If I had to point to the beginning of modern horror cinema, then Night of the Living Dead is where it's at. This was definitely a transitional film and retained several elements from mid-20th century horror films, but the gruesome nature of this movie along with its social commentary would create a paradigm that horror cinema would embrace in the coming decades. Fans of modern "zombie" films and television may find this film to be quaint or even somewhat boring, but there is no Rick Grimes without his walking in (our lead character) Ben's footsteps.
I admit that I was one of those who was a bit bored when I first watched this film. My first exposure to modern horror was through films like The Fog (1980), Phantasm (1979), and The Shining (1980). These were all creepy films with equally creepy soundtracks and many other horror films of the era followed that pattern. I knew Night of the Living Dead would be a bit different based on its age alone. The soundtrack, which was all stock incidental music, was more reminiscent of films from the 1940s and 1950s. Shooting it in black & white hearkened back to those days as well. The film's graphic nature was really the main point that set it apart from some of those classic monster movies, but even that was rather tame by today's standards. For teenage me, while I liked it enough to own a copy, this was an "old movie".
I don't look at it so much as an old movie anymore, but rather like a demo or an independent early release from a nationally known band. It's rough, maybe even primitive, but all the pieces are there, pieces that would be developed and expanded upon and put together in different ways to become something greater.
This film's main contribution to modern horror, obviously, is the introduction of the "living dead" creature. Reanimated dead bodies are nothing new to horror films; the classic monsters such as Dracula, the Mummy, and Frankenstein's monster are all dead people brought back to life somehow, but possessed their own intelligence. Resurrected dead were also featured in Ed Wood's Plan 9 From Outer Space, but were under the control of an alien force. Zombies, at this point in time, were generally recognized to be Haitian slaves under the influence of a "voodoo" priest. Now we have a new type of monster: a mindless reanimated corpse whose only purpose is to feed on the flesh of the living.
Characteristics of the Living Dead
These ghouls, as they are called in this film, form the basic template for numerous variations of this creature that would follow. For the most part, these ghouls are slow moving, possess little intelligence, and eat living things. Basic rules for the Romero living dead, right? Not so fast. Even in this early film there are exceptions.
The first ghoul we see, the one in the cemetery, does almost run at one point when he's chasing the car. Perhaps that one died only a short time before he was reanimated and still retains some "living" abilities (I know he's featured more in the additional footage shot for the expanded edition back in the 1990s but I haven't ever watched it and therefore don't know his story) but he moves pretty fast compared to the average ghoul. Existing in a decaying form would make running a problem as the ankles would not withstand the wear and tear of running without the body being able to repair that tissue, so from an anatomical standpoint, it makes sense for them to not run. He does seem to pass for living for both Johnny and Barbara, so the freshly dead reanimated corpse theory is plausible. I won't make any comparisons to the zombies in some later films that can do a fast sprint, as those are a separate matter entirely.
The cemetery ghoul also appears to have retained some intelligence. When Barbara locks herself in the car we see the ghoul pick up a rock to break the window. Another ghoul later grabs an object in an attempt to break down the door into the house. Using tools is not an exclusive trait of living humans, even some of the smallest animals will make use of rocks, wood, and things of that nature. These are reanimated dead bodies, though. A good amount of suspension of disbelief is required to buy the fact that they move and want to eat, are we also to believe that they think and use some low level of reasoning? Tool use suggests they still retain some small part of a living mind. While the freshly dead rationale could be used here, in later Romero films, the not so freshly dead retain and even further develop these skills. The only way I can rationalize this is whatever reanimated them in the first place supplies some type of impulse to their brains. Is it radiation? Electromagnetics? Something alien? Who knows? On some level, though, these are thinking creatures.
Yet another action by the cemetery ghoul calls into question whether or not flesh eating is their driving force. Johnny never gets devoured in the cemetery struggle, he is simply killed and left to reanimate as the ghoul chases after Barbara. This can be explained away by watching cat behavior: play with something until it stops moving then go after the new prey. That theory works until the girl in the cellar dies and reanimates. First she feeds upon her father, but later only appears to kill her mother using a trowel and does not feed upon her. Perhaps the primal urge to kill prey is separate from the urge to feed; we often see them together but a small body that has just fed has that urge temporarily satisfied, but the urge to kill still remains.
Night of the Still Living
Of course you can't talk about a George Romero living dead film without mentioning the fact that the living dead are not the focus of the story. The ghouls are really an environmental factor, the plot of the film is how those still living are dealing with this abrupt change to their world. This is true of every film in this series, and different aspects of humanity are covered in each film. Each is a reflection of society at that point in time.
In the late 1960s, some of the prevalent issues were civil rights, feminism, and a general shift in cultural norms. While none of these issues are explicitly addressed in this film, it is still a product of the attitudes associated with these issues.
When the dead first besiege the house, the only two characters that we know to be there are a black man and a white woman. I wasn't alive back then but that had to raise a few eyebrows. It had only been six months since the Martin Luther King Jr assassination, so race relations were still very much a sensitive point.
I would imagine that when Ben first appears, rushing up to Barbara in the house, many viewers' prejudices caused them to assume this meant more trouble for the woman who was the audience surrogate up until this point. We quickly learn that this is no black stereotype. Ben immediately takes control of the situation, calmly and intelligently. He is not a token black character, he is the leading man and his race is not important, judge him by his own merits. This character, whether by design or accident, embodied one of the goals of the civil rights movement.
I wish I could say that the female characters did the same for the feminist cause, but that wasn't pulled off so successfully. We do see Barbara begin to rise to the occasion when the shock starts to wear off, but she is quickly overcome by the dead when confronted by the reanimated form of her brother. A similar fate awaits Judy when she follows Tom outside to the truck. Next, Helen meets her demise down in the cellar where her husband had previously retreated after he was shot. All of these women's deaths are connected to a man in their lives. Patriarchy still ruled the day.
On a more general level, the people in the house represent a cross section of the new society emerging in the 1960s. You have young people, women and minorities trying to secure their place in society, and a traditional nuclear family adjusting to these changes. The dead outside are the establishment standing in opposition to new ways of thinking, who relentlessly try to get these people in line with the established ways. They are unthinking, generally indistinguishable from one another, but have great numbers on their side. The group in the house have nowhere to turn for help except to each other, and the infighting plays a big role in their undoing. To make matters worse, then help finally does arrive, their incompetence, or maybe it's simply indifference, renders moot everything that the last survivor went through that night.
The Legacy of the Living Dead
Night of the Living Dead gave us a new breed of monster, a new kind of movie, and a new era of horror cinema. Not content with simply scaring the audience, Romero makes us uncomfortable. He holds up a mirror that allows us to see things about ourselves that we would rather not acknowledge. This would become an essential ingredient in modern horror cinema.
These ghouls, zombies or whatever you want to call them, are particularly scary because they are us. They are not the product of a curse, a mad scientist, an alien plot; they are simply people stripped of everything that makes us human. They are people who we once knew and loved, now unrecognizable and intent on harming us.
The people are no longer simply victims or "the good guys". The ghouls are amoral, little more than an environmental hazard to be dealt with by the survivors if they don't destroy themselves first. The survivors are as much of a danger to each other as the ghouls are to the survivors.
We would have to wait ten years for the next installment in this series. Dawn of the Dead explores more of the human condition, taking the struggle for survival into a shopping mall. In the meantime The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974) and The Hills Have Eyes (1977) revisit the theme of showing us an altered vision of ourselves, a nuclear family with a different set of social norms.
I doubt anyone involved in this film had any idea it would become the cinematic milestone that it is. The budget was low, the special effects were primitive, the gore was certainly considered distasteful. It has spawned remakes, sequels, meta-sequels, copycats, ripoffs. It inspired and formed the basis of countless branches of living dead mythology. Even Michael Jackson owes the success of one of his biggest hits in part to zombie lore that began with this film. All fans of modern horror owe a big debt of gratitude to Night of the Living Dead.