a lot of other documentary-style horror movies, at least Romero's is intelligent enough to address the problem of camera battery life, but his handheld technical glitches look too much like what they are in actuality: cheap, half-assed post-production effects. If his intention was to draw the viewer into the story via the character of Jason - the film-within-a-film's director and chief cameraman, mostly represented by a subjective camera - Romero shoots himself in the foot by making him unsympathetic and unlikeable. Something's got to be wrong when the guy shooting the film-within-a-film you're supposed to be enjoying is the first person you want to see become zombie fodder! As the film progresses, Romero allows multiple camera perspectives and attempts at comedy and suspense to creep in, by which time his mockumentary, which ought to be coldly dispassionate, begins to resemble a conventional low budget horror, masquerading as something more important. He even makes excuses for some of his artistic decisions, for example the use of a traditionally manipulative score, via the character Debra's voiceover at the very start of the film. For the first time, Romero presents the dead coming back to life as a global phenomenon; it's a pity that this expansion of his vision didn't coincide with a more generous budget and a resurgence of his talent. Not recommended. Life's too short; wait till you're undead ;)
Ken S

sigh...
Randy T

Technology and expensive special effects does not a great horror film make. Romero needs to sit down with a copy of his original classic Night of the Living Dead and remind himself how to scare the daylights out of an audience.
Dean M

Masterpiece since master of the dead director George A. Romero returns to ground zero in the realm of undead after over two decades. This is geting better than Land of the Dead with the unknown actors and actresses in this Romero's latest zombie movie.
Chris W

Extremely unsubtle in terms of the satire and social message, but that's ok. This movie has lots of dark self-referential humor and in-jokes, and even though the whole hand-held camera thing is getting overdone, I like the fact that this film is a cross between Blair… More
Extremely unsubtle in terms of the satire and social message, but that's ok. This movie has lots of dark self-referential humor and in-jokes, and even though the whole hand-held camera thing is getting overdone, I like the fact that this film is a cross between Blair Witch/Cloverfield and a zombie film. As I said, the film lacks subtlety, but it makes up for it with style, atmosphere, and some fun little cameos from the likes of Wes Craven, Quentin Tarantino, Guillermo del Toro, and others. This is far from being the best Romero zombie film, but it is still worth watching.
Derek A

I love George A. Romero and zombie movies, but WOW, this was a disappointment!Diary of the Dead carries the same similar plot: the dead have risen and continue to eat the living, otherwise they die of thirst. Yeah, we all knew that.... the twist here is… More
I love George A. Romero and zombie movies, but WOW, this was a disappointment!Diary of the Dead carries the same similar plot: the dead have risen and continue to eat the living, otherwise they die of thirst. Yeah, we all knew that.... the twist here is that the entire movie is made on a small video cam recorder. Diary chronicles the Armageddon experience through the eyes of a group of film students, namely one little prick: Jason Creed, the aspiring film maker who will stop at nothing to make this documentary and spread the "truth" about what is happening. This in lies the problem with this film: disbelief. I know right, disbelief in a zombie movie??? I know that sounds strange, but hear me out. This guy continues to film during all instances, including while his closest friends are being attacked by zombies. One time he just watched as his female friend fended off a zombie by herself as she begged for his help, but he thought continuing to film was more important than saving her life. He also would choose some of his friend's deaths as an opportunity to get a close up. His actions were completely unnatural and unrealistic. There was also occurrences where he refused safe, secure places because he wanted to be out in the world filming this damn "truth." It was completely absurd! And even more absurd, his friends followed!! In real life, we would say "Hey man, you're an idiot. See ya!" Hmmmm... safe room or film zombies?I had no empathy whatsoever for the characters. One couple in particular were being shown as infatuated, head-over-heels in love... but when one of them is killed, the other doesn't even cry. The event doesn't even move him/her!! Terrible acting... awful scenarios with huge plot holes. All of Romero's movies have made sense, but this one is just a complete disaster.The only positive thing I can find is the cool, drunk, arrow-shooting professor. That guy was a bad ass. I wish he would've put an arrow through Creed's head.It should also be noted that Romero used the slow-moving zombies opposed to the super-fast ones in Dawn of the Dead. This created a laggish pace for the movie with very little thrills.If you love Romero, then you will inevitably see this crap. Don't get your expectations too high. I wish I would have never paid money for the DVD :(
Alexander W

I love Zombie films most of them, and this is the worst, compare to other George Romeros films this is just boring, perhaps i like 28 weeks later much more this is really slow film and the consistent bad character, phony dialogue and VCR styled video shots are in poor taste.
James A

Just because you invent the genre doesn't mean you have to ruin it and make it horrible. Romero is to horror what Uwe Boll is to video game movies.
Tim S

Another Romero Masterpiece.