The Aftermath (1982) Poster

(1982)

User Reviews

Review this title
28 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
4/10
Sooooo Bad it is Fun to Watch
Terry-2321 November 2007
If you pick this up to watch a serious movie about life after a nuclear war, you'll give up on this in about 5 minutes. But if you like watching a movie that you can make fun of and groan at, then this is the movie for you.

As I was watching this I was thinking just how bad this movie was, but I kept watching to see what goof, inconsistency, bad line, etc. would come up next. And I was not disappointed.

You've got stupid people running around in the desert and guns that never run out (almost never) of ammunition. You've also got the chance of running into a radioactive rain storm, but only drive cars with no roofs. And much, much more.

This is a prime example that if you make the movie bad enough, but still entertaining, it will hang around for a long time.
19 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
I didn't realize 11 other people watched this movie
lrkiel16 January 2012
This is my favorite bad movie of all times. When the video store was selling off it's stock of movies that were not renting, I bought it. I had rented it two or three times previously.

I love Sci Fi, having grown up in the 50's and 60's where things like a nuclear attack were more apt to happen, so watching this was a combination of relief that we avoided this, and laughing at the seriousness of the production.

Over all, this is the yardstick by which all other good creative "Bad" movies MUST be measured against.

If you can find it, watch it.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
"Would you please shut up! This is serious"
hwg1957-102-2657048 March 2021
Warning: Spoilers
Two astronauts come back to earth to find an irradiated beach, a destroyed city, a band of mutants, a murderous gang and Forrest J. Ackerman. Not sure how long they were space travelling but the world seemed to have decayed a lot. There are some good effects of the ruined city and persuasive bits of gore but on the whole it's not exciting, partly because of the dreary voiceover given by the character Newman and the monotonously dull performance of Steve Barkett as Newman. The film only livens up when the reliable Sid Haig is onscreen playing the main villain Cutter. He is amusing and loathsome at the same time. As was his wont.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
thought provoking, disturbing, way above average
trooper-1924 September 1999
A fabulous music score evocative of the Great Bernard Herrman films. It has a full symphonic original music score on a low budget movie!Landmark effects by the soon to be famous Skotak Brothers(3 time Academy Award Winners for ALIENS, ABYSS and TERMINATOR 2). This low budget film transcends the usual genre limitations, and deals with its subject matter on an emotional as well as visual level. That may be one of the reasons it is so disturbing to some, and so misunderstood by others. At a recent international sci fi convention it was voted among the best "end of the world movies" ever made. I saw it on laser and highly recommend it.
13 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Steve's the man - honest
Ninja Thunderbolt11 June 2000
I remember seeing this low quality cheese production several years ago. It was repackaged in the UK as 'Zombie Aftermath', but 10 minutes into this extravaganza, it became apparent that the only zombie on view would be 'versatile' 'actor' Steve Barkett.

Steve's the kind of guy who was always picked last in a line up to play school sports, an out-of-shape middle aged trainspotter who you would certainly not cast as the lead. At first you wonder how he landed this role, until a cursory glance at the video box reveals that he wrote and directed it.

There certainly are some laughs to be had, as Steve comes to terms with the horror of a post apolcalyptic Earth (and viewers come to terms with the horror Steve's limited abilities, both in front of and behind the camera) and if you're prepared to pan a river of boredom in search of a piece of cheese gold (as I always am) then get prospecting.
18 out of 30 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Some nice low budget effects without much else...
MercurioKnight7 July 2005
Warning: Spoilers
Aftermath is a horror/sci-fi cross along the lines of Planet of the Apes/Omega Man mixed with Mad Max. You have two astronauts coming back to Earth after a long deep space mission, only to find it in ruins, devastated by nuclear and biological germ warfare.

Early on, we're given a glimpse at two roving bands. One, a 'normal' biker-like gang of misfits who rob and plumage the other normal folks still left in the land, killing their men and stealing their women. The biker-like gang is led by Cutter, played by none other than a much younger Sid Haig (House of 1,000 Corpses). I'd never seen any of his other films and the screenshot on the back showed him in it. So I figured I'd give it a shot.

The other band, mutants who all look like lepers in various stages of decay. There is a brief throwaway moment where one normal looking guy scorns his band of mutants because they'd drunk the contaminated water and thus, this caused them to become mutants. Though if all the water in the land were contaminated, wouldn't that make it kind of difficult to exist at all in this world? I suppose people could live on canned goods, as shown by the astronauts picking up a few cans off the beach in front of a group of fried corpses. But what's to say those weren't contaminated, too, being exposed out there on the beach like that? In any case, it's a minor issue.

The basis of the story follows the lead astronaut, who, in a little minor scene, supposedly likes the fact that the world he knew had crumbled. This 'plastic, fake' world. Which is due to his own personal loss that we later learn to be his wife and son in an accident. What we're told is, the doctor wouldn't treat them until he had the astronaut guy fill out some forms and by that time, they were already dead. Sounds like malpractice to me and a little bogus way to blame the system. If they're in the emergency room, they should be treated, regardless. Only, the guy wouldn't be able to see them until he filled out the forms. That would have made more sense if, they wouldn't let him see his dying wife and child until after filling out the forms, but by then, it was too late. Even that is a bit much and just seems way too convenient an excuse.

The lead guy leaves his friend behind (his friend had injured a knee during the trip down) and explores the world at large. He runs into a boy and a woman, who become his replacement family. The woman had escaped from the biker-like gang and wanted our hero to not only protect her, but eventually go back and rescue her friend and friend's kid. This leads our hero directly into conflict with the gang, first on a stealth mission, and when that wondrously comes back to bite them in the rear when they aren't smart enough to leave town immediately after, then a Commando like mission. You know, the Arnold Schwarzenegger film. He literally goes on a similar action extravaganza rampage, though believability has long since gone out the window.

The music sounded like it was stolen directly from a 50s sci-fi/horror film. It was overdone, droning in parts, and does not work. Not one moment. This remains the largest problem of the film. There is also a voice over narrative throughout the entire length of the film, which adds nothing of real substance. Just an excuse to guide the film along and make up for obviously poor writing. Which, to note, is predictable and the set-ups are obvious. The acting is subpar at best, and probably not even that. The dialogue in some scenes is hard to hear without pumping the volume up, yet if you do that, in the very next scene the music starts again and is much too loud. The lead actor, who was also the writer/director/producer, has no real charisma and no business starring in a film like this. Not that he had any really good lines, anyway. But I doubt he could deliver them to good effect even if he had them.

I keep finding new things to comment on, like towards the end when a guy gets shot in both legs and his foot, and less than a minute later is walking perfectly as he tries to fight off the hero. I wonder where the script supervisor was on that day? Oh, wait, what script supervisor? Let me just take a moment to comment on the effects. I thought the models for the post apocalyptic city were outstanding. The beach corpses looked cool. The gore effects are decent throughout, with standard gunshot wounds, a guy with his face beaten in, head explodes, and another one with a knife through his eye. The mutant makeups are passable. So, on the production side of things, this film has some good elements going for it. There's also some prime female nudity to keep the exploitation side of things on target.

The final line. In the right hands and a better script, this could have been something special. A nice low budget post apocalyptic film in the tradition of Mad Max or along the lines of The Hills Have Eyes. Instead, we are stuck with something less than interesting, with some cool looking post apocalyptic effects/models/nudity that isn't enough to save the film from boredom for most viewers.
10 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Woah...
BandSAboutMovies19 September 2019
Warning: Spoilers
Writer/producer/director/lead actor Steve Barkett only would create one other movie - 1990's Empire of the Dark, in which a private detective battles a Satanic cult, monsters and ninjas - but he lent his auteur spirit to this post-apocalyptic bit of strangeness.

Barkett was such an artist that while he originally filmed this in 1978, he wasn't happy and reshot most of the footage with different actors.

Just like Def Con 4 - or more to the point Planet of the Apes, as the film was shot in many of the same locations - Newman (Barkett) watches the world end from space and comes back to try and survive in the endtimes. Of course, he does that by undergoing a montage where he tidies up a mansion, but you'll have that.

Incidentally, that mansion belonged to Ted V. Mikels. It was literally the castle that he referred to when he kept a harem of women he called his Castle Girls.

Newman looks like every stepfather in the late 70's and early 80's, the kind of guy that takes you fishing even though you don't really want to go and says stuff like, "I really care about your mother" and "You don't have to call me dad, unless you want to" while at nights you ball your fists up and sob hot wet tears while he and your beloved mother act out the next ten pages in Dr. Alex Comfort's The Joy of Sex.

He's no Snake Plissken. Or Max Rocktansky. Or even Paco Queruak.

Stop motion animator Jim Danforth plays a fellow astronaut and Forrest J. Ackerman - wearing the prop rings from Universal's The Mummy and Dracula - shows up as a museum curator dying from radiation (he even plays Newman a tape with Dick Miller's voice on it). And Sarah is played by Lynne Margulies. You may recognize her name from her involvement with Andy Kaufmann.

The real star of the show is Sid Haig, who plays Cutter, the leader of a gang of cannibalistic mutants who kill all the men and children, only keeping the wives. All of the meanness and brutality of this whole sordid mess can directly be traced back to Cutter. For some reason, our hero is so stupid that he allows him to escape and Cutter comes back and kills everyone to get back at Newman.

There's also a laser gun that gets made in this movie and we're just supposed to say, "Yeah, lasers exist."

If you read our Section 3 video nasties article, you already know that this film was seized and confiscated, but not prosecuted for obscenity.

As if this all wasn't weird enough, this movie was co-written by Stanley Livingston (Chip Douglas from My Three Sons). He also played Jeff in Paul Bartel's astounding Private Parts and Russ in Smokey and the Hotwire Gang.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Bad Enough to Be Funny, but Not Boring
tclark5512 June 2020
Warning: Spoilers
POSITIVE: 1) although it is bad enough to be funny, it is not boring; 2) there was some nudity; 3) some of the special effects (the destroyed city, the radioactive rain) were not bad; 4) there were a few surprises in the script, such as children being killed (not shown)--as a father, I do not like seeing children killed or abused in movies, but it is noteworthy when it happens; 5) the actor who played Newman, the lead, seemed to be doing his own stunts; 6) Sid Haig's acting was good.

NEGATIVE: 1) the pretentious script, especially between the lead character, Newman, and the boy; 2) the soundtrack which had so many different snippets of music, many of them unrelated to what was happening on the screen (cute, happy music when people are fighting?); 3) the film-making--fading to black between scenes always seems like a low-budget, old fashioned way to transition; 4) the hero's stupidity--Newman has to be stupid to try to take Cutter, Sid Haig's villain, alive, and it leads to the deaths of the most sympathetic characters; 5) the plot--it ends with a boy out in the desert walking down the middle of the highway alone (he probably will not last long); 5) the narration--the final narrator is the boy, but if he is looking back, shouldn't he have an older voice? 6) logic--Newman shoots one of the bad guys in both legs, then suddenly the bad guy is able to start fighting with him and is almost able to throw him off the roof; 7) special effects-- the space ship at the beginning.
2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Terrible-Math is more like it. A waste of time.
mhorg20181 July 2018
Warning: Spoilers
If you're going to make a low budget film, especially about a nuclear war, one should try and hide the inadequacies of the budget. This movie, about two astronauts {there were 3, but one gets killed during the landing) returning to earth after a nuke war, does none of that. It's a terrible little movie full of bad acting and has a contrived plot. One of many post-nuke films to come out of the 80's. So what's horrible about this? Only everything. Steve Barkett can't act, write or direct. The story is ridiculous. So where were these three astronauts and why do they keep talking like they'd been in space for decades? They also seem like they want to kill each other. The ship crash lands WITH BARKETT STANDING. Another astronaut gets killed (how he dies, probably didn't want to be in this tripe, is beyond me) in the crash. The second survivor pops in and out for a while before disappearing. Even Sid Haig, the only actor in this mess I recognized, seems to be phoning it in. Forrest Ackerman is in it as a curator who's still running a museum while dying of radiation poisoning. No one else is dying of it, just him. Everyone in this looks too clean and Lynn Margulies nipples, which are popping out of her shirt for nearly the entire run, threaten to poke someones eyes out. Did I mention that the special effects stink as well? This is down on The Asylum level of terrible. Maybe even below it.
2 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Now there are 12 "other people" that have watched this movie! (7 out of 10)
Air_Traffic_Supervisor23 September 2013
After knowing it "inspired" DEFCON-4, I went in search for this film, since I'm addicted to PA (Post-Apocalyptic) movies. I don't care about budget and technical limitations. I'd rather focus on the feel and the honesty of the work. And in this field, The Aftermath really shines. The history and characters easily overlook the obvious low budget restrictions and put to shame many hi budget counterparts.

The premise is: 3 astronauts come back to Earth after a long space mission, just to find it destroyed by nuclear war. One of them die on the spaceship forced landing, and the other two must find their way through the new and haunting reality of a nuked world, facing radiation, mutants, marauders and the lack of hope for the future.

The dialog, acting and the action scenes are somewhat laughable, but no one can deny the fact that there's an obvious labor of love beneath each take. OTOH, inventive (altough simplistic) visual effects, a huge and loud soundtrack and the voice-over only adds to the bleak atmosphere. There are effective sequences like the radioactive rain, the dead city landscapes and the corpses on the beach. Surely they're the film highlights.

A great movie despite the low budget restraints, and much better than the most contemporary (and some newer) PA movies.
10 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
This Movie Put Me To Sleep
BabySnakes697 November 2006
Actually, I grew up with Laura Barkett (Steve's daughter) who was but a wee tot in the movie (those of you who remember the line "this one's for Laura" before Steve offs a villain)--well, that's about the only memorable thing this movie had for me. One night in 1983, I was spending the night at Laura Barkett's house (in Oklahoma; her mom & her dad, Steve, were divorced & he lived in Cali making low-budget, weak-scripted movies that he threw his kids into for fun) and although at that age (11) was an apocalyptic movie NOT up my alley, I agreed to watch it with Laura because she was in it, after all; so was her older brother Chris, and of course, her dad was the one who MADE the movie. I lasted about 20 minutes into the movie. But I do remember being awakened toward the end by Laura telling me "You have to see this part! He says my name!" Hence, the "this one's for Laura" line. Sure, it was interesting seeing my 6th grade best friend and her older brother in a real live MOVIE, and although I was just 11 when I watched it (at least the parts I didn't sleep through), I just don't think I could sit thru it again--except to fast-forward to the parts where Laura and Chris are shown, since I actually KNOW them. The special effects weren't very special, and frankly, I was bored to tears. But hey--judge it for yourself. Frankly, I'd be surprised if it's still AVAILABLE on video. Steve Barkett would've been better off making home movies as a hobby.
3 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Quite Entertaining actually
Kammurabi10 December 2000
This movie is pretty entertaining really. It borrows from The Planet of the Apes, The Omega Man or The Last Man on Earth, and The Stand among others (although every movie borrows from something). Yet the movie still has a style all its own and while it is mostly a very funny movie that was supposed to be serious, it does offer a bit of creativity. Has several scenes that most directors would not have included, that's not a bad thing. A good movie for the fatalist. Worth watching for everyone else. Except kids I guess, there are some scenes of gore. (head explodes, a knife through the head via the eye, lots of bullets flying, dead bloody kid, mutants, and decayed bodies).
23 out of 26 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Not a zombie movie
Stevieboy66626 August 2020
In the UK this was originally released as The Aftermath, but a few years later it was re-released on VHS under the title Zombie Aftermath, however this is NOT a zombie movie. Two astronauts land back on Earth in their cheap looking spacecraft only to find themselves in a post nuclear aftermath. There are only a few survivors, these are comprised of a few good people, a gang of vicious thugs (led by Sid Haig, who excels in the role) and some mutants, who eat human flesh. Aftermath is a very violent movie, it did find itself on Section 3 of the Video Nasties list in Britain, though it was never prosecuted. It is also a very cheap looking movie, add to that a bad script and some very far fetched fight sequences, I did find it quite comical at times. So bad it's good. Well sort of. Certainly recommended for Sid Haig and post apocalyptic movie fans.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
SUCKS LIKE A LEMON
lordzedd-129 March 2003
Warning: Spoilers
Saying this thing sucks is an understatement. I mean using Nuclear and Biological weapons in WWIII is way over kill.

SPOILER WARNING: Both Astronaughts are killed leaving a 10 year kid alone in this violent deadly wasteland. That's why it fails!!!!

On a scale of 1 to 10 stars (10 Being Best) I give AFTERMATH, THE -100 STARS

On The Positive Side: Good Model Work (The Devistated Cities look real)

One The Negative Side: EVERYTHING ELSE!!!!!!!!
2 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Utter Crud Vomit
Rally18 January 1999
yes, total vomit, if I was in this movie, I would be totaly ashamed of it...

This is a good example of how NOT to make a movie

1) poor quality video 2) crap effects 3) cheap shots 4) lauhable acting / scenes 5) totaly unrealistic, people get shot in the legs and can still walk! 6) shocking sums it up

Only watch this if you want to laugh at a crud movie I give it 0.00000000000001
2 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Not Bad Enough to Hate Not Good Enough to Like
Like many cheaply made, poorly acted vanity pieces, this movie has long meaningless pauses, camera pan outs and crazy camera angles. I think the long pauses were caused by the fact that Steve Barkett was both actor and director and had to wait for himself to catch up. The only good part of this really boringly bad movie was the astronaut's costumes and the post apocalyptic sets. The locations, props and footage from other, better movies was the best part. The movie was so bad I couldn't even hate it. Also, the female characters were mere sex objects, incapable of defending themselves and only able to pout and be pathetic helpless creatures.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
A vanity project that leaves a bad aftertaste. Needs the RiffTrax treatment.
lee-966969 October 2023
I saw this on Amazon after an especially hard day at work. I needed some dumb escapism. But you know what? This move is not lame enough to be really funny, nor good enough to be in any way entertaining.

The set up is simple. Three astronauts return to earth after some sort of mission to, well, somewhere. They land their craft just off the coast of Los Angeles, but the two survivors find dead bodies on the beach, the city devastated, and a band of mutant humans threatening them.

They make their way to a mansion in the Hollywood Hills, while encountering a young boy, Chris (Christopher Barkett, the producer's son), and Sarah (Lynne Margulies) an attractive 20ish woman fleeing what looks to be an amped up motorcycle gang / Mad Max cult. Along the way our two astronauts learn that most of mankind has been wiped out by nuclear war or biological warfare. The rest of the film is about their navigating and trying to survive in the dangerous post armageddon L. A.

Negatives?

-Wooden acting. Steve Barkett is the producer, director, writer, and star so this is clearly a vanity project. He is pretty deficient in each category. And fails to get much more from the other actors. Margulies tries her best, but is mostly relegated to being the helpless female, always in peril.

-Exploitive. There are gratuitous scenes of poor Sarah bouncing, jiggling about, on the run from what looks to be a biker gang gone berserk, her nipples plainly showing beneath her tight tank top. She's at the center of several disturbing rape / sexual assault scenes that are way over the top for violence. While no one was prosecuted for obscenity, this was the early Thatcher years in Britain. The film was seized and confiscated in the UK under Section 3 of the Obscene Publications Act.

-A blaring, intrusive, off-the-VU meter musical score. The composer, John Morgan, used a full orchestra and got every dollars worth. Trumpets blast. Flutes riff. Snare drums snare. French horns warn. No one makes a move without the music overwhelming the scene. And it's usually inappropriate. Happy music, say, for an abduction scene.

-Looks cheap, but the budget in 2023 dollars is just under $500,000. Today that would make for a pretty good indie film. Maybe the money went for the score?

Positives?

+A for effort. The cast looks like they are having a good time, especially the senior Barkett.

Clearly this movie needs the RiffTrax, MSTK3 treatment.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
High on Cheese
Tweetienator10 April 2022
Great on the cheese-o-meter: get some Planet of the Apes, some Omega Man, and a low budget production, add Sid Haig as the bad guy, and you get what you expect: entertaining and cheesy junk. No doubt, The Aftermath is bad, but still entertaining, but only if you like the post-apocalyptic genre. Recommended if you like movies a la Def-Con 4, Damnation Alley and such pleasures.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Not Bad Or Good Enough To Be A Cult Classic.
P3n-E-W1s311 June 2022
Greetings And Salutations, and welcome to my review of Aftermath; here's the breakdown of my ratings:

Story: 0.75 Direction: 1.00 Pace: 1.00 Acting: 1.00 Enjoyment: 1.25

TOTAL: 5.00 out of 10.00

Aftermath, for me, didn't quite make it into the B-Movie Cult Film Hall Of Fame for a few reasons. 1 - It's not bad enough (in the right ways). 2 - The story, characters, and cinematography are average. 3 - It's not cheesy enough. It's no Plan 9 From Outer Space, but what it is is entertaining.

Steve Barkett and Stanley Livingstone are regurgitating the old favourite of Sci-Fi flicks - astronauts return to Earth and find it terribly transfigured. In this case, the nutters in charge have all pressed their big red buttons, unleashing a nuclear armageddon across the planet. The plant life and wildlife are blighted, the cities have fallen, and the remaining humans are in turmoil. It's a good job that Newman and his team have returned to save the day...well, at least a couple of damsels in distress and a kid - well, you can't save 'em all. Though the narrative appears to be borrowed from a few pictures and stitched together, there are a few respectable ideas. One of the best is the narration. For most of the film, it's a nice feature to drive the story forward. But the ingenious bit comes when the narrator's voice changes, and we have a passing of the gauntlet moment. What lets the story down is its characters. The only two individuals who get fatted up are Newman and the boy Christopher. It could be because Barkett and his son play the roles - there's nowt like nepotism - or it could be that he made changes to the script on the hoof. Unfortunately, the rest of the people in the narrative are flat and dull. Even the miscreant Cutter, played by Sid Haig, is vapid. The scumbag laughs while his men rape and kill. It would have only been right to show this man for what he is and for what he stands for, but he's mediocrity personified. Regrettably, the rest of the story's population fares just as terribly.

Barkett tries to do better behind the camera, and to point, he succeeds. Though he repeats a couple of segments of footage, he appears to push himself to add interest and enthusiasm. There is a strange kind of joyful heartwarming sentiment throughout the picture. It's like you can feel Barkett's delight in making the movie. It's this emotional hook that, in part, kept me watching. I have to give credit to the FX crew for the devastated cityscapes and the atomic storms. Though you can discern their illusory content, it doesn't hinder the film much. In truth, they sent a cold shiver or three down my spine. Sadly though, the budget didn't stretch to the radiation zombies. The movie needed a faster tempo overall; it's a tad too slow, especially during the action sequences and the revelation of Cutter's revenge.

The cast is okay but not too dazzling, which I contribute to the script and direction, and not the actors or actresses. It's no surprise that Barkett senior and junior are the outstanding members, even though you have Sid Haig in the movie.

Aftermath could have been a fantastic Cult B-Movie Classic had they stuffed the story with credible individuals and allowed the cast to fill their boots. As it stands, it's a passable Dark Thriller of a Science Fiction flick that I'd recommend for an evening viewing on a cold and dark winter night when there's nothing else to watch.

So now you've crash-landed the spaceship back on Earth, please visit my Killer Thriller Chillers and The Final Frontier lists to see where I ranked Aftermath.

Take Care & Stay Well.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
You're Going to "Love It!" or "Hate It!"
nammage22 November 2020
Warning: Spoilers
Three astronauts, coming back to Earth from wherever, can't seem to get an answer from Mission/Ground Control. In re-entry, the ship 'Nautilus' starts to become damaged and then there's only two astronauts left. When they arrive the world they knew no longer exists and the world they are now trying to survive in is in a nuclear fallout with men gone mad and mutated (not zombies), people trying to survive a cult-like leader (played by the late Sid Haig), and a bevy of other things.

I loved it from the opening credits. Never seen it before. Never heard of it before and it reminded me of those campy 50s and early 60s science fiction films that are difficult to find; not that those were necessarily good and not that this is necessarily good except in that particular vein.

Now, I'm a technical rater so I had to rate it primarily on that however, if there's enough of everything else (story, emotion, character development, etc.,) then of course it gets added on top of the technical rating. Is there much of a story? I think there is. I outlined the main plotline above but there's more to it if not directly in one's face. Emotion? A little. I mean, it seems to be more of a drama than a strictly horror/thriller film or what not. Though the third act kind of forgets the emotional aspect and becomes more 'action' than anything but there had to be an end and that's what was chosen, I guess.

Does it ripoff other films/novels of the time or before? Yes. It isn't new now and it wasn't new then. Sometimes one is inspired though this has hints of just rippoffs such as with "The Road Warrior", "The Planet of the Apes" and "The Day the Earth Stood Still". Still...I enjoyed it. I mean, one could say those who made the "Fallout" video games ripped off this film. It goes both ways, you know?

The writing is subpar and preachy (non-religiously) at times, the acting is paint-by-numbers (probably because of the writing and direction), the direction is basically getting the job done; one can tell he never directed anything before. There are quite a few humorous scenes throughout but of course they were made to be dramatic or intense but they come off humorous. Slipping on a bullet casing, picking up a gun, escaping from bad guys etc., even about an hour in the love scene was bit corny and humorous and it lasted a few seconds.

As I state in the title: you're either going to love it or hate it. I will say this, though: I loved how they added a laser gun in the last 30 minutes. No laser guns anywhere else in the film but in taking Cutter's camp: laser gun! I also loved how the astronaut never missed a shot one against 50 but one on one, well, he's a pretty bad shot.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Not great but sincere
Jefbecco-119 May 2023
A sincere effort. Amateurish, exploitive, low-budget and clunky, but everyone involved in the movie gives it their all. Borrows (or rips off depending on one's viewpoint) from every famous post-apocalyptic horror movie made up to that time. Reminds me of the "men's adventure" serial novels (The Survivalist, The Last Ranger) that I read as a teenager in the Eighties. It's interesting to note that at the same this movie was in production George Romero was working on his equally low-budgeted, but far superior "Dawn of the Dead". Watch the two movies back-to-back if you want to see how truly skilled film makers can work with a low budget and semi-professional actors.

Nevertheless, I've always had a fondness for low budget flicks that are made by enthusiastic semipros. Eye rolling and silly, but watchable.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Steve Barkett is the MAN! (8 out of 10)
dominion7625115 August 2011
As a very early entry into the post-nuke game, this one was kind of a genre-defining film for what would follow. Yes, it was insanely low budget, and corny at times, but what really makes it work is Steve Barkett. You know he wasn't a pro, but his amount of enthusiasm for the project more than made up for his lack of skills. He's rolling, jumping, kicking, driving, shooting; no stuntmen here! Flicks like this probably inspired others to get into movie making. It just looks like they had a hell of a lot of fun doing it. This was a movie with a lot of spirit- something the 150 million dollar pictures can't say.

A group of astronauts is in space when WWIII goes down, and they return to earth of find a burnt-out, zombie-infested, wasteland. Criminals run loose, raping and pillaging at will. This film was blatantly copied by Def Con 4 several years later, which was good also. Sid Haig is great as Cutter, the ruthless leader of the filthbags. There is a good amount of decent gore and some nudity to keep you going, but the main plot is the good vs. evil and the battle with Cutter and his band of evil-doers. One thing: this movie will be hard to find. It took me a couple years to find it. UPDATE: I just saw that they have now released this on DVD as Zombie Aftermath! I need to go upgrade my old VHS copy at once!!

If you like B-movies and the post-nuke genre, you will not be disappointed. You may even want to go out and try to make you own movie! This one is a slice of tasty cheese. Recommended. Also, check out Survival Zone (another rare bird).
8 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Damn Good
zaskar9 April 1999
First of all, you have to remember this is a VERY low budget movie. Made by a man who loves movies, and his son. I feel the story is excellent, yea, the acting could use a little work, but come on, not evey si-fi movie can be Star Wars. I'm not saying its the greatest movie ever, but it is very entertaining, and fun to watch, and that is what movies are all about!!!
8 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
I'm obsessed with Post-Nuke Movies
Pete-21519 September 1999
This movie wasn't that bad. When I was a little kid I rented it and it always seemed eerie to me. If your bored one day just rent it, who cares if its totaly low-budget. It's fun to watch because I wish I could make a movie that like someday. Hey if your bored also rent "DEFCON4" Thanks.
9 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Hard-hitting post-nuke sc-fi survivalist opus
Woodyanders6 February 2018
Warning: Spoilers
Astronauts Newman (a solid and sincere performance by Steve Barkett) and Matthews (well played by Larry Latham) return to Earth only to discover that a nuclear holocaust has caused civilization to collapse and subsequently degenerate into a harsh barbaric state. Newman must protect himself and several other people from the evil Cutter (Sid Haig in fine nasty form) and his gang of vicious outlaw bikers.

Writer/director Barkett maintains a tough gritty tone throughout (for example, both women and children are brutally killed), relates the engrossing story at a snappy pace, stages the exciting action set pieces with flair, and delivers a chilling "adapt or die" central message. The moments of raw violence and stark savagery pack a fierce punch. The special effects are quite good considering the modest budget. Moreover, the fetching Lynne Margulies provides plenty of spark as the plucky Sarah, Forrest J. Ackerman has a small, but memorable role as a dying museum curator, and Dick Miller's voice can be heard on a tape recorder. The sharp cinematography by Dennis Skotak and Thomas F. Denove gives this picture an impressive polished look. John W. Morgan's robust score hits the rousing spot. An on the money indie winner.
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed