Night of the Living Dead

Rating:
Summary: Surprisingly entertaining remake
Review: Roger Ebert once told me that the secret to making a good thriller is to make sure that it can't age. The best thrillers never get old, and never lose their edge. Movies like "Halloween," "The Silence of the Lambs," "Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer," and of course "Night of the Living Dead" have never lost their death grip on the collective jugular of movie goers. Back in 1990, George Romero wanted to remake his 1968 cult classic with brand new make-up effects from the man who assisted him on his previous zombie pictures, Tom Savini, in the director's chair. Age has been kind to the original version of this film, and I anticipate the same will be true with its surprisingly effective and well-acted remake.

I was really impressed with Tom Savini's (The King of Splatter) work on the "Dawn" and "Day of the Dead" films, along with his work on "Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2" and "Friday the 13th (and Part 4)," so when I saw his name stenciled after the words "Directed by" on the video box, I immediately rented it. The most obvious changes in the film lie within the newer, state of the art make-up effects, which range from a man broken in half from a car collision to a man walking around with the Y-incision from his autospy displayed to the world at large. There are other little differences in the film, which mostly reside in the performances (bravo to Tony Todd), the demeanors of the characters (Patricia Tallman's character is much tougher than the timid, frightened woman her predecessor played), and an all-new ending. The film still incorporates the trademark Romero satire, but it's much subtler and more understood than it was in "Dawn of the Dead." The characters in the remake are more engaging than in the original, and I think the new make-up helps the film work well on the horror level. Sure, it doesn't have the grainy, documentary feel that the original had, but the movie still works. I like it a lot.

Rating:
Summary: Modernized. Butchered ending...still good.
Review: Yeah Yeah. Don't start with me on the obvious negative aspects about this film's remake some 20 plus years after the original. I am aware of them and while many are tempted to start knocking off stars let me explain my rating the film what I have. First, I gotta award an extra star for the features because horror film DVDs seldom have any extras and they fit a decent amount in this "regular" DVD and not reserving it for some (insert exciting word here) edition. Second, while I like Tom Savini I haven't liked his special effects in the past Romero movies they seem exaggerated even by the standards of "zombie" movies. The dead look great in this movie and while goofy signature zombies are still all over the film they are more sparse then the other films. I like that they were even more vague in this film about the mysterious cause of all the events. Tony Todd makes a great Ben in the film. Now the ending isn't as good as the original, but in defense for the film most people complain it is to similiar to the original. Guess you can't keep some people happy. I'm a huge fan of the original and I agree with many compliants about this film, but I don't see how people can bare the animousity towards the film that they do. I think it's a respectible remake and it's almost as good as the original in it's own right. I consider it a sort of modern tribute. It's a fun and scary film even in color.

Rating:
Summary: not bad for a remake
Review: I ordinarily hate remakes,but this one is surprisingly good.Devotees of the original should give this film a look.The wooden,somnambulistic acting of the original is absent in this remake.Although some would argue thats the charm of the original.You decide.

Rating:
Summary: "They're coming to get you, Barbara!"
Review: So you're George Romero, writer and director of one of the most influential horror movies ever, Night of the Living Dead (1968), and it's some twenty odd years later and you're executive producing a remake of said movie. Who do you get to direct? How about special effects master Tom Savini, the man responsible for the horrifying effects in Dawn of the Dead (1978) and Day of the Dead (1985)? Seems a pretty good choice to me...

Night of the Living Dead (1990) stars Tony Todd and Patricia Tallman as Ben and Barbara, respectively, two individuals who seek refuge in a farmhouse as a legion of hungry corpses descend upon them and soon find the house not so much a haven as a claustrophobic nightmare. They also discover they aren't the only ones in the house, as there are five people locked in the basement. Emerging from their hidey-hole are Harry and Helen Cooper, a married couple, and Tom and Judy Rose, a younger couple, Tom's uncle being the owner of the house. Also in the basement is the Cooper's daughter, Sarah, who has become ill after being bitten by one of the undead (guess where that's going). A diverse group, for sure, and one that finds itself at odds in if it's better to fortify the house or retreat to the fairly secure basement. Harry thinks it's best to go into the basement and bar the door, but Ben would rather board up all the doors and windows, using the basement as a last option, as there is only one way in and out and he doesn't want to trap himself down there unless he absolutely has to...Harry, who is quite vocal throughout, thinks this plan foolish and says once he goes into the basement and bars the door, he won't open it for anything, regardless. As tensions flare, night falls, and the dead begin arriving in greater numbers, I guess sensing the warm, living flesh they so crave to be inside the house. As the situation grows worse, an escape plan is formulated, but the plan soon falls apart, and it's back to the house. Who lives? Who dies? Is rescue in the wings, or should they just put their heads between their legs and kiss their hinders good-bye?

It's always a sketchy affair remaking a film, especially one that's deemed a classic and definitive representation of its' genre. Look what happened in 1998 when director Gus Van Sant released a remake of Alfred Hitchcock's Psycho. A total and tremendous flop...Yes, I am sure there was a awful lot of apprehension to redoing a movie that really didn't need to be redone, but the end result turned out an interesting update, remaining true to the original while adding a few surprises along the way. Tony Todd is excellent as Ben, and is definitely the strongest characterization in the film, bringing a lot of what Duane Jones did in the original, while adding personal nuances to make the character his own. Patricia Tallman's character of Barbara starts out the same as the original played by Judith O'Dea, but goes through some serious changes by the end, allowing for the a modernization of the character to fit more along the lines of the strong female lead, as seen in the Alien films with Ripley, played by Sigourney Weaver. Was this for the better? I am still undecided, but it certainly made interesting viewing. The character I found most annoying was that of Harry Cooper, played by Tom Towles. His portrayal was overblown to the point of being silly, with his constant yelling, screaming, and berating of other characters. The Harry Cooper in the original was a jerk, for sure, but at least you got the feeling it was a jerkiness borne of overriding desire to protect his family, even if his plans were at odds with the rest of the group, allowing for viewers to develop some empathy for the character. Here, the character is played as a bonehead to the nth degree, and it only served to, in my opinion, disrupt the flow of the film. The biggest difference between the original an the remake is obviously the color factor, but one will also notice that the undead are much more detailed than in the original, due to a much larger production budget. You can tell a great amount of effort was taken in this area, enhancing on the original film. The film wasn't quite as gory as I thought it was going to be, but that's pretty well explained in a making of featurette. Seems in order to avoid an X rating, these scenes were either removed or toned down. Savini didn't seem too upset about it, as he felt, and I agree, that sometimes what you don't see is just as effective as what you do see.

The disc has the wide screen presentation on one side and the full screen on the other, and includes some good special features like trailers, production notes, commentary by Savini, and a 25 minute making of featurette called 'The Dead Walk' that highlights a lot of interesting facts about the movie, along with comparisons to the original. Also in this featurette are some of the scenes that were deleted to get an R rating, along with alternate, more visceral scenes that were toned down in the release. If you liked the original, chances are you'll get a kick out of this film, as I wasn't disappointed, and I usually despise remakes.

Cookieman108

Rating:
Summary: So you wanna be an extra in a George Romero film?
Review: Tom Savini's Night of the Living Dead has some of the most interesting extras on film. This is a great movie! It is frightening on many levels, the cast is wonderful and the rewriting brings the movie into the present in a terrifying way.
I prefer this version to the original, mostly because Barbara is not a catatonic fruitcake. Also, the ending of Romero's film just makes me so mad I want to scream!
Patricia Tallman makes her character real. She plays a frightened but strong and rational person dealing with an insane situation. She is definitely a predecessor of roles like Alice in 2002's Resident Evil, even if she does not have the amazing kung fu skills that all our modern genre heros seem to come with.
Tony Todd is an amazing actor, and any director is lucky to have him. His description of events offscreen is eerie and sets the perfect tone for the story until later, when things get a little more desperate.
Tom Towles makes a wonderful creep-I love to hate him! He's a cad, a jerk and worse as the family man who just wants to hide instead of accepting the truth.
The best thing about the DVD version is the really neat commentary by director Tom Savini. It's just him and the mic, but he has alot of interesting things to say about every aspect of the production. The story of how he came to direct this film is recounted, and Savini seems to have something fascinating to say about each and every actor, extra and crewperson on the set.
A featurette about the film is included in the disc with more good stuff to watch. The extra cost of the DVD is totally worth the money, and a must-have for living dead fans everywhere.
I am always finding more reasons to love this film!

Rating:
Summary: Night of the living remake
Review: Ok, this is a rather pointless remake of the original classic. What makes it so bad is that it was directed by Tom Savini, who collaberated with George Romero on "Dawn of the Dead" and Day of the Dead". Savini, a noted make-up artist specializing in gore and blood, left this movie pretty dry. The plot is the same, a group of strangers are wholed up in a farm house that is besieged by zombies. There are no big stars here, except Tony Todd, who went on to be the Candyman. He is obviously the hero, or so you'd think. The end is different, and not for the better. The acting is pretty wooden, but you were expecting that, weren't you? The gore is graphic, but like I said, I was expecting more from Savini. The moral of the story is pounded home too hard. But it's fair, and not too long, so it's barable. It is a good movie, just not great. I only wish that they would stop remaking the classics and give Romero the money to do the fourth 'Dead' movie.

Rating:
Summary: Night of the living remake
Review: Ok, this is a rather pointless remake of the original classic. What makes it so bad is that it was directed by Tom Savini, who collaberated with George Romero on "Dawn of the Dead" and Day of the Dead". Savini, a noted make-up artist specializing in gore and blood, left this movie pretty dry. The plot is the same, a group of strangers are wholed up in a farm house that is besieged by zombies. There are no big stars here, except Tony Todd, who went on to be the Candyman. He is obviously the hero, or so you'd think. The end is different, and not for the better. The acting is pretty wooden, but you were expecting that, weren't you? The gore is graphic, but like I said, I was expecting more from Savini. The moral of the story is pounded home too hard. But it's fair, and not too long, so it's barable. It is a good movie, just not great. I only wish that they would stop remaking the classics and give Romero the money to do the fourth 'Dead' movie.

Rating:
Summary: Good, but not as good
Review: I have to give Tom Savini credit, this was not your average Remake. It captures much of the qualities that made the original so wonderful, the spontaneous attack, a fabulously gifted leading man, and a good deal at stake. The direction is nearly flawless, and the newer effects are a welcome addition. Savini even managed, though massively retooling some key characters, to maintain the sociological subtext of the original film. (Take note everyone, when the dead live, we need to work together)

My only problem with the film is that it is only part one of a three part story, and Part One ends too easily. The plot tends to pin every wrong on one character, who, though often wrong in the original film, was only one player in the greater chaos. I like the few changes in the character of Barbra, but, well, let's just say I like the original ending (and its implications) better. Nevertheless, I highly recommend this remake of a classic, if for no other reason than to see an already great story told in a slightly different way.

Rating:
Summary: Remakes
Review: Most remakes are a total joke, however Savini is a genius when it comes to gore etc and makes this one part of the Dead family. If you LOVE the original film and want a small "different" spin then check this out, the acting is GREAT and the zombies look disgustingly cool. Not one to miss if your a "dead" fan.

Rating:
Summary: Amazingly, even better than the original classic!
Review: If the internet had been nearly as popular in 1990 as it is now, I'll bet the IMDB message boards would be filled with protests from outraged fans of the original (the way the message boards on Dawn of the Dead are now). I'm pretty sure that when this came out, there were plenty of people screaming blasphemy. But, I'm almost ashamed to say this, I found this remake even better than the original, and the original is a classic! It launched the zombie genre of to incredible popularity, and it's a just plain amazing movie. I rented this earlier the other day, not really sure what to expect. What I found was that this movie was much more entertaining and exciting and suspenseful than the original. It moves faster, has better effects, better acting, the works. Also, it throws in plenty of little plot-twists so a scholar of the original could still be surpried. From the get-go, things aren't as they seem. We think we know what's going to happen, but then it's totally different and unexpected.

The biggest change in this flick is the Barbara character. No longer is she a whiny little pansy who just sits around and cries. Now, she shoots zombies, she stabs zombies, she fights zombies, and she finally points out what I'm sure many fans of the Dead trilogy have known for a long time. "They're so slow!" she observes. "We could just walk right past 'em. We wouldn't even have to run."

The acting is very impressive. Tony Todd is outstanding as Ben, improving on Duane Jones' excellent performance from the '68 version. Patricia Tallman is probably the best in the movie. Stong, capable and determined. Tom Towles is great as the scumbag, and his wife performs admirably. William Butler is pretty good as Tom, but his girlfriend is definately the worst performer in the movie.

Tom Savini, as well as being an amazing make-up man, proves himself to be a capable director. The movie has plenty of style, and the action scenes are exciting. The make-up in the film is appropriatly gross (though nothing compared to Dawn or Day) and the zombies are a big improvement over the ones in the original.

Roger Ebert and other critics may have hated this movie, but trust me when I say that it not only lives up to the original, but also improves on it. The two movies are also different enough to warrant owning both (Millenium Edition for the original).

5/5