NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD (1968)

  Now I realize this is a horror classic, a film adored through the ages by film fans, horror fans, and the general public.  I know it's a piece of cinematic genius from a respected director in the industry.  I know it was made on a small budget as a political statement disguised as a zombie movie.  I know all of this, and I still don't get it.

   First off, for a movie to work, especially a horror movie where you're rooting for the protagonists to survive, you must like the characters, and relate to them.  You MUST care that they survive.  If you don't care whether they live or not, a film of this nature does not stand a chance.  The character I could relate to and enjoyed was taken out of the action 10 minutes in.  I did not care if Barbara (the "heroine") was eaten alive in front of the screen shortly after the zombies attacked.  Heck, I would have enjoyed that.  She was whiney and condescending and not likeable, and that was before she was a whiney and unlikable basket case after the events began to take place.  In fact the next character to show up lifted things up a bit.  He was a strong, smart, and fearless (on the outside) thinker who helped lift the film a bit (especially after bossing around Barbara, and eventually knocking her out!  If only he had then drug her outside...).  But further characters came crawling out of the woodworks to establish indoor tension, as opposed to... I don't know, say the fact that there are flesh eating zombies on the other side of the walls... But those zombies are in no hurry when there's racial and sexual tension, and fights for power going on indoors.  The flesh eaters will have to wait.  Further, the new characters are dumb and also unlikable, save Judy and I think his name is Tom.  It's not really important, they're just foils for the disagreeable and untrustworthy Coopers.

   Getting away from the unlikable characters, which is somewhat common in the horror genre, anyway.  Let's look at the afore hinted at zombies.  First off, aside from the early attacks, they are mostly unimposing.  They're slow, weak, and dumb.  The action scenes are slow and almost laughable (maybe they were intense in 1968, I don't know, but I was not once on edge).  Then, as the numbers mount, they sort of just hover around the house with the waiting victims, rather than attack.  Well, until the final 15 minutes or so of the film, then they come full force.  I guess in the hours that ticked away (roughly 5 or 6 of them) they were enjoying the banter and power struggle going on inside the house.  I'm glad someone was enjoying it, I was thoroughly bored by it.  Without the zombies constantly trying to get in throughout the ordeal, I had no sense of imminent danger to keep me on edge, and interested in the plight for survival.  Instead we were treated to "they could come at any time, through all these windows" and "there's more of them out there" and "we can't hold them off if they team up".  I wanted to see that, not hear about the possibility of it. Eventually it came to fruition and it was exciting for the short while it lasted. 

   Then there were the issues of continuity and convenience: Nails, hammers, wood forever were to be found in all the closets and doors.  A gas pump, gun, plenty of bullets, jars and kerosene.  The news was clearly day footage when it was supposed to be live at 2 and 3am.  Stupid character moves leading to worse conditions.... All this I'm willing to overlook, and come to expect in horror genre, and low budget films.  If I'm intrigued in the story, and invested in the actions and characters, I don't even notice this stuff until further viewings, or having it pointed out by someone.  When you're not interested in the happenings on the screen, you notice things.  One thing I don't understand about zombie films: If they're the dead come back to life, then why when you kill them, don't they just come back to life again?  Seems logical to me.

   All that said, it was not a horrible film, for a low budget zombie film, that sort of had zombies in some of it.  Some scenes were intense and there was some sense of dread, but not enough to make it as great as people are proclaiming it to be.  The ending was excellent, undoubtedly the best part of the film.  Unfortunately I had to sit through an hour and twenty minutes of the other stuff to get there.  5.5/10

Director: George Romero

Writer(s): George Romero,
John Russo

Staring: Judith O'Dea,
Duane Jones

Company: Image Ten

Review Home

Hosted by www.Geocities.ws

1