Rating: 
Summary: Great movie but not the best of Romero's Dead Trilogy
Review: All of Romero's dead movies are the the must sees of horror movies and so is Day of the Dead. However, Day of the Dead dosn't have something that the others do. It may be because his budget was cut and was not able to do the orignal script he wanted. He wanted to make it more violent than an R rating would allow and his financers wanted it to be an R movie to make more money. So they cut his budget in half. But, being the true artist he is he was not going to sacrifice anything to give up his idea of what the movies was going to be. The movie has amazing make-up effects and is probally more violent and graphic than any of his others(other than Dawn of the Dead). Picture is great and so is the sound. It is a must see for any true horror fan and all the other movies of the dead trilogy for that matter. You must see this and all of Romero's other dead movies. His masterpiece has to be Dawn of the Dead. Everyone should watch this movie even if you don't like horror movies this one goes beyond just being a horror movie. It is by far the best written horror movie of all time and the most violent.
Rating: 
Summary: Bub and Dr.Logan saved it
Review: Picture and sound is very good, despite the fact it's an older movie. The opening scenes are great, but then the script's becomes kinda lame. But the scenes with Dr.Logan and his "Specimen" named "Bub" are really something. In the rest of this movie,there's a bit to much of cursing and foul language: they say it so often, that I could it only stand as a "Redneck-Talkin-Parody". The FX, made by Tom Savini, are more realistic and gory than in it's predecessor.(Tom Savini really is a Trade Mark for great effects)
Rating: 
Summary: best of the trilogy
Review: day was by far superior to dawn in lots of ways,stronger acting,better fx,the original script would have made this the "GONE WITH THE WIND" of zombie movies.but this is still a great movie,it takes a bunch of misfits (presumably the last people on the planet),and puts them in a hell of a situation,the army and the scientific team trying to resolve the problem of the dead over running the earth,on the military team is captain rhodes ,hell bent on destroying every zombie that walks (although he doesnt kill any in the entire movie),on the scientist side is sarah,a doctor looking for a cure for this disease,but she is rapidly running out of ideas,i wont give away the ending but its a classic although the last 2mins are very disapointing,i still give this movie 5/5 for sheer brilliance
Rating:
Summary: THE DEAD GET BETTER!
Review: WELL NOT WHAT MR. ROMERO WANTED. I SAW THE 1 ST. SCRIPT AND IT WAS GOOD. IF YOU HAVE TIME LOOK IT UP ON THE WEB. BUT WHAT A MOVIE TO SEE. THIS IS A MUST SEE FOR ANY FAN OF ROMERO. I WISH THEY WOULD BRING IT BACK TO THE BIG SCREEN. AND I HOPE ONE DAY MR. ROMERO WOULD BE ABLE TO DIRECT THE 1ST. SCRIPT. LIKE HE WANTED TO. BUT THIS A MUST FOR ANY FAN OF THE DEAD MOVIES. THERE IS TALK ABOUT ANOTHER DEAD MOVIE. LOOK FOR IT!
Rating:
Summary: An underrated zombie masterpiece.
Review: George A. Romero does it again with this new zombie films was one of the last zombie films in the eighty. Despite was a box office dispointment in 1985. The Plot-About a loney scientist played by Lori Cardille living with a bunch of sexism army men, she only has a few friends, also she the only female person in that underground base. The best scenes are with almost human zombie Bud with the scientist are funny and touching also. Gory scenes are impressive by the make -up effects by Tom savini. An Underrated Classic.
Rating:
Summary: The Dead get Un-inventive
Review: The drastically increasing population of the living dead has reached such a critical points that they might wipe out humanity completely. The social and psychological allusions Romero made in the two previous movies are now ominously coming true. Instead of humans fighting along side one another against the zombie threat, the human inclination to question authority, bicker over petty details, and become obsessed with only self-preservation has lead to the fatal dis-unity of the human race. These dire circumstances allow Romero's zombie ranks to grow and grow and grow. With such a grim obstacle-facing mankind, Romero starts his story by showing a large metropolitan landscape devoid of all life except for thousands and thousands of the living dead. As Day's story progresses, Romero begins authoring his most intense critique of modern society yet. Romero is known for his ability to work in culture and society issues deep within the subtext of his work. The lack of unity and submission to fear in Night or the comparison of mall shoppers to the living dead in Dawn are great examples of his directorial style. In all three of the Dead films, the decades the films were composed in were portrayed fairly well within the macabre boundaries of Romero's grisly canvas. Each film captured the genesis of its personality from the decade it was birthed in. The paranoia and fear of world decimation of the 60's, the jubilant pro-violent self-preservation of the 70's, and the birth of yuppie ignorant conservatism of the 80's. Tom Savini again supplies us with utterly unbelievable zombie special effects. The zombies now have a de-composed look suggesting that quite a bit of time has passed between Night and Day of the Dead. Beyond all of the societal commentary and analysis, Day remains the least engaging of the Dead films. Due to the tremendous lack of funds needed to film Romero's original Day of the Dead script (estimated to have cost 10 million dollars), Romero had to severely tone done his story and focus on 80's society. The result is a haphazard film with a compelling story, touches of brilliance, and virtuoso grisly special effects. However, the film lacks any new focus to necessitate more zombie gore. Not to mention the characters are so one-dimensional and unpleasant that the audience can't care for Romero's characters with the same passion they had in the past. With such lofty expectations produced from the previous two classics, Romero was unable to explore any new philosophical ground with his zombies. Only the inclusion on "Bub" adds anything to the whole of the landscape of Romero's Zombie-filled world. The results lead to so-so conclusion to Romero's Classic Zombie Trilogy. P.S. George what's the deal with that tacky uninspired ending?
Rating:
Summary: The Last Film In Romero's Classic Trilogy?
Review: In 1985, George A. Romero released the third enstallment in his Zombie trilogy entitled Day of the Dead. The film starring Joe Pilato, Lori Cadelle, Jaralath Conroy, and Terry Alexander is actually a quite effective apocalyptic continuation of the grim circumstances exisitng in Romero's previous Dawn of the Dead. The drastically increasing population of the living dead has reached such a critical point that they might wipe out humanity completely. The social and psychological allusions Romero made in the two previous movies are now omniously coming true. Instead of humans fighting along side one another against the zombie threat, the human inclination to question authority, bicker over petty details, and become obsessed with only self-preservation has lead to the fatal dis-unity of the human race. These dire cirumstances allow Romero's zombie ranks to grow and grow and grow. With such a grim obstacle facing mankind, Romero starts his story by showing a large metropolitian landscape devoid of all life except for thousands and thousands of the living dead. As Day's story progresses, Romero begins authoring his most intense critique of modern society yet. Romero is known for his ability to work in culture and society issues deep within the subtext of his work. The lack of unity and submission to fear in Night or the comparison of mall shoppers to the living dead in Dawn are great examples of his directorial style. In all three of the Dead films, the decades the films were composed in were portrayed fairly well within the macabre boundaries of Romero's grisly canvas. Each film captured the genesis of it's personality from the decade it was birthed in. The paranoia and fear of world decimation of the 60's, the jubliant pro-violent self preservation of the 70's, and the birth of yuppie ignorant conservatism of the 80's. Tom Savini again supplies us with utterly unbelevable zombie special effects. The zombies now have a de-compossed look suggesting that quite a bit of time has passed between Night and Day of the Dead. Beyond all of the societal commentary and analysis, Day remains the least engaging of the Dead films. Due to the tremendous lack of funds needed to film Romero's orginal Day of the Dead script (estimated to have costed 10 million dollars), Romero had to severely tone done his story and foucs on 80's society. The result is a haphazard film with a compelling story, touches of brillance, and virtuoso grisly special effects. However,the film lacks any new focus to necessitate more zombie gore. Not to mention the characters are so one-dimensional and unpleasant that the audience can't care for Romero's characters with the same passion they had in the past. With such lofty expectations produced from the previous two classics, Romero was unable to explore any new philosophical ground with his zombies. Only the inclusion on "Bub" adds anything to the whole of the landscape of Romero's Zombie-filled world. The results lead to so-so conclusion to Romero's Classic Zombie Trilogy. P.S. George what's the deal with that tacky uninspired ending?
Rating:
Summary: Zombie-Horror at it's best
Review: George A. Romero's third Zombie-Movie is my favourite Horrorfilm. Tom Savini made great FX. Gore-Effects at it's best. But the most important are the great actors! I've never seen a Movie that combined both: great acting and good Gore-FX! Because of that I can only say: the best Horrorfilm ever been made!
Rating:
Summary: Wonderfully executed!
Review: Day of the Dead, the third in George A. Romero's Living Dead series is a spectacular zombie film that offers a lot of delicious gore from the one and the only Tom Savini, brilliant but heavily overlooked performances by the cast, and great music. I love this movie, it has everything to please zombie-lovers! Also, watch the great quotes...in which are very, very memorable to hardcore horror fans. I actually find this film superior to the original 1968 classic, due to the great effects and even more interesting characters. Here's how I rate the Romero zombie flicks... 1. Dawn 2. Day 3. Night
Rating: 
Summary: Romero at his worst
Review: I think George Romero led the way on zombie movies with his night of the living dead (1968) and then with his sequel, dawn of the dead (1978). However, and particularly for those of you that have seen the above two films, one simply cannot understand how someone with the antecedents of Romero may end producing a movie that is so bad and uninteresting like day of the dead. When I began watching the movie I blamed on the actors for spending so much time in their screamed and senseless discussions about who's the boss in their underground world. However, I think the script is probably what's really bad about this movie. The whole story was hardly planned. For instance, the scientist hoping to control the behavior of zombies and his 'humanized', almost 'chimpy' zombie are simply pathetic. In day of the dead you will see what really makes a horror film to be a bad movie: people behaving in ways you will not under the same circumstances. I hope George Romero fills himself indebted to their fans and give us a real sequel in the future. Overall, rent the movie and watch the last 30 minutes of it where you will find the only good thing about it, some interesting gore.
|
