Day of the Dead (Divimax Special Edition)
|
List Price: $19.97
Our Price: $8.90
Your Save: $ 11.07 ( 55% )
Availability: Usually ships in 24 hours
Manufacturer: Starz / Anchor Bay
Starring: Terry Alexander, John Amplas, Don Brockett, William Cameron, Lori Cardille
|
Average Customer Rating:  
|
|
Aspect Ratio: 1.85:1
Audience Rating: Unrated
Binding: DVD
EAN: 0013131209099
Format: Anamorphic
Label: Starz / Anchor Bay
Number Of Items: 2
Publisher: Starz / Anchor Bay
Region Code: 1
Release Date: 2003-08-19
Running Time: 102
Studio: Starz / Anchor Bay
Theatrical Release Date: 1985-07-19
|
|
|
|
|
|
Spotlight customer reviews:
|
Customer Rating:
Summary: 3 stars out of 4
Comment: The Bottom Line:
By far the least appreciated of Romero's original "Dead" trilogy, Day of the Dead might not have Night's raw power or Dawn's shock value, but it features the director's trademarked blend of zombie carnage and unpretentious social commentary, making it well worth a viewing for fans of the genre.
Customer Rating:
Summary: Zombies
Comment: This movie although good gave me a rather grim out look on society, which i guess is the point of zombie movies :)
Customer Rating:
Summary: Best of the original trilogy.
Comment: As a rule "Day of the Dead" is considered to be the weakest of the original Romero 'Dead' trilogy the general criticism being that the film didn't take the zombie scenario anywhere new.
I for one would say that unequivocally this is the best of the three films for two simple reasons - it is the scariest, it has the best story.
The first of the trilogy "Night of the Living Dead" was a pretty decent B flick but by now is extremely dated. It is not so much scary as creepy and whilst there is clearly an underlying theme it is a little unsophisticated - man and zombie are not so different, i.e. both violent and sometimes, seemingly, unconditionally so.
Next up "Dawn of the Dead" is not really at all scary. It is not a comedy or spoof but is certainly light atmospherically. One might say that the underlying theme in this film is that people are like zombies insofar as they are mindless and habitual - they do the same things every day as if they were in some sort of unbreachable trance. The zombies look a bit silly - covered in strange blue paint - are not scary and I find a lot of the story is a bit 'empty'. It doesn't really seem to go anywhere.
In "Day of the Dead" you have a complete change in atmosphere. It is by far the darkest of the three films and in this film, much more than in the previous two, effort has gone into portraying the psychological effects on individuals and group dynamics as the desperation of the situation takes its toll. Characters find it difficult to sleep, yearn for escape from the hell they are in, get snappy with each other with respect to the amount, or lack thereof, of effort they are putting into the survival struggle. The music I think is stronger in this film - there is a creepy sort of pipe music played at the very beginning of the film, for example, and the caribbean-style music/song played towards/at the end is very metaphorical of the sense of freedom the characters feel at escaping the hell of the zombie-(and military-)ridden compound.
There is a pseudo-scientific attempt to explain how the zombies function and a strongly presented satirical point of an elite group of individuals trying to control the dumb masses, that are baying for blood, by military and scientific means. Should the masses be 'conditioned to behave' or just shot for failing to comply to the rule of the few in power? According to the head scientist Logan it comes down to reward - civil behaviour is only meaningful if rewarded, otherwise it is completely pointless.
There is a general social comment on the nature of human civilization and progress as measured by 'graphs and charts' and scientific sophistry. Logan's conditioning approach to solve the zombie problem is clearly unworkable - takes too long to train individuals, doesn't work on most zombies, only works on Bub because he is being fed warm human flesh (from dead soldiers). Logan's motivation is in any case not so much to solve the zombie problem but to assuage his own psychological imbalance by acting as a parent to the conditionable zombie Bub so as to compensate for his own sense of parental absence as a child. The scientists bewilder the military, impatient at the lack of results, through their sophistical prowess, the military's bullying nature though must have its vent sooner or later...
Then there is the chief protagonist the scientist Sarah and, Yin to her Yang, John the helicopter pilot. Sarah believes they have to do everything they can to resolve the zombie problem - rational and logical thinking will resolve everything. John believes man has created hell on Earth partly as a result of his need, and attempts to control, that which, ultimately, cannot be controlled, i.e. mortality. Man has moved so far from nature he no longer lives and yet is not dead either but exists in an altered state - disoriented, confused, driven by primeval urges, inclined to eat human flesh and watch reality tv shows. John does not see the point in a futile struggle to attempt to civilize that which is, for the most part, not amenable to a process of civilization (i.e. man/nature) and thinks it better that they just escape from it all and find an island so that they, mankind, may start over. Whilst the allusions to Dante's 'Inferno' are in evidence here it does not take a religious person to appreciate that the west's (over)emphasis on science and military is a pretty lethal cocktail - it is not clear what man is progressing towards, other than self-destruction perhaps.
*SPOILER*
The impact of plot of course depends on the atmosphere which in the case of this film above and beyond the others in the original trilogy is dark and the final 20 minutes extremely gory and intense. I think this actually contrasts well with the final escape and the relief of the three 'heroes' of leaving behind a 'world gone mad'. The special effects and rotting zombie look is particularly foul and this adds to the sense of bleakness in the film - the zombies are scary looking not comical as in Dawn.
So, to compare, above all, with "Dawn of the Dead", I would say this film seems to have more to say, is more atmospheric and just more impactful. It may not be fun in the same way that Dawn is but as a movie with a point I think it is the most complete of the series and definitely worth owing on dvd.
Customer Rating:
Summary: Philosophy of science and medicine
Comment: This movie is an absorbing symbolic depiction of the initial public response to HIV/AIDS--emphatically making unreasonable demands on scientists, who respond by overhyping the immediate value and scope of their work, which all scientists do anyway, that's their job. Dr. Logan has a plausible strategy. An army of Bubs trained to protect live humans and shoot undomesticated zombies in the head could in principle have solved the whole problem and saved humanity since other zombies would not attack them (zombies only go for live and recently-dead people). But it's unworkable for reasons which become obvious. This sort of thing has a technical name: "Proof-of-Principle". Sometimes, more-conscientious scientists phrase their proposals as efforts to study obstacles to solving a problem rather than as efforts to solve the problem. And sometimes the outcome is good, if the obstacles are few and solvable like the thermoinstability of DNA Polymerase which made PCR impractical until they cloned the thermostable polymerase from ocean-floor hot-springs organisms. Too often it's an excuse for relegating obvious critical impracticalities to the world-changers of the future.
Among the worst abusers of "Proof-of-Principle" and the closely related "Even-if-it's-useless-it's-still-basic-science" argument today is the collective of industrial and academic scams called Gene Therapy. It's based on the plausible-sounding idea that we can genetically program cells in our bodies to make good proteins, by putting artificial DNA into them, the way we program cells in flasks to do. Without screwing things up worse than they already are. Even though we have almost no ability to modify the genomes of live multicellular organisms except in a random, non-directed fashion. We can control which genes go in but not where in the genome they go. ALso, our control over which cells in the body get the DNA is very primitive and leaky. The whole thing gets less and less plausible the more you learn about it.
Anyway, the exchange between Captain Rhodes and Dr. Logan also sums up the point of the trilogy nicely: "Civility must be rewarded, Captain. If it's not rewarded, there's no use for it. There's just no use for it at all!" That's George Romero's total essence in one line, including other movies like THE CRAZIES and MONKEY SHINES.
This movie contains at least FOUR world-class character-acting demonstrations: Joe Pilato as Captain Rhodes, G. Howard Klar as Steele, Richard Liberty as Dr. Logan, and Howard Sherman as Bub. These make up for poor work in the protagonists' roles. In fact the good guys are the main problem with this flick. They're too good; except for token weaknesses there's nothing objectionable or even less-than-saintly about any of them. You never wonder what they're gonna do or say next--it's always the most good-guy possible thing. They face the facts, intercede for others, spare their enemies, lay down their weapons, and martyr themselves. Mr. Spock himself was not so goody-goody. Where are the ambiguous, flawed good guys who made the previous two chapters of the trilogy so interesting??? The protagonists of DAWN have no problem waging lusty semi-comedic war against the biker invaders, and even Ben (the black truck-driver in NotLD) kills his (live) enemy in righteous anger, invariably drawing the most enthusiastic response from the audience. In this one we get John the pilot instead. The only black character is also the superstitious anti-rationalist who wants to find a desert island and loaf, without even keeping a calendar. A veritable noble savage. Pardon me for being PC but I expect something less ham-handed from Romero.
So it's a flawed masterpiece but everyone interested in medical technology and society should see it. In fact all students of any health-care profession should see it. Oh yeah, the torn-to-pieces-by-zombies scenes are very effective too, and Tom Savini should get an award just for the make-up on the elderly female zombie who gets loose and bites someone. She is about as scary and repulsive as anything I've ever seen on screen.
Customer Rating:
Summary: Day of the Dead
Comment: Day of the Dead (Divimax Special Edition)
Loved this version of a classic zombie movie, very exciting from the very start! Like the idea of people trying to domesticate a dead person, if you can't stop them, use them....great!
|
|
|
Editorial Reviews:
|
Customer Rating:
Summary: 3 stars out of 4
Comment: The Bottom Line:
By far the least appreciated of Romero's original "Dead" trilogy, Day of the Dead might not have Night's raw power or Dawn's shock value, but it features the director's trademarked blend of zombie carnage and unpretentious social commentary, making it well worth a viewing for fans of the genre.
Customer Rating:
Summary: Zombies
Comment: This movie although good gave me a rather grim out look on society, which i guess is the point of zombie movies :)
Customer Rating:
Summary: Best of the original trilogy.
Comment: As a rule "Day of the Dead" is considered to be the weakest of the original Romero 'Dead' trilogy the general criticism being that the film didn't take the zombie scenario anywhere new.
I for one would say that unequivocally this is the best of the three films for two simple reasons - it is the scariest, it has the best story.
The first of the trilogy "Night of the Living Dead" was a pretty decent B flick but by now is extremely dated. It is not so much scary as creepy and whilst there is clearly an underlying theme it is a little unsophisticated - man and zombie are not so different, i.e. both violent and sometimes, seemingly, unconditionally so.
Next up "Dawn of the Dead" is not really at all scary. It is not a comedy or spoof but is certainly light atmospherically. One might say that the underlying theme in this film is that people are like zombies insofar as they are mindless and habitual - they do the same things every day as if they were in some sort of unbreachable trance. The zombies look a bit silly - covered in strange blue paint - are not scary and I find a lot of the story is a bit 'empty'. It doesn't really seem to go anywhere.
In "Day of the Dead" you have a complete change in atmosphere. It is by far the darkest of the three films and in this film, much more than in the previous two, effort has gone into portraying the psychological effects on individuals and group dynamics as the desperation of the situation takes its toll. Characters find it difficult to sleep, yearn for escape from the hell they are in, get snappy with each other with respect to the amount, or lack thereof, of effort they are putting into the survival struggle. The music I think is stronger in this film - there is a creepy sort of pipe music played at the very beginning of the film, for example, and the caribbean-style music/song played towards/at the end is very metaphorical of the sense of freedom the characters feel at escaping the hell of the zombie-(and military-)ridden compound.
There is a pseudo-scientific attempt to explain how the zombies function and a strongly presented satirical point of an elite group of individuals trying to control the dumb masses, that are baying for blood, by military and scientific means. Should the masses be 'conditioned to behave' or just shot for failing to comply to the rule of the few in power? According to the head scientist Logan it comes down to reward - civil behaviour is only meaningful if rewarded, otherwise it is completely pointless.
There is a general social comment on the nature of human civilization and progress as measured by 'graphs and charts' and scientific sophistry. Logan's conditioning approach to solve the zombie problem is clearly unworkable - takes too long to train individuals, doesn't work on most zombies, only works on Bub because he is being fed warm human flesh (from dead soldiers). Logan's motivation is in any case not so much to solve the zombie problem but to assuage his own psychological imbalance by acting as a parent to the conditionable zombie Bub so as to compensate for his own sense of parental absence as a child. The scientists bewilder the military, impatient at the lack of results, through their sophistical prowess, the military's bullying nature though must have its vent sooner or later...
Then there is the chief protagonist the scientist Sarah and, Yin to her Yang, John the helicopter pilot. Sarah believes they have to do everything they can to resolve the zombie problem - rational and logical thinking will resolve everything. John believes man has created hell on Earth partly as a result of his need, and attempts to control, that which, ultimately, cannot be controlled, i.e. mortality. Man has moved so far from nature he no longer lives and yet is not dead either but exists in an altered state - disoriented, confused, driven by primeval urges, inclined to eat human flesh and watch reality tv shows. John does not see the point in a futile struggle to attempt to civilize that which is, for the most part, not amenable to a process of civilization (i.e. man/nature) and thinks it better that they just escape from it all and find an island so that they, mankind, may start over. Whilst the allusions to Dante's 'Inferno' are in evidence here it does not take a religious person to appreciate that the west's (over)emphasis on science and military is a pretty lethal cocktail - it is not clear what man is progressing towards, other than self-destruction perhaps.
*SPOILER*
The impact of plot of course depends on the atmosphere which in the case of this film above and beyond the others in the original trilogy is dark and the final 20 minutes extremely gory and intense. I think this actually contrasts well with the final escape and the relief of the three 'heroes' of leaving behind a 'world gone mad'. The special effects and rotting zombie look is particularly foul and this adds to the sense of bleakness in the film - the zombies are scary looking not comical as in Dawn.
So, to compare, above all, with "Dawn of the Dead", I would say this film seems to have more to say, is more atmospheric and just more impactful. It may not be fun in the same way that Dawn is but as a movie with a point I think it is the most complete of the series and definitely worth owing on dvd.
Customer Rating:
Summary: Philosophy of science and medicine
Comment: This movie is an absorbing symbolic depiction of the initial public response to HIV/AIDS--emphatically making unreasonable demands on scientists, who respond by overhyping the immediate value and scope of their work, which all scientists do anyway, that's their job. Dr. Logan has a plausible strategy. An army of Bubs trained to protect live humans and shoot undomesticated zombies in the head could in principle have solved the whole problem and saved humanity since other zombies would not attack them (zombies only go for live and recently-dead people). But it's unworkable for reasons which become obvious. This sort of thing has a technical name: "Proof-of-Principle". Sometimes, more-conscientious scientists phrase their proposals as efforts to study obstacles to solving a problem rather than as efforts to solve the problem. And sometimes the outcome is good, if the obstacles are few and solvable like the thermoinstability of DNA Polymerase which made PCR impractical until they cloned the thermostable polymerase from ocean-floor hot-springs organisms. Too often it's an excuse for relegating obvious critical impracticalities to the world-changers of the future.
Among the worst abusers of "Proof-of-Principle" and the closely related "Even-if-it's-useless-it's-still-basic-science" argument today is the collective of industrial and academic scams called Gene Therapy. It's based on the plausible-sounding idea that we can genetically program cells in our bodies to make good proteins, by putting artificial DNA into them, the way we program cells in flasks to do. Without screwing things up worse than they already are. Even though we have almost no ability to modify the genomes of live multicellular organisms except in a random, non-directed fashion. We can control which genes go in but not where in the genome they go. ALso, our control over which cells in the body get the DNA is very primitive and leaky. The whole thing gets less and less plausible the more you learn about it.
Anyway, the exchange between Captain Rhodes and Dr. Logan also sums up the point of the trilogy nicely: "Civility must be rewarded, Captain. If it's not rewarded, there's no use for it. There's just no use for it at all!" That's George Romero's total essence in one line, including other movies like THE CRAZIES and MONKEY SHINES.
This movie contains at least FOUR world-class character-acting demonstrations: Joe Pilato as Captain Rhodes, G. Howard Klar as Steele, Richard Liberty as Dr. Logan, and Howard Sherman as Bub. These make up for poor work in the protagonists' roles. In fact the good guys are the main problem with this flick. They're too good; except for token weaknesses there's nothing objectionable or even less-than-saintly about any of them. You never wonder what they're gonna do or say next--it's always the most good-guy possible thing. They face the facts, intercede for others, spare their enemies, lay down their weapons, and martyr themselves. Mr. Spock himself was not so goody-goody. Where are the ambiguous, flawed good guys who made the previous two chapters of the trilogy so interesting??? The protagonists of DAWN have no problem waging lusty semi-comedic war against the biker invaders, and even Ben (the black truck-driver in NotLD) kills his (live) enemy in righteous anger, invariably drawing the most enthusiastic response from the audience. In this one we get John the pilot instead. The only black character is also the superstitious anti-rationalist who wants to find a desert island and loaf, without even keeping a calendar. A veritable noble savage. Pardon me for being PC but I expect something less ham-handed from Romero.
So it's a flawed masterpiece but everyone interested in medical technology and society should see it. In fact all students of any health-care profession should see it. Oh yeah, the torn-to-pieces-by-zombies scenes are very effective too, and Tom Savini should get an award just for the make-up on the elderly female zombie who gets loose and bites someone. She is about as scary and repulsive as anything I've ever seen on screen.
Customer Rating:
Summary: Day of the Dead
Comment: Day of the Dead (Divimax Special Edition)
Loved this version of a classic zombie movie, very exciting from the very start! Like the idea of people trying to domesticate a dead person, if you can't stop them, use them....great!
Studio: Starz/sphe Release Date: 03/25/2008 Run time: 102 minutes Rating: Nr
|
|
|
- Ask about this healthcare product "Day of the Dead (Divimax Special Edition)" in the forum
- Give review on this healthcare product "Day of the Dead (Divimax Special Edition)" in the forum
- Search related information in the forum
|
|
|
|
|
|
