Post by Vits on Jul 12, 2020 15:06:19 GMT
NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD 1968 (the story of 7 people hiding in a farmhouse from zombies ghouls) is too slow and repetitive, even for the decade. Even though the low budget held it back in terms of cinematography, camera work, etc., George A. Romero's directing is good enough for it to be genuinely scary at times. Among the survivors, Ben (the then rare black hero) comes off as the best character. After watching so many annoying and/or boring people throughout the sequels and remakes, I like him even more in retrospective.
6/10
After making a horror movie, George wanted to make an action/horror movie. The difference is that, in that genre, the main characters aren't just victims; they fight back... but they still have to be inferior to the threat. During the majority of DAWN OF THE DEAD 1978, the survivors feel in control of each situation. In fact, there are many moments where the zombies (yes, now they're called that) get near them and they just push them away. Due to these issues (how ironic that the directing (again, not the same as technical quality) and the writing in this sequel (made 10 years later and with a bigger budget) is worse), there's no suspense. The goofy make-up doesn't help. A couple of moments during the last part (including the use of that ear poison Herbert Chappell called THE GONK) suggest that this was also meant to be partly a comedy, but they feel out of place because the story's overall tone isn't consistent.
1/10
DAY OF THE DEAD
3/10
RETURN OF THE LIVING DEAD PART I
3/10
RETURN OF THE LIVING DEAD PART II
1/10
NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD 1990
4/10
RETURN OF THE LIVING DEAD PART III
1/10
DAWN OF THE DEAD 2004
7/10
LAND OF THE DEAD
1/10
RETURN OF THE LIVING DEAD PART IV: NECROPOLIS
0/10
RETURN OF THE LIVING DEAD PART V: RAVE TO THE GRAVE
0/10
DAY OF THE DEAD PART 2: CONTAGIUM
0/10
DIARY OF THE DEAD
3/10
SURVIVAL OF THE DEAD
1/10
-------------------------------------
You can read comments of other movies in my blog.
6/10
After making a horror movie, George wanted to make an action/horror movie. The difference is that, in that genre, the main characters aren't just victims; they fight back... but they still have to be inferior to the threat. During the majority of DAWN OF THE DEAD 1978, the survivors feel in control of each situation. In fact, there are many moments where the zombies (yes, now they're called that) get near them and they just push them away. Due to these issues (how ironic that the directing (again, not the same as technical quality) and the writing in this sequel (made 10 years later and with a bigger budget) is worse), there's no suspense. The goofy make-up doesn't help. A couple of moments during the last part (including the use of that ear poison Herbert Chappell called THE GONK) suggest that this was also meant to be partly a comedy, but they feel out of place because the story's overall tone isn't consistent.
1/10
DAY OF THE DEAD
3/10
RETURN OF THE LIVING DEAD PART I
3/10
RETURN OF THE LIVING DEAD PART II
1/10
NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD 1990
4/10
RETURN OF THE LIVING DEAD PART III
1/10
DAWN OF THE DEAD 2004
7/10
LAND OF THE DEAD
1/10
RETURN OF THE LIVING DEAD PART IV: NECROPOLIS
0/10
RETURN OF THE LIVING DEAD PART V: RAVE TO THE GRAVE
0/10
DAY OF THE DEAD PART 2: CONTAGIUM
0/10
DIARY OF THE DEAD
3/10
SURVIVAL OF THE DEAD
1/10
-------------------------------------
You can read comments of other movies in my blog.