Day of the Dead (1985) User Reviews

The dead will have their day...

[paul_haakonsen · 7/10 · 20 January 2016]

As a zombie aficionado is it impossible to not have watched the Romero zombie movies, especially as they are such big milestones in the zombie genre. And also as they are the zombie movies that has the most heart put into it, no pun intended.

This 1985 movie, directed by George A. Romero, is the third of zombie movies in his lineage of zombie storytelling. And it continues with the usual bleak world overrun by the living dead. Society has collapsed and the world is in disarray, with small clusters of people struggling for survival. But it is not the threat of the living dead that proves the only danger is the new dying world.

Romero does a great job at telling the story he has in mind, and it is presented in a very enjoyable manner, which makes his movies quite entertaining and watchable.

The story in the 1985 movie "Day of the Dead" is about a group of soldiers and scientists who have barricaded themselves in an underground bunker facility. Here they try to survive the dying world around them. Some scientists are studying the living dead in order to understand more about them and to control them, a study which does not sit well with the armed military forces.

Granted that this movie is from 1985, so the special effects and zombie make-up is a bit outdated by today's standards. But it still works fine though, and the effects are still believable. But in the Romero movies it is not the special effects that drive the movie, it is the story and the characters; the special effects just help to progress the story and add a visual imagery to the dying world.

The acting in "Day of the Dead" was quite good, and there is a very memorable gallery of characters in the movie. And there was even a very memorable zombie known as Bub. And they had managed to cast some good talents to portray the various role and characters. I must admit that I was surprised to find out that special effects master Greg Nicotero was in the movie.

I assume that you are already familiar with this 1985 classic zombie movie if you are a fan of the zombie genre. If you are not, shame on you, then it is about due time that you get around to watching it. In fact, watch all the Romero zombie movies, as they are important to the zombie genre.

I have watched "Day of the Dead" several times, as I have with all of Romeros movies, and it can sustain multiple viewings, because the story is so well-written and executed on the screen.

"Day of the Dead" receives a seven out of ten stars from me. This is a good, wholesome zombie movie.

"Dark Days, Bright Nights"

[dee.reid · 9/10 · 19 September 2004]

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

Another zombie classic from Romero. Highly recommended!

[Infofreak · 5 April 2004]

'Day Of The Dead' is one of the greatest sleepers in the history of horror movies. A flop when originally released almost twenty years ago, its reputation has slowly increased over the years, and now is generally regarded as a classic. I certainly underestimated it for a long time. In my opinion Romero's 'Night Of The Living Dead' and 'Dawn Of The Dead' are two of the greatest horror movies ever made, but I always thought that 'Day...' was a bit of a let down. But after watching it again for the first time in several years (via the highly recommended double disc "special edition" DVD) I must humbly eat my words. This is a GREAT movie! Romero and special effects Tom Savini do wonders on a limited budget, and the movie is full of suspense, a claustrophobic atmosphere and plenty of gore. It probably flopped the first time around because it's so bleak, but now that's one of its strengths. Interestingly Romero features a strong female protagonist (Lori Cardille) and a strong black supporting character (Terry Alexander), something not all that common in horror movies. Both actors give good performances, the soldiers led by Rhodes (Joseph Pilato) are all suitably ultra macho and deranged, and it was cool to see John Amplas ('Martin') in a supporting role, but the two stand out performances are by Richard Liberty ('The Crazies') as Dr. Logan (who the soldiers refer to as "Frankenstein"), and Howard Sherman as Bub, the zombie he has tamed. The sequences between Logan and Bub are just terrific and add a whole new level of pathos to the movie. The only negative comment I can make about 'Day Of The Dead' is that it brings home the depressing fact that George Romero hasn't made a truly outstanding movie in close to twenty years. I really hope he makes his long threatened fourth Dead movie 'Dead Reckoning' and that it turns out to be his masterpiece. But whatever happens he has already carved his name out in horror history as the creator of three classic zombie movies that just get better and better as the years go by.

Dusting Rhodes

[southdavid · 7/10 · 28 April 2021]

Our rewatching of the original Romero trilogy comes to an end with "Day of the Dead" which is perhaps the most unloved of the three but has some of the best gore moments of the series and a legendary jump scare at the beginning.

With the planet all but lost, a team of scientists and soldiers have formed an uneasy alliance in a large bunker in Florida. Tensions are high between them though, with the soldiers bearing the bulk of losses, trying to capture zombies for experimentation. The situation comes to a head though, when it becomes apparent that chief scientist, Dr Logan (Richard Liberty) is more interested in taming the threat, than eliminating it.

In so many ways, this is the best film of the original trilogy. The acting performances are better than any that have gone before. Lori Cardille in particular is excellent as Sarah, one of the scientists and the lead of the movie. Joseph Pilato, who has a tiny role in "Dawn" has a much bulkier one here, with Rhodes being the chief antagonist. Tom Savini's effects are the best we've seen, with some of the disembowelment that occurs towards the finale being the most striking and still very much holding up 35 years later. The character of 'Bub' is perhaps the most effecting of the entire series, though I do have to admit the idea of the zombies learning is an uncomfortable one and I'm glad that most don't explore that idea.

Plot wise, it could be better though. Initially starting with a big scope, and showing a Floridian town destroyed by the outbreak - it sinks back down into the only real storyline zombie films have, that of man's intolerance of each other ultimately causing our downfall. This might have something to do with the increasing cuts to the planned story, that budgetary restraints forced on Romero. It's the bleakest of the films, demonstrating not just that survival is unlikely, but perhaps even undeserved would this really happen.

That bleakness though speaks to me, and I do enjoy the film. "Dawn" is still my favourite; the score and the location alone see to that, but "Day" isn't that far behind.

Very gruesome and claustrophobic zombie movie.

[Aaron1375 · 8/10 · 4 October 2003]

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.

The Last Great American Horror Film?

[tieman64 · 19 April 2010]

"Cinema is wasted on cinema. Most cinema is bedtime stories for adults." – Peter Greenaway

Consensus seems to be that this is the worst film in George Romero's zombie trilogy. Personally I think it's Romero's best film, and one of the bleakest, if not best, horror movies ever made.

Three points. Firstly, what people fail to realise is that the humans are actually the bad guys in Romero's zombie universe. They are adept at selling out their friends, stabbing their companions in the back, acting violent, brutal and flittering away their lives with mindless banalities. In contrast, the zombies are representative of a kind of primal humanity which, because it always remains at the core of mankind, can not be escaped.

In this film, we have a group of people trapped in a military bunker whilst thousands of zombies wait outside. The humans are divided into three groups: the hastily militarist right wing, the scarily experimental left wing and the apathetic (and hedonistic) middle ground who just want to drink and live peacefully whilst the world goes to hell. Romero's point, though, is that despite their differing ideologies, everyone is selfishly looking out for their own interests, no matter how altruistic they may seem.

Secondly, this film acts as a precursor to fare like "The Mist", in that it is about a small group of people who, when put under extreme pressure, begin to turn against one another, exposing their prejudices, insecurities, sexist feelings and petty jealousies. Romero's point: a small group of humans can be far more divided, vicious and bestial than any number of ravenous undead.

Thirdly – and this is what distinguishes the film from all other horror movies – the film says that because most, if not all, actions are motivated by self interest, mankind is ultimately doomed. Forget all the ancillary themes often attached to this film – Reganism, the threat of nuclear war, feminism, Aids etc – while they're valid, this film takes a far grander, far more hopeless, view of things.

The zombies and the humans are divided by what Freud called the pleasure principle and the reality principle. The zombies, as a kind of stripped down, primal version of humanity, simply eat, breathe and wander about looking for food. Satisfying their primitive instincts are their only purpose. As one scientist says, "they gain no nutrition from the flesh they consume." In other words, they eat solely to satisfy a desire to eat (much as wealthy nations no longer eat to survive, but to prolong pleasure). Humans, in contrast, are able to defer instant gratification, constructing a variety of long term plans.

What the humans in this film realise, however, is that the rewards of the reality principle, of all their long term schemes, are no more advanced or noble than the drives of the zombies. The lead scientist in the film, for example, conducts experiments not because he wants to save humanity, but because he is thinking about future accolades and scientific prestige.

These themes are summed up in one scientist's interactions with a domesticated zombie called Bub, who performs only when rewarded. "They can be tricked into being good little girls and boys," he says, "same way we were tricked into it on the promise of some larger reward."

For the humans, however, any chance of a long term reward is slowly being eradicated. The last survivors on the planet and unable to fathom any future, the humans increasingly see no point in surviving. "It's the beginning of civilised behaviour," one scientist says, pointing out that the zombies operate on the same performance/reward level as humans, "civil behaviour is what distinguishes us from the lower forms. Civility must be rewarded, if it isn't, there's no use for it. There's just no use...for it at all."

The notion that there is "no use" for any and all human actions is expanded when one character discusses the various immigration papers, tax returns and official documents that the American Government stored in the bunker. All this information stored, all these records kept...toward what end? What is the use of human history? To what goal does it climb?

Ultimately, the world Romero creates here is one that is ruled by self interest. Goal oriented, man's actions are guided by pleasure, constantly striving to achieve his ambitions and protect his interests. The only easy way to get someone to not spend their lives as a Machiavellian power zealot would be to persuade them that they will enjoy an eternity in heaven. Heaven being pleasure incarnate.

Man is merely a dopamine zombie, fingering his neuro-chemical G-spot in one form or the other, no distinction between low-order pleasure and high-order pleasure. By a similar argument, we'll never achieve true happiness through the pursuit of pleasure because we can never be truly comfortable while we are in a pleasurable state. If we're experiencing pleasure it's because we must need something. Take temperature. Only if we're too hot or cold will we be able to experience the pleasure of a cold drink or hot bath. Once our temperature has stabilised, we're indifferent to either experience. If we are in no danger or need of any kind, we're in a comfortable but indifferent state. Sensory pleasure is not happiness, it is joy. The state of indifference is true happiness.

Now reconsider the final scene of the film, where the female character escapes and sits on a beach with the apathetic, hedonistic middle men who refused to fight throughout the film. They haven't escaped. They've become 21st century zombies. Get your mind around that, and this film will have you slitting your wrists.

8.5/10 – Ignore the one dimensional characters and the $500,000 budget. This film attains a depth of utter hopelessness that few films match.

Worth two viewings.

Romero's finest film to date...

[poe426 · 10/10 · 15 January 2002]

I saw DAY OF THE DEAD at a drive-in; the second half of the double bill was DAWN OF THE DEAD (which I'd seen a dozen times by then, most often at midnight showings). I was stunned. DAY OF THE DEAD was as tight and as dramatic and as frightening as anything I'd ever seen. Although I'd championed Romero's movies in the pages of magazines like Famous Monsters of Filmland, Fantastic Films and Fangoria for years, I was totally blown away by the savvy evinced in DAY OF THE DEAD. No more of the tell-tale amateurishness of a "regional filmmaker," no more overindulgence: this is Romero at his very best, and a great movie by any standards. For critics who espouse the virtues of DAWN OF THE DEAD over DAY OF THE DEAD, take this simple test: watch them back to back, as I did the night DAY OF THE DEAD opened. If you're still not convinced, you may be a zombie yourself...

How time can change things...

[Quinoa1984 · 9/10 · 6 December 2000]

For a while, I could not see what the fuss was about George A. Romero's third installment in the 'Dead' series, for quite a few years. I considered it my least favorite of the lot (until Survival, maybe Diary too but I have a soft spot for that), but in retrospect I think I was a un-fair in some of the departments I criticized.

The thing about Day of the Dead is that it tends to grow on the viewer looking to allow it to, especially as time goes on and the 1980's carry a different flavor than, say, in the late 90's. And I saw that the dialog came off weak (at least weak when compared to others), the characters didn't have the strength and need to really care about them like in 'Dawn' and 'Night', and the music just flat out stunk. Years later and many more repeat viewings around friends who loved the film, I grew to like it, and by now (this is many years later) I find that some sequences top even those in Dawn of the Dead. Marking it as still my least favorite of the 20th century 'Dead' films doesn't mean it's bad at all.

Actually, there is a certain style and sense of humor that tends to somehow work better with more time given with the derangement and over-the-top methods amid the dark atmosphere- the "camp" of the series, or at least the cartoonish aspects, stay fresh as ever. And the zombies look magnificently, as Tom Savini creates a kind of masterpiece of make-up, alongside future notable make-up man Greg Nicotero. To say that the zombies are the real stars of the film (in particular the infant-like 'Bub', played in a very good performance by the actor) is almost an under-statement. When Romero brings it on, he does bring it on well, and does go for broke in topping his wild, outlandish, and shockingly funny climax in Dawn of the Dead. So, in other words, I do enjoy it more after seeing it a few more times over the years, and I definitely don't see it as a C- movie; far from it, it's actually, in its own camp-art way, a great achievement.

My favorite Romero film.

[darimoviesthoughtsoffilms · 8/10 · 30 March 2021]

Day of the Dead is George A. Romero's third Zombie film and it's by far my favorite. It has a lot of great social commentary on how we view the people with power and how corrupt that system can get. I enjoy the characters and the practical effects are absolutely amazing. Bub is probably my favorite Zombie in a movie because the character is pulled off so well. The entire movie has a lot of building tension that leads into one of the best third acts in any Zombie film. And just like with Zack Snyder's Dawn of the Dead I really can't find anything I dislike about this movie.

I'm giving George A. Romero's Day of the Dead a 9.8/10.

A long-time sufferer of the "Alien 3 Syndrome"

[Robin-97 · 7 September 1999]

"Day of the Dead" is a film that is an unfortunate sufferer of the "Alien 3 Syndrome". And, no, I don't classify those that are affected by the syndrome to be disappointing final entries in a trilogy. To suffer from "Alien 3 Syndrome", you must follow two exceptional films, and the entry that has preceded you must be so exciting and action-packed that when you dare take a grimmer, more deliberately paced approach to your material, you will become universally reviled, with many people failing to notice that you have more than your fair share of merits on your own. In fact, "Day of the Dead" has a LOT of merits - even more than the film that its syndrome is based on. While it doesn't quite approach the greatness of "Dawn of the Dead", it is still an intelligent, first-rate horror effort and stands as one of the best genre films of the 80s.

In this final entry of George Romero's "Living Dead" trilogy, the walking dead supposedly outnumber the humans by a ratio of 400,000 to 1. Twelve people who have devoted themselves to studying and wiping out the zombies hole up together in an underground missile silo, and for all we know, these could be the last twelve living humans on the face of the planet. Most of these people don't capture our sympathy like the foursome who holed up in the shopping mall in "Dawn". Half of them are gung-ho soldiers who seem to take great pleasure in threatening the scientific team, and Romero spends much of the first half focusing on the bickering and intense conflicts between these people. In fact, for over an hour, the hordes of living dead get very little screen time, as the story focuses on the tension between the characters, and the efforts of an off-the-wall scientist to train a captured zombie named Bub to act human. Compared to its predecessors, this long section of the film may seem slow and talky, but it is always interesting and, for the most part, effectively performed by its unknown cast. Besides, it all eventually leads up to a corker of finale when the zombies finally invade the compound, and most of the humans become showcases for the brilliance of Tom Savini, who outdoes even himself in the gore F/X department.

While most of this material is very grim, "Day" ironically has the most hopeful, upbeat conclusion in the trilogy - which, alas, is its only major shortcoming. The quick transition to the final scene is so abrupt and unexpected that the audience feels cheated, leaving the impression that the production ran out of money before the whole climax could be filmed. Indeed, Romero has often expressed his unhappiness about being underfunded for this project, which prevented him from creating a truly definitive final chapter for the trilogy. But while "Day of the Dead" may not quite be the ultimate finish to one of the greatest trilogies of all time, it is still a very satisfying conclusion (at least until Romero gets funding for his long-rumoured "Twilight of the Dead"). It may not be popular among everyone, due to many unfair comparisons to its superior predecessors, but on its own, it is about as good as horror films get.

Another George A.Romero's masterpiece.

[HumanoidOfFlesh · 10/10 · 27 February 2001]

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.

Good tension and sick gore with only a few failings in the plot and the failure to paint a convincing Armageddon

[bob the moo · 24 May 2004]

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.

This one is better than Dawn of the Dead!!

[reapercrew-05584 · 10/10 · 29 May 2021]

This version of Day of the Dead is really good even tough it mostly takes place underground it still is really amazing!!! All the kills in this movie are creative and gorey!! Even tough it isn't really that funny but this is still amazing!! And the haunting 80's sound track in the background is really good!! And the zombie (Bub) is really cool!! When the creater of him dies and when bub discovers him you feel bad for him! Don't worry he gets his revenge.

Cold, harsh sequel to DAWN

[fertilecelluloid · 8/10 · 5 August 2005]

A cold, harsh sequel to DAWN with superior special effects and a viciousness that froths at the mouth. Aside from the brilliant opening sequence where the dead are introduced, the film does lack contrast and has a monotony about it.

There is evidence of the dead developing conscious rather than instinctive will in the character of "Bub". The film's central location, a large underground mine, is plenty claustrophobic and serves as another storyline decision that addresses both Romero's financial constraints and thematic concerns.

A sequence where zombies are rounded up in a pen is very suspenseful, as is the climax where the living dead prisoners go on the rampage for a feed.

NIGHT had a strong black character, DAWN had a strong black and a strong female character; this outing has a fiercely independent white woman who isn't obsessed with the plays for dominance the male characters engage in. It is their undoing, of course, and all character arcs follow their inevitable curves.

Bleak and filled with despair, this is another courageous work from a director whose best years were twenty-five years ago.

The perfect zombie movie

[Agnelin · 5 March 2012]

It's a scandal that such a brilliant film as "Day of the dead" has been overlooked for so long, and still pretty much continues to do so. In fact, being an avid horror movie consumer and favoring zombie movies especially, it is only now that I've been lucky enough to get a copy of this. I'm so glad about that! "Day of the dead" is, to my mind, not only the best of all Romero's zombie flicks, but also in the top three of all zombie movies ever made. It has every single asset that I consider desirable for a zombie film to be perfect: a claustrophobic environment with little realistic ways out, characters pushed to the limits, paranoia, darkness (literal darkness as well as an obscurity, a density of word, thought and mindset that clearly reflects the apocalyptic world that they now live in), powerlessness, lots of quality suspense, and gore. Many of those elements are missing in an awful lot of zombie movies.

"Day of the dead" is also ahead of its time (1985) in special and makeup effects and, beyond that, in the general pessimistic mood that is now sadly a reality. There is nothing funny, redeeming, thrilling about the new world dominated by zombies; the heroes of this show do not make a point of killing zombies as if it were some sort of hunting expedition with lots of adrenaline. They are simply the last humans standing, a group of scientists and military who happen to have survived so far (how, and why them, is never told), and trying to live another day in an underground facility (which is one of the best settings ever devised in a horror movie). Some kind of science project or experiment is also taking place, with a Dr Logan leading it (great character, that one), but this doesn't leave for much optimism. Basically, the gray, primary, claustrophobic setting, the rivalry between the military and the scientific communities, and the sickness and nightmares that ail the heroes let us know early on that we're in for a gloomy tale.

"Day of the dead" is also worth watching because it introduces elements that are completely original in the genre, and have still (to my knowledge) either not been used at all, or have been so only recently.

My score is a resounding 10/10!

People Making a Bad Situation Worse

[koltonbrett · 9/10 · 19 January 2022]

This classic zombie movie doesn't hold back on the gore. I'm not a huge fan of the kind of horror that simply seeks to gross me out. While there are moments of gratuitous guts and gore, this movie offers much more. It reminded me of The Walking Dead series in the way that it focuses mostly on the drama between the surviving people. This movie puts us inside an underground bunker with this small group of survivors who are seemingly safe in their little fortress. The problem they run into is that the real monsters are the living people inside the bunker. The interactions between them are extremely tense. The suspense is real as we watch and wait for the moment when it all falls apart for these survivors. With the exception of the zombies, the acting is really good.

Best of the trilogy!

[K3nzit · 8/10 · 3 January 2020]

Not a huge fan a zombie movies, but I liked this one. The story was good and the effects looked amazing. Joe Pilato's performance is so over the top - it's hilarious.

Masterpiece in 2023

[danielcereto · 8/10 · 1 May 2023]

I just watched this for first time now in 2023 and what a great discovering. A zombie's classic from the boss Romero.

First, the script is not as simple as it seems. It has some deep emotional treatment about the relationship between zombie's and humans. Sometimes seems that the real plague are the humans.

Second, the Fx's are amazing. More than 40 years and still looked incredible. I don't understand why nowadays they stop using this kind of makeup and magic tricks. Definitely, CGI has ruined the genre.

Last but not least acting is more than correct, even it is not and Oscar winning show.

So, overall a masterpiece even in 2023.

Great Conclusion of a Trilogy

[claudio_carvalho · 7/10 · 19 November 2004]

A group of stressed survivors, composed by soldiers and civilians, share an underground military bunker surrounded by an increasing number of zombies. When the commander of the base dies, the tyrannical Capt. Rhodes (Joe Pilato) occupies his spot and the friction with the team of scientist reaches an uncontrollable level. Meanwhile, Dr. Logan (Richard Liberty), the leader of the scientists, develops a kind affection to the zombie Bub (Howard Sherman), showing signs of insanity. Sarah (Lori Cardille), the helicopter pilot John (Terry Alexander) and their alcoholic friend William (Jarlath Conroy) are the only lucid persons, being threatened by the rest of the survivors and the zombies. 'Day of the Dead' is a great conclusion of the George Romero's trilogy. Yesterday I watched it again, maybe for the fourth or fifth time, and I found a very claustrophobic story, having excellent nasty special effects. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): 'Dia dos Mortos' ('Day of the Dead')

Best of the 'dead'

[haildevilman · 10/10 · 26 June 2006]

Sure it's talky as hell, but the script deserved an Oscar.

Utter paranoia and hopelessness made this film a 'I'm glad it's not real but wouldn't it be cool if it WAS?' paradox.

Lori Cardile pre-dated Thelma & Louise in the hardcore female hero sweepstakes. (That's right. 'Hero.' Not heroine.) The supporting cast was top notch as well.

Joe Pilato as the nasty Col. Rhodes nearly stole the film. You hated him, but wanted to keep dealing with him.

Richard Liberty (love the name) played a great mad scientist prototype. Likable even if you couldn't 'get' him. And he practiced what he preached for what it was worth.

The Brit radioman and rasta chopper pilot made a nice balance. And I liked Steele too. A perfect savage idiot. Good job to that man.

Howard Sherman was the real deal as 'Bub.' And admit it, you loved it when he saluted the Colonel the second time.

The third film in the "dead" series.

[Captain_Couth · 10/10 · 31 October 2004]

Day of the Dead (1985) was the third film in the "Dead" series. For awhile this was going to be the last chapter until recent events have changed the mind of the series creator George A. Romero. Whilst it was going to be a huge budgeted venture for Romero and Laurel Films, a small budget and a few extras limited the scope of the director's vision for this film. But like all good film makers he made do with what he had around him and made a dreary and depressing film.

Society is dead. Zombies have overran the living and the survivors can only be found in very small numbers. One of these groups are bunkered inside an old underground bomb shelter. The survivors inside this subterranean military installation have been divided into three groups: the soldiers, scientists and civilian employees. Stress, sexual tension and a dire situation have split the group even further apart. The dead have been growing in numbers outside and dwindling supplies have made everyone desperate. But within the base their is some order. But what will happen with that collapses?

The third film of the series is not as great as the second film but it's a good film. Performances from the actors may be uneasy and the tight budget restrains the director's vision but it still succeeds as a very frightening and depressing horror film. Savini and company have made the gore more realistic and nauseating. Gone is the cartoonish blood and cheesy gore effects. State-of-the-art splatter effects have been included adding a whole new element to this awesome trilogy. I have to strongly recommend this film. If you love the first two, you'll definitely enjoy this this installment of the one and only trilogy of cinema!

Highly recommended!

Brisk, enjoyable elaboration of the zombie series

[HenryHextonEsq · 7/10 · 13 June 2010]

This third instalment in Romero's series of zombie films is a mixture of the thoughtful, the satirical and the downright gory.

The zombies are generally more of a sideshow in the early part of the film, with more emphasis on the semi-military group dynamics of the humans under siege. Romero expands upon this theme, by contrasting the 'egghead' Dr Logan (Richard Liberty) with the twisted, action hero-gone-wrong Captain Rhodes (Joseph Pilato). Both are anti-heroes in their different ways, fitting in with the 'Dead' series' clever refusal to countenance good and evil. Logan represents a fascinating, if potentially deluded and irrelevant academia; Rhodes a stunted, shoot-first, ask-questions-later militarism. Both are dismembered, neither approach shown to be 'right' or effective in the face of the undead onslaught.

Again, the zombies are wonderfully crafted, though there is less poetry and surrealism in their depiction than in the magisterial "Dawn of the Dead". Barring perhaps the pivotal scenes of Dr Logan, with his application of behaviourist theory in training a lone zombie in his lab. These experimentation sequences have the sort of evocative use of sound that runs throughout the earlier film: the same sense of melancholy and dislocation, and Romero clearly relishes elaborating the 1978 film's core theme of the zombie regressing to previous learnt behaviour. There is a woozy, ambient calm to the scene where he tries to instill in the zombie a liking for Beethoven through textbook behaviourism. Otherwise, the music tends a bit towards the post-Carpenter 1980s norm.

Performances are excellent, make-up and assorted guts present and suitably incorrect. However, whilst Lori Cardille is excellent, she could have been given more to do, and the progression towards the resolution is rather more contrived than in the previous two films. There are stretches towards the end where it gets close to standard action territory, and several characters are barely developed.

This hasn't quite got the style and engagement of the previous films, but works on the level of a satirical exposure of mainstream action films and of dry academic theory. "Day of the Dead" is an admirably cynical and at times thoughtful piece of entertainment, always holding the interest.

Solid entry in Romero's cannon

[ArcherAdam · 7/10 · 19 July 2020]

While not quite up to the levels of Night or Dawn, Day Of The Dead still packs a story line that is just as relevant to day as it was in 1985, and boasts performances that are better than it should be. I really loved Lori Cardille here, and I'm surprised she didn't do much, much more than this.

It has one of the best openings in horror movie history (and Dr. Tongue is likely the most impressive zombie in any of these films), but it does drag just a little bit in the middle. The antagonists (of which there are more than one), aren't your typical mustache twirlers, and Romero gave them some depth and nuances that actually made most of their actions completely believable.

The climax more than makes up for the middle drag, and I love how Romero injected his undead with both horror and humor. A must for not only Romero fans, not only zombie fans, but horror fans in general.

My 2nd favorite zombie movie ever.

[HorrorDisasterGuy-90617 · 9/10 · 6 September 2023]

I really do like the story the movie have with it. Its interesting how the movie is set in a underground bunker which is a great place to be at during a zombie apocalypse and it brings atmosphere to it. The movie have a couple of interesting ideas in it like one of the characters trying to train the zombies to not be violent and finding solutions to the zombie pandemic. We also see how people mental state can change due to being in isolated area for a very long time and how each of them is against each others. The movie also have a couple of enjoyable action scenes and its really entertaining to watch it.

My only nitpick is the dreams Sarah Bowman have in the movie. It's mostly cheap jump scares and its not that effective.

For the hardcore zombie fan.

[michaelRokeefe · 7/10 · 14 June 2008]

Nothing too different. Maybe more of it. This the third in the George A. Romero trilogy of the flesh-eating undead taking over the world. In a high-tech underground bunker, a group made up of military and scientists dwell together actually cordoning off zombies to experiment with. There is some talk of even trying to domesticate these gut-suckers. The military would rather be rid of the walking rotted flesh; just as much as the scientists would keep a few alive. One mad scientist may have just crossed the line. A new commanding officer seems determined to let all hell break loose. Let the fun begin. Some pretty damn grisly images. F/X deliberate and pronounced. How hard is it for Romero to "out-gross" his followers? He leaves little to be desired. And there is a chance you'll get to taste your lunch one more time. Cast includes: Lori Cardile, Terry Alexander, Joe Pilato, Anthony Dileo Jr. and Don Brockett the chief Zombie.