Type in any movie or show to find where you can watch it, or type a person's name.

User Reviews for: Night of the Living Dead

Keeper70
/10  3 years ago
Made at a time when the zombie films were starting to make a comeback this is at first glance a straight up remake of the original that started it all ‘Night of the Living Dead’. With the Godfather who decided the living dead would be flesh-eaters George A Romero as an executive producer it was up to his old collaborator and ace make-up man and actor from his early efforts Tom Savini to take the directorial reigns.

This could have been more of disaster than a zombie plague.

It was not.

Savini shows from the start that although he is over-the-top and inventive with his anatomically correct and gore-some special effects in the zombie classics and many other horror films he has also learned a lot about the art of making a film. It pays to bear in mind that not only was directing but he was directing a much-loved classic that many people were waiting to take severe umbrage at the minute the opening credits rolled. Well it must be said old ‘Blade’ from the Dawn of the Dead proved he was more than a zombie slaying biker.
Although a great part of the action takes place at ‘night’ hence the title the opening sequence is filmed in bright spring time – completely the opposite to what you might have been expecting and with the ‘gag’ opening sequence starting off the ‘attacks’ but then on we were treated to some impressive zombies we were on a familiar if slightly different path.

As with the first Barbara, Patricia Tallman, rocking a particularly fetching short cut to her fierce ginger-red hair seems to be heading towards being a useless female lead, going as Judith O'Dea did in the original into a non-speaking near catatonic state, which in the original was to be Barbara’s undoing. No, this Barbara gets her act together and proves to resourceful, brave and bright. The sort of attributes that you would need to survive ‘Night of the Living Dead’. Tony Todd makes is a great modern Duane Jones and enhances his hero-role by not making the best of decisions from time to time. Harry Towles is great as the repugnant Cooper which if you use Social Media you will know is fairly accurate. I saw this in the cinema when it came out and I would have said his character was a little over the top but nowadays I think it is spot on. In fact, although Cooper treats his wife dreadfully and is clearly very frightened not all his decisions are wrong, but he is a villain, and a villain must do what a villain must do. His wife, the attractive McKee Anderson like all the roles from the previous film is expanded and given a bit more to do and has a bit more character. Only the role of Tommy and Judy-Rose seem similar and a bit stereo typical and have the same stupid fate befall them as the original. Katie Finneran as Judy-Rose ends up with the traditional screaming role which even in the 1990s seemed a bit old hat. I mean she got on and did what she had to during the action so why the high-pitched screaming?

The set pieces are convincing with various zombies in various states of distress or not, wandering around the countryside and we do get a re-run of the nice-bottom nude lady-zombie. Surprisingly for a Savini effort this is fairly free of real gore and most of what would be blood splattered grue takes place off-screen. In the case of this film it appears to be a strength not a weakness. Unlike the original this is a much more athletic and trim film and has little to no flab around the middle. The acting, particularly from three main leads is strong and the movie’s ending, different from the original, is more satisfying. Savini tips his hat to the originals with the blood splatter over the trowel in the cellar and a helicopter watching the ‘good old boy’ action near the end, is that Fran, Stephen, Peter and Roger in this new timeline watching before they fly off to the mall?

I am pleased to say this remake of much-loved horror-film classic is a welcome addition to the genre being well-made, well-acted and intelligently updated. The lighting and cinematography are fine, set a tone and do not ruin your enjoyment which, particularly for a film taking place mainly at night is a fine skill to master.

The film is not without flaws as any film is. The location of the cemetery if you think about it for more than ten minutes does not make any sense and how come there are some many graves there? Where do all those zombies come from? There are bloody hundreds of them for a place out in the sticks. These are all ‘nitty-gritty it makes no difference’ points being honest. You can pick any horror film apart when you start applying logic.

If you liked the original Night of the Living Dead but perhaps never really liked the black and white ‘we have no budget’ feel of it then this remake by Tom Savini is the one for you. It feels like a love letter to genre and is made by someone who knows exactly what a Romero-style zombie film should be like.

Truth be told it is a well-made and fun zombie film.
Like  -  Dislike  -  0
Please use spoiler tags:[spoiler] text [/spoiler]
John Chard
/10  6 years ago
We are them, they are us etc...

The original creators of the seminal Night of the Living Dead (1968) reconvene 22 years later to, well, make some money!

It was a compromised production, with director Tom Savini announcing that the finished cut is not half the film he set out to make. Surprising, then, to find it still works to the point of being viable. It's a very effective zombie pic, one performed with quality by the cast, with the concept of a group of people holed up in a house - under intense attack by the walking dead - still terrifying. Group dynamics again explode, heroes and villains are born, and the creatures are high grade in scary construction. Caveat, though, is that although it's a faithul(ish) remake, where with the new tools to hand it's understandable why the makers thought they could create another horror classic, but one for the 90s horror hordes, it still remains that it's utterly bloodless. While the finale is a bit stinky... 6/10
Like  -  Dislike  -  0
Please use spoiler tags:[spoiler] text [/spoiler]
$hubes
3/10  2 years ago
I've watched the original black-and-white version from 1968 and found it barely "spooky"…certainly not "scary" by today's standards. Somehow for the past 32 years, I've managed to miss this 1990 remake and could have easily gone at least another 32 years without watching this vile load of tripe. But nooooooooooo... with George A. Romero and Tom Savini's name headlining it, I fired this baby up preparing to be blown away by fast-moving zombies, extreme gore, and a truckload of gut-munching grotesqueries. I could not have been more wrong. What should have been a simple reboot of the original turned into a joke, a laughingstock, a steaming pile of whale dung that deserves the scathing reviews it has evoked over time. The plot holes were big enough to pilot a C141 cargo transport through, the acting was absolutely atrocious - even Tony Todd blew chunks here - and the zombies looked like cookie-cutter clones. I was absolutely amazed at (1) how refreshingly live and unscathed these "back from the dead" looked…I guess most of these undead either managed to walk that _"200 miles from the nearest place to get a beer"_ or they were buried in the nearby cemetary in their bib overalls, jogging shorts, Levi jeans, housedress, or whatever else they happened to keel over in. I think I saw two of the "undead" that were actually in what appeared to be burial clothes (i.e. suit/tie or formal dress). It's just simple stuff like that that you notice when you watch enough movies...and in a case like this, that oversight was glaringly obvious. Although there was (obviously) a cemetary nearby - where "Barbara's" mother had obviously been buried - none of the zombies that were surrounding the place seemed to have come from there. Or else there had been some sort of plague and all of them had died suddenly within the past 36 hours because I didn't spot a single rotting corpse. As I mentioned, seeing Tom Savini's name at the top of the credits, I was expecting some of the absolute best in special effects and gruesome zombies but these looked like Walmart Nov. 1 half-price Halloween costume specials. Utterly ricidulous and very disappointing. As far as the story, the increased hostilities between "Ben" and "Cooper" did nothing except irritate you. In a situation like this, vying for power would have (in all likelihood) been the LEAST of anyone's concern, and the whole "I'm the boss up here, you're the boss down there" schtick was just beyond silly: it was downright STUPID. As a "gorror" fan and especially having an affinity for good zombie movies, I would strongly advise ANYONE to avoid this smelly carcass. It's not even "so bad it's funny"; it's just BAD. Rotten smelly stinking bad. What a humongous disappointment.
Like  -  Dislike  -  0
Please use spoiler tags:[spoiler] text [/spoiler]
Back to Top