Land of the Dead IS 3 years after the outbreak:

[AcesandEights]

This is indeed a key piece of evidence why Day happens after Land.

[facestabber]

What you are given in Day is a small little window of one group. A group that has lost communications. And by that fact alone you extrapolate that the world has to be over and Washington DC knows of civilian established Fiddlers Green and other outposts etc. The US is kind of big you know. I can't imagine DC being able to keep current on every civilian stronghold let alone make sure our Day group is kept up to speed on a shelter in friggin Pennsylvania. Buts lets say the Gov't was aware of Fiddlers and this is early on as you believe. Do you believe the gov't would allow a money hungry civilian run the show or would they immediately place it under military order? But maybe since the title is LAND of the dead, that is Romero telling us that the land belongs to the dead. Sure a few city blocks in Pittsburg has proved a safe haven but the dead have taken over. I see gov't soldiers/scientists in Day working on a problem but I dont see them running Fiddlers.(granted some of the armed soldiers may have been military but if they are following a civilian thats a sign that society is long gone). Never saw scientists working day and night for Kaufman to solve the zombie epidemic, which if in its early stages, would be a worthwhile effort. Further, you believe that because the scientists were given military protection under ground that all of our military has been forced into hiding? If thats your belief then you have the same grave ideas about our military as Romero. "zombies rule the land in Day" is very disputable. You saw one street in one FL city. One. And nobody answered Mcdermott up and down the coast. No doubt that looks bleak just as Romero intended. But it doesnt prove your time line. The effort to build the corral in the mine sure looked less time consuming than designing and constructing dead reckoning. My guess is a person would need the military to start to deteriorate before getting access to miniguns and missle batteries. One other quick thing. In Land you belief its "relatively" safe to travel around because? Correct me if I'm wrong but is it that in LAND of the Dead, you believe the dead haven't really taken over the LAND even though Romero is telling us its LAND of the Dead? And Kaufmann was taking a car to a boat. Not to cruise the desolate Ohio countryside. He built Dead Reckoning for a reason and thats because its pretty damn dangerous to venture out da Green. I really rambled on and for that I apologize. At the end of the day we are gonna disagree. I dont think you're dumb, we just interpret the movies different. Regardless I love seeing activity back on this sight and come Sunday shit is going to get real.

[JDP]

What you are given in Day is a small little window of one group. A group that has lost communications. And by that fact alone you extrapolate that the world has to be over and Washington DC knows of civilian established Fiddlers Green and other outposts etc. The US is kind of big you know. I can't imagine DC being able to keep current on every civilian stronghold let alone make sure our Day group is kept up to speed on a shelter in friggin Pennsylvania. Buts lets say the Gov't was aware of Fiddlers and this is early on as you believe. Do you believe the gov't would allow a money hungry civilian run the show or would they immediately place it under military order? But maybe since the title is LAND of the dead, that is Romero telling us that the land belongs to the dead. Sure a few city blocks in Pittsburg has proved a safe haven but the dead have taken over. I see gov't soldiers/scientists in Day working on a problem but I dont see them running Fiddlers.(granted some of the armed soldiers may have been military but if they are following a civilian thats a sign that society is long gone). Never saw scientists working day and night for Kaufman to solve the zombie epidemic, which if in its early stages, would be a worthwhile effort. Please, read the thread again. A lot of what you are repeating here has already been addressed to death: these people are not desperately looking for solutions, survivors or any safe place to go to just for the hell of it. It is not their "hobby" to do such things, you know. And their desperation is not based just on how bad things have gotten in Florida. They have been in communication with others up until things got so bad that they no longer can establish contact. They have little other choices, otherwise the soldiers would have abandoned the shelter and the scientists quite a while back and moved to greener pastures. I find it incredibly naive that some people are trying to argue that "it's only about what's happening in Florida". If that was true, all they have to do is simply move to another place out of Florida, and presto! easy problem, easy solution. The problem is, as Dr. Logan poignantly points out, that there hardly are any places left to go to anymore. This is NOT the still relatively safe world of Dawn or Land anymore. As I have shown, even the media knew about the outposts. And yes, the US is a pretty big place, but the government in Washington was still able to maintain communications all the way down to Florida, yet you apparently expect me to believe that they would not have been able to do such a thing with next door Pennsylvania? And since the topic of finding survivors is such a prevalent one in Day, what makes you think that our Florida team did not care one bit to inquire about the subject to their superiors in Washington? Not that is really needed, mind you, the existence of the outposts was already even reported by the mass media! The bizarre thing would be if no one down in Florida was already aware that such places existed once upon a time. And if you want to try to argue that they still must have existed during the time of Day, then it begs the question of how can they be so unbelievably stupid and self-defeating not to take advantage of their existence and just abandon Florida and head towards the outposts? Yet this thought does not even cross their minds, specially Rhodes', who has to swallow his pride in front of his men because he can't answer the very simple "where will you go, captain?" taunt that Dr. Logan keeps rubbing all over his face. The humans of Land don't care that much about the zombie problem because they are still relatively safe in their outposts. Kaufman is not the US government, he is a scumbag crook who only cares about getting richer and more powerful, he doesn't care one bit about solving the zombie problem. As long as the status quo with him on top running things remains, he is perfectly happy about the whole situation! His money is going to be invested in what interests him (controlling the booze, tobacco, hookers, gambling, mercenaries, etc.) not in paying any scientists to find a solution to a problem that does not affect him much. Further, you believe that because the scientists were given military protection under ground that all of our military has been forced into hiding? If thats your belief then you have the same grave ideas about our military as Romero. Funny, even Washington itself is underground by Day. And we can see how "effective" the military has been in handling the situation in the other movies. They have stopped jack-squat! In Diary and Survival we see what some of them have been up to, in fact: trying to make it on their own. "zombies rule the land in Day" is very disputable. You saw one street in one FL city. One. And nobody answered Mcdermott up and down the coast. No doubt that looks bleak just as Romero intended. But it doesnt prove your time line. See above. These people are better informed about the situation. And they obviously have tried finding survivors in more places than we see in the movie. We could see how bad the situation was already getting everywhere in Dawn, so let alone by the time of Day. The effort to build the corral in the mine sure looked less time consuming than designing and constructing dead reckoning. My guess is a person would need the military to start to deteriorate before getting access to miniguns and missle batteries. Building the corral was not the hard part, bringing that bunch of zombies in from the outside is what would have been difficult and risky. Yet they pulled it off. The construction of Dead Reckoning itself is yet another piece of evidence that Land happens before Day. The US government can't even keep up its own communications network up and running anymore in Day, and you expect me to believe that a crook up in Pennsylvania somehow is able to build this armored vehicle with computers, radio communications, machine guns and long range rockets? Not to mention maintain armies of mercenaries armed to the teeth, all manner of vehicles, electric power, all manner of communications, maintain a huge workforce that would be required to keep these things going, etc. Once again, such level of progress and stability is unthinkable in Day. Even trying to communicate with others has become quite a task in the world of Day. People there are hoping to make it out alive, period. Nothing else matters. Just manage to survive. One other quick thing. In Land you belief its "relatively" safe to travel around because? Correct me if I'm wrong but is it that in LAND of the Dead, you believe the dead haven't really taken over the LAND even though Romero is telling us its LAND of the Dead? And Kaufmann was taking a car to a boat. Not to cruise the desolate Ohio countryside. He built Dead Reckoning for a reason and thats because its pretty damn dangerous to venture out da Green. I really rambled on and for that I apologize. At the end of the day we are gonna disagree. I dont think you're dumb, we just interpret the movies different. Regardless I love seeing activity back on this sight and come Sunday shit is going to get real. Land of the Dead is just a title. You don't really think that zombies really own the "Night", "Dawn" and "Day" just because some of these movies have these words in the title, do you? Kaufman was obviously heading to one of the safe places he refers to when he is talking to one of his associates. Riley wants to leave the city in search for a better place with a car. Foxy drops off Cholo and leaves to find another place on his own in a car. Most of the mercenaries that raid the towns are in fact in vehicles and bikes, not inside Dead Reckoning.

[EvilNed]

Actually that brings up an interesting point - wasn't the original Day script set towards the end of the apocalypse just as it was beginning to burn itself out? The big question is, did the time-frame of the story change with the re-write of the script? Well, I'm pretty sure it was reworked somehow of course. But ask yourself this question; Had the original Day of the Dead been produced do you think George woud've recycled the Fiddler's Green idea for Land? Both Day and Land somehow feature "end of the apocalypse" events at the end of them. In Day, it's that the zombies no longer come back. In Land, it's that we now have to learn how to share this world with each other. Both of them signal a change in the post-apocalypse order and in ways an end to the plague. What would be interesting to see is a film set even further ahead in timeline than Land - What happens after this event? Would the humans and zombies co-exist? Obviously not co-habit... But anyone see the french mini-series Les Revenants? Maybe something like that. As for the cell phones - it's obvious that Kaufman got a lot of things working that weren't before. Dead Reckoning itself, for instance. He somehow manufactured a tank. No easy feat. - - - Updated - - - Please, read the thread again. A lot of what you are repeating here has already been addressed to death Actually, no. Everyone has pointed out exactly what @facestabber is reacting to. Nobody is really disputing the idea that Day takes place after Land - at least I'm not (even though it's obvious it doesn't) - but the way you arrive at your conclusions are ridiculous extrapolations and outright denial. Like the decay in Day - and the communciation with Washington. You're just repeating the same old story despite several people pointing out the flaws in it. If you want to see where, just read the thread again, I can't be bothered to.

[Trin]

Which have been addressed and shown to be faulty. Conjecture is not proof. The things you continually contend are logical and obvious aren't very persuasive. I'm not hearing a lot of agreement with your arguments. Not only have they been living there for who knows how long, they had to find a suitable place to keep zombies in, without them being able to escape or make it back into the living areas. Agreed. That by itself means having to explore the caves. And ... that is conjecture. You assume they had to explore the caves in their entirety. They did not. Here is MY conjecture. They had to explore a PART of the caves to secure the living area. They explored outwards from the living area as much as they needed to at the time they moved in. Once they realized that they had a single place that they could barricade off to secure the main living areas, they barricade it off and focused on other priorities. The rest of the place was for all intents and purposes considered outside the secured area. It was convenient to use it as a zombie corral so they did. The place was enormous. They were putting together the operation on very short time. They had lots of other priorities. I think it's perfectly reasonable to think they didn't explore every inch of the place once they had secured an area. And once they had a zombie population back there, they'd not be very motivated to explore it. "Eeny, meeny, miny, moe, that's it, we will build the corral here! Don't bother checking out the place, who cares if these caves lead to another exit outside and we lose all the zombies that are going to cost us a lot of work and risk to bring in, or even worse, have another entrance back into the bunker complex so they have a nice chance to kill us all, we don't give a rat's ass about our lives, so let's be as careless as possible about this!" Interesting statement considering that they left an open hatch to the outside. I would think that if they'd explored it thoroughly they'd have blocked that off somehow. Plus on top of that we have two civilians who know the silo is there. Exactly through what miracle these two could have been aware of this but the soldiers, who are in charge of the facility, paradoxically know nothing about it you have never cared to explain. John overtly displayed knowledge about the place that no one else had. He was reading all the documentation that was housed in the caves. And you'll notice that Sarah and McDermott didn't beeline for the silo until John caught up with them. They didn't seem to be moving with purpose at all. I'd contend that John was THE ONLY PERSON who knew about the silo exit. He may very well have known about it for some time and chosen not to share it with the military because he wanted to have his own escape route if it came to that. I won't contend that my hypothesis fits ALL the available facts. But it leaves less loose end. Such as: - The soldiers didn't display knowledge of there being an additional exit when it was particularly important that they have one. - The soldiers placed Sarah and McDermott in the corral as if it were a death sentence. They did NOT act like they knew there was another exit. - The soldiers displayed an abundance of counter-behaviors to the contention that they were highly security minded. They were portrayed as lazy and stupid. For example, they posted no guards. They did no rounds. They had no clue John and McDermott had built a sanctuary outside the living quarters. They brawled. They threatened rape on Sarah. They left the corral gate open as they fled. - The soldiers clearly did not know the cave layout. When the zombies stream in through the corral gates they make it to the living areas BEFORE the soldiers. Your ONLY evidence is an assumption of what you think people like them SHOULD do. To be honest, I agree with that assumption. They SHOULD HAVE explored the caves. But it doesn't fit the facts. Stop acting like you have to explain everything to me when your own hypothesis fails so obviously. The outposts are not mentioned in Day because such a thing simply can't exist anymore. Even what's left of the government itself is holing up in bunkers just like they are. Even if we assume that Land occurs less than a year into the outbreak I don't see how you can contend that places like Fiddler's Green "simply can't exist anymore," by your assumed 5 year mark of Day. It seems like a setup similar to the Green could go indefinitely. The Green was more capable of securing supplies and building infrastructure. Whereas the Day bunker had limited resources and no means to scavenge. Here's an interesting question. If Land was set so early into the outbreak, why didn't Peter pick up transmissions from Fiddler's Green or the scavenging parties listening to the radio in the mall?

[MinionZombie]

Cant really see how a person can attach the use or lack of use of money in Day as evidence of anything. We have Govt workers/contractors that were given top notch shelter, provisions(including booze mmmmmm) and protection to do a job. What purpose would they have for money? I don't think they were cruising to local 7/11's for slurpees. They had provisions and a job to do. I'm not sure if someone else was talking about money in Day of the Dead ... but I was specifically referencing the use of money in Land. The soldiers "must have" searched the caves. Why? Simply because they lived there? Because they built a corral there? There is no direct evidence to support that they actually DID search the caves. It is inference and conjecture. And your conclusion ignores that they very clearly think they are trapped in the cave when the Lift control is topside and the panel is broken. Aye, and when Rhodes et al stick our heroes into the coral it's with the sole intention of condemning them to death - that's it. The soldiers don't know what's down there in those caves, and nor do the scientists. It's just a big hole, and the only thing they know about it is that where they have the coral is the only 'access' point to that part of the cave system (i.e. so they'd be safe in knowing the zombies couldn't stumble around and accidentally find themselves on the non-zombie side of the coral via some roundabout route). Sarah & Co have no idea where they're going - McDermott drags her along as they need to be anywhere but at the coral (because of the soldiers blocking them from just climbing back over, and because of the encroaching zombies while they have no weapons bar a 2x4) - it's a shot in the dark, they have to move somewhere. They have no knowledge of what lies ahead, but they have no choice but to run into the depths - it's by luck that they find those lights and arrows pointing the way. If it wasn't for the gunshots and them calling out afterwards, John would have quite possibly found himself lost down there. They didn't know that cave system at all. Do you consider the films to be linked? We're talking back and forth as if in Day - Fiddler's Green is out there somewhere... Yet this might not have been the case. Riley uses a cellphone and McDermott a ham radio, for instance... I've not necessarily thought of them as all being in the same zombie apocalypse, rather a zombie apocalypse - but that they all take place at different amounts of time into their respective zombie apocalypses. Or, I can also think of them as all being the same apocalypse, but that the difference in technology is just something to ignore as the films, as GAR has regularly stated, have been his way of commenting on different periods in times - the 60s, 70s, 80s, 00s. It does make the links between the films a bit awkward, but on the other hand - being that each film is all about representing a particular decade - they are thematically linked. You just have to throw aside the inconsistency of the technology, the fashions, the sexual politics, the socio-political elements etc. Also, Diary and Survival are linked directly - but they're another zombie apocalypse entirely ... or they simply rewind time back to the beginning ... however, I've never considered Diary and Survival to be linked to Night/Dawn/Day/Land. It's four movies linked, and then two movies linked together but separate from the first four.

[shootemindehead]

Which have been addressed and shown to be faulty. Not even in the slightest lad.

[facestabber]

"Well in the beginning I had this conceit between Night and Day. In this instance the movie is roughly THREE years after the zombie phenomenon has started. Of course the movies themselves are four decades apart. I like the idea that this is a CONTINUING saga but nothing period wise, like the cars or clothes, dates them. Yet I like to reflect a little bit about the decade. That's why I originally set Land in the nineties". Any guesses who may have said that?

[MinionZombie]

"Well in the beginning I had this conceit between Night and Day. In this instance the movie is roughly THREE years after the zombie phenomenon has started. Of course the movies themselves are four decades apart. I like the idea that this is a CONTINUING saga but nothing period wise, like the cars or clothes, dates them. Yet I like to reflect a little bit about the decade. That's why I originally set Land in the nineties". Any guesses who may have said that? hehe ... I think that answers that particular question quite well.

[EvilNed]

hehe ... I think that answers that particular question quite well. Thats not evidence of anything! It's obvious Kaufman's tank can travel through time and arrived from the future - the so called 3 years he's talking about! In fact, Land takes place PRIOR to the apocalypse in a post-Trump presidancy America!

[JDP]

Not even in the slightest lad. One only has to review the thread to see that it plainly has. It is you "Land has to happen after Day" fellows that still have to bring up any counterarguments that have not been answered yet. The ball is still on your court.

[EvilNed]

One only has to review the thread to see that it plainly has. It is you "Land has to happen after Day" fellows that still have to bring up any counterarguments that have not been answered yet. The ball is still on your court. Occam's razor. There, back in your court.

[JDP]

Actually, no. Everyone has pointed out exactly what @facestabber is reacting to. Nobody is really disputing the idea that Day takes place after Land - at least I'm not (even though it's obvious it doesn't) - but the way you arrive at your conclusions are ridiculous extrapolations and outright denial. Like the decay in Day - and the communciation with Washington. You're just repeating the same old story despite several people pointing out the flaws in it. If you want to see where, just read the thread again, I can't be bothered to. Is it my fault that you and a couple of others apparently don't understand simple common sense and logic and can't make the connections between all that has been quoted, pointed out, and reasoned? Don't think so. I suggest you take your own advice and re-read the thread. It is you who have failed to provide any solid counterarguments. If we had to believe in your way of "arguing" we would have to come to such ridiculous assumptions as the survivors in Day being total self-defeating masochist morons who are putting themselves willingly in a desperate dangerous situation and blowing things out of proportion for no reason other than the fact that their "backyard" has no survivors anywhere and plenty of zombies in it. Of course, the fact that this is in total contradiction to their character does not seem to bother you in the least. - - - Updated - - - Occam's razor. There, back in your court. That was already bounced back at your court. Your little mantra does not work. - - - Updated - - - I'm not sure if someone else was talking about money in Day of the Dead ... but I was specifically referencing the use of money in Land. Both movies feature money, and both of them have quite a different outlook on it. Aye, and when Rhodes et al stick our heroes into the coral it's with the sole intention of condemning them to death - that's it. The soldiers don't know what's down there in those caves, and nor do the scientists. It's just a big hole, and the only thing they know about it is that where they have the coral is the only 'access' point to that part of the cave system (i.e. so they'd be safe in knowing the zombies couldn't stumble around and accidentally find themselves on the non-zombie side of the coral via some roundabout route). Self-defeating argument and conclusion. There is no way of knowing whether the zombies that they are going to work very hard and risk their lives to round up and bring down there are going to escape to the outside or get back into the living/working areas without exploring the caves first and knowing their layout. Unless one hilariously wants to argue that these people are psychics and already know the answer and therefore do not need to check it out. In which case they obviously would also know about the silo as well, so even such an outlandish argument would still not work. The reason why sticking the civilians in the cave is basically a death sentence is because they had no weapons to fight with. The caves have a bunch of zombies in them. The likelihood of them making it out alive is quite slim. Rhodes only cares to freak out John and coerce him into cooperating with them, he doesn't care about the fate of the civilians anyway. Even if they manage to make it out alive, they are still pretty much screwed in the long run. They have no weapons and are going to have to survive out there on their own. Of course, Rhodes did not count on the fact that John was going to screw his plans. Sarah & Co have no idea where they're going - McDermott drags her along as they need to be anywhere but at the coral (because of the soldiers blocking them from just climbing back over, and because of the encroaching zombies while they have no weapons bar a 2x4) - it's a shot in the dark, they have to move somewhere. They have no knowledge of what lies ahead, but they have no choice but to run into the depths - it's by luck that they find those lights and arrows pointing the way. If it wasn't for the gunshots and them calling out afterwards, John would have quite possibly found himself lost down there. They didn't know that cave system at all. False. Sarah mentions the silo being back there before they even start making a run for it, and McDermott says that they can't make it back there without weapons. They knew very well where they were going. Unfortunately, they did not count on things like a rock slide cutting them off, or zombies getting on their way, and so on. The silo even has red lights and arrows clearly pointing to it. It is not like it is very difficult to follow its trail otherwise. Trying to argue that the soldiers would not have known about this when even two civilians are well aware of it is about as absurd and unsustainable as claiming that they would build the corral without first making sure that it was safe to keep the zombies in those caves in the first place. Also, Diary and Survival are linked directly - but they're another zombie apocalypse entirely ... or they simply rewind time back to the beginning ... however, I've never considered Diary and Survival to be linked to Night/Dawn/Day/Land. It's four movies linked, and then two movies linked together but separate from the first four. As far as I can tell, Romero meant all these movies to be part of the same series. If that is the case, Diary and Survival are obviously also from early on during the zombie crisis. - - - Updated - - - "Well in the beginning I had this conceit between Night and Day. In this instance the movie is roughly THREE years after the zombie phenomenon has started. Of course the movies themselves are four decades apart. I like the idea that this is a CONTINUING saga but nothing period wise, like the cars or clothes, dates them. Yet I like to reflect a little bit about the decade. That's why I originally set Land in the nineties". Any guesses who may have said that? Probably the same guy who in the original script also said that Day takes place five years after the phenomenon started.

[EvilNed]

You've offered no reasonable argument to anything, so still; Occams razor.

[MinionZombie]

Thats not evidence of anything! It's obvious Kaufman's tank can travel through time and arrived from the future - the so called 3 years he's talking about! In fact, Land takes place PRIOR to the apocalypse in a post-Trump presidancy America! Dear God!