IMDb > Night of the Living Dead (1990) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Night of the Living Dead
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Night of the Living Dead More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 5 of 21: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [Next]
Index 204 reviews in total 

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Maybe not necessary but still entertaining

6/10
Author: Johan Louwet from Belgium
3 November 2015

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

The original is a classic as it is the first or one of the first to portray zombies as we know them today, dead humans coming back to life hunting for the flesh of the living. What me always bothered about the original is the characters are not given much background. Here we get to know a bit more about backgrounds and the relations between the characters and that the young couple was actually related to the inhabitants of the house where the group is hiding. Another thing is that in the original Barbara is a vegetable for most of the movie which really got annoying. The remake makes her at least fight maybe a bit too much. I thought her changing into a GI Jane (as if she served in the army) was a bit too radical given I always pictured her as a feminine woman not the tomboy she was here. I prefer the ending of the remake even though still feel sad for Ben but the ending for Mr Cooper was well deserved I think (couldn't help to cheer there) as he was even nastier than in the original. What I miss mostly about this remake that the original got is the creepy atmosphere. I guess the original being in black and white sure helped a lot there as color in my opinion takes away some of that in my opinion. I would say I like both versions equal but I prefer the later Dawn and Day of the Dead (original versions).

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

same basic plot, better gore and better barbara.

7/10
Author: Marc Rhodes-Taylor from United Kingdom
26 October 2014

just watched this and thoroughly enjoyed it! same basic plot as the 1968 original, so not particularly surprising, but very well done. savini does some great work here, and the move up to colour enhances the gore effects, which are certainly more gruesome than the first. music is not so good, the original had a better score, and goblin's work is also better, nothing wrong with the score but nothing catchy/moody as could be. one of the best aspects is, of course, watching how quickly people's civilised exteriors fall away under pressure. tallman is notable as a very different, much stronger barbara, another one of the good differences, there is also more time spent on the aftermath as we see more of the rednecks and the remaining humans. recommended.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Refreshing Modern remake of a an absolute Classic

8/10
Author: loomis78-815-989034 from United States
26 May 2014

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Due to a copyright problem, the original film makers of the classic "Night of the Living Dead" made little to no money of the enormous success of the original. This is part of the reason for this remake, so John Russo, George Romero and Russ Streiner could actually make some money that was rightly due to them. Legendary effect master and friend Tom Savini takes over the Director's chair and this remake rolled with a script by Romero. Romero sticks closely to his original storyline of a bunch of people thrown together in a country farm house fighting off the undead. Many of the new cast members look like the old ones and at times the dialog is word for word. There are some differences, with one of the biggest being this one is of course is in color and some of the grit that made the original almost feel like a documentary is missing. Ben is still the main character played this time by the talented Tony Todd but there is a slight twist to his fate this time. Tom Towles as Harry Cooper manages to be just as big a weasel as the original. The biggest change in the entire movie comes in the role of Barbara played by Patricia Tallman. In the original, Barbara is so shocked by the events that happen to her brother and herself she is pretty much in shock the rest of the film and a side character. Barbara this time is a kick ass leader who is on par with Ben and is actually the smartest one of the group. This may have bothered fans of the original but this tougher Barbara fits this modern version and is a welcomed change. With Savini's background as a makeup wizard, this new version could have been a gory blood bath, but Savini shows great control as a director and the movie never goes over the top to its credit. There are solid scares and the makeup and gore is excellent. With some well timed jump scars that work and great zombie design this remake has a lot to offer in the Zombie film genre. Savini wisely knows when to pull back, take the scene in the basement when the zombie girl comes back to life and kills her mother. Romero's original vision resulted in a shocking scene and is one of the most horrific deaths in horror history. Savini recognizes this and doesn't try to top it. Instead, he pays homage to it by showing blood splash on a trowel that is hung on the wall. Classy and well executed. Savini achieves everything he sets out to do with this remake. Does it have the claustrophobic feel or atmosphere of the original? No, how could it? It still is an effective modern zombie film that has scares and memorable scenes. This film allows a newer generation to see an updated version of horror history and is a worthy remake.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

One of em Good ol' Zombie flick

9/10
Author: Daario Naharis
24 May 2014

The original version is very old and I din bother to see it. I was in the mood of watching a good old fashioned zombie movie and this certainly catered to my needs.

Watch the movie with an unbiased opinion and you'll even love it. Not one of those high-fi zombie movies like Resident evil but one of the originals.

The Zombies are slow and dumb. Doesn't mean they are on easy mode. This is the way they were supposed to be; the ancestors of today's mutated zombies. This was the way they were meant to be. This movie was meant to be and it sure does a swell job of what it was originally meant to be.

You will love it if you love Zombie movies.

Amen!

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Good remake by the master of Special effects

8/10
Author: (trentpatterson518)
24 February 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This is very good remake of the classic movie, especially since it was directed by Tom Savini. The special effects are done very well, the autopsy zombie is especially gruesome. The movie also has a creepy feel to it, much like the original. The story itself did not change much, and characters retain the same names. This version is also the best one to come out with the same name as the original, and there have been plenty of horrible movies that keep the name of the original. The whole movie is solid and the acting isn't half bad. The violence is very tame though, especially coming from Tom Savini, and I believe it focuses more on human nature more than the violence. I would recommend this movie for George Romero's fans and Tom Savini fans. Very well done.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

"Good Horror Remake!"

6/10
Author: gwnightscream from United States
7 November 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Tony Todd and Patricia Tallman star in Tom Savini's 1990 horror remake of George Romero's 1968 classic. This update is slightly different, but basically the same story. It begins with a young woman, Barbara (Tallman) and her brother, Johnny (Bill Moseley) heading to a cemetery to visit their mother's grave. They become attacked by flesh hungry zombies and Barbara barely escapes while Johnny becomes unfortunate. She seeks shelter at an isolated farmhouse nearby and is attacked by more zombies. She soon meets trucker, Ben (Todd) who helps her and together they protect themselves along with a few other people. Savini (Creepshow, From Dusk Til Dawn) wanted to do the make-up effects for Romero's original, but got to helm this version that's also written by Romero. Todd (Candyman) and Tallman (Army of Darkness) are great in it and I like the make-up effects. I recommend this good remake.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Colors more comforting to the eyes. That's all.

5/10
Author: (zfiany@hotmail.com) from Lebanon
15 October 2009

I usually don't love remakes even if they add to the original though in this case not much is added. The one time I enjoy a remake is when I haven't seen the original but in this case I did. I watched it anyhow for the sake of getting the sense of reality with the colors and everything. I just love horror movies so much that I don't mind sometimes even watching very-low-budget horrors.

This movie is not bad but is boring as a remake. To enjoy it, you have to deal with it as if you are watching a good movie again just like when you watch old good ones from your library.

The one good scene though in the movie is the one of the naked girl in the car when the zombies eat part of her face before she turns into one herself. Other than that, I can't seem to remember any scary scene in the movie.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

What is this? A remake that works!

8/10
Author: bowmanblue from United Kingdom
19 February 2015

It is fair to say that, in zombie movie terms, the original 'Night of the Living Dead' was a classic. Not only was it pretty gory and creepy for its time (hey, it was still the sixties!), but it also carefully alluded to the racial tensions of America at the time. Therefore, it not only cemented its place in the horror hall of fame, but also won praise for its daring social commentary.

How could anyone truly do the original justice by remaking it? Well... perhaps one thing that may go a long way is by giving it back to the people who made it to begin with! Yes, zombie overlord George A Romero returns at (well, near) the helm to make sure the remake goes smoothly. If you don't know... the film is about the start of a worldwide zombie epidemic. While society crumbles a rag-tag bunch of people try to survive the night in an abandoned farm house, while trying to fend off seemingly never ending waves of flesh-eating ghouls. Now, that synopsis actually describes both the 1968 version and the 1990 remake. The latter's first selling point is that it sticks to the original concept pretty tightly. In fact, the story is basically a shot-for-shot remake (okay, not 'shot-for-shot' in that depressing 'Psycho' remake, but shot-for-shot enough to keep the basic premise constantly the same).

Yes, it has some changes. First of all the remake looks better. It has a higher budget and has a more 'polished' feel to it. Plus all the actors really do play their parts well (some even being improved, in a few cases). Basically, the original is so good, that a remake that simply takes everything that's good at it and just updates its look and feel for a more modern audience isn't such a bad thing.

Yes, the original was a classic, simply because it was – for want of a better word – original. There had never really been anything like it before, therefore it's stayed the test of time. Yes, it was filmed in black and white (and the 'coloured in' version looked a little odd) so having what is technically a 'properly coloured' version of the same movie is no bad thing.

If you were to ask most (a) zombie purists and (b) film critics, they'd probably tell you that nothing could outdo the 1968 version. And, to be fair, they may be right. However, that doesn't stop the 1990 remake being a decent enough little zombie film in its own right. If you like your undead slow, creepy and relentless, give this one a go.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

Classic Zombie Horror!

9/10
Author: Jodie Pieters from United States
10 November 2013

This movie is a classic zombie horror, it's great and there are a lot of thrills throughout.

If I have to knock it at all, the acting could be a bit better. There are no big names in this movie but for what it is, being a fun zombie movie, it is good enough.

Also I would say that the movie is a little bit too much like a copy of the original grandfather of all zombie movies "Night of the Living Dead". It can't possibly be better than that so if you want to remake the movie at least make it different, add more twists or different settings etc.

At the end of the day this is a fantastic movie that you can still enjoy today, some great cheesy special effects and gore, and lots of fun zombie deaths!

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

Not as scary as the original but still very good

10/10
Author: Mike Davidson from Bradford, West Yorkshire, England
10 October 2012

Although this 1990 remake of the scariest film I have ever seen is not anywhere near as scary as the 1968 original, it is still a very good film and has improved with age and repeated viewings. I first saw the original NOLD upon the initial 1968 release at a drive-in, again in 1970 at a drive-in and then not again until around 1980 on VHS video. In the interim I was lucky enough to find and buy the original paperback edition of the 1974 Warner Books novelization. In the remake, Tom Savini does a fine job with the director's chair and the film benefits hugely from two very strong performances from Tony Todd and Patricia Tallman. The make-up effects, on-location filming and music are also all first-rate. It is a very worthwhile film despite being a remake of a true classic. It does not attempt to be equal to or better than the original. It doesn't copy the original scene-for-scene and dialog-for-dialog. Although the plots are indeed very similar, the remake offers some very unexpected twists and enhances some characters while it somewhat changes others. And for those who have seen the original film but not the remake, steer clear of reading spoilers for the remake's ending. It was a touch of pure genius and won't be at all what you will be expecting. See the remake but don't compare it to the original classic. It stands very well on its own merits and even compliments and pays homage and tribute to the 1968 version.

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 5 of 21: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards External reviews Parents Guide
Plot keywords Main details Your user reviews
Your vote history