The Night Of The Living Dead is a can be seen as Horror. This is evident as the characters are being attacked by zombies creating an intense feeling of fear and shock , expression(s) shown throughout the entire entourage. The Story has a specific plot, as the base characters get a inital glimpse of the upcoming issue. The characters then come together, attempting to rid of the issue. Finally the issue gets a hold of the characters, ultimately making the characters zombies. Its told this way and not in another way, because this plot creates the most suspense, making the viewer thirsty for what comes next. It supports the horror genre as fear is displayed throughout the entire plot.
All performances are suited to give the viewer a horror or fear type feeling. The performers act on different roles as Barbra is seen as the initial main, then Ben takes immediate command of almost every decision, displaying how the story creates an emergence of any character to take leadership regardless of fear, to take down the antagonist(s) (Zombies).
The most important character is Ben, an unknown actor. Barbra was also apart of her first major film. I feel as if they chose these characters due to them being new in the movie scenery. Creating the basis and start of something special to come.
Each actor matched their role; Ben being the leader and the rest being back seat drivers, ultimately assisting the leader to the destruction of the enemy. The plot can be deemed as unrealistic due to the viewer never being exposed to real torture or gore or death (camera doesn’t catch actual moment of impact). This isn’t a bad thing because at the time of production of this film, this was acceptable and doesn’t take away from the overall plot: Zombies ( Horror) .
More specifically, Todorov define it as a “marvelous” horror film, being explained as “the bizarre events of the story can only be explained by reference to another level of reality. First of all, this film is a black and white film style. The contrast between black and white highlights the mysterious and horrible atmosphere of this film. Second, the movie is full of scary elements. People are always afraid of the dead and the grave, and this film starts from the cemetery, with the dead as one of the main characters. The film also shows a lot of bloody horror scenes, such as the zombie cannibalism, the end, the little girl cannibalism and other scenes. This story is told in a nonlinear narrating way. As noted in Film Art, “nonlinear systems, permit random access to the entire store of footage” (68). Bit by bit, the film has to give information about the origin of the living dead. The actress ‘body movements and some background music perfectly present the intense scene, the plot’s advancement and the character’s psychological changes. There was no line, but anyone could intuitively feel Barbara’s fear. The actors stars are unknown because of budget issues. But it’s an unknown actor who makes this movie a success. It’s easy for audiences to form fixed mindsets about famous actors, associating them with their most famous roles.
The Night Of The Living Dead is a suspenseful movie, including multiple major segments. The first most important segment would be “They’re Coming to get you”. As Barbra and her Brother Johnny are at a graveyard, Johnny begins to joke around ” They’re Coming to get you” he says multiple times. As Barbra tells johnny to knock off the obnoxious jokes, she runs into an actual zombie. She then screams for johnny’s’ assistance. As he attempts to rescue his sister, he is ultimately knocked unconscious and Barbra is left to defend for herself. Another important segment is when everyone is stationed at the safe house, As Harry, Tom, Ben, and Barbra. They all are informed of the situation and have a better understanding. Two attempt to flee in a vehicle but die, due to engine flames. Everyone are ultimately bit and turned into zombies. These segments are situated this way to create the most suspense as possible, keeping the viewer waiting for scenes to come.
There are three segments of the movie. In the first part, Barbara and her brother encounter a zombie, and her brother dies of a virus. The second part is that she meets Ben, who is also hiding from the zombies, and other people in the house. The third part is the ending part. Cooper who loves his daughter is eaten by his zombie daughter. The other is stabbed to death by her daughter. Barbara is captured by her brother Johnny, and Ben is shot dead after being mistaken for a zombie. These parts are the main plot turning points. This way adds to the drama of the movie and renders the atmosphere of terror. Whenever the audience watches the film in a way, the director immediately gives an unexpected reversal, which surprises the audience. When I was watching the movie, I thought that Ben should be the final winner, but Ben was shot.
This horrific black and white film told to be the original zombie ice breaker into the movie industry was directed by George Romero, and can be described as one of a kind. Solely written by Romero this movie is a pure representation of his way of portraying a zombie horror film. Even with a low budget Romero was able to exemplify his film to an accepting audience fairly well. With sex, political views, violence, and racial equality incorperated with its blood and gore it seemed to not shock its audence as a reasonable person would think. Audencese took Romeros take on a zombie horror film as a reality that could happen. While first impressions of the film being in black and white might have labeled it as poor quality, some might say it was because of the low budget, others seem to think of it as having a deeper meaning.
With racial tensions high at this time, you can notice some racial tension during the film. Nevertheless the making of this cinema caused a huge fascination in zombie horror and films alike. It may have been the feeling it radiates when you think of a world dominating force with only your demise as its goal, and that coming together to stop the carnage is all that we have left. At this time coming together as a whole may not have been the country’s main objective in the 1960’s. It could even be seen as a metaphorical picture to unite white people together and eliminate a threat to their livelihood, which in this day was seen to be African Americans.
”choppy black/ and white scenes” was just one discription about the actual picture and visual of this cinema, although having “special effects ahead of its time” during the Vietnam era this film experienced a number of rewrites and character changes throughout the filming. With emotions and opinions high about war, sexual opinions, racial equality and politics, having these themes bridge together by a global threat was a smart tactic to use to keep viewers entertained. Over all this film was a small spark that helped edge many movements to the light. Not only in society but in the film industry as well. For younger folks at the time it was something no one had seen before which made it so special.
Fast forward to current horror genre zombie films such as 28 days later, resident evil, World War Z, and even some comedies like Shawn Of The Dead zombie movies have been steadily increasing in popularity since then. Night Of The Living Dead was original, had shock value, incorporated social and political views, and was advertised well enough to make a big hit in the world of cinema, Although the film may be more appreciated in recent years it’s ripped its way into the televisions of generations not only as a benchmark for zombie films, but as a teaching subject for cinema enthusiasts.
The genre of Night of The Living Dead is horror. There is plenty of evidence of this throughout the film. The plot of the film is a bunch of adults hiding from ghouls in a house, which is a horror film concept. None of the characters are villains or anything that would suggest they’re evil but after they get attacked by the ghouls they turn into ghouls and start attacking the other characters.
In terms of the dramatic structure, the exposition takes place when Barbara and Johnny are at the cemetery when Barabara get attacked and then she retreats to the house. During this scene we get some background knowledge on where the setting of the film will be and who is one of the main characters is. The rising action occurs when Barbara meets Ben and the other characters in the house and they are all planning on what they should do to escape the ghouls. The climax occurs when Tom and Judy hop in the truck outside and Ben follows them, then the truck catches on fire while Ben fights off the ghouls. The falling action is after everyone has either turned into a ghoul or died besides Ben the next morning and there is a search team that finds Ben. The denouement occurs when one of the members of the search team mistakes Ben for a ghoul and kills him.
The narrative is mainly structure around Ben. Ben is the one who seems to take charge and make all the decisions. He takes on a leadership role and boards up the windows and doors, lighting the couch on fire to fend off the ghouls, and using the rifle to shoot the ghouls. I think if the narrative were different and they would have structured it around Barbara for example, then the movie would have been much different because Barbara was very quiet throughout the whole film. This supports the genre because in all movies, and especially in horror movies, one character has to be brave and take on a leadership role to overcome the adversity that they are facing in order to prevail and Ben takes on that role in Night of The Living Dead.
The performances were suited to the genre by each actor filling their role appropriately. Ben suited the role of being the leader because he was the most vocal out of everyone and took charge of every situation and was extremely confident. All the other characters played minor roles which fits in well with the horror genre because in horror movies usually the other characters take a back seat to the leader of the group. The performances aren’t realistic, the camera turned away whenever one of the characters was about to get stabbed or eaten during the film. This isn’t a bad thing because this film was made over 50 years ago, so at the time it probably seemed realistic, but it doesn’t really take away from the plot.
The main actor, Duane Jones, as Ben is an unknown actor. Judith O’Dea was a stage and commercial actress at the time and she played the role of Barbara. This was the first major film that Judith O’Dea acted in at the time so the audience would not have had any prior background knowledge on her work. I don’t know why the director chose to make Duane Jones take the lead role and not Judith O’Dea. It seems like it would have made sense casting the actor with more experience as the lead actor but the director possibly just wanted to have a strong males presence be the lead actor would be my guess.
There are three major segments in Night of the Living Dead. The first segment is at the cemetery when Barbara and her brother Johnny are visiting their dead father and Barbara’s Johnny jokes about there being zombies in the graveyard. Subsequently, a zombie does appear in the graveyard and attacks Barbara and then her brother while Barabara retreats to a nearby house to hide.
The second segment is the house. At first it is just Barbara in the house and she is still in shock from what took place at the cemetery but she is soon joined by Ben. Ben kills a few zombies outside trying to get in and then begins to board up the doors and windows in the house. Shortly after, Harry and Tom join Barbara and Ben and begin to bicker about whether or not they should stay upstairs or go down to the cellar. Tom and Judy go down to the cellar while everyone else stays upstairs. While upstairs, they turn on the TV and see a message informing them that the government is aware of what’s happening. The TV anchorman states that people being stalked by zombies are supposed to report to the nearest shelter to stay safe. After seeing this message, they go outside and Ben fights off a group of zombies while Tom and Judy attempt to escape in the truck. Tom and Judy are unable to escape because the truck catches on fire while Ben is fighting the zombies and they die. Ben and Harry go inside and begin to fight and Ben shoots Harry. Harry retreats downstairs and is transformed into a zombie and eventually Karen, Helen, and Barbara are also attacked and turn into zombies.
The third segment is the next morning when there is a rescue attempt. Ben wakes up when he hears gunshots outside and then is shot by someone for being mistaken as a ghoul. This is where the movie ends.
The purpose of segmenting the movie in this way is to create a gradual build up of intensity for the viewer, keeping them engaged throughout the film. The impact on the viewer is to craft a sense of intrigue, causing the viewer to wonder what’s going to happen next. is more In the end, Ben is shot and it seems like an appropriate ending to a horror film since then goal of the movie was to entertain the audience but also scare them.
Night of the Living Dead does not strike me as the gore fest that the initial reception by the audience held it back then. The AVClub article proclaims, “[the film’s] status as a gore champion has long since been superseded.” Romero uses buckets of blood splattered onto his actors to ignite gore, but comparatively to today’s films, that practice would not be up to par to the standards of horror. But perhaps, appealing to popular belief, its popularity proves the weight of it opening the doors in the aspect of gore in horror.
In the Bright Lights article Night of the Living Dead: Reappraising an Undead Classic, Stephen Harper mentions that the movie was shot “over seven months on a shoestring budget.” Harper displays the evolution of film production in how a film took a longer timespan to shoot—especially one of a low budget film like George A. Romero’s Night of the Living Dead. However, it does not take anything away from the film; in fact, it amplifies Romero’s ability to stretch the budget.
Roger Ebert says that the audience seems to be majority of kids under 16 years. Once the “gore fest” in the film started, Ebert observes that the audience, especially the kids, were unfamiliar with the gore. On one hand, I cannot blame Ebert for being troubled about the how these kids will live their lives from then on; but on the other, I cannot help but find it absurd to find the movie disturbing from the lens that I have. Ebert misses on accurately projecting on the generation outside of his. It is very possible that the kids he observed have a more mature understanding that the feeling gore induces.
Romero opens the doors to a specific sub-genre of horror—gore. The audience’s reception and the critique assumes the progress that the film industry has made on two aspects: visual and an audience’s stomach for gore. The amalgam of the two says that as film has evolved visually, an audience tends to evolve what we accept, even the diction Ebert uses in his review is outdated. If constructing the binary in film watching creates the side on camera and the side of who is watching outside of that camera, Night of the Living Dead shows how the medium evolves on both sides.
Pickup on South Street was produced and released in 1953. The film is indicative of the social and political climate of the United States during the mid to late 1900s. The plot is heavily centered upon the infiltration of communist spies on American soil, as well as the support of defectors to the communist cause. The characters in the movie are portrayed in a continuous struggle of determining where their personal loyalty lies. Nonetheless, the dominating theme of money and power is overwritten by the obligation to uphold and protect American values against those who oppose them. Additionally, due to the political climate of the mid to late 1950s, the French and German release removed any references or suggestions of spies and communism (Anthony 2018). The censorship of spies and the negative light of communism presented (good vs. bad) in the movie as would be censored because both those countries had ties to or were communists sympathizers.
Sam Fuller utilized his films to voice and display the less advantageous working class in environments where violence and death are unfiltered (Sanjek 1994). Fuller ‘s depiction of criminals and the police department, which is meant to uphold the laws and integrities of due process is skewed. Fuller is able to demonstrate the virtues and lack thereof in both the criminal and police sector by shining a light on the perceived notions of a criminal’s character and policemen’s character. He effortlessly emphasizes this message by highlighting the commonalities in both a policeman and a criminal. Thus, revealing that both policemen and criminals only distinction is the motives they are driven by. Furthermore, the film’s conclusion suggest that criminals have the potential to change if love is given.
Most of the reviews applauded the film and were driven to note that, Pickup on South Street is one of the best American films of all time. Another review stated that Fuller was completely preoccupied with a, “barrage of sensations than telling a story” (Crowther 1953). This statement only focuses on the emotions triggered by the violence of the film and does not consider the objective for the display of violence in the storyline. In the article,“Seeing Red” by Willie Osterweil describes both the plot and the caliber of each character. He believed the movie poorly portrayed Americans and fabricated the communists to be ambiguous characters in the shadows. Willie’s words lacked an optimistic outlook on the theme and portrayal of the film. One of the issues with his review is that it could potentially encourage readers to disregard the film.
Works Cited
Anthony, S. (2018, November 20). A FILM TO REMEMBER: “PICKUP ON SOUTH STREET” (1953). Retrieved from https://medium.com/@sadissinger/a-film-to-remember-pickup-on-south-street-1953-82917d8ac985
Crowther, B. (1953, June 18). Article 3 — No Title; Roxy’s ‘Pickup on South Street’ Mixes Underworld Goons With Communist Spies. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/1953/06/18/archives/article-3-no-title-roxys-pickup-on-south-street-mixes-underworld.html
Osterweil, W. (2015, June 02). Seeing Red. Retrieved from https://www.theparisreview.org/blog/2015/06/02/seeing-red/
Sanjek, D. (1994). `Torment street between malicious and crude’: Sophisticated primitivism in the films of Samuel Fuller. Literature Film Quarterly,22(3), 187. doi:9503101747
Maybe because the first STAR WARS movie was so successful and spawned so many sequels and prequels, it’s tempting to see it as unique. But many features of STAR WARS: A NEW HOPE (as it came to be called) come from its genre or genres, a clever mix of science fiction, adventure, and fantasy. Its dramatic elements are very general and simple, and many of its story elements go back to the folk tale. But effective storytelling devices dress up this blend of genres to give the impression of something different: ‘old wine in new bottles,’ as the saying goes.
STAR WARS: A NEW HOPE uses some of the visual iconography of science fiction (space ships), but the differences are many. The science fiction genre often pits humans from earth against creatures from outer space, whether monstrous and dangerous or just simply misguided–as in the STAR TREK TV series. But STAR WARS does not use earth as a point of reference at all. It’s not about us going into space, it’s about a space without an “us.” Likewise, science fiction explores the human condition by putting humans in different environments and giving them different tools. Sci-fi asks: are we still us in these altered circumstances? Sci-fi is at least potentially socially critical. But the first STAR WARS movie, has a simpler good-evil contrast which is closer to the adventure film as explained by the web site Script Lab:
Adventure film is a genre that revolves around the conquests and explorations of a protagonist. The purpose of the conquest can be to retrieve a person or treasure, but often the main focus is simply the pursuit of the unknown. These films generally take place in exotic locations and play on historical myths.
STAR WARS certainly draws on the iconography of outer space and advanced technology, even though it is explicitly set in the past: “a long time ago in a universe far, far away.” And the technology sits uneasily beside magical powers and objects like light sabers–which seem only to be handled by those initiated in The Force. In science fiction, the laws of our physical universe still apply, but imaginary technology allows, say, space or time travel. But STAR WARS is closer to the fantasy genre, where magical things, beings, and powers abound. The web site Filmsite explains the fantasy film clearly:
If fantasy films, the hero often undergoes some kind of mystical experience, and must ask for aid from powerful, superhuman forces on the outside. Ancient Greek mythological figures or Arabian Nights-type narratives are typical storylines. Flying carpets, magic swords and spells, dragons, and ancient religious relics or objects are common elements. Bizarre and imaginary, invented lands include sci-fi worlds, unreal worlds, fairy tale settings, or other whimsical locales (e.g., Shangri-La or Brigadoon). The earliest sci-fi writers (H. G. Wells and Jules Verne) created fantastic worlds and/or journeys – the subject matter of many fantasy films.
The fantasy-adventure film goes all the way back to 1924, at least.
The Millennium Falcon might as well be a “flying carpet,” the light saber is a “magic sword,” and the Cantina is a “whimsical locale”
Genres can be rituals, and the fantasy genre especially is more like an initiate ritual or “rite of passage” than the horror-sci-fi mix where a monster must be cast out in a sort of action-adventure exorcism (as in ALIEN). STAR WARS, by contrast, is clearly an initiation ritual or rite of passage. Luke goes from petulant farmhand to hero through his adventures in faraway places and his contact with and instruction in mystical knowledge.
The all-nighter: a part of every college student’s rite of passage?
The dramatic structure of STAR WARS could not be simpler, but clever storytelling re-arranges the elements to intensify the suspense and create a series of dangerous adventures, last-minute rescues and escapes. Although Luke is the film’s protagonist, he actually joins forces with several others (Obi-Wan, Han Solo, and Chewbacca) to rescue Princess Leia and then attack the antagonist Darth Vader and his team, the forces of the empire. Yet the film does not start with the protagonist, it starts with the antagonist Darth Vader and the ‘object of value‘: Princess Leia. Aside from some bossing and flirting, Leia’s role in the story is to be rescued. (A plot outline emphasizing narrative functions can be found at the end of this essay.)
Indeed, if we look at the timings of the DVD (from a deleted web page available from Archive.org), fully 23% of the movie (1:03:09 to 1:29:52) consists of the rebels being captured, hiding, rescuing Leia, nearly being crushed to death, and getting back to their ship to escape: action and adventure. The next longest chunks are Luke finding the message from Leia, feeling trapped by his family, meeting Obi-Wan, and losing his aunt and uncle (0:19:41 to 0:39:04, roughly 16% of the running time): so just setting up the story.
Many of these elements are similar to the “functions” Russian folklorist Vladimir Propp found in his analysis of the Russian folk tale. Absence, interdiction, violation, and interrogation could all apply to Leia stealing the plans for the Death Star. Lack, Villainy, Decision, and Departure could all apply to Luke sensing something missing in his life, his family being killed, and his decision to go with Obi-Wan to rescue Leia.
But these very old-fashioned elements are re-shaped by re-arranging the story information so we see it less clearly than in a folk tale. The movie’s storytelling exposes and hides key information to keep the audience keenly involved. The film mostly exposes. We know Leia needs rescuing long before Luke does, so we are in suspense about whether or not the droids will find Obi-wan. We know Leia’s planet Tattooine has been destroyed before the rebels do, except for Obi-wan’s vision, which is none too definite. We know the rebels are hiding in the floor when Darth Vader and his force powers do not. We know the droids escaped when the clueless imperial forces seem not to. The fact that later storm troopers are looking for them does increase the sense of danger for Luke, even though not long earlier the imperial army had no clue anything was wrong. The point is not that the film makes a ‘mistake’ or is shoddily constructed: it’s that the movie does what it needs to do to raise the dramatic intensity, the sense of risk and adventure.
In short, STAR WARS: A NEW HOPE is an adventure film which uses folk tale elements and clever storytelling to create something which seems new but whose pieces are in fact very familiar. This is no slight to the filmmakers but rather a good demonstration of how “creativity” doesn’t always mean inventing something ‘never seen before.’
STARS WARS helped make moviegoing itself into a ritual in which we escape our humdrum lives for an adventure to faraway places, returning refreshed and ready for our boring everyday existence. Like contemporary professional sports, a spectacle of physical strength and skill allows us to return to a world in which the ability to withstand boredom is the real survival skill. STAR WARS is the dream, OFFICE SPACE is the reality.
ANTAGONIST Darth Vader captures OBJECT OF VALUE Leia, but two droids HELPERS escape.
The droids are captured and sold to Luke’s OBSTACLE Uncle who won’t let Luke become a soldier.
Luke finds message from Leia asking for help, and finds HELPER Obi-Wan.
Vader’s henchmen murder Luke’s family.
Luke sets a GOAL: rescuing Leia with Obi-Wan.
Luke and Obi-Wan hire HELPERS Han and Chewie.
When PURSUED they FLEE.
The planet they seek has been destroyed by Vader [The ANTAGONIST causes HARM].
The PROTAGONISTS are captured by Vader but find Leia and hide [FLIGHT].
In a CONFRONTATION, Obi-Wan sacrifices himself to Vader.
The rest of the team escapes with Leia.
They regroup and discover a flaw in Vader’s plan. Han and Chewie choose not to go along.
In a CONFRONTATION, the PROTAGONISTS attempt to destroy Vader’s ship, and many are killed [HARM], but Han and Chewie return to HELP, and Luke SUCCEEDS in destroying Vader’s ship.
Vader ESCAPES to fight another day.
Luke and Han receive RECOGNITION, and Chewie gets nothing.
:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/8885537/livingdead1.jpg)
