|
Night of the Living Dead
|
List Price: $14.95
Our Price: $14.95
Availability: Usually ships in 24 hours
Manufacturer: Weinstein Company
Starring: Marilyn Eastman, Karl Hardman, Rossie Harris, Duane Jones, Judith O'Dea
Directed By: George A. Romero
|
Average Customer Rating:  
|
|
Aspect Ratio: 1.33:1
Audience Rating: Unrated
Binding: DVD
Brand: WELLSPRING/GENIUS
EAN: 0796019811743
Format: Subtitled
Label: Weinstein Company
Manufacturer: Weinstein Company
Publisher: Weinstein Company
Region Code: 1
Release Date: 2008-05-20
Running Time: 96
Studio: Weinstein Company
Theatrical Release Date: 1968
|
|
|
|
|
|
Editorial Reviews:
|
"The granddaddy of modern flesh-eating zombies" (Marjorie Baumgarten, The Austin Chronicle), George A. Romero's Night of the Living Dead still sets the standard for all indie fright flicks. This 40th Anniversary Edition, authorized by the director himself, reanimates the landmark tale of five strangers who struggle desperately against hordes of the walking undead. Remastered and loaded with all-new Special Features, Night of the Living Dead remains "a bona fide classic... still very scary after all these years" (Jason Jones, Classic-Horror.com)
|
|
|
Spotlight customer reviews:
|
Customer Rating:
Summary: NOTLD 68-40-08
Comment: This review is for the Genius 40th edition. Cover, film quality, and extras all excellent. NOTLD is a 1 zombie film, and need to be treated with respect. I own this movie on vhs, and dvd. So far the Genius Extreme is the best. NO TRUE HORROR FAN SHOULD BE WITHOUT THIS MOVIE!
Customer Rating:
Summary: NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD
Comment: This is an excellent edition of Night of the living dead because of the extras. It contains interviews with the living cast members except for Judith Ridley who played Judy.It was nice to see Barbra and Johnny back in the cemetary 40 years later.Unfortunately Duane Jones(Ben),Karl Hardman(Mr.Cooper)and Keith Wayne(Tom)are no longer with us.May they rest in peace!But it was nice to see the others talk about this classic movie! This will always be George Romero's one and only masterpiece!!The film quality is excellent considering all the bad copies of this movie out there. I will always be a loyal fan of this film and it will always remain my favorite.
Customer Rating:
Summary: Excellent Old Classic Horror
Comment: I bought this movie recently and is superb. The sound is crispy and the visual rich.
For the Extras, i was happy to watch and see for the first time most of the actors talking in the present and an interview with Duane Jones (rip).
Customer Rating:
Summary: The One Time the Living Dead were truly Terrifying
Comment: In 1968 George A. Romero took the world by storm with an incredibly violent, low-budget, horror film that introduced what would grow to be the modern day interpretation of the living dead (referred to as zombies by most modern day moviegoers). These creatures are the reanimated corpses of the recently deceased, they shuffle, moan and eat the flesh of the living, and the only ways to kill them being incineration and a fatal blow to the head (via gunshot or clubbing). Naturally these aspects would lead these monsters into being the most common form of canon-fodder in today's video games.
In recent years the zombies, due to their stupidity, and the fact that they are easy to kill, have made them nothing more than things for the heroes of a film to blow apart in increasingly gruesome manners (so long as they're zombies the MPAA does not care how the characters go about killing them). So what is it about Romero's first Dead film that makes these creatures so darn scary? Two out of the three sequels to this cult classic (the classic Dawn of the Dead, and the more resent Land of the Dead) have used these creatures to create socially satirical environments exploiting human nature, while never bringing real spine tingling moments, the concepts (at least in Dawn) were equally frightening to the horror of Night of the Living Dead, just in a more psychological aspect.
How do these pitiful excuses for monsters bring in the scares within this low-budget exploitation film? I'd have to place my bet on the claustrophobic atmosphere Romero creates within the farmhouse, where ninety-five percent of the film takes place. In films such as Dawn, and Day of the Dead the characters had a lot more maneuverability. They could run, they could hide, and easily out maneuver these slow, clumsy creatures. Here, there is no room to move about, and you can feel that there truly is no way out, and no place to hide.
The film starts as a brother and sister drive to apply the annual decoration to their father's grave. The two individuals are Barbra and Johnny, and as the two leave they are assaulted by a man. Barbra flees to a nearby farmhouse, and the story begins. Soon after she arrives she encounters a strong willed man by the name of Ben, who quickly establishes that Barbra is hysterical and must be taken care of. Taking responsibility for both their survival Ben soon boards up the doors and windows, preparing to sit the infestation out until help arrives.
During the stay they discover some more survivors living in the house's cellar. There's the eager to help young man by the name of Tom, and his loyal girlfriend Judy, and then the paranoid Harry Cooper, his wife Helen, and their ill daughter Karen. Mister Cooper instantly protests against the command of Ben, saying that they all should retreat to the cellar, because there's only one way in and out of the cellar, as opposed to the house with its many doors and windows. Ben denies this, not wanting to be enclosed in a death trap without any means of escape if things were to go badly (which you know they will). In the end it seems only ironic as to how each character meets his or her fate.
I must point out the Ben character played by Duane Jones because he is obviously the star of this film, and for good reason. Considering this was the 1960s, and racism was still a huge factor throughout the country it feels remarkable to see such a well done performance by an African American actor, with such great intensity, especially with such a low-budget. He is strong willed, and won't let people change his mind, even to the point of ignorance, but he does so with such passion we, the audience, can't help but side with him as the character, even when he is clearly wrong at times with his decisions. His survival techniques are not perfect, but with his strong attitude he is able to make the survivors inside the house side with him, over the over-cautious (yet, in all fairness, intelligent) Harry Cooper.
This film has rightfully earned its reputation as one of the best horror movies to date, and still beats out all of today's zombie films by a mile. Here the zombies really are scary, without resorting to being anything more than slow moving, clumsy beings (unlike the remake of Dawn of the Dead where they felt inclined to super power the creatures). Also, the setting is so normal it further increases the scare factor. How many people haven't been in houses like the one in this film? Imagine being trapped in one of these houses, surrounded by vicious flesh-eaters in the late hours of the night. This is where Night of the Living Dead succeeds where others of the genre have miserably fallen. If it wasn't for the original Night of the Living Dead, and Dawn of the Dead (both of which have been remade with a less positive response from critics and audiences alike) zombies would be some of the worst movie monsters ever conceived. This film innovated and created the concept of the living dead which have been embraced by mainstream audiences, and it is fitting that it is perhaps the ONLY film involving the creatures that has legitimately frightened me. Maybe it was watching it at night with the lights turned off, but I can say that few films have actually scared me when I watched it. Let me put it this way, most classic horror films that truly deserve their status don't scare me when I'm watching them, but end up poking my mind later on in the day (Examples are The Shining and the original Nightmare on Elm Street). With this film I was constantly holding my breath, and looking about the room nervously.
The reason I was frightened (and surprised) by this film was due to its incredibly fast pacing, which is very similar to the way films are made today. This film just never has its dull moments (not to say I like all action, I was just surprised how quick it was). The plot is extraordinarily simple, and could've easily been covered in thirty minutes, but Romero was careful to grab the audience in the first attack scene, and keep their attention through means of suspense and violence.
Now that brings us to the violence, and there is nothing that the undead are more associated with then excessive amounts of blood and gore. For the 1960s this film is incredibly violent, especially when it shows the undead feeding on the flesh of their victims. Being low-budget the victims are not seen being torn apart like they are in the sequels, but you still are given some disgusting shots of flesh from the bones, or fighting over intestines, which in some perverse way reminded me of people fighting over a chicken wing at a local KFC buffet. The images are just truly grotesque, maybe not to the avid, modern day gore lover, but to the common moviegoer it still holds up as being disturbing.
This is the best film of the living dead subgenre, followed closely by its sequel, Dawn of the Dead, and certainly holds up in all regards to the modern, brainless horror film. The film goes out to scare, and manages to pull it off, even to this day. Though the zombies are most associated with gore, and for the 60s this film surely had it, this is a film with more brain than blood, and that's why it has terrified people for so long, and will continue to do so, even as the creatures continue to become even less threatening through video games and modern interpretations (which happen to be video game based, for the most part). With their decline as an actual icon of terror, at least we can still return to the gut wrenching human struggle, and terror of George A. Romero's definitive horror picture.
5/5 stars; a classic that has endured the test of time with more strength, emotionally, and in the form of pure terror, than many films of the same era which possessed a larger budgets, certainly being on par with some of Hitchcock's greats.
Customer Rating:
Summary: The Best of the Colored Versions
Comment: This is by far the best of the colorized versions of this film.
They did a pretty good job with it overall, although there are some spots were it seems weird (the car is bright orange and looks like the General Lee from Dukes of Hazzard...and whats up with the psychodelic colored walls???) it is solid overall. The fire is mesmerizing looking, but Ben's skin tone isn't quite right (at least i hope not).
The quality of the picture isn't bad, but it still is not as sharp as some of the remastered black and white versions of this film. so this version is a little more blurry, but not enough to detract from the overall enjoyment of what you're looking at.
The movie itself is unchanged. No new cuts, edits, or soundtracks, just the original stuff.
The bonus features are lame, and the commentary track is retarded and not even worth listening too.
Basically, if you want to see what this movie is like in color, buy this one. It actually makes it feel like a whole new movie, and you find yourself thinking ahead and trying to guess what color various things in the film are going to end up being.
I think overall they did a good job, and it is worthy of a place in my Romero collection.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
