Sick: Survive the Night (I) (2012) User Reviews

My Review Of "Sick: Survive The Night"

[ASouthernHorrorFan · 3/10 · 18 December 2014]

The story is a somber, monotone one that relies on a lot of dialog. Most of the story is about the human experience and toll the zombie apocalypse has on one psychologically as we battle for a "cure". It is reminiscent of Romero's "Day Of The Dead" in pace and stripped down style. The acting is mediocre, with a lot of the characters feeling contrived. It is a clunky drama that does more peacocking of personalities than the material, or cast can actually account for. There are moments when the story almost becomes thrilling, and a few of the cast really get into their character. It is just not enough to save "Sick: Survive The Night" from being a bit dull.

The special effects, for the most part, keep within practical-low budget grade effects that work. I preferred the stripped down zombies that go back to the beginning of this genre. The creature effects are cool enough, however the zombies don't dominate the film with enough force or energy to really kick "Sick: Survive The Night" into thrilling gear. The soundtrack and sound effects are decent enough to give the film atmosphere, some moments do feel creepy and chilling, it just never seems consistent through the whole film.

Overall, I found myself wondering why? What was the story that this film was wanting to tell? Most of the components are redundant aspects found in zombie horror. I did appreciate the added mix of these scavenger crews roaming around raping and pillaging. However the story doesn't give enough time for that element to really take off. Most interesting things take place in flashbacks while the main meat of the tale is left to melodrama and mild zombie attacks. "Sick: Survive The Night" isn't a film that you will kick yourself if you miss it. Mostly it is just a boring movie where people talk too much.

Zombie flick

[epiceffectss · 4/10 · 28 January 2015]

A zombie film , not a high budget one , I can see a lot of effort went into it for a low budget one , the actors did their best acting. The story was OK, it followed the same stuff which is in all the zombie films. Is it a classic , no. If your into zombie low budget films you may want to watch it. The zombies make up is good and their movements are credible . The main actors were not high end actors like walking dead ones. The cinematography is good, no dodgy camera work, scenery was good , good locations . My last words would be this film would mostly appeal to a zombie fanatic who has watched all the other zombie flicks and just has to watch another one because this genre is his thing. I think if the film could have increased its standards by one third it would've been a decent film and I would have scored it higher , ie. acting a third better , story a third better and it would be getting much higher reviews , good luck to the maker of the film , and hey you have a knack with the whole thing but if the next one just went to being a third better I think you would've pulled of a low fi cult of this genre , but needs fine tuning

A good 'watch once & forget' film

[RuiChiu · 4/10 · 3 March 2019]

The film is low budget and, for the most, part that aspect is used well--the Romero Night of the Living Dead type of zombie, locations sparse and simple blending well with the survivalist tone of the story. The action is simple, and they're not breaking new ground or taking the genre in a new direction. The acting is rather bad, some of the scenes meant to be emotional or characters reflecting back on the trauma they've endured, forced and uncomfortable. If you're a big zombie movie fan, this is a white noise time killer.

Low budget - hard core zombie fanatics only

[Mikelikesnotlikes · 3 March 2017]

I watch everything zombie related which means watching low budget movies in the hope the director/writer will explore old ideas in new ways.

SICK had a few good scenes and someone had plotted it out to make the most of the constraints. The cast were enthusiastic but characters weren't developed and the scenes near the end with main characters being killed off in the wrong order did not help. Something was lost in translation from script to production.

But it is pretty standard stuff. A couple of funny parts. Passes as entertainment if you wake up at 3 AM and can't get back to sleep like I did.

YOU GET BIT. YOU DIE

[nogodnomasters · 3/10 · 1 June 2019]

A world wide zombie virus pandemic forces Dr. Dr. Leigh Rozetta ( Christina Aceto, Sister Rosetta Stone already taken) to live in isolation with three other people in a remote location to work on a cure. Recreating the CDC would break the film's budget. There is internal conflict. Why? I don't know.

In a subplot survivors fight infected people. Eventually they meet up and Dr. Leigh takes off her clothes. Very boring. Script was an attempt at clever. One guy named "Christian" for example is going "into the lion's den."

Low budget boredom.

Guide: F-bomb. Nudity. No sex.

A green, introspective undead paced movie.

[johnanthonymazzei · 5/10 · 8 October 2020]

This is a green movie, it recycles the plots or parts of plots from other movies. We start with a virus of unknown origin which has brought don all societies. We open to an underground civil / military research base trying to find a cure. Attitudes and tensions are high DAY OF THE DEAD They borrow from Romero, it's hard not as he is the father of the genre. Survivors, the good natured kind out scavenging for supplies are fooled / trapped by the vultures, ( bad, cannibalistic survivors ) Until all but two are killed / eaten by zombies. THE WALKING DEAD. They meet up with a scientist from the base and spend an introspective night as they die off one by one. NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD. Again hollywood gets the military wrong. They are more than stiff, angry people who perpetually stand with their hands behind their backs. The zombies transition from fast to slow moving to fit the story--sloppy. On the plus side people do stupid, normal and wrong things. Accidents happen and people die. A plot twist or two which made ne think. The value of money and possessions' are questioned. Debbie Rachon needed the money and people are the real monsters.

Loved it!

[dymentintherough · 8/10 · 14 December 2013]

Loved the different take on a huge craze! The acting was excellent, they got some very talented people to be in this movie! Don't watch it if you're looking for a lot of action and gore though, it's mostly psychological, a view of life a couple years into a worldwide epidemic. Has some really great plot twists and some interesting characters, even though most of them are very short lived. I would have liked to have seen some plot points elaborated, for example, they mention that there are 'safe zones', and I wondered how that is possible. What made them safe zones? How were they kept safe? Liked that the protagonists were called 'Vultures'. Seemed pretty appropriate, and it was nice to see another set of people with a nickname the way the zombies are called everything except 'zombies' in most films from this genre these days. All in all an excellent independent film, I highly recommend giving it a watch!

I enjoyed it.

[remypsmith · 7/10 · 13 October 2018]

This is my second IMDb review. It's also the second "zombie" movie that I've felt i should say has been under rated in its reviews. Overall, it was an entertaining movie. Yes, it was low budget, and over/under acted at points in the movie. But... If you are a true zombie genre lover, it is one of the better low budget movies I've seen in awhile. It did not try to over compensate with a huge amount of gore or cheesy CGI. It relied on the location and the actors to set the tone and drama. It could have used a little more back story on some of the characters to round out the plot, but overall a good movie. If you like Romero's first Night of the Living Dead, then, check this one out.

What's the matter with you critics?

[paul-ayres-60784 · 7/10 · 23 March 2020]

I thought this to be one of the best films in it's genre! Why have people given it so a low score? Great acting, good story and sadly believable. No need for high budget, it works well without.