The first time I saw the 1968 version of Night of the Living Dead, it stayed with me for days. Over the years, whenever I thought of it, I can recall many vivid scenes, but no more so than the poignant ending that seemed like an odd choice for a horror film.
Why am I bringing it up? This month marks the 30th anniversary of its remake – Night of the Living Dead (1990) that debuted October 19, 1990. Also, I recently reviewed another zombie film #Alive that drew the inevitable comparison.
So I started thinking of both films.
But then I considered the 1990 remake, I couldn’t remember one scene. I recalled I vaguely liked it, so I had to watch it again recently, which caused me to rewatch the original.
Like The Omen (1976) that had its own remake in 2006, the newer version paled in the original’s comparison in my opinion.
But why? I decided to delve a little deeper into why these films differ so that one remains a classic while the other leaves little impression at all.
FLASH BANG START
Both films start out the same. Brother and sister Barbara and Johnny travel to a cemetery to visit a grave. Johnny taunts his sister with one of the most famous horror lines: “They’re coming to get you, Barbara.”
In less than five minutes, zombies attack. Considering most horror films spend more time in the status quo phase, it’s shocking and effective.
At this point, I prefer the remake over the original. The old black and white film stock, cheesy music and bad audio of the 1968 version distracted from the story.
Also, I liked the remake’s use of opening credits where Barbara and Johnny are bickering about why they are making a trek to the cemetery.
But it takes off when the zombies arrive. Compared to the 1968 version, these zombies are more menacing, and there’s more gore to go around.
Barbara runs to what looks like an abandoned farmhouse where there are more great scenes involving dripping blood from the ceiling and a severed hand dropping from the banister.
But after she meets Ben, who’s the film’s main protagonist, the two films start to diverge.
TWO FILMS DIVERGE IN MIDDLE
From this point on, I prefer the original by horror director George A Romero. Why?
First, I liked the subtleties of the 1968 version, especially the use of radio and TV broadcast cleverly built tension and advanced the storyline at the same time.
The people trapped in the home have no idea what’s going on outside other than new reports that were sprinkled throughout this section of the film.
The 1990 version didn’t use this convention as often, but that’s likely because it wouldn’t have been as shocking simply because it’s a remake, and many already know the storyline.
The second reason why I liked the original far more is the characters, in particular Ben, played by Duane Jones, who’s an everyman, who is desperately trying to keep himself and others alive against the odds.
When I watched the remake, I became bored with the constant bickering and yelling from all the characters that now appeared over the top compared to the original, which was a far quieter film.
But one of the biggest difference and perhaps the most perplexing to me dealt with the zombies. You’d think a zombie is a zombie, but not so in these two films.
The original 1968 zombies scared me, but the 1990 remake zombies didn’t – not at all. And it’s not just because I saw the original and wasn’t shocked by zombies. I’ve seen a lot of zombie films, and I’m almost always scared.
I chalk it up to Romero, who not only directed it but also wrote it. He had an indisputable knack for horror storytelling that included zombies with notorious films, including Dawn of the Dead (1978) and Day of the Dead (1985).
For instance, the scariest scenes to me were not when the zombies were breaking into the home.
Rather it was Romero’s wide shots of the zombies in mass staggering toward the house. He did this several time throughout the film, which created a nuanced message that seemed to say that no matter what anyone did, the zombies would ultimately overwhelm them in end.
The feeling of foreboding took over the film whenever those mindless creatures lumbered in screen – something which the remake lacked.
A HAUNTING AND UNEXPECTED ENDING
That’s not to say the 1990 version never had legitimately scare zombies. One in particular stands out in the film’s end. The character Sarah Cooper, played by Heather Mazur, turns into a zombie. While it’s a small role, it’s effective.
As she staggered toward Barbara, the look on her this zombie’s face captured all the creepiness of a monster that has now become one of most unique in horror history.
The ending of the 1990 remake felt typical, which is perhaps why I couldn’t remember the film. It seemed like no one knew how to end it, so it meandered on until it took the easiest path that didn’t satisfy.
But the original film’s ending took a devastating turn that I didn’t expect. I think it’s the ending that caused me to remember it all these years.
If Romero had chosen a less maudlin ending, the film would still have been novel in its idea and storytelling mode. He’d lost little credibility in that way. It’s a risk to end the film in the manner he did.
But that choice possibly changed it from a great horror film into a classic because it seems Romero was trying to make a point as well as a film.
And I don’t think for a moment it was an accident. The wide shots of the staggering zombies coming toward the house in the 1968 version makes sense with the ending.
FINAL THOUGHTS
Perhaps I’m overthinking it, but to me the film’s theme is a lesson about the human condition. No matter how rich you are, no matter how poor – your fate is the same. Death stalks us all, just like the zombies – mindless, persistent and seemingly unstoppable.
We can run from it, maybe outsmart it for a time, but we can never escape it.
In the original, Ben did everything right. He showed courage, resourcefulness and humanity. He’d lasted the night and came out the other side. But it didn’t matter – his fate was the same – just like all of ours.
Romero’s point: Death wins in the end – always.
What do you think? Let me know in the comments below.
