Saturday, October 8, 2016

Night of the Living Dead, Directed by George A. Romero


The first five minutes of the film features the famous line, “They’re coming to get your, Barbra!”

They didn’t come fast enough.

I really, really wanted to like the movie. I took deep breaths and told myself that even though the movie is nearly 50 years old, it’s a classic for a reason. Even if it’s because it’s so bad it’s good. I also told myself not be a snob about it being in black and white. Plenty of great films are in black and white. Miracle on 34th Street. Clerks. The first fifteen minutes of The Wizard of Oz. B movies rarely take advantage of the latest in film-making technology, and the same holds true in Romero’s Living Dead.

I know I’m going against the grain, but there are multiple reasons it took me nearly a week to get through, in 15 minute increments.

1.)    Awful acting. The best actor in the movie died in the first ten minutes. He issued his warning (albeit, it was in regards to something altogether different) and then got into the lamest fight ever with a zombie, er, ghoul. We are then subjected to a litany of bad actors who yell for no reason.

2.)    Bad script. The concept was good. No, great. You take Richard Matheson’s I Am Legend and swap out vampires with zombies, er, ghouls and you get Night of the Living Dead. Romero admitted it was a direct rip-off of the book in an interview with Cinemablend in 2008. The dialogue, on the other hand, was just terrible. From Ben’s over-the-top berating of everybody in his immediate area (and he’s the hero?), to Barbra’s catatonic presence throughout. And things escalate quickly. A disagreement over where to hole up quickly devolves into a gun grab. There’s no opportunity to develop the characters. None. There are no arcs, no moments of redemption. No heroics. We literally sit down and just watch people die for 95 minutes.

3.)    Abhorrent cinematography. I’ve seen B movies that understand its budgetary limitations and attempts to compensate with creative camera angles or increased thematics. That doesn’t happen here. The filmmakers do little more than show up with a camera. Yes, there are a couple of attempts to get “artistic,” but they feel forced. They were using B&W film, yes, but instead of using it for effective contrast like what we see in Psycho, we just get a swirling mass of grey, dark grey, and black.

4.)    Where are the scares? I didn’t feel any build-up. There was one attempt at a jump scare. We are given gore for gore’s sake, and I guess that was what passed as scary in the late 60s. No, that’s not the case. Rosemary’s Baby came out the same year and had all the elements Living Dead lacked.

5.)    “They’re coming to get you, Ben.” The last five minutes of the movie is a search party under no threat as it systematically dispatches remaining zombies, er, ghouls. One might think, “well that’s just fine!” Well it wasn’t fine. Ask Ben.

It was just such an abrupt end. It didn’t leave anything to the imagination of the viewer. It didn’t hint at a world-ending apocalypse. It was really just a single night of living dead.

So what would I have done differently? I think I would have made the Barbra character stronger. Even for the era this was made she was too weak. It was the sixties! Women’s lib and such! And the best we could get from Barbra was a half-hearted attempt to hold one end of a board in place for Ben as he nailed it over it a door.

I would have beefed up the dialogue a bit, too. Over the course of the entire movie there were really only two dialogues going on, and one was a monologue due to Barb’s silence. The other was whether to go to the basement or stay upstairs. Sure, there were moments that took us away from those two conversations, but the film always went back to them.

Overall, I didn’t find this movie as enjoyable as I should have. It makes me wonder if there’s something wrong with me as a horror writer. Were my expectations too high? Or do I just not know a good film when I see it?

4 comments:

  1. Oh Chad, I must disagree. First of all, most of the actors were new/amateurs which I think works. This is like the Blair Witch Project. had they used professionals, you might not have felt like this could be the folks in the house down the lane. I thought Ben was a good actor and while yes, Barbara made us all look bad, she stayed true to character. She was scared in the damn cemetery before anything happened. I'd say Babs has been catered to and babied her whole life. What did we expect her to do? Now Karen refused to stay in the house like a "good girl" and she went right out there into the fray with her man. She redeemed the female character, as did Helen for that matter. One would expect her to act as the submissive, chronically abused wife once we met Harry, but did you see some of the looks she gave him? And she defied his orders when she felt it was the right thing to do. Overall, 2/3 women made me proud in this movie.
    The scares were in the tension. We are all trapped in the hot, cramped space with the rest of them, hoping to just make it through the night. Where is the safest place? Do we have every possible entrance boarded up? Are we safe? And when the hoard arrives, suddenly, there is no escape.
    The end is gut wrenching! So what if we know exactly what happens. We knew the posse was out there, we knew the government already had a handle on it. It was only a matter of time. So when the posse comes and we think Ben is going to make it, they kill him. After all that. It hits me deep in the guts every time.
    I don't know, I liked it. I like the build up, the suspense of horror. So this movie worked well for me.
    Joe-la

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You make a great point about the fear being in the tension. It did get tense at times, but I felt like I was watching my parents argue the whole time.

      It's not that I hated the movie, I just didn't look at it with as critical of an eye as I should have. After reading a lot of other blogs on this, I think I missed a lot.

      Delete
  2. Chad, I have to agree with much of what you wrote, but I disagree in that I enjoyed the film. Everything you said about the movie is valid, and I think in my post that I actually stated that if it were made today the same way, it would be a fail. when I take into consideration that it was created nearly five decades ago, I gave it a bump in stars. I guess because it was the trail blazer for zombie apocalypse.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mario, you are right. I tried to look at it as the trailblazer it was, but some of it just didn't work for me.

      Delete