MBunge After Sundown is one of those movies made by people with very little money and even less talent where you are not surprised to see the same names listed over and over in the credits, but you are shocked it took so many to produce something so pitiful. On the one hand, you have to respect these folks for setting out to make a film and accomplishing that goal. On the other hand, everyone would have been better off taking up knitting instead.Out of respect for the effort that was made, I'm going to give this thing an actual review even though all that's really needed is to note that the writing sucks, the acting sucks, the direction sucks, the production values suck, there's no nudity, nothing deliberately funny, virtually nothing unintentionally funny and the violence and gore in After Sundown is tamer than what you'll see in an average episode of Mighty Morphin' Power Rangers.The plot concerns an wild west vampire and his bride who are revived in the modern world and start turning people into zombies. Yes, these vampires turn people into zombies and not other vampires. No, it doesn't make any sense but that's the least questionable thing about this script. Our cast of characters basically wander around the extremely limited number of locations these filmmakers could afford to shoot at, trying to avoid being eaten, going long stretches without saying anything and going longer stretches where they can barely be seen because this film has worse lighting than an abandoned mine shaft.I don't have much criticism for the actors of After Sundown. They don't give very good performances but with the abysmal dialog and frequently nonsensical story they had to work with in addition to the miserable direction they no doubt received, they deserve some credit for not completely embarrassing themselves.Both writer/co-director Christopher Abram and co-director Michael W. Brown do warrant a heaping dose of humiliation for their weak and excessively extended labors. If you've ever been to a film festival and seen a 20 minute short that was so terrible you couldn't understand why anyone bothered to make it, add another 68 minutes of equally awful stuff and you have good idea of what After Sundown is like. From having a dream sequence in the middle of a flashback to pulling a conclusion completely out of their asses and then literally forgetting about it, Abram and Brown demonstrate the storytelling aptitude of sea slugs that have smoked too much marijuana. I mean, they couldn't even show this movie to their own mothers and not get "two thumbs down".After Sundown is another drop in the ocean of utterly worthless films that have been vomited up onto DVD in a desperate and deceitful effort to scam the movie-loving public. It isn't worth renting. It isn't worth watching for free on TV. They should have to pay people to watch this thing and then let the viewers kick Abram and Brown square in the nuts when it's over.

Lwood Bluz For a low-budget horror film, it lives up to the slockiness of most. Many of the scenes are quite predictable and have been done to "DEATH"!!! Do we always have to see a town full of SLOW ZOMBIES chase after the last group of people in the town...and wind up catching members...if not all...of the party???The one thing that makes this film worthy enough to watch, in my opinion, are the scenes that deal with the diary and the background information that it gives to the happenings that plague the town. It would have been a much better film if they focused purely on the Western village in the past. Maybe if they would make a prequel, a much larger audience would enjoy that film.

purban I see many independent and low-budget films, and those involved with this film on all levels clearly have talent. The problem with low-budget horror films in particular is that horror is a genre that relies a great deal upon mood. Without a lot of money to put into good film stock, these films often appear digitized and lack the ability to give the same degree of color richness, depth and texture necessary to set an appropriate mood. Lighting is also far less forgiving, which influences not only mood but also the special effects and gore. So, while it is clear those involved in this film have talent, the low-budget nature is often distracting, and left me wondering what could have been. The story has an interesting twist on typical vampire lore with the addition of zombies (and I love a good zombie flick). Throw some more money at these guys, and lets see what they can do next.

wrlang A campy horror flick made to be gory fun on a very low budget as a master vampire and his wife turn some people into the undead and others into flesh eating zombies.Through flashbacks, you discover that a 19th century preacher's daughter turned vampire bears a demon child as her vampire husband comes to take her and the baby away. The townspeople subdue and stake the husband, wife/daughter, and baby after a fierce, but one sided, gun battle with the husband, and a tortured child birthing scene.Present day - A group relocating an existing cemetery for developers uncover a buried non-decomposed woman and her baby (in 19th century dress) with wooden stakes in their hearts. Awe struck, the group takes their bodies to the morgue for examination. They pull the stakes out, and leave the bodies unattended. Well, you can guess what happens next at the morgue. In the mean time, workers pull a silver cross from the chest of another body at the cemetery - guess who.Flash backs to the 19th century fill in some of the blanks as the master vampire husband searches for his wife and child wreaking havoc along the way.The twist is that the vampires control the mindless zombies.If you're looking for attention keeping entertainment, skip it. If you're looking for some low budget gore and a combination of zombies and vampires, then this is for you.