Dead and funny. Back to the roots

It so happened that the original George Romero film I saw after the remake of Savini. Therefore, to evaluate the film was doubly difficult. To begin with, I note that the version of Tom Savini is significantly different from the original with respect to the characters of the individual characters (Barbara), as well as the version of the finale.

Despite the fact that the film was shot more than 40 years ago, he is still able to scare even the notorious horror lover. No, not at the expense of the realism of the "dead" or special effects, but in a much more sophisticated way, which can only be achieved thanks to the talent of the director, who is Romero. "Night of the Living Dead" creates a special, frightening atmosphere. Creates so realistically that sometimes goosebumps ran through the skin.

One of the main techniques that George Romero used to create a heated atmosphere - music and sound series in general. Terrible, pressing, frightening music is almost constantly present in the film. It then calms down, then increases almost to the limit in particularly acute scenes. The second method is actually the "zombies" themselves. The make-up is very realistic, even taking into account modern films of this kind. The only thing that bothered me was the eyes of the "dead". They were still alive, unlike the heroes of the remake of Savini.

The actors play is difficult to assess. After all, we are now accustomed absolutely to other standards of acting. I would call the game "Night of the Living Dead" somewhat theatrical, and in the case of Judith O'Dea - frankly weak. On the contrary, Carl Hardman, who played Harry, was quite tolerable with his task.

I will dwell on the final stages separately. I will not disclose the cards, but Savini's version loses noticeably to the original Romero. George managed to achieve a much greater tragedy. After the Romer finale, the aftertaste is stronger, if I may say so. So, the classic again justified a respectful attitude.

9 out of 10