Passes the time.

Looks cheaper than his other greats, but this is still a chilling examination of how people react in a crisis.

The pacing in this film was not to my liking, and despite the subject matter this film didn't scare me at all. The premise, though, is excellent and Romero does an awesome job of making you wonder who is and isn't infected.

The idea seems really good but it's dull and boring now that we have movies just like this one. The action wasn't well played out either.

Gets better as it goes on. Nothing groundbreaking or anything, but the early bits are so agonizingly deficient that anything even slightly improved is welcome.

Score based on distant memory.

ZZzzzzZzzzZZzZZZzzz

A still-relevant critique of military interventionism and subhumanity, The Crazies is another multi-faceted Romero success despite some choppy editing and tinny sound. Romero's politics aren't as insightful (or as creative) as those in a De Palma joint but they lend his film a palpable edge absent from more insubstantial exploitation fare being produced at the time.

This wasn't so bad for a low budgeted movie as Romero seems to do well with these kind of things early on in his career. This seemed like a slow paced action flick rather than a horror movie. The acting was very well done which was alos a surprise for me. Not a bad movie and I would recommend this to people.

Could have been so much better.

The Crazies is a sometimes slow-paced zombie-esque horror, but more along the lines of the rage-inducing virus seen in 28 Days Later. The addition of two possible outcomes to infection with the virus varies the action a little, but it generally sticks to the now predictable plotline of accidental release of a bio-weapon and eventual quarrantine procedures. It's by no means bad, but the exhaustion of the basic idea behind the movie as dulled down its appeal over time.

Romero's non-zombie pic about a bio-toxin that causes homicidal insanity. Lots of bloody action, but overall it's lacking the sharp satirical quality that made his Dead films so good.

Bad acting, cheap looking special effects, bad story (well, maybe it WAS innovative at the time). Overall it is completely amateur movie. That holds some charm in itself. If it is not for Romero' name, I doubt anyone would remember this film.

even after the completely boring first half, the real meat of this movie is something that george himself has done better time and time again. the majority of the soundtrack consists of a single snare drum, and if thats good film making i think my calling is in cinema. not terrible, but certainly not impressive, and has a dud of an ending.

Decent satirical horror film that shows the ineptness of government planning taken to a degree that is as scary as the film itself. Everything is adequate with nothing extremely outstanding with the exception of a few deaths and scenes that make you go "oh fuck, why?" I'm looking at you man with beaker scene. Good for a watch, nothing exceptional.

There are a lot of flaws to this film (e.g bad acting, cliched motifs, and awkward action scenes), but the social commentary at the center of the script shines through. It's a striking satire of the incompetence of government agencies, the mindlessness of hippie counter-culture and the general shittiness of human nature. If Kubrick picked up this film, it could have turned out to be a sequel-in-spirit to Dr. Strangelove.

I seen this after i seen the new one in 2009. The new one is way better. This is pretty boring. But i had to watch it when i seen Romero directed to bad it was not that good.

Not one of Romero's better, but fascinating in all its imperfection.

Terribly boring and poorly acted. Doesn't compare to any of Romero's great films, big waste of time.

Some chilling moments but mainly it's derivative, hopped-up action moviemaking.

57.000

It's not awful, but Romero has certainly done better. The survivors storyline takes a long time to get into gear but, once it gets going, it's quite engaging. This has a couple advantages over the remake- the inclusion of the military perspective is interesting, and the fact that the Crazies show no physical symptoms of their infection ramps up the suspense of guessing who might be crazy. On the other hand, the remake's single-minded focus on the survivors allows for better pacing.

Romero's not quite in top form here. Though I like the premise, the "crazies" aren't very threatening with the exception of maybe one or two scenes. The result is that it turns into an examination of the blundering and brutal martial state, which becomes pretty dull pretty fast. It's not bad for low budget horror, but it's certainly no "Night of the Living Dead."

Another deep Romero horror film

As with Night of the Living Dead, the Vietnam war suffuses the whole thing. Unlike Night, it's not very good. Romero the scriptwriter has a ton of fun with it, turning it a lot darker than most similar movies, but Romero the director - not to mention half the cast - seems to be on bad drugs; it's simply a mess, with scenes so badly shot or edited that you far too often find yourself going "OK, what I think is meant to be shown here is..." A pity.

An interesting idea, but poorly executed. Marred by absolutely dreadful pacing.

Fairly solid, and created inbetween his "Dead" movies, this is a satire/sci-fi film but not a horror movie. Although some aspects only losely work, overall the movie not only manages to roughly tackle Vietnam, but feature some inspired, well made moments. This is also probably the most action packed movie Romero ever made, or at least out of the ones I've seen. Which really isn't a bad thing. The characters are quite sketchy, but with Romero its all about the big picture, anyways.