Lumsdal Good , But It Is Overrated By Some

Quiet Muffin This movie tries so hard to be funny, yet it falls flat every time. Just another example of recycled ideas repackaged with women in an attempt to appeal to a certain audience.

Curt Watching it is like watching the spectacle of a class clown at their best: you laugh at their jokes, instigate their defiance, and "ooooh" when they get in trouble.

Brooklynn There's a more than satisfactory amount of boom-boom in the movie's trim running time.

Red-Barracuda The Crazies was the film where director George Romero returned to similar territory that he had explored in his earlier cult classic Night of the Living Dead (1968). Its story hinges on a bio-chemical warfare virus that accidentally ends up in the water supply of a small town. The unfortunate people who become infected by it turn into homicidal maniacs. Government forces turn up en mass and quarantine the whole area while a small group of scientists attempt to find an antidote.Although this film is nowhere near as well-known as Romero's zombie films, it's one that should really be seen by anybody who appreciates those films. By having the relentless killers people infected by a virus, the film makes the horror just that little bit more plausible. In fact, there is no way to physically tell who is infected or not, which is quite a clever plot element as it creates paranoia amongst the survivors who wonder if erratic behaviour from one of their group could be a symptom of the virus or simply a result of the stressful situation they find themselves in. In this way, along with the heavy-handed tactics of the government men, Romero is able to explore the idea of whether it is the infected or the normal people who are the worse overall danger. This theme is one the director explores in many of his other films but it's perhaps here that it is the most direct; after all, the pandemic is entirely man-made, while one of the solutions offered is to nuke the town. In this sense The Crazies falls into the large group of pessimistic 70's films in which the government are seen to not have the people's best interests at heart. The irony of the fate of the scientist who finds the cure for the virus only emphasises that the priorities and methods of the government men are way off the mark.One thing that might be off-putting to some viewers is the very low budget nature of this movie. I mean it's hardly rock bottom as there are many locations, costumes, sets, etc but it is most certainly technically raw. The sound recording in particular is quite basic and there is no real cinematic gloss to be found anywhere. I have to say though that I think in this instance, these factors sort of work in the film's favour a bit. There is a more realistic feel to events and it makes the scenario feel just that bit grittier and truer to life. Like other Romero's the script is pretty good while he does get some effective performances out of his cast. The most notable being Lynn Lowry of I Drink Your Blood (1970) and Shivers (1975) fame, who plays the fragile young woman who slowly loses her mind; her creepy father is played by Richard Liberty, who would go on to be more well-known as the scientist who teaches Bud the zombie in Romero's later Day of the Dead (1985). But aside from the low-key guerrilla style, there are also some pretty memorable horror moments too such as the kindly old woman who calmly stabs a soldier repeatedly with a knitting needle, the girl who insanely sweeps up the dead with a broom and the priest who sets himself alight. On the whole, I have a lot of time for this movie and it's one that I find gets better every time I re-watch it. It's definitely another example of the intelligent approach that Romero is rightly famous for bringing to the horror genre.

geminiredblue You've got to give George Romero points for consistency. No matter what type of film he's making, be it NOTLD or his modern-day vampire tale MARTIN, his message has always been the same: We're our own worst enemies. After completing NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD, George and his crew spent the next 5 years trying to get another production off the ground. After making a few forgettable ones, he decided to return to familiar ground. Inspired by a real-life incident, George this time makes an eco-based horror film. A military plane carrying an experimental bio-weapon crashes in a small Pennsylvanian town. The weapon, codenamed Trixie, leaks into the local water supply. Anyone who drinks the contaminated water becomes a homicidal maniac. So the army moves in to quarantine the town until they can decide on a strategy. Meanwhile, two firefighters and a handful of other people try to find a way out of the town. The army sends in squads to locate, destroy and rescue people. However, the townsfolk don't take kindly to their being detained. And that's where the horror works best. Because there's no physical way to tell which people are infected, and which are just reacting from the stressful situation. Though the film is Romero's personal favorite, in my opinion it's a very good movie, but it's not his best. The acting, as always, is excellent from a cast of unknowns. There are plenty of frightening moments. My favorite involves an old woman and a darning needle. However, it seems to lean a little too heavily on showing the authorities as being incompetent. I understand that Romero has his agenda, but please George we don't always need it shoved down our throats. Still, it's a satisfying horror flick that may be a little dated. And if nothing else, it got a superb remake in 2010! Check either of these two out to see eco-terror in action.

secondtake The Crazies (1973)A fairly creaky but still chilling movie, and a cult classic, with an original big-government bad-army premise that must have been frighteningly real at the time: a germ warfare mishap has infected a town and the army has moved in to quarantine the entire area. And kill or let die anyone not cooperating.The powerlessness of the individual against an army determined to be heartless (out of necessity) is a theme that worked then as well as now. But if there is some sympathy for the individual doctors and army personnel, since they are doing what needs to be done to prevent further outbreak, you can only feel growing anger that this kind of situation could actually happen. If bio-weapons exist, it seems eventually one will be released by mistake, and then what? Will it be like the Japanese nuke plant after a tsunami, where evacuations and appropriations are "required" in the name of national security. And is the solution to bio warfare the dropping of an atomic bomb? Maybe.That's at the core of this film. There is of course a couple at the center of the struggle to evade the authorities and survive. And infighting, questions of who to trust, how to figure out who is infected (going back to "Invasion of the Body Snatchers," of course), and fear of infection itself pepper the film with drama and sometimes incredulity. There is also the hope of finding someone immune to the disease, which turns out to be slim, especially when the real cures get obscured by events.All of this would work better with better acting. Director George Romero got away with some raw and imperfect acting in his very original "Night of the Living Dead" in 1968, but that was partly because everyone was either panicked or behaving like a zombie (there were, for sure, a couple great leads in that one). Here, though, most people are ordinary folk, and between their clunky acting and the even more clunky filming (in raw color), it just smells too much of a throw-together affair. Too bad, because the premise is terrific. There are other movies that push this kind of idea, by the way, and push it better, the most famous probably being "The Andromeda Strain" from 1971. However, if this kind of rough-edged production doesn't bother you, I think you have a kind of low-brow high-brow classic, appealing to all kinds of sentiments.

Hitchcoc I haven't seen the remake of this. I hope it has a bit more verisimilitude (I love to sneak that word in). This is one of those films where people deliver lines a bit like Romero's zombies. There is so much pain in the situation thrust upon them, and we are to believe that our society would be as indifferent and cruel as they are presented here. Everyone is afraid of panic. Yes, panic is not a good thing, but it is traded for a group of townspeople thrust into a horror story, not understanding what is going on. Obviously, this premise rides along on the fact that there was never a contingency for what takes place and so the army and its counterparts don't have a clue how to handle things. Thank God these people aren't like this in war or we'd be goose stepping to this day. So, while it's entertaining, don't think too much. It's a caricature B movie. But that's what this director is best at.