The Crazies.

Review #1901: The Crazies.

Cast: 

Lane Carroll (Judy), Will McMillan (David), Harold Wayne Jones (Clank), Lloyd Hollar (Colonel Peckem), Lynn Lowry (Kathy), Richard Liberty (Artie), Richard France (Dr. Watts), Harry Spillman (Major Ryder), Will Disney (Dr. Brookmyre), and Edith Bell (Lab Technician) Directed by George A. Romero (#738 - Night of the Living Dead (1968), #1155 - Dawn of the Dead (1978), and #1588 - Day of the Dead)

Review: 

If I gave you a couple of guesses as to what George A. Romero directed after Night of the Living Dead (1968), you probably would struggle a bit before giving up. Go figure, the two films that followed them were not horror films. There's Always Vanilla was released in 1971 as his only romantic comedy, and Season of the Witch was released in 1972 as a feminist film that got cut into a softcore porn film (never doubt the gall of independent releasers). And then of course this film followed those, a horror film that was shot for $275,000 in the towns of Evans City and Zelienople in Pennsylvania. The film is based on a screenplay called "The Mad People" that Paul McCollough had written. There was interest from both the producer and Romero to make the film, albeit with changes made by Romero. The screenplay did have a bioweapon released on accident in a small town with a coverup and revolt, but apparently the screenplay was more existential than horror, since it focused on the townspeople rather than the military. I can definitely see where the interest may lie better with trying to cut to the chase in chaos rather than focusing on implications. There was a mix of both professional and nonprofessional actors (such having the special effects technician play the husband acting against the kids of the cinematographer in the opening sequence) that did their own stunts while a good deal of the audio mixing was done in post-production. The movie was a failure at the box office, owing in part due to ineffective marketing (the movie was released as "Code Name: Trixie" in some markets). A remake was commissioned in 2010, released in the middle of other movies involving threats of sickness in Outbreak (1995) and Contagion (2011), and Romero served as an executive producer. Romero followed this film with the thriller The Amusement Park (premiered in 1975 to one festival and nothing else) and two horror films with Martin (1978) and Dawn of the Dead (1978). 

It is the raw immediacy of the film when it comes to mixing both social subtext and horror that makes it a curious cult classic, one that looks better and better for what it reaches for in the horror of chaos rather than something made with glossy or lofty ambition. It certainly helps that the ending doesn't play it particularly safe by the time it finishes its 103-minute runtime. In crisis, you really can't tell who the crazy one is, as one sees in a movie wrapped in paranoia and perhaps a bit of dark comedy, where people will either recess into their darkest desires or end up shooting at tons of folks in the name of order. One can look at it something quite relevant to now or look upon the possible comparisons to the Vietnam War, at least when you think about the fact that one of the characters is depicted lighting themselves on fire. It inspires flashes of debate over what side you find yourself on in perspective when it comes to people trying to do their job with plenty of resistance versus townspeople who are thrust into chaos with a lack of timing and everything (so yes, do you find favor with folks who get stabbed by old ladies or people who get shot if they resist and run?). In a nutshell: When things go to hell, they really can go to hell in a hurry. As with Living Dead, the acting is fairly suitable in mild expression when compared to the surrounding terror. McMillan, Carroll, and Jones make up the key trio that meet their task head on in frantic timing that works to the pacing of the movie rather than bog it down, where their drama does seem to matter. The beleaguered Hollar is one of the highlights, one that carries tension on his shoulders with righteous timing to make a quality tragic role. France (an occasional actor when not writing plays or reviews) generates the irritated confidence required here as the sane man in hell, while Liberty and Lowry close out the general focus decently. The climax is bittersweet and utterly dead-on with leaving things where they are for the audience to use their imagination (cynical or not) rather than play it easy. It does play a bit loose with its pacing at times, but the moments of horror (blood or not) do help to keep things with steam, and I think it qualifies as something that works the right angle in wry observation without pandering or cheap tricks. It may have been under-appreciated in its time, but a near half-century since the release of this film has only served to make it better and better to look upon in the documents of horror, imperfect or not. 

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Day of the Dead.

Review #1588: Day of the Dead.

Cast: 

Lori Cardille (Dr. Sarah Bowman), Joseph Pilato (Captain Henry Rhodes), Terry Alexander (John), Jarlath Conroy (William "Bill" McDermott), Richard Liberty (Dr. Matthew "Frankenstein" Logan), Anthony Dileo Jr. (Pvt. Miguel Salazar), Sherman Howard (Bub), Gary Howard Klar (Pvt. Steel), Ralph Marrero (Pvt. Rickles), John Amplas (Dr. Fisher), and Phillip G. Kellams (Pvt. Miller) Written and Directed by George A. Romero (#738 - Night of the Living Dead (1968) and #1155 - Dawn of the Dead (1978))

Review: 

"I just wanted to make a film about something extraordinary that is happening and the people are unable to grasp it. They continue to argue about stupid things instead of recognizing that there’s something really awful going on. So that’s what I wanted, and I thought, ‘What if the dead don’t stay dead and what if they were going around eating people?’ That was my idea of something awful!”

When it comes to the first zombie film, the general argument is that White Zombie (1932) was the first one to be released, and the subsequent decade that followed resulted in other "zombie" films like I Walked with a Zombie (1943). However, the latter half of the 20th century found a new voice for zombie films, one that has generally led to him being nicknamed the "Father of the Zombie Film." That man was George A. Romero. Romero found an appreciation of film as a child growing up in New York City, with one film that shaped him being The Tales of Hoffmann (1951), which he appreciated for the power of visual media that could be experimented with a film like this (as done by the famed duo of Michael Powell and Emeric Pressburger). He attended and graduated from Carnegie Mellon University in 1960 and moved to doing projects in commercial work for the next few years (one of which being work with Mister Rogers' Neighborhood). Alongside his friend John Russo and Russell Streiner, they aspired to make a horror movie together, which they would do with various producers for a small budget in Pittsburgh. That film, written by Romero and Russo, was Night of the Living Dead (1968). Its grisly effects alongside its devastating story about human nature at the forefront of an apocalypse proved to be a classic of independent cinema and for horror as a whole. Ten years passed before the USA/Italy co-production of Dawn of the Dead (1978), which is thought to be as compelling as the earlier film from a decade prior if not better. Romero mixed horror with drama in the second gap between "Living Dead" films with Knightriders (1981) and Creepshow (1982, a film on the waitlist for quite some time) before his aspiration to make "the Gone with the Wind of zombie films" with this feature, which he wrote and directed.

Romero described this film as a tragedy involving lost communication and chaos within a small "pie slice of society." The tragedy besides that is the fact that Romero had to reduce his original intent when producers curtailed the budget that led to reduction of the script by Romero, who aspired for a unrated version while United Film Distribution Company balked at the idea of doing an estimated $7 million project even with an R-rating - this led to Romero cutting his script (reportedly around 200 pages) to make for a film that could be done on $3.5 million. With the 1968 film, it dealt with an assault on a farmhouse with a growing spread of un-dead, with the 1978 film dealt with a larger scale crisis that had an assault on a shopping mall. Here, we have a film where the humans really are on the run (estimated to be about 400,000 zombies for every one living person), barricading themselves in bunkers and trying to find some sort of possible solution to the pandemic of zombies before the other conflict bubbles onto the surface - the struggle of humans to get along and stick together. When it comes to comparisons between the films, Day of the Dead has been regarded as a lesser follow-up to Dawn of the Dead, but honestly it is still a pretty enjoyable effort in the art of panic within survival, and in some ways it could be thought of as a misunderstood classic. Romero wanted to make another film about panic with humankind and the undead with a certain type of actors involved, ones that while not exactly well known still make a useful effort to the growing sense of paranoia and fear that make a worthwhile time in nerves with its own kind of thoughtful ending (which could be argued to be the most hopeful or just as indefinite as the others); like the other two films, it also has been remade (twice, actually!), and a television series is reportedly in development. Romero would not return to the undead creatures until two decades later with Land of the Dead (2005).

The characters have been criticized in part for the varying level of unlikable aspects to them, but I find it pretty appropriate for such a tense movie, one that depicts a conflict of reason and aggression that is reminiscent of before from Romero without being a rehash. He wanted to make a tragedy and I think he succeeded pretty well with what he set out to do. Cardille (daughter of Bill Cardille, featured in the first Dead film) headlines the cast with well-done tolerance, handling her side of tension with useful timing that balances time spent in combat with strong assertive conviction that seems stronger as a lead than other before her, mostly because she makes a worthy double act with the other side of conflict with structure besides undead ghouls, which is where Pilato comes in. Pilato (whose first role as an actor was a bit part in Dawn of the Dead) is undeniably the highlight of the film, making a brash study of instability and stubborn nature come out with great interest that reflects the film in paranoia without seeming too privy to just being ham for the sake of it, an absolute perfect foil to grit the teeth with. Alexander makes a calm third rail in all the hubbub with a bit of soothing charm. Liberty does quite well here in parts, delivering ghoulish charm in the curiosity that befits what the film lightly presents with the making of a zombie, which naturally goes hand in hand with the instinct delivered by Howard that ranks as the one and best performance of a member of the undead in these films in warm curiosity. The other actors are average at best, but at least they don't trip over the overall tone of the film in bleak horror, where accusation and miscommunication is just as horrifying as the prospect of being ripped apart by members of the undead without any bullets present. The effects are just as effective in visceral power (even when having to deal with warm conditions that came with filming in a former mine shaft in Pennsylvania), with credit deservedly going to Tom Savini and his team for making a clever experience Romero reflected on the film in subsequent years as the one that was his favorite, stating that it accomplished the goal he set out to do with another Dead film in making it different from the previous film as one that is "very much me", which is generally reflected well in its 100 minute run-time. It's a bleak movie, but it's a worthwhile bleak movie that is engaging in its tone in surviving a land with lost structure with tense execution that fits upon the landscape in a distinct place among horror in the 35 years that have passed since its release. It isn't the best film from Romero, but it still serves as a well-done testament to his vision about showing the horror in both the living and undead of a society in its third different phase that maintains his place as a director deserving of one's curiosity in the horror genre.

Next Time: Hellraiser.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.