X
- 1985
- TV-MA
- United Film Distribution Company (UFDC)
- 1 h 41 m
- 1985
- TV-MA
- United Film Distribution Company (UFDC)
- 1 h 41 m
Summary A small group of military officers and scientists dwell in an underground bunker as the world above is overrun by zombies.
Directed By: George A. Romero
Written By: George A. Romero
- 1985
- TV-MA
- United Film Distribution Company (UFDC)
- 1 h 41 m
- 1985
- TV-MA
- United Film Distribution Company (UFDC)
- 1 h 41 m
Day of the Dead
60
7.0
Where to Watch
Summary A small group of military officers and scientists dwell in an underground bunker as the world above is overrun by zombies.
Directed By: George A. Romero
Written By: George A. Romero
Where to Watch
Top Cast
Metascore
Mixed or Average
Based on 13 Critic Reviews
60
54% Positive
7 Reviews
7 Reviews
31% Mixed
4 Reviews
4 Reviews
15% Negative
2 Reviews
2 Reviews
Metascore
Mixed or Average
Based on 13 Critic Reviews
60
54% Positive
7 Reviews
7 Reviews
31% Mixed
4 Reviews
4 Reviews
15% Negative
2 Reviews
2 Reviews
It's an intelligent, well-written, excellently played movie, with top flight gore/horror effects, perverse humour and a provocatively bleak vision. Also, it has the world's first true zombie hero in Bub, who listens to Beethoven and eats people.
Day of the Dead has a less startling setting, since most of it takes place underground. But it still affords Mr. Romero the opportunity for intermittent philosophy and satire, without compromising his reputation as the grisliest guy around.
User Score
Generally Favorable
Based on 50 User Ratings
7.0
64% Positive
32 Ratings
32 Ratings
28% Mixed
14 Ratings
14 Ratings
8% Negative
4 Ratings
4 Ratings
User Score
Generally Favorable
Based on 50 User Ratings
7.0
64% Positive
32 Ratings
32 Ratings
28% Mixed
14 Ratings
14 Ratings
8% Negative
4 Ratings
4 Ratings
I honestly don't understand why this film receives so much flack when, in my opinion, it's the best one out of the three movies in the Living Dead series and certainly my personal favorite. From what I gathered, it wasn't as popular as the previous two films and more specifically "Dawn of the Dead" which seems to be the fan favorite. It seems to me like people at the time more or less wanted Romero to deliver Dawn of the Dead 2 and set themselves up for disappointment when they found out this isn't a direct sequel. Instead, the film follows different characters while further fleshing out the post-apocalyptic world overrun with zombies. One thing I personally find funny is the notion that the film has "bland" characters and "over-the-top acting" which I've noticed many people bring up... not sure about that because I thought the acting was incredible, and the protagonist--Sarah Bowman--one of the first 'strong female protagonists' in American film before that became a thing. What I loved about Sarah's character, in particular, was the fact that she was strong (arguably one of the most resilient characters for sure), but she was still a woman at heart, not some manly ""badass"" Mary Sue cliché devoid of vulnerabilities sadly so prevalent today. Over the course of the film, she faces sexism and death threats from an unhinged self-appointed leader of the military, and has to balance multiple things like her work as a scientist and taking care of her husband who's having a mental breakdown. The other characters were quite intriguing as well, and the subplot involving the domestication of the zombies creepy and macabre. I honestly wish I hadn't seen movies like 'Resident Evil: Extinction' that flat out copied certain plot elements from this film prior to watching Day of the Dead. As I said, I LOVED this chapter in the trilogy, and while it's different from the other two installments as far as the story and characters are concerned, the atmosphere is still distinctly Romero-esque and unique. Without a doubt 10/10.
Report
Fans of the first two films in the series may be a bit dismayed by Day of the Dead's deemphasis of gory action in favor of characterization, but the need to exploit the horror of the situation has passed and the film works by concentrating instead on its implications and possible solution. The standard 1950s sci-fi/horror film conflict between science and the military is also resurrected here, with distinct political overtones.
Day Of The Dead is more like Romero's scorching 1973 satire The Crazies, in which anarchy reigns and the very concept of heroes dissolves. The action at the end is lurid, made giddily disgusting by Tom Savini's amazing gore effects, and made gripping by Romero's gift for the cold logic of systemic breakdown. Still, some audiences may give up early, fed up with the shrill claustrophobia.
Day of the Dead is an unsatisfying part three in George A. Romero's zombie saga. The acting here is generally unimpressive and in the case of Sarah's romantic partner, Miguel (Antonio DiLeo, Jr.), unintentionally risible.
Let's hope Romero is not tempted to go for a quartet, for at this point sheer gruesomeness overwhelms his ideas and even his dynamic visuals. He would, in fact, have been better off not having tried for a third installment. [04 Oct 1985, p.4]
It's bankrupt in terms of imagination. All he (Romero) does is place his zombies in the basement of a missile silo and have a few crazed military types scream at the zombies and at each other. End of movie. [03 Sept 1985, p.5C]
This is a solid movie by George A. Romero tough it doesn't turn out to be as good as "Dawn of the Dead" and "Night of the Living Dead". I found it quite ordinary without the energy and originality of the two I mentioned before. Anyway better than any of the zombie movies that are coming out today.
Report
George had pushed himself in the previous chapter. This seems like overstretching things. Now, does that pay off? Come on, that's subjective. But, no.
Day Of The Dead
I, or anyone for that matter, would be and should be austere towards the writer and director George Romero's beloved zombie-defining trend-setting horror franchise. It comes with a lot of expectations. It should deliver considering the hype and momentum it carries. Now, unlike others I tend to not lean on the subject that is shown but rather the way it is shown. So for a satirical psychological horror thriller franchise as such, I will take the most remote-est storyline of this world. And I mean, break the genre, bend the rules, change the formula and isolate yourself as far as you can from the gold mine that I, we, George knows, should be a safer ground. In fact, make it everything listed before. This hotchpotch of ingredients should be the recipe. And though, George does not and may never combine these many risky factors, he is, I think, in his own way, breaking the established ground. What made these "dead" so infamously ruthless and grossly scary, he has tried to lop off that very subject matter. "He could be domesticated!" George, talking about one of the ghouls, pleads to his audience through a character and their slips the glass out of his hand. What made his formula so unique, is bashed with a hammer. The aim is good. He practised hard. But on that. Just that stroke. Another issue, is of course, the way the rest of the blank is filled, the time is spent. It is the same blood dripping, spraying all over, organs pouring out imageries that gets better as an achievement in technical procedure on how it works. Not in storytelling. That part is the same. Overcooked.
Report
The only thing redeemable about this movie was the last 25 minutes. Everything before that was just an utter bore. The constant overacting, The bland characters and the failure to take advantage of the premise of being stuck in a close-quarters area surrounded by zombies. It was very disappointing for me and honestly, If it wasn't for the ending, This would be a 0 in my book.
Report
Awards
Academy of Science Fiction, Fantasy & Horror Films, USA
• 1 Win & 1 Nomination
Sitges - Catalonian International Film Festival
• 1 Win & 1 Nomination
