As a big zombie horror fan, I have to recommend that you watch the *1990 remake* of this film, which is one of my top 3 favorite zombie films. And also one of the best remakes ever made, in my opinion.
@@JJCommentary I guess it depends on a person's personal taste and opinion. But, yes, I would say it's better than this one. I like Romero's original, don't get me wrong. It's a classic that was groundbreaking for it's time. But I like the remake even more and I think it would be something you would find much more to your own liking, as well. It was directed by Romero's friend, Tom Savini, the legendary makeup artist.
@@TehRodane I happen to think it is and, yes, I'm serious. In fact, the remake even has my favorite scene out of all zombie and horror films in general. The original Dawn of the Dead is great, too. That's the other film in my top three zombie films.
You have to remember it's a low budget independent movie from 1968. The crying helpless woman was a thing. And before this movie zombies just walked with their arms out in front. There was no zombie lore as we know it now before this film. This was also the first horror with a black leading man.... which kinda explains the ending.
@@JJCommentary maybe it doesn't if you aren't used to the style of that time period. Once you gotto the 60s and going back, acting and movie making had a different style. Everyone sounded like they were from England. Like Barbara and all the women in this movie actually. It was called a Mid-Atlantic accent. A cross between a American and British accent...on purpose. These movies flowed more like plays. Lots of conversation and clues are in the dialogue as opposed to "in your face" horror. It was more about the mood. Because of the of the technology of the time films used shadows, angles, music, no music, echos, quick shots, etc. instead of depending on special effects. This movie came around the time when movies started going for realism. It's definitely a dated movie but the 1st of something would be. I watched a reaction to Halloween (84) and said "why doesn't she use her headphones?"😃 Think of it as a "period piece".
A couple of notes: At no point in the movie are the undead referred to as zombies. That connection came soon after but not in this film. Before NotLD, zombie movies were closer to what Hollywood imagined Haitian voodoo would be like, while missing the mark completely but that's another story, zombies weren't undead but mindless/will-less servants of a priest/priestess. NotLD sowed the seed for the modern undead, flesh-eating zombie. 2nd: The ending, to me anyway, is absolutely brilliant in its relentlessness. The feeling of hopelessness that builds up throughout the film is really driven home, like being hit with a massive sledgehammer just when you thought it was all safe and good. In a way, the ending is the peak horror moment of the entire film, unlike most other flicks.
oh, also, the music was not actually composed for this film, it's from a stock music library, so they were just working with what they had from other movies. Also interesting to note is that the film has always been in the public domain because of a copyright snafu. When the film's title was changed at the last minute from "Night of the Flesh Eaters" to "Night of the Living Dead", they forgot to add the copyright disclaimer and symbol in the opening credits. So the movie has made millions of dollars but the producers don't get a singe penny of it. Anyone can post it online in its entirety or release DVDs of it. That's why you see characters in other horror movies watching this one on TV.
This isn’t actually the full movie. The video you watched didn’t actually start out like that. It started with a car driving on a road to a cemetery where it showed the title. The video you watched actually cut out most of the movie making it hard to understand what was going on.
These reactions vids are for people who have seen the whole movie lol I’m not gonna upload the whole thing. This film is in the public domain, but I wasn’t talking throughout the whole thing so I cut and edited it to only include comments I liked or wanted.
Everyone loves to criticize and yell at Barbara, and from a 21st century perspective I get it, but at the time these “zombies” were not called “zombies.” In fact, the reason Night Of The Living Dead ended up in public domain is it was originally copyrighted as Night Of The Flesh Eaters. Barbara goes into shock and is mostly useless because the events of that night traumatized her in a way I suspect people of the time were; whereas, now I think we would all recognize these creatures as zombies. They most likely would have been referred to as “ghouls” in this film. Night Of The Living Dead (1968) and The Last Man On Earth (1964) created the modern zombie, bridging the gap between the Haitian, Voodoo zombie from Horror films prior to the 1960s and the zombies we know today-Rotting corpses shambling around eating people. Point is, George A. Romero didn’t know he was making a zombie film because he was inventing the genre. Technically, the creatures in The Last Man On Earth starring Vincent Price are supposed to be vampires. However, if you’re watching if with a modern lens they look and act a hell of a lot more like zombies than vampires. 1964’s The Last Man On Earth is the first adaptation of Richard Matheson’s I Am Legend, (which has been adapted twice since-both of those are pretty bad though-The Omega Man (1971) & I Am Legend (2007.) The ‘71 film was intentionally trying to distinguish itself as separate from the ‘64 adaptation, and the ‘07 film just totally missed the point. Anyway, in 2018 Criterion Collection releases an incredibly beautiful restoration of the film on DVD & Blu-ray, I highly recommend checking out that version, especially now that you’ve seen the original quality. The pacing is certainly slower, but it was slower with all films, (even 30 years ago the pacing was much slower.) The music is, I believe mostly the same in terms of the compositions, but quality has been improved-both sound and music. I don’t know if it was Romero’s intent to add the sound effects over the daughter-kills-her-mother scene but it does have the affect of distracting viewers for just a moment, because it is ridiculous that she is just lying there. The other moment in the film that annoys the hell out of me is when Judy runs out of the house “with no plan” to go to the truck with her boyfriend/partner (don’t remember if they really clarify their relationship,) and it’s because of her that he dies, (she seemed pretty competent up until that point.) The actors, if they even have any acting experience, were mostly theater actors. Nearly all of the zombies are just people who lived in the surrounding areas-a trend Romero would continue throughout the original three Dead films, (Night, Dawn, & Day.) The final act and the ending of the film is one of the strongest there is, so many films completely fall apart at that point. Romero swore his entire life he cast a black man as Ben because he was the best actor to audition, and although I definitely believe that I doubt the political significance was lost on Romero, and I feel like he leaned into it with those end credit still shots. Although Romero denies it, everyone of his films is pretty overtly delivering a political. Despite the popularity of this film and its overall success, Romero was never really given a budget for any of the films he would make, (same goes for John Carpenter.) By far, Night Of The Living Dead is one of the most successful independent films of all time, (shot outside Pittsburgh, Pa.,) and it provides solid evidence that if you want to make a movie the only thing stopping you is yourself.
As a big zombie horror fan, I have to recommend that you watch the *1990 remake* of this film, which is one of my top 3 favorite zombie films. And also one of the best remakes ever made, in my opinion.
Is it better than this one?
@@JJCommentary I guess it depends on a person's personal taste and opinion. But, yes, I would say it's better than this one. I like Romero's original, don't get me wrong. It's a classic that was groundbreaking for it's time. But I like the remake even more and I think it would be something you would find much more to your own liking, as well. It was directed by Romero's friend, Tom Savini, the legendary makeup artist.
@@LennyCash777 it's not
@@LennyCash777 are you serious?
@@TehRodane I happen to think it is and, yes, I'm serious. In fact, the remake even has my favorite scene out of all zombie and horror films in general. The original Dawn of the Dead is great, too. That's the other film in my top three zombie films.
You have to remember it's a low budget independent movie from 1968. The crying helpless woman was a thing. And before this movie zombies just walked with their arms out in front. There was no zombie lore as we know it now before this film. This was also the first horror with a black leading man.... which kinda explains the ending.
Ok thanks for explaining that. I was just seeing it through my 2020 eyes, but then doesn’t it show that it didn’t necessarily age well?
@@JJCommentary maybe it doesn't if you aren't used to the style of that time period. Once you gotto the 60s and going back, acting and movie making had a different style. Everyone sounded like they were from England. Like Barbara and all the women in this movie actually. It was called a Mid-Atlantic accent. A cross between a American and British accent...on purpose. These movies flowed more like plays. Lots of conversation and clues are in the dialogue as opposed to "in your face" horror. It was more about the mood. Because of the of the technology of the time films used shadows, angles, music, no music, echos, quick shots, etc. instead of depending on special effects. This movie came around the time when movies started going for realism. It's definitely a dated movie but the 1st of something would be. I watched a reaction to Halloween (84) and said "why doesn't she use her headphones?"😃 Think of it as a "period piece".
It has aged very well. Unfortunately, the ability of audiences to appreciate it has not.
A couple of notes: At no point in the movie are the undead referred to as zombies. That connection came soon after but not in this film. Before NotLD, zombie movies were closer to what Hollywood imagined Haitian voodoo would be like, while missing the mark completely but that's another story, zombies weren't undead but mindless/will-less servants of a priest/priestess. NotLD sowed the seed for the modern undead, flesh-eating zombie. 2nd: The ending, to me anyway, is absolutely brilliant in its relentlessness. The feeling of hopelessness that builds up throughout the film is really driven home, like being hit with a massive sledgehammer just when you thought it was all safe and good. In a way, the ending is the peak horror moment of the entire film, unlike most other flicks.
oh, also, the music was not actually composed for this film, it's from a stock music library, so they were just working with what they had from other movies.
Also interesting to note is that the film has always been in the public domain because of a copyright snafu. When the film's title was changed at the last minute from "Night of the Flesh Eaters" to "Night of the Living Dead", they forgot to add the copyright disclaimer and symbol in the opening credits. So the movie has made millions of dollars but the producers don't get a singe penny of it. Anyone can post it online in its entirety or release DVDs of it. That's why you see characters in other horror movies watching this one on TV.
This isn’t actually the full movie. The video you watched didn’t actually start out like that. It started with a car driving on a road to a cemetery where it showed the title. The video you watched actually cut out most of the movie making it hard to understand what was going on.
These reactions vids are for people who have seen the whole movie lol I’m not gonna upload the whole thing. This film is in the public domain, but I wasn’t talking throughout the whole thing so I cut and edited it to only include comments I liked or wanted.
Also....he seemed to have missed the point about the dead being UNburied
Everyone loves to criticize and yell at Barbara, and from a 21st century perspective I get it, but at the time these “zombies” were not called “zombies.” In fact, the reason Night Of The Living Dead ended up in public domain is it was originally copyrighted as Night Of The Flesh Eaters. Barbara goes into shock and is mostly useless because the events of that night traumatized her in a way I suspect people of the time were; whereas, now I think we would all recognize these creatures as zombies.
They most likely would have been referred to as “ghouls” in this film. Night Of The Living Dead (1968) and The Last Man On Earth (1964) created the modern zombie, bridging the gap between the Haitian, Voodoo zombie from Horror films prior to the 1960s and the zombies we know today-Rotting corpses shambling around eating people. Point is, George A. Romero didn’t know he was making a zombie film because he was inventing the genre.
Technically, the creatures in The Last Man On Earth starring Vincent Price are supposed to be vampires. However, if you’re watching if with a modern lens they look and act a hell of a lot more like zombies than vampires. 1964’s The Last Man On Earth is the first adaptation of Richard Matheson’s I Am Legend, (which has been adapted twice since-both of those are pretty bad though-The Omega Man (1971) & I Am Legend (2007.) The ‘71 film was intentionally trying to distinguish itself as separate from the ‘64 adaptation, and the ‘07 film just totally missed the point.
Anyway, in 2018 Criterion Collection releases an incredibly beautiful restoration of the film on DVD & Blu-ray, I highly recommend checking out that version, especially now that you’ve seen the original quality.
The pacing is certainly slower, but it was slower with all films, (even 30 years ago the pacing was much slower.) The music is, I believe mostly the same in terms of the compositions, but quality has been improved-both sound and music. I don’t know if it was Romero’s intent to add the sound effects over the daughter-kills-her-mother scene but it does have the affect of distracting viewers for just a moment, because it is ridiculous that she is just lying there. The other moment in the film that annoys the hell out of me is when Judy runs out of the house “with no plan” to go to the truck with her boyfriend/partner (don’t remember if they really clarify their relationship,) and it’s because of her that he dies, (she seemed pretty competent up until that point.)
The actors, if they even have any acting experience, were mostly theater actors. Nearly all of the zombies are just people who lived in the surrounding areas-a trend Romero would continue throughout the original three Dead films, (Night, Dawn, & Day.)
The final act and the ending of the film is one of the strongest there is, so many films completely fall apart at that point. Romero swore his entire life he cast a black man as Ben because he was the best actor to audition, and although I definitely believe that I doubt the political significance was lost on Romero, and I feel like he leaned into it with those end credit still shots. Although Romero denies it, everyone of his films is pretty overtly delivering a political.
Despite the popularity of this film and its overall success, Romero was never really given a budget for any of the films he would make, (same goes for John Carpenter.) By far, Night Of The Living Dead is one of the most successful independent films of all time, (shot outside Pittsburgh, Pa.,) and it provides solid evidence that if you want to make a movie the only thing stopping you is yourself.
Hiiii :)
Hi lol
Can you post the entire reaction
I see why he found it boring and annoying. He was so funny I can't fault him