decisions, decisions...

[shootemindehead]

"Day of the Dead", hands down. If ever there was a film that displayed the utter dispair of the so called "zombie apocalypse", it's that film. Nothing comes close to it. Some think that "Dawn of the Dead" is a better film, but I've always disagreed. "Day of the Dead" beats the crap out of "Dawn of the Dead" by a huge margin. These days "Dawn of the Dead" looks utterly ridiculous at times and while there's a lot to discuss about "Dawn of the Dead", "Day of the Dead" yields far greater discussion IMO. It truly is a disturbing movie. ...and I've yet to see anyone laugh at it.

[Zomby Woof]

"Day of the Dead... If ever there was a film that displayed the utter dispair of the so called "zombie apocalypse", it's that film. Nothing comes close to it." You hit the nail on the head. Day is great in that regard. My only knock on this flick is the portrayal of the military. I’m no gung-ho army type, but Steel & his cronies are caricatures of the worst sort. I’ve always thought the film could have been much stronger if they’d been portrayed more seriously. Imagine Rhodes in command of a unit like the one in 28 Days Later – well disciplined but on the verge breaking down. That could ratchet the intensity up a notch! Having said that, I think Day would be my second choice.

[shootemindehead]

You hit the nail on the head. Day is great in that regard. My only knock on this flick is the portrayal of the military. I’m no gung-ho army type, but Steel & his cronies are caricatures of the worst sort. I’ve always thought the film could have been much stronger if they’d been portrayed more seriously. Imagine Rhodes in command of a unit like the one in 28 Days Later – well disciplined but on the verge breaking down. That could ratchet the intensity up a notch! Having said that, I think Day would be my second choice. When you think about it, only Steele is a "gung-ho" mouthy type. His sidekick, Rickles is just falling apart and using cheap laughs to offset everything. Miguel is just falling apart. The rest of the soldiers (Greg Nicatero etc) are just guys coping....and Rhodes is a psychopath, who'd still be a psychopath if he wasn't in the military. I think the soldier characters are pretty good in "Day of the Dead". If I have a criticism of any character in "Day of the Dead", it would be Dr. Logan. But Richard Liberty is just so good in the film that I can overlook the mad scientist cliche very easilly.

[Zomby Woof]

I guess I should have been a little clearer. It wasn’t my intention to suggest that Steel & his gang we’re gung-ho types. To the contrary, I meant that while I don't think it's necessary to portray the military as all-spit-&-polish, Steel & his gang seemed so far removed from any semblance of discipline that they came across as cartoonish. That, IMHO, is the one weak area of the film.

[shootemindehead]

I guess I should have been a little clearer. It wasn’t my intention to suggest that Steel & his gang we’re gung-ho types. To the contrary, I meant that while I don't think it's necessary to portray the military as all-spit-&-polish, Steel & his gang seemed so far removed from any semblance of discipline that they came across as cartoonish. That, IMHO, is the one weak area of the film. But, who's around to control discipline? The structure has broken down and they seem to have given up. One of them is even growing dope outside. It seems to me that the soldiers are just existing as best they can and without an officer to control discipline, it'll quickly break down, as in real life. It's clear from the dialogue that the last officer they had wasn't much use and Rhodes is just nuts. That isn't much for the men to look up to. I'd say the main function of the military in the bunker was to round up subjects for Dr. Logan and to thin out their number at the gates. The rest of the time they were probably pretty idle and the pressure of day to day life in the bunker is clearly too much, hence the brawl to let off steam in the mid section of the film. Besides, aren't the military characters in "Day of the Dead" supposed to be reservists or something? Part timers, probably called up as the crisis got worse. They're probably struggling with the fact their families and loved ones are dead, they don't want to be where they are and that they are themselves in a hopeless situation and it's getting worse. All in all, I think Romero's decision to make the military character's respond as individual humans was spot on and if he decided to have them adhere to some military code of discipline, it would have been the weaker move in my opinion.

[blind2d]

But, who's around to control discipline? The structure has broken down and they seem to have given up. One of them is even growing dope outside. It seems to me that the soldiers are just existing as best they can and without an officer to control discipline, it'll quickly break down, as in real life. It's clear from the dialogue that the last officer they had wasn't much use and Rhodes is just nuts. That isn't much for the men to look up to. I'd say the main function of the military in the bunker was to round up subjects for Dr. Logan and to thin out their number at the gates. The rest of the time they were probably pretty idle and the pressure of day to day life in the bunker is clearly too much, hence the brawl to let off steam in the mid section of the film. Besides, aren't the military characters in "Day of the Dead" supposed to be reservists or something? Part timers, probably called up as the crisis got worse. They're probably struggling with the fact their families and loved ones are dead, they don't want to be where they are and that they are themselves in a hopeless situation and it's getting worse. All in all, I think Romero's decision to make the military character's respond as individual humans was spot on and if he decided to have them adhere to some military code of discipline, it would have been the weaker move in my opinion. Couldn't have said it better myself (and glad I didn't... that's a lot of text!) Retardless, your essay is spot on in every whichway. I just thought of Rhodes' face when Logan asks him where he'll go... pure terror! Priceless! Thank you for such a great post.

[triste realtà]

I guess I should have been a little clearer. It wasn’t my intention to suggest that Steel & his gang we’re gung-ho types. To the contrary, I meant that while I don't think it's necessary to portray the military as all-spit-&-polish, Steel & his gang seemed so far removed from any semblance of discipline that they came across as cartoonish. That, IMHO, is the one weak area of the film. Every time of the year when I have Dawn and then Day on heavy rotation, I get some kind of epiphany about the movies, however small it may be. And the latest one is that every single character in Night Dawn Day Creepshow and probably other Romero films is a stereotype on steroids or whatever the word is where the character is completely over the top "cartoonish". Peter is black panther, Steven is clutz, Logan is mad doctor, John is Jamaican laid back (I'm suprised they didn't have him smoking foot long spliffs), Billy-boy is drunken Irishman, etc.etc. I like it that way cause it's more like a comic book but we should recognize that this was done on purpose for whatever reason and it applies to every single character in every story.

[shootemindehead]

Cheers B2D. Though Zombie Woof's opinion is shared by a lot of people and that's fair enough. I too love Rhodes' expression when "egghead" points out the futility of suggesting that they can upsticks and bugger off somewhere and the "blow the piss out of 'em" remark is brilliant. Every time of the year when I have Dawn and then Day on heavy rotation, I get some kind of epiphany about the movies, however small it may be. And the latest one is that every single character in Night Dawn Day Creepshow and probably other Romero films is a stereotype on steroids or whatever the word is where the character is completely over the top "cartoonish". Peter is black panther, Steven is clutz, Logan is mad doctor, John is Jamaican laid back (I'm suprised they didn't have him smoking foot long spliffs), Billy-boy is drunken Irishman, etc.etc. I like it that way cause it's more like a comic book but we should recognize that this was done on purpose for whatever reason and it applies to every single character in every story. I'm not too sure about that. I used to think that, of couse...Billy the Irishman had to like a drink and Logan was a mad doc stereotype. But on subsequent viewings, I've seen Logan not as "mad" in the stereotypical way, but losing his grip due to the extremity of th esituation that confronts him. In fact, all of the characters (except maybe John) seem to be barely holding it together. As far as Billy is concerned, him liking a drink is not a problem or even a cliche to me. Speaking as an Irishman, I know damn well that I'd be knocking back the suds big time, if I found myself in his position.

[MoonSylver]

Every time of the year when I have Dawn and then Day on heavy rotation, I get some kind of epiphany about the movies, however small it may be. And the latest one is that every single character in Night Dawn Day Creepshow and probably other Romero films is a stereotype on steroids or whatever the word is where the character is completely over the top "cartoonish". Peter is black panther, Steven is clutz, Logan is mad doctor, John is Jamaican laid back (I'm suprised they didn't have him smoking foot long spliffs), Billy-boy is drunken Irishman, etc.etc. I like it that way cause it's more like a comic book but we should recognize that this was done on purpose for whatever reason and it applies to every single character in every story. Bingo. I used to share Zombie Woof's sentiments (& still do in some small way depending on how I approach the film), it was an aspect of the film that always bugged me a bit when viewed in LOGICAL, RATIONAL, UN-E-MOTIONAL terms ( )but a few years ago when I considered the "comic book approach" Romero was always stated that he was going for, I had the same epiphany you did. It doesn't stick out quite as glaringly as it does in Dawn, which was rendered a little more comic book accidentally with it's day-glo colors of blue zombies & red blood, but it's there. One thing that hit me was that Day was made a few years after Creepshow. Though it's more pronounced in Creepshow there is a DEFINITE similarity in the LIGHTING in some scenes (the caves for example) where a LOT of blues & reds are used that gives it a very comic book vibe. So, yeah, viewed through that lens, it takes on a whole different slant.

[blind2d]

One thing that hit me was that Day was made a few years after Creepshow. Though it's more pronounced in Creepshow there is a DEFINITE similarity in the LIGHTING in some scenes (the caves for example) where a LOT of blues & reds are used that gives it a very comic book vibe. So, yeah, viewed through that lens, it takes on a whole different slant. Whoa, I just watched Day and Creepshow recently, and you're totally right! This is probably a "duh!" thing for everyone else, but... yeah, it's totally similar! Zombies... it's just inhuman how awesome they is.

[Doc]

(BTW: My sister laughed at NOLD68 too. What's a matter with kids today?) How could anyone laugh at NOTLD? It is most definitely the most horrifying not only of his series but, zombie/walking dead film ever made.

[clanglee]

Yeah, at the screening last month, people were laughing in the oddest places. Just the cheese acting factor I think. George did answer a question about that subject. Can't remember whaty his answer was though. look it up later.

[shootemindehead]

If they we laughing at 1968's "Night of the Living Dead", I can understand why. Judith O'Dea's acting is a farce in parts and to a modern audience (especially one who's never seen it before) it can be very clunky overall. It's still a fine film for the right people, with a humdinger ending. An ending BTW, which tops Romero's choice for "Dawn of the Dead" by a country mile. I think that film would have been much better if Peter and Fran had decided to knock themselves off in the end. Or maybe Fran hears Peter's gunshot, slowly closes the door of the chopper, sits for a while as the camera pans across the living dead pawing at the helicopter's glass and then she slowly lifts off into the dawn...roll credits (and the gonk). Or...we cut from Fran's face as we hear Peter's gunshot to the room where Peter is. His brains are all over the wall and he's slumped backwards as the living dead slowy enter the room and make their way across to where his body is. We then hear another single gunshot from outside and cut to a medium shot of the dead reaching the chopper, its engine still running. But it's clear that Fran has topped herself. As the zombies reach the chopper, it cuts to Romero's dawn shot...roll credits (and the gonk). As it stands, I've heard people belly laugh at the silly music which accompanies Peter's sudden about face and half-assed karate moves

[Yojimbo]

How could anyone laugh at NOTLD? It is most definitely the most horrifying not only of his series but, zombie/walking dead film ever made. I agree, I have found this frightening since I first saw it at eight. But maybe it is because I recall nostalgically my first exposure to NOLD that I still find it frightening. And, plus, the audiences of today are kind of jaded, and NOLD does not stand out in their minds as a first-time frightening landmark as it does for me.

[MoonSylver]

Yeah, at the screening last month, people were laughing in the oddest places. Just the cheese acting factor I think. George did answer a question about that subject. Can't remember whaty his answer was though. look it up later. Oddly, I still think the acting holds up well, but maybe it's because I understand the context of the era it was made in, the miniscule budget, the mix of working & amateur actors, etc.