Review of Night of the Living Dead (1968) by Everett D — 19 Feb 2014

This is very much a turning point in the history of horror films: a crossover between the classic chillers and modern splatter films. It's George Romero's classic zombie film "Night of the Living Dead." One of the most revolutionary horror films of all-time, it marked a significant change when it came to special effects and gore. Practically every zombie movie that's come out since has tried to emulate its technique...So am I crazy to think it's a little overrated?

Now before you guys go nuts, just hear me out. Yes, this is a very good movie. It's got a haunting, chilling atmosphere, top-notch effects and is mostly a well-crafted story. But just because it was such an influential film when it came out, does that mean it really holds up? Well, there's no doubt that Romero has his own way of making movies; he sticks to his guns and doesn't submit himself to studio demands. Now how about the movie itself?

The film begins with siblings Barbara (Judith O'Dea) and Johnny (Russell Streiner) driving to a cemetery in rural Pennsylvania to place a wreath at their father's grave. Then a zombie (Bill Hinzman) suddenly attacks them; way to start the movie. No spending half the movie setting up the plot; the action starts immediately. Barbara escapes to a farmhouse, where she meets a black man named Ben (Duane Jones), although I don't remember him actually introducing himself as Ben; one of the later characters just suddenly refers to him as such. Anyway, they start boarding up the house before they meet a bunch of people that are hiding in the basement: married couple Harry (Karl Hardman) and Helen Cooper (Marilyn Eastman) and their daughter Karen (Kyra Schon), and young teenage couple Tom (Keith Wayne) and Judy (Judith Ridley).

So this is where we get to the main point of the movie; it's just these people hiding in this house from the zombies outside; they keep them at bay by setting fires all around the house, which keeps them away. Sounds like Romero watched some "Frankenstein." It's a very isolated type of movie; the action all takes place in this house. The only time we know about what's going on elsewhere is when they're listening to the radio or watching a report on TV. That's clever filmmaking right there; it's like we're trapped in the house with them, so I'll give the movie points for that. But why are there times when we're watching stuff on the TV happening during the day, when the action clearly takes place at nighttime?

The main issue, though, is that I can't really get into these characters all that much. Some of them are okay, like Ben, Tom and maybe Judy. But wow, is Judith O'Dea bad as Barbara. After the initial attack at the cemetery, she spends the rest of the movie in a state of shock, doing a lot of whimpering and generally not contributing. I'm not saying that's a bad thing; this can be a natural response to a crisis like this. But she is not the least bit convincing in the role; it just seems like a performance to me, nothing else. People quote Johnny's "They're coming to get you, Barbara" as a classic movie line, but Barbara's response of "Stop it! You're ignorant!" nearly ruins it for me because of how awkward the delivery is. Plus, she falls for no reason when she's running from the zombie.

There's also Harry, who also doesn't contribute; he just tries to act like a big boss all the time and tell people to hide out in the basement. Again, that's not exactly bad; where is the best place to hide in a situation like this? Up top, where if they get in, you have a way out, or down below, where there's less chance they get in, but you have no way out? But aside from that, he's just an annoying bore, especially the way he just stands back while Ben is actually contributing, or in one case, actually under attack. It just feels like it could be so easy for these people to survive if they chill out and stop bickering; there's sort of a bigger problem happening right now.

Now with that said, most of the rest of the movie is high quality. I should re-iterate how cool I think Ben is. I just love how calm and composed he is whenever something is happening; he's scared in some parts, but he seems like a natural leader, someone that I would put my trust in if zombies were attacking. And for a time where there were far fewer leading actors that were black, he was the first to have the distinction in a horror film. I know Sidney Poitier was probably the more famous name to cross the racial boundaries of cinema, but don't forget about Duane Jones.

I also want to mention the effects of the death scenes when the zombies are eating the corpses. It's still impressive and grotesque when you see these things munching on people's innards; imagine how audiences in 1968 viewed them. There are some movies where all you remember are the death scenes; thankfully this movie has a lot more going for it than that. Not much more I have to say than that, but I also have issues with the ending. Without giving too much away, it feels very sudden and cheap, and had me very irritated with the characters that initiated exactly what happened. I know Romero wanted to keep that dark tone by not having a happy ending to the movie, but the execution could've been better, in my opinion.

So it's no secret how influential this movie was; it was back in the day where anyone could still go attend movies--including children without any real restriction. But a movie like this simply threw audiences for a loop; they were shocked and frightened by this movie's level of violence and gore. Children that saw opening releases were crying in their seats in terror. Shortly after the release of this movie came the MPAA ratings system, so it's obvious that this film changed the course of cinema, for better or for worse. But does that make the movie as great as everyone thinks?

People tend to view "Night of the Living Dead" as a masterpiece, and to its credit, it can be considered a landmark in filmmaking. Some of its shortcomings actually work to the film's advantage, like the fact that it's shot in black-and-white and looks very grainy and cheap; it makes it look quite real. But like I said, some of the acting is very poor, and it just seems like it wouldn't be hard for these people to survive or escape a bunch of slow-moving brutes. I like watching it, though, and pretty much anyone can watch it anywhere. When this movie first came out, the theatrical distributor forgot to put a copyright indication on it, which makes this probably the most famous public domain movie of all-time. And I suppose that's a good distinction. It's still a good movie; but I've seen better.