George A. Romero's Diary Of The Dead...

saltysam · Post by **saltysam** » 12 Sep 2007, 21:36

first review here,sounds good

http://www.bloody-disgusting.com/review/1032

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 12 Sep 2007, 23:04

Which of these is considered by most to be the best? Do you need to see them in order?

I don't think I've ever seen any of them and I was thinking as I surprised myself by liking Halloween (which I didn't think I'd like) I thought I should give them a chance.

Are they as stupid as Evil Dead 2? That was so rubbish.

Cheers guys.

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 12 Sep 2007, 23:05

As you have asked them questions maybe 10 times before and had the answers many times, I wont say a word

EvaUnit02 · Post by **EvaUnit02** » 13 Sep 2007, 01:04

Night of the Living Dead is a masterpiece, plain and simple - the Citizen Kane of zombie films. As order between the humans walled within the farmhouse continues to disintergrate, the zombies on the outside (whom operate on base instinct) move in harmonious bliss. A very depressing film all around. The newsreel-esque ending is quite harrowing, but super-effective.

Dawn of the Dead is a very good film, with fantastic gore effects by master practical effects man Tom Savini. Romero predicts the mass-consumerism that would overwhelm the Western world in years/decades to come.

I haven't seen Day of the Dead. But Land is quite disappointing (a lot better than most studio horror films of recent years though).

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 13 Sep 2007, 02:44

Cheers Eva but Citizen Kane is a major borefest??? I'll discard that bit as I know what you (or is it Kermode) mean.

I presume the "Elite Millennium Edition" is the way to go? CD WOW claim to have it for only $14/£6.88. They may actually have it in stock what with it being an older title.

I hear Day is the weakest of the original three.

slasher13 · Post by **slasher13** » 13 Sep 2007, 08:14

Yes the Elite Millennium version is the best version to go with, and a bargin at that price

Day is good, there was restriction on George Romero, he didn't get that much funding so he couldn't do a zombie epic which he wanted to.

Dawn is a great movie, the 4 disk version is great

I kinda liked Land, one thing that was different was that you saw how Zombie act to each other, it kinda strange, but I liked it.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 13 Sep 2007, 13:08

Best to Worst

DAWN 78,
NIGHT 90,
NIGHT 68,
DAY,
DAWN 04,
LAND.

slasher13 · Post by **slasher13** » 13 Sep 2007, 14:12

I am glad everyone has forgot about Night 68: 30th Anniversary where they filmed in new elements and stuck it into the movie.. Completely horrible, and yes i have it on dvd

saltysam · Post by **saltysam** » 13 Sep 2007, 16:12

Anyone seen NOTLD 3-D.?i have it here and it looks crap

Day of the Dead 2:Contagium is atrocious as well.

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 13 Sep 2007, 17:04

slasher13 wrote: I am glad everyone has forgot about Night 68: 30th Anniversary where they filmed in new elements and stuck it into the movie.. Completely horrible, and yes i have it on dvd

I own it, shocking unwatcable transfer! double prints all the last frames of every scene! gives you a headache after a few minutes.

Day if not the weakest of the three if anything its a total masterpiece, its blows the origanal Night of the Living Dead away from a mile.

But Land is the worst (even if it still is a good film).

Dawn is the Only way to start watching them at all I say.

Night 68 shows its cheapo age far to much to impress most people, clunky acting as well.
NIGHT 90 is a far better film in every respect, esspecially acting it deserves an Oscar for horro film acting (not that that means much Oscars suck still).

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 13 Sep 2007, 18:53

I have to agree with Romero on the original NIGHT.

The last time I saw it I just couldn't get passed the extrordinary cheapness.

It looked like a student movie.

It put Romero on the map but I can't imagine many filmmakers putting that much effort into something that looks so poor.

The Savini remake improves upon the original on some levels: technically it's far better looking, acting is better too (Tony Todd, Tom Towles, Patricia Tallman (who actually gives us a rounded, strong female character).

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 13 Sep 2007, 19:04

Night 68 is a great film still, just it feels very dated and more like a stage play at times, like most old films I feel like that about them. Still I love it mind you, just it does get a bit overated as being the best Zombie film.

But the films are so vastly different it probibly does not matter which film you start with, as none relate to one another. Only thing they have in common really is a director, who has no style of his own I think so I cannot just watch his films and say hey thats him directing it.

I love Patricia Tallman in the 90 version, she irratates at first, but by the end I adored her.

Zombie films in general I would say the good ones are not really Zombie films, horror films is more apt I would say, as if the films just zombies then it would probibly suck. Most of the best are good films in general, but just happen to have have zombies in them

saltysam · Post by **saltysam** » 13 Sep 2007, 19:20

Dawn '78 is king of the zombie films, Night is a good movie but has dated a little, Duane Jones is great in it though.

saltysam · Post by **saltysam** » 13 Sep 2007, 19:21

Everyone should watch Zombie Lake at least once

Old Pang Yau · Post by **Old Pang Yau** » 13 Sep 2007, 19:35

Oooo! Zombies! Oops, shouldn't have used that word. But anyway, it seems like Day and Land are the lesser of his series, and after I thought about it, they both had the same reasons... restrictions. Day was going through hell because Romero had an epic script to begin with which needed a $6 million budget... but no studio would give him that much money for something "unrated". So he had to chop the budget in half and drastically re-write the script. Meanwhile with Land, Romero finally made a film in the series fully backed by a big Hollywood company... and of course, he had to make the studios happy before he could make himself happy. Plus, using very recognizable actors (Hopper, Leguizamo, Argento, etc), it kinda took away from the independent feel that the earlier films had. But with Night, Dawn, and from what I hear about Diary, Romero had full freedom to write what he wanted, shoot what he wanted, and edit together what he wanted. This being said, I'm looking VERY forward to Diary now. I was a bit hesitant at first, but I've read practially nothing but good things. Meanwhile, The Weinstein Company supposedly bought the US rights to it. Hmm, well, let's see what they do with it. At least they're not afraid of the NC-17/UNRATED labels... for DVDs at least

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 13 Sep 2007, 19:44

Day is perfect, you could not ask for a better films I say.

But each to their own, some people think Land is a great film

if they remade it without the pathetic rich people plotline, it could be

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 13 Sep 2007, 20:49

slasher13 wrote: I am glad everyone has forgot about Night 68: 30th Anniversary where they filmed in new elements and stuck it into the movie.. Completely horrible, and yes i have it on dvd

I heard about that it sounds atrocious.

Cheers guys.

I see Dawn of the Dead is coming to BD. The 4 disc Anchor Bay effort looks like overkill for me.

saltysam · Post by **saltysam** » 13 Sep 2007, 20:50

The 4 disc Anchor Bay set is one of the greatest dvd releases ever.it's so good a 50gb blu-ray disc can't fit everything from that set onto the hi def release.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 13 Sep 2007, 21:26

I know. All I want is the Theatrical Cut though tbh. HD is a bonus. I certainly don't need 3 cuts.

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 13 Sep 2007, 21:29

bradavon wrote:
I see Dawn of the Dead is coming to BD. The 4 disc Anchor Bay effort looks like overkill for me.

Ahh but the BR version only has one version of the film on it

the 4 dvd standard version has 3 very different versions of the film on it, including the very long Cannes cut version which improves the film a lot in every way and makes it so long it can be desribed as Epic. The Theatrical cut while superb, just isnt as good as the Cannes cut which is more more more, not filling shit footage like most longer cuts.

I would go for BR now to get Dawn, but not only the theatrical cut

Anchor Bay know they will release another version, then another and milk fans.

saltysam · Post by **saltysam** » 13 Sep 2007, 21:33

Yeah Cannes version is the best version of this classic movie.i'll be keeping my 4-discer,which has great image quality anyway.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 13 Sep 2007, 23:00

romerojpg wrote:Ahh but the BR version only has one version of the film on it the 4 dvd standard version has 3 very different versions of the film on it, including the very long Cannes cut version which improves the film a lot in every way and makes it so long it can be desribed as Epic.

12 minutes is considered "so long" to make it an epic?

Like I said I've zero interest in seeing 3 different cuts, one is enough. I hear the TC is Romero's Director's Cut so that will do me. I know longer want to buy DVDs which have HD versions out. I may buy both if I love the film enough though.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 14 Sep 2007, 02:20

bradavon wrote:I know. All I want is the Theatrical Cut though tbh. HD is a bonus. I certainly don't need 3 cuts.

Opinions vary, but I think the Cannes Workpint cut of DAWN is the best of the bunch, and if you like the film enough to own it, you really need to get the 4-disc set. That way whichever version is your preference it's covered. Plus it has two feature-length docs as bonus material.

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 14 Sep 2007, 02:34

It's not available in any other form right?

EvaUnit02 · Post by **EvaUnit02** » 14 Sep 2007, 03:33

bradavon wrote:It's not available in any other form right?

It is, but on old shit no one cares about (VHS, LD).