How good was it? Compared to me, it's a 2. But compared to all the other movies in the world, it's a 10. Compared to all of the other George A. Romero movies? It's a 9 (nothing beats Day of the Dead and Creepshow).
So yeah. It was pretty fucking sweet. Lots of gross gore moments too which you can tell was obviously edited (can;t waut for that unrated directors cut DVD).
Some highlight gore scenes:
-A zombies head being stepped on like a rotten pumpkin.
-Arm ripped down the middle
-Lots of headshots
-Guts everywhere
-Zombie pulling some dudes guts (or something) through his mouth
-A nearly headless zombie attack (crazy cool and hard to describe)
-Cheakless zombie
-A Kill Bill scene of blood spray
-Belly button peircing being ripped off
-and many more.
The plot takes place along time after Night of the Living Dead. And if you really want to take Tom Savini's Blades cameo seriouslly, many years after Dawn of the Dead also. How far after Day of the Dead? Thats hard to decide. Maybe Day takes place after Land, who knows.
The zombie effects in this movie are great. Barely any CGI is used, so you get bitchen KGB work.
My problems with the flick?
1. The editing seems bad. But that'll be fixed with the DVD.
2. The characters arn't the greatest.
3. Some random things like, people just commiting suicde after being bitten by a zombie. In Day of the Dead, it established that you can survive a zombie bite, by cutting off the limb that you where bitten on quickly enough *as long as it was a leg or arm of course*. Everytime someone got hurt, they'd quickly kill that person off. That annoyed me.
and 4. Something contrict the other movies. Like when this SWAT-style guy got bitten by the nearly-headless zombie, the main character said that it takes about an hour or so to change. In the original Dawn of the Dead (remake doesnt count), Peter says that the guys he seen bit by the zombies usualy die withen a few days. Maybe the zombie virus got stronger, who knows.
Anyways, this movie kicked ass up and down the place, go see it.