User Score

Generally favorable reviews- based on 287 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 31 out of 287

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Aug 8, 2014
    I am stunned, this movie is for kids! not bad? but my husband who is 49 bought this show, kinda weird when he makes fun of Real of But since his girlfriend who is 26 now loves it, I guess it is Great....
  2. Nov 19, 2013
    It vampires all over again-- Basically it Twilight but with zombies. The plot is nothing special and is a rip of of Undying Love by Hattori Mitsuru. The character were not memorable and their personalities were god awful; I would give the characters a 4 out of ten. It would have been really cool if they start explaining why the zombies hearts are beating again but the movie failed in that aspect as well. Also why did only R come back to life while the others didn`t; it was a massive plot hole. The actor were excellent but were the only thing going for the movie. 8 out of ten for that. I must say the movie was better than I expected since I read the book and it was better than that piece of crap. Now why did the girl R fall in love with kiss a walking corspe? Put it simple, would you kiss someone who has eaten your boyfriends brain? Expand
  3. Aug 3, 2013
    We all know what a zombie is right? Those moaning dead things that wander around eating humans? Yeah, well Warm Bodies says a human girl and a zombie can fall in love. That's a con job.
  4. Jul 16, 2013
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. First off, I didn't read the book, which is why I gave this movie a two (If I would have read the book, it probably would have dropped to a zero).

    To begin with, I adore the lore of zombies; the fact that a strain of something can turn anyone into a slobbering, stumbling husk of a human has always fascinated me. This film, however, fails to add anything new or exciting to the zombie lore/genre. The gaining of the emotions, memories, and thoughts of the victim's brain felt contrived and convoluted; just the fact that these zombies get such a euphoric rush from eating brains would have been enough. Now, this might just be a pet peeve of mine when it comes to these types of movies but, how exactly did this all happen? It's shown that if a zombie doesn't eat the brains of a human, said human turns into a zombie. So, this would suggest that the 'virus' spread from parental transmission, or biting, which is odd due to how slow it would spread through a population. Would you stand next to someone who's very aggressive and nonsensical?

    Furthermore, the characters felt very flat and it felt that the 'zombies' were just thrown in there for a cheap gimmick. It's basically, as most people and critics have said, Romeo and Juliet with zombies. This wouldn't be so bad if we'd get more exposition about the main character and supporting characters. We spend a total of about five minutes with Perry (the soon to be zombie dinner) and his girlfriend/lover, Julie. Both felt very two-dimensional and it was obvious that the actors had little chemistry on screen, though how can you blame them with such bad source material?

    Moving on, the zombies themselves. These 'zombies' are apparently not the only un-dead thing looking for flesh and brains. They're in competition with the 'bonies' which look more like Ghouls from Fallout. Apparently, regular zombies all eventually end up as 'bonies' due to them losing hope and faith? What kind of sense does that make? They're supposed to be ZOMBIES, not pre-teenaged girls. A disease is a bit more complex and it spreading faster usually doesn't correlate with one losing 'hope' over it. How fast it spreads varies from person to person and besides, they've already lost their humanity to this disease/virus, what is there to lose hope over?

    The 'bonies' themselves are unimpressive and aren't too consistent with how they were built up to be. Later on in the movie, Julie's father says that the 'bonies' are very fast and are very dangerous which is unlike anything they've ever seen. Though, during the scene where R and Julie are running away from the 'bonies', R trips and Julie fires two shots into the bonie that was about to pounce on R which kills it instantly. She didn't even aim for the head and it dropped after two shots. So, why is her father and the rest of the 'city' freaking out over these things? They've got Humvees with fifty-cal turrets, adding to that, a wall that splits their settlement from the outside.

    As for Julie's father? He was a dumbass and a piss poor representation of someone stuck in their ways. For example, when R is shown to him and tries to communicate, why didn't he blow R's brains out right there? I'm all for turning someone who's stubborn but still, he could have acted a bit more in-character with his archetype.

    Next, the fact that the zombies were even able to turn back into humans 'through the power of love' is a horribly executed cliche' of old Disney films with a dark twist. You cannot just simply wish for someone to get a beating heart again just because they or you love hard enough. Also, where did all the blood even go when they became zombies in the first place? It shows that their hearts can return to beating and when they 'come back to life', they bleed when shot. It takes a lot longer than a few seconds for blood to return to a body, and if it's not circulating it dries out. So what is the heart pumping?

    Also, perhaps it was explained in the book, but where exactly did this all take place? We see that it's a big city, but it also has agriculture right in the middle of the streets. I understand this was done in order to survive in such a small area of land, but how can you have agriculture IN A CITY ENVIRONMENT? You need a LOT more than a bit of grass and hay to raise the several goats and cows shown in the film. And where are they getting the patches of grass and bales of hay exactly? How far has this strain gone in 8 years time? From what's implied, it's wiped out most of civilization, but apparently not the areas vital for growing crops and selling it to small bunkers that somehow avoided infection.

    I'm almost out of characters, so I'm wrapping this up. The film was bad, it was lacking the essential information needed to know what's going on. The characters were bland and inconsistent, and the lore of zombies was done just as well as the lore of vampires was done in Twilight.
  5. Jul 5, 2013
    Honestly, this movie seemed pretty good when I saw the commercials, but obviously, I was wrong. I watched the whole thing hoping it would pick up at one point, but it never did. It was boring, and not funny at all (except for like maybe 3 little jokes, which still were not that funny). Huge disappointment.
  6. Jun 16, 2013
    I didn't expect much out of this film yet I was disapointed. The movie offers a very cheesy message that "love saved the zombies". I laugh at the idea that this movie is was a comedy. The jokes this movie had to offer were really stupid. Any copy of this movie should burn in a fire.
  7. May 17, 2013
    mildly interesting for first 5 minutes of the movie and then it takes Rome Juliet to new levels of low by taking this sort of script seriously. It would have been more interesting to see if Romeo was a vibrator with all the grunting that is happening instead of dialogue.

    Shakespeare should sue.
  8. Apr 11, 2013
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Are all zombies cursed with lock-in syndrome, or is it just R., a jarringly articulate walking corpse, whose interior monologue indicates a cognitive ability to love that belies the grunting and monosyllabism? Wandering aimlessly through an airport that has long-past outlived its usefulness, R.'s inner voicings of alienation("Why can't I connect?") and self-loathing(" pale.") uncannily echoes Charlie Kaufman in Adaptation, whose opening can be gleaned in Warm Bodies. The word "adaptation", here, is applicable in the biological sense, referring to the existential struggle of transitioning from life into death(heretofore only implied in Dawn of the Dead, where the zombies faintly recall the consumer culture of the living, converging on a shopping mall in parodic imitation of their former selves) and the angst that comes with post-death, whereas in Adaptation, it's a literary term: Kaufman's fruitless attempt to transform words into images from a non-fiction work about flowers. Guided by Charlie's tortured agency, the film's conceit that his screenplay and resulting film are occurring concurrently, gets thrown into chaos, when Kaufman's identical twin hijacks the narrative and turns Adaptation into some cheesy action picture. Donald is a hack, a Robert McKee disciple, whose tenets are a counterintuitive affront to Charlie's iconoclastic-minded psyche for non-formulaic screenwriting. Similarly, in Warm Bodies, despite the film's lack of self-reflexivity, two zombie narratives: one that demonstrates fidelity to the genre, and the other, while not the work of a maverick by any means, does humanize a historically malevolent monster whose inner life has rarely, if ever been explored, seem to emanate from two sensibilities at odds. A "bony", on one hand, is your standard issue zombie, engaged in the singular activity of unrepentant cannibalism, but R., conversely, while sharing the bonies' overriding appetite for human flesh, is a corpse with scruples, a corpse who feels conflicted about his bloodthirsty nature. Akin to Charlie attending a McKee seminar on screenwriting, selling out his guiding principles so he can finish adapting The Orchid Thief, R. watches a zombie, his compatriot, turn into a bony, ripping the flesh right off the bone: a two-fold adaptation that first, shows how taxing a conscience can be, as the decomposing man gives up on the idea of being nearly human, and second, on an intertextual level, like Adaptation, kinesis takes precedence over languor, or rather, Warm Bodies grows increasingly Hollywood in form and content. A bony, after all, is a zombie who adapts to the concept of death; it desires none of the earthly pleasures, but to eat. As a filmic metaphor, the self-mutilating zombie can be reconstructed as a Charlie figure, tearing himself apart as penance for using Donald's ideas to finish his shooting script. Charlie, in essence, is a zombie, sad and alone, more dead than alive. When R. intones, "Don't be creepy. Don't be creepy," as he approaches Julie, the girl he keeps captive in his tarmac-situated home, a converted airplane, the moviegoer can imagine the hoody-cladded young man's analog, the bipolar writer, chanting the same mantra as he flirts with the diner waitress whom he wrongly invites to an orchid show. R., however, wins Julie over, in due part because he eats her boyfriend's brains. Here, the film borrows from another Kaufman/Jones collaboration, Being John Malkovich. On a subconscious level, Julie can sense Dave's presence behind R.'s eyes, just like how Maxine would know whenever Lottie was occupying the famous actor's body. By snacking on the dead beau's grey matter, R. collects his memories, thoughts, and feelings, which makes the zombie more like Dave than himself. So strong is Dave's aura, Julie allows R. to occupy the same bedroom in an abandoned suburban house. If Julie gave necrophilia a go, would R. stand for "rapist", since the faux Romeo, unbeknownst to the girl, is a conduit for Dave's ghost. Nevertheless, R. is a zombie in love, signified by his heart turning red, the same hue perceived by an ideologically pure boy from a 1950s television series, who discerns the rose's true color after having just made love to a real girl. Arguably, Pleasantville is a zombie film, a latent one. In the aftermath of the girl's mother experiencing sexual pleasure for the first time, she hides in the kitchen, embarrassed by her flesh tones and ruby lips. Afraid of what her monochromatic husband may think, with Bud's help, she acts in a reactionary manner, using black and white makeup to conceal the newfangled vividness. But she's alive, like R. is alive. Contextually speaking, you can't go back to Night of the Living Dead, the 1968 George Romero original, whose zombies now seem one-note and monotonous, just like a sitcom housewife of yesteryear. To answer R.'s friend's question, the mother feels it. Life after death. Expand
  9. Mar 12, 2013
    So I guess zombies are where we draw the line with young love. Going in I didn't expect much from this movies and I was right. I didn't expect this movie to have a good story line, decent acting or realistic graphics and they delivered. I feel like the whole movie was made to follow the trend of paranormal love and it just didn't work out. Despite few scenes where I was woken up by the sound of people leaving, I was a sleep the whole time. An I never fall a sleep in a zombie movie. Expand
  10. Feb 16, 2013
    Honestly this is one of the worst movies I have ever scene, well besides Rubber. What ever happened to rotting flesh and ripping obnoxious faces off? For one the make up is pathetic; Honestly my 6 year old cousin could of done a better job on those veins then a professional. Two who the hell did beginners photo shop on those “Bonnies”, Syfy could of make better skeletons then that. Thirdly The camera shots were horrific. The whole movie shouldn’t be blurry, what happened to making everyone look fat in HD, gotta boost the American fat people organization’s hopes somehow. Now that we have the basic’s said and done let’s start digging on the bigger picture ZOMBIES. Their not supposed to beat people up, their supposed to rip you apart, and when did they get so strong? They’re supposed to be fragile morons like the average teenage girl, and not some scrawnie white boy like Edward Cullen. Also they’re not even meant talk, like really now it’s called growling and mumbling not saying words like”hungry” and “safe”, they’re not two year old’s learning their first words. The fith bad thing about this horrible romantic comedy” is nothing really fit’s together it’s put in randomly like a freshman’s first thesis essay. Marcus is not supposed to blurt out some huge paragraph of word’s at “R” without some back ground information, and what made him tell R that he had a dream about some breakfast food what ever happened to his true love? Also i’m pretty sure that some plot twist’s would of helped. The movie in it’s self if a good concept but honestly someone else should of directed it. I would of love to of seen R start to turn into some Bonnie when Julie broke his heart in the bed room, then had to have Marcus come save the day again by having to track Julie down and get her to find some way to get him to not rebel against everything to make him have a flack back of the brain he enjoyed oh-so very much’ or something stupid like that.) Honestly they should make a second movie with this concept, but please make the zombies LOOK LIKE ZOMBIES! And not some white trash punk that rolled around in a pig pen. Expand
  11. Feb 11, 2013
    I've registered just to say how horrible is this movie. It's the worst movie I've ever seen, it doesn't even make sense. The bad acting make It completely awful.
  12. Feb 7, 2013
    Even after pushing to seal up plot holes the story broke itself again and again. How did the knife wound in his chest not destroy his heart when he came back to life? Why are bonies stronger without skin or muscles? This on top of mediocre acting and cringe-worthy CG scenes ruin what is a cool idea for a different kind of zombie movie.
  13. Feb 6, 2013
    Extraordinarily slow and weak. It's the type movie that is squarely in my wheelhouse I should have liked this. A waste of Malkovich. And the bonies? Check out Tom Chick and crews's rundown at Quarter to Three they encapsulate to the gist of my feelings on this film. Even Rob Cordry can't get it done here. They break all the zombie rules, and in doing so, it becomes ridiculous.
  14. Feb 6, 2013
    Maybe I missed the point of the movie, but this sends a terrible message. Sort of like Forrest Gump with its advocacy of stupidity. I'm sorry but its not okay to be a moron. Just like the silly Twilight junk, we have another case of a dumb young girl and a boy who is wrong for her, not just wrong but biologically wrong, like science and stuff. Of course, for the children who run Hollywood, that is ok. Sure why don't we all hook up with zombies...nothing bad can happen then. I'd tell my daughter, "Yes, I'm sure he's a nice boy but don't let him eat your brain on the first date. Save that for Marriage." Expand
  15. Feb 4, 2013
    This movie is the zombie version of Twilight. The mythical view of vampires have been ruined and now the same fate has bestowed zombies. Do not let the high user scores fool you. They will most likely be from the adolescent female crowd of Twilight fans.
  16. Feb 4, 2013
    Warm Bodies was a huge disappointment. It was another film I went into with low expectations, and was still let down. The trailer is very cute and perhaps if this were a 60 min tv show on MTV it could have been more bearable. It had some cute moments, but again, not enough to warrant the hefty ticket price.
  17. Feb 3, 2013
    This movie makes Twilight seem like Citizen Kane. Easily in the top 10 worst movies I have ever seen. How did this script even get the 'green light' to get produced? How on Earth did the critics rate this about the same as The Hobbit? Just as one example of how inane this movie is. .it starts off with the Zombies being unable to talk or communicate other than grunts and rare single words, but suddenly they are all chatting it up with full sentences spoken slowly with broken English, including Rob Cordry and the lead actor. Also, the Zombies can smells humans inside buildings, but when it comes to the female lead, as long as she acts like a Zombie, she can walk amongst them if she is with her Zombie boyfriend. An intellectually offensive movie. Expand

Mixed or average reviews - based on 38 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 22 out of 38
  2. Negative: 3 out of 38
  1. Reviewed by: Stephanie Zacharek
    Feb 26, 2013
    Levine – whose last picture was the intriguing, if only partly effective, cancer comedy “50/50” — is going for something more here, exploring what makes us human by contrasting it with a character who has lost all the basics and is desperate to get them back.
  2. Reviewed by: Peter Bradshaw
    Feb 9, 2013
    Zombie-ism in the movies is traditionally inspected for metaphorical qualities. Here it could simply be that we males are emotionally dead … until love revives us.
  3. Reviewed by: Rosie Fletcher
    Feb 9, 2013
    A Frankenstein’s monster of comedy, romance and horror that’s less than its parts, Warm Bodies entertains but underwhelms.