So, you found Night of the Living Dead boring, eh? Well, first, welcome to the club. Each FI before you felt the same way. In fact, during the first FI, many students slept, the two teachers freaked-out, and the whole ordeal came to a head with a "heart-felt talk." Ahhh...the memories. How's that for undead cannibals really bringing people together?
On one hand, your reaction is nothing new. On the other hand--how DARE you?
Have we taught you nothing? You claim to love zombies but hate this movie? Romero is the knight of the living dead. No him---no zombies! One doesn't exist without the other. Without this movie, there is no Shaun of the Dead. No 28 Days Later. No nothing. Eat some gruel. Go to bed.
Do you claim to love rock 'n' roll but hate Elvis? Oh...you do? Well, my little whipper snappers, you shouldn't!
Here's how art works. You can choose to hate something influential. I hate Deep Purple. I hate the Yankees. I hated There's Something About Mary. That's ok. I'm allowed. Art exists to demand preference. It exists to rouse debate on what is pleasing to us aesthetically.
But I am aware of each of those things. I have exposed myself to them. My judgement is based on awareness at least...analysis at best! Since I have been exposed to them, I can do certain important things. I can recognize their importance. I can posit an opinion.
See?
NOLD is the Elvis of zombie movies. It is certainly your right to NOT choose to rock out to Elvis records. Maybe Elvis doesn't rock as hard as you are accustomed to rocking. But you must RESPECT Elvis' influence. Period. Kiss the ring. I won't talk rock 'n' roll with someone who never heard an Elvis song, and I WILL NOT talk horror with someone who ignored NOLD. As I will NOT ROLL ON SHABBAT!! Got it?
Have we taught you nothing? You claim to love zombies but hate this movie? Romero is the knight of the living dead. No him---no zombies! One doesn't exist without the other. Without this movie, there is no Shaun of the Dead. No 28 Days Later. No nothing. Eat some gruel. Go to bed.
Do you claim to love rock 'n' roll but hate Elvis? Oh...you do? Well, my little whipper snappers, you shouldn't!
Here's how art works. You can choose to hate something influential. I hate Deep Purple. I hate the Yankees. I hated There's Something About Mary. That's ok. I'm allowed. Art exists to demand preference. It exists to rouse debate on what is pleasing to us aesthetically.
But I am aware of each of those things. I have exposed myself to them. My judgement is based on awareness at least...analysis at best! Since I have been exposed to them, I can do certain important things. I can recognize their importance. I can posit an opinion.
See? NOLD is the Elvis of zombie movies. It is certainly your right to NOT choose to rock out to Elvis records. Maybe Elvis doesn't rock as hard as you are accustomed to rocking. But you must RESPECT Elvis' influence. Period. Kiss the ring. I won't talk rock 'n' roll with someone who never heard an Elvis song, and I WILL NOT talk horror with someone who ignored NOLD. As I will NOT ROLL ON SHABBAT!! Got it?
Romero elevated the game. He exploited us. He showed us what other horror film-makers feared showing. He made two of the most important moves in horror film history.
HE MADE ZOMBIES COOL. By making them scary. By taking the dead-eyed creepiness and adding the most important element -- FLESH-EATING!
Before Romero, movie zombies were nothing. Lame aliens and slow-moving voodoo dudes. They were like being chased by enslaved office workers. Seriously. if a zombie got you, it just wrestle you to the ground. Maybe hit you with a shoe. Honestly. They were no more dangerous than any big lumbering lummox. Easy to evade and avoid. And if by some crazy happenstance, you DID get caught...bump on the noggin. No worse.
Romero turned zombies into cannibals...and holy game changer! Now they were scary. Why? Cause aren't you, as a rule, scared of things that can eat you? Ghouls. Creeps. Flat out trouble. All flaking flesh and animal moans. "They're dead. They're all messed up." That was Romero.
Am I lying? Disprove me. Find me a cinematic zombie prior to NOLD that remotely resembles what you know and love today.
Thought so.
Zombies are still not that much trouble one on one. But Romero invented the zombie infestation. And in doing so made a film that was anxiety-inducing as well as "jump" scary. The zombies, like life, win by overwhelming you. And this delicious metaphor has kept American society shuffling the zombie walk ever since.
Everyone in the modern zombie film is gonna die. Prior to Romero, the horror movie world was going to end in the rubber hands of Mothra or some giant bug. End of the world movies involved a lot of running and screaming. But not a lot of actual threat. Godzilla would run through a building, and people would just scatter around it magically. Certainly no on-screen dying. And certainly no on-screen dying because a character got eaten by a woman in your Nana's house dress.
In Romero's apocalypse, death is coming. Inevitable. Like the viewers, the characters WILL die. It's just a matter of when. The suspense comes in whether or not they will die at this very moment. Sound familiar? Zombies are the plague. And the plague is scary real.
Also, Romero's apocalypse bought with it the consideration and pontification of death. Characters faced their mortality. They discussed it. They allowed it to bring out the worst in them. Cue The Walking Dead. Viola! Instant genre.
On top of all that, NOLD had a message to offer. It stood as testament to the "unrest" of the wildest, most radically chaotic social times in our nation's history. Romero played with convention. He slammed the man. Indicted capitalism and government. He made a socially conscious horror movie. He made a youth movement horror movie. He pushed the envelope. And that is that. Watch the dang movie 'fore I hurt somebody.
Everyone in the modern zombie film is gonna die. Prior to Romero, the horror movie world was going to end in the rubber hands of Mothra or some giant bug. End of the world movies involved a lot of running and screaming. But not a lot of actual threat. Godzilla would run through a building, and people would just scatter around it magically. Certainly no on-screen dying. And certainly no on-screen dying because a character got eaten by a woman in your Nana's house dress.
In Romero's apocalypse, death is coming. Inevitable. Like the viewers, the characters WILL die. It's just a matter of when. The suspense comes in whether or not they will die at this very moment. Sound familiar? Zombies are the plague. And the plague is scary real.
Also, Romero's apocalypse bought with it the consideration and pontification of death. Characters faced their mortality. They discussed it. They allowed it to bring out the worst in them. Cue The Walking Dead. Viola! Instant genre.
On top of all that, NOLD had a message to offer. It stood as testament to the "unrest" of the wildest, most radically chaotic social times in our nation's history. Romero played with convention. He slammed the man. Indicted capitalism and government. He made a socially conscious horror movie. He made a youth movement horror movie. He pushed the envelope. And that is that. Watch the dang movie 'fore I hurt somebody.
Just a guess, Tod Browning?
ReplyDeletegoing off of memory lol
First off I feel pretty privileged to be mentioned in this post. I just rewatched Night of the Living Dead earlier this month along with a slew of other horror classics. One thing that needs to be known to all is that Romero literally started a chain event in history where directors brought the horror into the light and let you see the blood, guts, and terrible things that would have been shown off screen. Tobe Hooper had gone to see it and was thrilled by it and a few years later directed Texas Chainsaw Massacre. John Carpenter and Wes Craven both were influenced by this work of art.
ReplyDeleteNow as for the first American Filmmaker... I'm sitting here clueless... Hitchcock not only was a Britt but was more thriller. Rosemary's Baby came out the same year as Night of the Living Dead but Polanski is far from American. Lon Chaney was an actor and not a filmmaker. I'll assume James is correct.
One last thing that needs to be said is, that of all films to not watch or pay attention to why this one? I remember horror fans and none horror fans alike not paying attention to this movie. I feel cinema is great because it causes us to feel something. Raiders of the Lost Ark is my favorite film of all time because no movie will make you so excited and thrilled and scared and happy. It sparks emotion. Night of the LIving Dead does the same thing. So sit down and watch it with the lights off and enjoy when you need to walk down the dark hallway to go to the bathroom that night. You'll end up learning something from this movie in the end.
And the zombie elvis is a nice touch, by the way
ReplyDeleteding, ding, ding...so proud of you guys!
ReplyDeleteWell said, Paul.
I don't see how anyone could be bored by "NOTLD".
ReplyDeleteIt's a perfect movie, with a spectacular ending.
Romero was at the top of his game here.
Paul, when you mention 'the blood, guts, and terrible things that would have been shown off-screen,' and then John Carpenter and Tobe Hooper...you can't be referring to "the Texas Chainsaw Massacre" and "Halloween", can you? They're two of the most blood-less horror films out there.
Craven does always keep it pretty juicy, though.
It is true that those films are very bloodless but there are also plenty of things that traditional Hollywood would have never brought to the light prior to Romero. Take John Carpenter's The Thing (my favorite), he brings the monster out for all of us to see what a crazy messed up monster it really is. The best part is despite showing us what is causing all this violence that is occurring on screen, he builds suspense because The Thing can also look just like one of us. While plenty of the filmmakers after Romero didn't always have blood and guts, their films were kicked up a notch in intensity and all of them have had problems with the MPA Rating system.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.baylor.edu/baylorpress/excerpt/104-excerpt.pdf
ReplyDeleteThanks for the procrastination material Costal. It was a very interesting read. Also check your email.
ReplyDeleteGotcha! Was confused by your above phrasing! Good point in regards to
ReplyDeleteCarpenter's "The Thing," which is my 2nd fav film by him (after "Halloween," of course).
Just a little bit of help to the current FI.
ReplyDeleteNight of the Living Dead came out the year 1968.
1968 was a tumultuous time.
Tet Offensive, Democratic National Convention Riots in Chicago, Civil Right Protest- deaths in South Carolina, Black Panther protest death in Oakland, Coup in Panama, "Prague Spring,"
These are things to keep in mind. Try looking up old wartime news reels or look up images from the civil rights riots/protest. The images are very similar to those of Night of the Living Dead.
i never found night of the living dead boring, i don't remember watching this in the F.I. last year
ReplyDeleteThat's because you guys weren't as cool as The Golden Age of the Film Institute. But it's ok Zander, we still love you.
ReplyDeletehaha thanks Paul, at least your guys still love me
ReplyDeleteHow come we didn't watch any zombie movies last year? A zombie section would have been just as good as (or probably better than) the vampire stuff... Zombies are pretty much one of the few unstoppable problems that show up in film, which makes it a very interesting genre...
ReplyDelete