Evad: It is in NO way "irrelevant" how well a movie was done for the time it was made in and how it was perceived when it first came out. Otherwise anyone should just be going for the "newest and hottest sh*t" and forget about everything before. And by that logic, "Alien Resurection" would be a better movie than "Alien" because it looks better, is faster paced etc. But I bet you wouldn't agree with this.
Another thing to consider at least about Romero's zombie-movies:
They all incorporate a threat that is far more real and - at least to me - more frightening than any Alien or Zombie. In all of his movies, the zombies are never the real threat. What puts the characters in danger are "human" traits like greed, selfishness, inability to coorparate etc. The zombies on the other hand are just a (supossedly) "dark" mirror-image of mankind... reduced to a primal state, obeying to primal instinct: Hunger. However, it's most of the time not them who get people killed... it's the people themselves, because they mostly are "human" in the most negative sense of the way. That's also why his movies to me are more "desaster movies" than actual horror, because the zombies are just one imaginable threat that could put people in such desperate situations were they turn on each other despite working together would be their only chance.
And THAT to me is even more scary. Because it's true. And because it can be applied to any extreme situation one might happen to endure some time.
|