Days of Darkness starts as lovers Steve (Travis Brorsen) & Mimi (Roshelle Pattison) head back to the city after a weekend camping out in the woods, however en-route they run into several flesh eating zombies who predictably try to eat their flesh. They are saved by a man named Simon (Chris Ivan Cevic) who then takes them both to a self contained compound/bunker high in the hills where an assorted bunch of survivors are hold up trying to stay alive & fight off the ever advancing hordes of zombies. No-one has any answers except that it started shortly after a meteor passed Earth, the survivors must find a way to send the zombies to the grave before they are completely overrun...
Written & directed by Jake Kennedy this was much, much better than I was expecting, it's certainly a lot better than most low budget straight-to-DVD potboilers. The script is a entertaining cross between Night of the Comet (1984) with the whole situation arising from a passing meteorite, Day of the Dead (1985) with it's ragtag blend of survivors who are at each other's throats holed up in some military looking bunker & after some unexpected twists it changes direction again & becomes a decent Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978) rip-off as it is revealed alien parasites want to take over the Earth by taking over our bodies. The Invasion of the Body Snatchers angle is probably the weakest element of the story & Days of Darkness is at it's best when it's a Day of the Dead rip-off with various people debating how to survive the marauding gangs of flesh eating zombies outside. At only just over 80 minutes in length it moves along at a nice pace, it's never boring, starts off straight away without any sort of prolonged introduction & plenty of zombie action & the character's are much, much better than you would expect. Everyone is given equal screen time to develop, there's a nice mix of people from ordinary teens, to a preacher, to a funny porn star & an actor. Some of the dialogue is quite sharp as well, the line where the porn star says that she was happy to become pregnant, even though she had sex with over seventy men that week & at least she didn't abort! Or the man who stands up for the only gay guy in the group yet still making it clear to everyone he isn't gay himself! Days of Darkness isn't perfect though, the film runs out of steam towards the end & starts going round in circles with repetitive arguments & there are a few plot inconsistencies like why some zombies act like they have no intelligence & stumble around making odd noises while other's who have been affected act like 'normal' people. A pleasant surprise & no-one is harder on rubbishy low budget straight-to-DVD horror films than me.
Director Kennedy does alright, at least he keeps his camera steady so you can see what's happening at all times & he doesn't go for the quick 'blink & you'll miss it' cut editing. There's some good gore, from exploding heads to severed penis' to chopped off hands & cut off fingers to the expected zombie intestine eating scenes & the fact that the special make-up effects are good helps. There's some nice alien creatures on show as well although the opening CGI computer shots of the meteor in space approaching Earth are awful. I don't usually comment on other IMDb users reviews but I honestly can't believe some of the crap I've read on here about Days of Darkness. If someone doesn't like Days of Darkness fine, I'll accept that but when people confidently say it's awful & openly admit to only watching 34 minutes of it I lose all respect for their opinion. So this person can say Days of Darkness is terrible after only watching the opening 34 minutes, this same person claims the story is pointless & that it's a waste of time, well how can he know when he hasn't even seen half the film? How does he know the script doesn't improve? How does he know Days of Darkness is a bad film after seeing 34 minutes? There's another review currently on here as well which the writer claims 'the film doesn't really explain whats actually happened'. Hello? Is anyone there! The film explains it's story perfectly (with a few twists that you need a brain bigger than a pea to understand so maybe that has something to do with it) & I honestly can't see how anyone could not grasp the fairly simple story that it tells. Films are a matter of opinion but these people really should try to put forward some sort of reasonable argument as to why they don't like a film instead of making themselves look stupid by openly admitting that they don't get what to me is a pretty straight forward storyline.
Technically the film is pretty good considering, OK the CGI computer effects are terrible but the actual make-up effects are decent. Shot in Topanga in California. The acting is alright but varies, no-one is that bad but at the same time no-one is going to win any awards.
Days of Darkness is a much better sci-fi horror film than I expected, there's some nice if unspectacular plot twists (which some people can't seem to grasp), the character's are better than usual, the effects are better than usual & at only 80 odd minutes it's pretty short. I liked it, I didn't love it but I did like it.
Written & directed by Jake Kennedy this was much, much better than I was expecting, it's certainly a lot better than most low budget straight-to-DVD potboilers. The script is a entertaining cross between Night of the Comet (1984) with the whole situation arising from a passing meteorite, Day of the Dead (1985) with it's ragtag blend of survivors who are at each other's throats holed up in some military looking bunker & after some unexpected twists it changes direction again & becomes a decent Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978) rip-off as it is revealed alien parasites want to take over the Earth by taking over our bodies. The Invasion of the Body Snatchers angle is probably the weakest element of the story & Days of Darkness is at it's best when it's a Day of the Dead rip-off with various people debating how to survive the marauding gangs of flesh eating zombies outside. At only just over 80 minutes in length it moves along at a nice pace, it's never boring, starts off straight away without any sort of prolonged introduction & plenty of zombie action & the character's are much, much better than you would expect. Everyone is given equal screen time to develop, there's a nice mix of people from ordinary teens, to a preacher, to a funny porn star & an actor. Some of the dialogue is quite sharp as well, the line where the porn star says that she was happy to become pregnant, even though she had sex with over seventy men that week & at least she didn't abort! Or the man who stands up for the only gay guy in the group yet still making it clear to everyone he isn't gay himself! Days of Darkness isn't perfect though, the film runs out of steam towards the end & starts going round in circles with repetitive arguments & there are a few plot inconsistencies like why some zombies act like they have no intelligence & stumble around making odd noises while other's who have been affected act like 'normal' people. A pleasant surprise & no-one is harder on rubbishy low budget straight-to-DVD horror films than me.
Director Kennedy does alright, at least he keeps his camera steady so you can see what's happening at all times & he doesn't go for the quick 'blink & you'll miss it' cut editing. There's some good gore, from exploding heads to severed penis' to chopped off hands & cut off fingers to the expected zombie intestine eating scenes & the fact that the special make-up effects are good helps. There's some nice alien creatures on show as well although the opening CGI computer shots of the meteor in space approaching Earth are awful. I don't usually comment on other IMDb users reviews but I honestly can't believe some of the crap I've read on here about Days of Darkness. If someone doesn't like Days of Darkness fine, I'll accept that but when people confidently say it's awful & openly admit to only watching 34 minutes of it I lose all respect for their opinion. So this person can say Days of Darkness is terrible after only watching the opening 34 minutes, this same person claims the story is pointless & that it's a waste of time, well how can he know when he hasn't even seen half the film? How does he know the script doesn't improve? How does he know Days of Darkness is a bad film after seeing 34 minutes? There's another review currently on here as well which the writer claims 'the film doesn't really explain whats actually happened'. Hello? Is anyone there! The film explains it's story perfectly (with a few twists that you need a brain bigger than a pea to understand so maybe that has something to do with it) & I honestly can't see how anyone could not grasp the fairly simple story that it tells. Films are a matter of opinion but these people really should try to put forward some sort of reasonable argument as to why they don't like a film instead of making themselves look stupid by openly admitting that they don't get what to me is a pretty straight forward storyline.
Technically the film is pretty good considering, OK the CGI computer effects are terrible but the actual make-up effects are decent. Shot in Topanga in California. The acting is alright but varies, no-one is that bad but at the same time no-one is going to win any awards.
Days of Darkness is a much better sci-fi horror film than I expected, there's some nice if unspectacular plot twists (which some people can't seem to grasp), the character's are better than usual, the effects are better than usual & at only 80 odd minutes it's pretty short. I liked it, I didn't love it but I did like it.