This is an incredibly boring movie. The first hour is relentlessly talky. This would be OK if the characters were interesting, but they're not - they're a bunch of stereotypes. The acting is never very good, and the script is strangely bad considering the high-quality screenplay of Dawn. The story is boring, and the setting even more so. The Special FX deserve an award but I'm afraid that they're the only good thing about the film. Even the "comedy" character, Bub the Zombie, isn't funny. Utter rubbish.

source: Day of the Dead

I remember when 28 DAYS LATER came out a lot of die hard horror fans decried Danny Boyle's movie as a rip off from DAY OF THE DEAD . I did have some reservations about the second half of 28 DAYS LATER , namely some quite illogical plot holes but since I'd never seen George A Romero's movie I couldn't compare and contrast . I eventually saw it last night and could see where the critics are coming from . They are both very similar movies but my criticisms are slightly different DAY comes with the set up of a scientific team who are trying to analyse the zombies being stuck in an underground bunker alongside a military unit . There's no plot holes in this scenario unlike the ones 28 DAYS LATER suffered from since the characters have all known each other a considerable length of time . There's also no unlikely " rainbow coalition " of the military unit either , the soldiers led by Captain Rhodes are , with one notable exception , entirely white something that Boyle blundered with by casting several actors from different ethnic backgrounds in his movie which strained credibility somewhat since no British Army unit is that cosmopolitan . There is also a problem with Romero's casting and that is none of Rhodes men resemble soldiers , they all look too old and too fat . It's not helped by the fact that none of them could act their way out of a paper bag either I'm afraid that the more I think about it the more I realise that if you're watching a Romero movie you have to suffer the bad with the good and nearly always one of the worst aspects with a Romero movie is the totally poor acting . THE CRAZIES suffered with this and after seeing DAWN OF THE DEAD again I noticed how bad much of the cast were . DAY keeps up the tradition . The military unit were bad but we're also treated to an Irishman whose accent is anything but Irish and a Jamican who I'm certain has never been outside of New England . Oh and if you're casting a Latino it might be a good idea to cast someone who looks like he might be Latino . Just having characters calling him racist names perhaps isn't enough . The actor playing Salazar might have a Spanish sounding name but that's not enough in my view . Did anyone else think Eric Roberts should have been cast as Rhodes ? The story itself did have intriguing possibilities but the script doesn't make the most of them . In this sort of scenario we're reminded of Conrad's HEART OF DARKNESS something 28 DAYS LATER utilised to much greater effect but here as many people have mentioned Romero seems far too interested in gore rather than intelligent story telling , and boy is this a gory film . I actually felt quite sick when the guts fell out of the zombie on the table and where Captain Rhodes met his end . I suppose Romero shouldn't be judged too harshly because in the mid 1980s gore was the primary selling point of a horror film but it is very frustrating watching DAY OF THE DEAD 20 years later , noticing so much potential in the story and noticing much of the potential has been wasted for the sake of stomach churning visual effects , and it's not like Romero isn't capable of better since DAWN OF THE DEAD featured incisive social commentary alongside splatter effects Before anyone asks I haven't seen LAND OF THE DEAD but there's no doubt in my mind that this is the weakest of the DEAD series . If you enjoyed any other of the movies in the franchise then I'm afraid you might be somewhat disappointed with this . I know I was

In 1985 this zombie movie virtually went by unnoticed except for many Romero fans. It was virtually dead a week or two after it hit the theaters. Many attribute its failings to the other many horror films released that year including "Re-Animator", "Fright Night", and "Return of the Living Dead". All these movies were R though and day was not. Romero stuck to his guns and made a very gory movie. Unfortunately, when dawn was released there were still many independent theaters, but by 1985 the chains had taken over and one thing chains do is not show movies like this. So it went by unnoticed and those that did notice it usually had nothing good to say about it other than the zombies looked really good. So suffice to say, I wasn't expecting much when I bought this movie except the zombies would look good. However, I am happy to report that I was very pleasantly surprised. Granted, Dawn was still a better film as it had more likable characters than the ones featured in this film. This would be the final Dead film George Romero would do until Land of the Dead was released, but I do not count that one as part of his original trilogy as they seem to belong together because Night showed us the humble beginnings of the zombie outbreak, Dawn showed us the zombies beginning to overrun us and this film shows us a bleak world where the zombies now outnumber the living 400,000 to one. The story has a group at the beginning flying a helicopter in the hopes of finding some survivors. All they find is the dead and quite frankly, any survivors out there would be better off keeping their mouth shut as they do not want to go back to the facility this group belongs to. It is like a bunker and in it we have scientists who have no clue what they are doing, army people in a rush to leave said facility even though there is no indication there are any people left, two civilian guys just doing their jobs and Bub the most awesome zombie ever! Tensions are running high in the facility as the army people want to leave and there is a lot of arguing; however, things take a turn for the even worse and the zombies that are topside begin to lick their lips! This film has great looking zombies and it does a good job with its setting. Originally, George wanted to do something much larger in scope, but could not get the funding so he had to scale back immensely which is why we sadly on get the one shot topside in the city and get to see how much the zombies have taken over. Everything in this film is rather good, except the characters! Seriously, Bub who is a zombie is the most likable character and then civilian guys. Everyone else just wants to yell and rant and this film is not a good one to watch when you have a headache! The good news is that this creates a finale where you really want to see a few of these guys eaten and suffer, unlike Dawn where you just kind of get a random motorcycle gang out of nowhere. So this film is good, just not as good as Dawn as this one just does not have the action of that film and for a good portion of the film the only thing you have to look forward too in between the shouting matches between the scientists and evil Bono are the Bub scenes. It does help build up the finale and like I said, you really want to watch these guys get eaten, but it also tends to get annoying as no one really seems right. That is just the way it goes though, mankind is pretty much lost here and so why worry about trying to cure something that cannot be cured when you can just try and live out your life the best you can.

Months after the first dead rose from their graves, the world has seemingly become overrun. Deep in a storage bunker in Florida, a group of soldiers and a group of scientists have formed an uneasy alliance in order to try and discover something that can help reverse their spread. However Dr Logan is not making the progress that the soldiers require and Captain Rhodes becomes increasingly impatient and erratic as a result. Things continue to worsen as the zombies gather above and Logan's work gets more worrying. Having seen and enjoyed (if that's the word) the remake of Dawn, I decided to re-watch the three originals on their own values. While I had seen the other two before, this was the first time I had seen Day and assumed that it would be bigger than Dawn was (in the same way as Dawn extended the ideas from Night). In that regard I was a little disappointed to find that the film stayed on a rather small scale and didn't manage to really convince me that the world was actually over on the surface of the earth. However this is not to say that it is not a good story in itself, because it is, albeit very different from both Night and Dawn. To me it lacked the social commentary that was to be found in Dawn but it is still tense, gory and gripping. The claustrophobic nature of the bunker and the battling characters means that tension is easily created even when the zombies are distant and seemingly pose less of a threat than the humans do to one another. The film is a little weak at points – the medical experiments are given too much time and the character of Bub is not clear as to his reasons for being included as much as he was. I didn't like the idea of Bub, the film didn't seem to know what to do with him other than using him to fill out the story – Logan's progress with him seemed such a waste of time that, even if that was the point, it didn't work. When the gore comes it is very hard to watch and a little sickening at times – bodies are ripped into and ripped apart in full bloody colour – as a horror it succeeds because I was looking a way quite a lot of times! Even though Shaun of the Dead has made fun of these slow zombies recently they still manage to be very effective here – I personally find them scary as they are relentless and simply wish to kill. True, the fast ones are scarier but these ones are too. The cast are more than just victims and are reasonably well drawn and acted. They have to be engaging or else the tension between them wouldn't work and, while hardly totally real people they still are good enough for a horror movie and they are not just fodder to rip apart – even if they are clearly penned as 'goodies' and 'baddies'. Overall this is not the best of the trilogy but it is still a good horror film. The tension between the characters creates as much of a threat as the zombies do – even if some of the plot isn't that good. It all builds well to a gory finish that really only lacks teeth because both the film and the actual ending both fail to really show just how bad things are and never convinces that the world has come to an end in the way that the whole trilogy suggests it has.

The third film in George A. Romero's immensely popular "Living Dead" trilogy is by far the bleakest and most complex film the director has ever worked on. "Day of the Dead" received a lot of negative press upon its release in 1985 - people picked apart unsavory characters, OVER-acting from a no-name cast, and outlandishly gory special effects that only Tom Savini himself could be proud of. But none of this makes it a bad experience really, does it? I don't think so. For the reason that I usually detest zombie flicks, I have worked up a fondness for the works of Romero and over the last two weeks have separately watched each film in his trilogy. "Night of the Living Dead" (1968) virtually defined a new genre of horror movie-making and basically set the standards for the many zombie flicks that would follow in its footsteps. Next up to bat was the most praised film in the trilogy - "Dawn of the Dead" (1978) - which was more of an action film than a horror movie and was nothing short of epic. Then came "Day" in 1985, which got the tongue-lashing that I described earlier. However those that did like it, praised the Savini effects, its complex, plot-driven characters, and satire. While "Day" is certainly a step down from "Night" and "Dawn," "Day" is more of a claustrophobic horror movie and that allows it to stand on its own as a fitting end to Romero's trilogy. It's more in sync with the tension of "Night" than it is with the adrenalin-laced action, zombie-slaughterfest that was "Dawn." A team of civilian scientists and a loose army unit clash with each other's motives after they have taken shelter at an underground military base from the hordes of living dead that storm the surface above. The civilian scientists aren't seeking to eradicate the zombies like the soldiers are hell-bent on doing, but are instead trying to get to the bottom of what is causing them to be what they are. In doing so, they need live zombie specimens, which are held captive in a maze of dark underground tunnels where they're corralled like cattle. We later get what is one of the most profound and moving experiences in the entire trilogy with "Day," when we see one zombie, nicknamed "Bub" by one particularly eccentric scientist, who eventually learns what it means to be "alive," so to speak. "Day of the Dead" obviously isn't a perfect movie, but is more or less a fitting conclusion to one of the most daring film trilogies in the horror genre. It may be best to not watch "Day" thinking it'll be anything like "Dawn" just because it has military men blasting away mercilessly at the living dead. Zombie slaughter is few and far between and much of the first hour of the film is clashing dialogue between the characters. The darkest day in the world - "Day of the Dead." 9/10

The living have lost the war and now the dead have taken over.A small pocket of survivors consisting of a military and scientific team staying in a secure underground bunker doing research,trying to find an answer to why the dead are walking,and also trying to find any other survivors,but without much success.The sequence of events that follow ultimately lead to their self destruction.Plenty of gore including usual gun-shots to the head,decapitation,amputation,bodies ripped apart,entrails eaten,throat rippings etc.The special effects by Tom Savini are truly outstanding and these scenes where Dr Logan(Richard Liberty)tries to train a zombie are simply amazing.If you love gore you must see "Day of the Dead".Highly recommended.

un

Day of the Dead_720p(480P)

source: Day of the Dead