The Return of the Living Dead Reviews

1985, a bumper year for the horror genre nonetheless, heralded the release of three disparate zombie films: "Day of the Dead", the bleak conclusion to Romero's seminal trilogy, Stuart Gordon's gore-laden "Re-Animator", and "Alien" scribe Dan O'Bannon's directorial debut, "The Return of the Living Dead". In terms of ranking the individualistic merits and themes of each film, "The Return of the Living Dead" is the least clinical, unconcerned with the human condition or science, herein the cause of the zombie plague is bureaucratic error. However, similarly to Romero's trilogy, the bulk of the story centres on a vicinity: a medical supplies warehouse, the cemetery and its adjacent mortuary. A warehouse foreman shows around a new hire, and in doing so, shares with him that the film "Night of the Living Dead" was in fact based on a true life case: a military chemical spill which caused widespread reanimation. Although controlled and concealed from the public domain, the original zombies affected by the chemical were contained in drums and as a result of a clerical blunder, sent to the medical supplies warehouse, where they have remained for fifteen years. Unfortunately, during the revelation and subsequent idiotic gesticulation, the drum is accidentally pierced, allowing toxic gas to escape; the foremen are poisoned and the cadavers in the warehouse are reanimated, setting in motion a series of events defying all logic and rationale, but somehow utterly convincing.

"The Return of the Living Dead" pastiches the hardcore punk rock movement of the 1980s, and in turn, reverses the genre's usual teenage character composite of bimbos and dullards; despite being bedecked in piercings and leather, the punks are surprisingly unaware of and largely blameless in what is about to unfold, and crucially, no more asinine than their elder counterparts, thus creating an unlikely camaraderie within the besieged group. In the quest for survival, the harried, incompetent warehouse operators and kooky mortician next door overshadow the droll teenagers in terms of sheer histrionics and comic value, and the dire consequences of their nonsensical irresponsibility and resulting meltdowns are compelling to say the least. Suitably gross and surprisingly droll, the titular living dead and their all-consuming desire for brains are deftly executed and performed, with particular credence given to their new abilities: they cannot be destroyed in the traditional sense, and are much faster on their feet. Even incinerating these zombies culminates in unintended chaos, and as such, acid rain and ashes become equally dangerous as being bitten by the undead in Romero's universe. Radically different from Romero's films, O'Bannon's rewrite of an intended sequel to "Night of the Living Dead" includes an undertone of black comedy that never overshadows the horror elements, striking the perfect balance of farcical and corporeal to sustain its entertaining qualities and healthy dose of morbid humour throughout the breezy run time. A punk edit of the zombie formula, establishing new rules and tropes, "The Return of the Living Dead" is a sensational, hidden gory gem that deserves to be reappraised for its technical assets, thematic innovation and mordant edginess.

"I ain't in no mood to die tonight."

1985 was a banner year for zombie films, as two "Dead" flicks hit cinemas within two weeks. George A. Romero's third zombie effort, Day of the Dead, came first, closely followed by The Return of the Living Dead, which was written and directed by Alien scribe Dan O'Bannon. Return is based on the novel of the same name by John Russo, who worked with Romero on Night of the Living Dead in 1968 before the pair parted ways, leading Russo to desire a franchise of his own. Tobe Hooper was initially slated to direct the adaptation of Russo's book but was replaced with O'Bannon, who promptly rewrote the script to change the tone to comedy-horror and retool the story to avoid similarities to Romero's flicks. It's hard to dislike the resultant picture - it's a completely unpretentious and devilishly enjoyable zombie comedy that delivers thrills and laughs in equal measure.

Following a botched army experiment that resulted in a zombie outbreak, barrels containing preserved zombie remains are mistakenly sent to the Uneeda Medical Supply Company in Louisville, where they're stored in the basement. When the company employs Freddy (Thom Matthews), his superior, Frank (James Karen), begins showing him the ropes of the job and decides to show the young lad the barrels of zombies. Frank unwittingly releases a gas from one of the barrels with the power to reanimate dead things, leading to cadavers and split dogs being resurrected. Fretting over the situation, their boss Burt (Clu Gulager) is brought in, who suggests they burn all the zombies with the help of mortician Ernie (Don Calfa). Unfortunately, however, the gas from the burning bodies spreads to a nearby cemetery, giving rise to an army of superhuman un-dead with a taste for human brains.

Not long into The Return of the Living Dead, O'Bannon actually acknowledges that Romero is the zombie maestro - Frank explains that Night of the Living Dead was based on true events, but some of the details were changed. Furthermore, O'Bannon pretty much ignores Romero's previously established zombie mythology. The similarities start and end with walking dead; as for the rest, O'Bannon does his own thing. A shot to the head doesn't stop these zombies - they must be entirely obliterated with fire, acid, or a nuke. The zombies can speak, too, and retain some semblance of human logic. It's refreshing to watch something as creative as Return, which remains unique in the heavily populated zombie subgenre. It helps that O'Bannon's treatment of the premise is so thoroughly fun, turning what could've been an undistinguished low-budget zombie pic into a genuinely memorable orgy of campy awesomeness. The script is a complete hoot, full of witty bantering and funny dialogue, not to mention a wonderful penchant for off-the-wall mayhem (there's a dwarf zombie, for crying out loud). Running a scant 85 minutes, O'Bannon infuses Return with fantastic narrative velocity, making the experience all the more satisfying.

O'Bannon has expressed disappointment in some of the special effects, as he could only do so much with the tiny budget, but Return of the Living Dead stands the test of time. The make-up and sets look impressive, and the prosthetic and animatronic effects bestow the undead creatures with a tangible quality that cannot be replicated on a computer. Sure, some of the zombies look like extras in tattered clothing with a dab of make-up, but this adds to the charm of the flick, reinforcing that nothing is being taken with a straight face. This was O'Bannon's first directorial outing, and while he doesn't attempt anything visually audacious, his work is effective and efficient, displaying a gift for storytelling and pacing. The excellent soundtrack (including a few nice songs and a flavoursome original score) is another standout, adding the finishing touches to this delightful romp.

The colourful and fun ensemble of characters also warrants a mention. O'Bannon recruited a great selection of actors, each of whom plays their respective roles to perfection. Matthews displays side-splitting comic delivery as Frank, while Gulager is both convincing and hilarious as the boss who's in over his head. But the film belongs to Calfa, who plays a goofy embalmer. Miraculously, nobody in the movie is called upon to do silly things for the sake of the plot; they all remain likeable and possess the right amount of campiness.

Perhaps this review has lavished Return of the Living Dead with more praise than some of you think it deserves. Sure, it's no Best Picture winner or any monumental achievement, but the film deserves respect and adoration for being the endlessly entertaining and witty extravaganza that it is. Pitched at the right tone, Return is a total hoot, and it closes with one of the most surprising and darkly comic endings in film history. Its four sequels may be of inferior quality, but they cannot diminish this original film, which is essential viewing.

7.8/10