DVD & Blu-Ray Purchases Thread - (DVD's! Do you buy them New or Used?...)

[JDP]

Just because it appears as a "stand-alone film", it doesn't mean that its inception wasn't as a "sequel" to Romeo's film. Italian cinema did this. The producer and the bankroller of the film, De Angellis, always had Romero's film in mind, the film was always going to be marketed as a "sequel" and Fulci was hired knowing the film was going to be a "sequel". Italian law at the time didn't care if filmmakers made "sequels", even if that film had nothing to do with the original film. Of course, it's not a sequel in any realistic terms though. But it was MADE as one. The term "sequel" must have been used very loosely here by the producing company, then, because obviously the movie itself cannot be qualified as one in any real sense of the word. Or if it was intended as a sequel in the true sense, then the producers miserably failed to convey the idea to the scriptwriter, as the story he wrote is very obviously self-contained and has zero whatsoever to do with a movie like Dawn, which starts right smack in the middle of an already ongoing zombie catastrophe. If anything, it could have been advertised as a "prequel" (purposefully ignoring Night, of course.)

[shootemindehead]

You're completely missing the point.

[JDP]

You're completely missing the point. Huh? I think it is you who has. I did not disagree with what you said. I am just saying that the word "sequel" here is not being used in a proper sense by the producers, or if they did use it in the true sense, the scriptwriter obviously did not get the point. This movie cannot be qualified as a "sequel" in any true sense, no matter what the actual intentions were.

[EvilNed]

Just because it appears as a "stand-alone film", it doesn't mean that its inception wasn't as a "sequel" to Romeo's film. Italian cinema did this. The producer and the bankroller of the film, De Angellis, always had Romero's film in mind, the film was always going to be marketed as a "sequel" and Fulci was hired knowing the film was going to be a "sequel". Italian law at the time didn't care if filmmakers made "sequels", even if that film had nothing to do with the original film. Of course, it's not a sequel in any realistic terms though. But it was MADE as one. The term "sequel" must have been used very loosely here by the producing company, then, because obviously the movie itself cannot be qualified as one in any real sense of the word. Or if it was intended as a sequel in the true sense, then the producers miserably failed to convey the idea to the scriptwriter, as the story he wrote is very obviously self-contained and has zero whatsoever to do with a movie like Dawn, which starts right smack in the middle of an already ongoing zombie catastrophe. If anything, it could have been advertised as a "prequel" (purposefully ignoring Night, of course.) You are both right. Zombi 2 was initially scripted as a standalone adventure called Nightmare Island and was apparently inspired by films like The Island of Dr Moreau (evil experiments etc. etc). The scriptwriting began before Dawn of the Dead hit cinemas, by which time it's likely that the producers bought the rights to it and adapted it to a Zombi 2 sequel by adding the wraparound story set in New York. The jungle setting of the film was probably inspired by the cannibal genre making it's way through italian cinema, rather than Dawn of the Dead. All this is of course speculative and based on contradicting reports from various italian filmmakers who churned out so many films that it's possible that they just got things mixed up. Dardano Sarchetti has 13 writing credits in the years 1977-1980 and I doubt he could recall any particular film with any exact detail.

[shootemindehead]

Huh? I think it is you who has. I did not disagree with what you said. I am just saying that the word "sequel" here is not being used in a proper sense by the producers, or if they did use it in the true sense, the scriptwriter obviously did not get the point. This movie cannot be qualified as a "sequel" in any true sense, no matter what the actual intentions were. But, nobody is saying that it is or trying to "qualify" it as such. You're brainlocked on it being an official sequel. There isn't anyone who thought is was then, or now. But, Italian law was extremely lax when it came to Italian film companies making unofficial sequels and ripoffs to popular films. They did it all the time. There's a 'Jaws' sequel, an 'Alien' sequel, a 'Terminator' sequel. None of them are connected to the original films, but they were all financed and produced as "sequels'.

[JDP]

But, nobody is saying that it is or trying to "qualify" it as such. You're brainlocked on it being an official sequel. There isn't anyone who thought is was then, or now. But, Italian law was extremely lax when it came to Italian film companies making unofficial sequels and ripoffs to popular films. They did it all the time. There's a 'Jaws' sequel, an 'Alien' sequel, a 'Terminator' sequel. None of them are connected to the original films, but they were all financed and produced as "sequels'. Then obviously the term was being misused by the producers, since that is not what a "sequel" is supposed to be.

[shootemindehead]

Then obviously the term was being misused by the producers, since that is not what a "sequel" is supposed to be. That's the point. What is it you're not getting about this? Italian moviemakers didn't give a tinkers cuss whether something was an ACTUAL sequel or not. But a "sequel" ( <- in quotes for a reason ) guaranteed a certain amount of bums on seats. I can't explain this any simplier.

[bassman]

We need to hold a reading comprehension class. This seems to be happening in a lot of threads, no?

[JDP]

That's the point. What is it you're not getting about this? Italian moviemakers didn't give a tinkers cuss whether something was an ACTUAL sequel or not. But a "sequel" ( <- in quotes for a reason ) guaranteed a certain amount of bums on seats. I can't explain this any simplier. Since the laws were so loose that anyone could make a "sequel" (whether really related or not to the plot of the movie it was claiming to be following), it could have been the case that a given production company simply was not communicating its ideas and intentions very well with the scriptwriters, and the final product was promoted with the incorrect term "sequel" nonetheless, despite not really fulfilling its intention as a "sequel" in the proper sense. I can't explain this any simpler either. - - - Updated - - - You are both right. Zombi 2 was initially scripted as a standalone adventure called Nightmare Island and was apparently inspired by films like The Island of Dr Moreau (evil experiments etc. etc). The scriptwriting began before Dawn of the Dead hit cinemas, by which time it's likely that the producers bought the rights to it and adapted it to a Zombi 2 sequel by adding the wraparound story set in New York. The jungle setting of the film was probably inspired by the cannibal genre making it's way through italian cinema, rather than Dawn of the Dead. All this is of course speculative and based on contradicting reports from various italian filmmakers who churned out so many films that it's possible that they just got things mixed up. Dardano Sarchetti has 13 writing credits in the years 1977-1980 and I doubt he could recall any particular film with any exact detail. That's more or less what I was aiming at. There might have been some communication/understanding/intention problems/differences here between the scripwriters & the producers, resulting in some of these pseudo-sequels, but which might in fact not been fully intended to be so, at least from the part of some of the people involved.

[bassman]

So back to the subject of the thread..... Scream has revealed the specs for In The Mouth of Madness, and are also releasing Carpenter’s Memoirs of An Invisible Man and Someone’s Watching Me!. http://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=23495 Really looking forward to “Madness”... BRAND NEW 4K REMASTER of the film NEW Audio Commentary with director John Carpenter and producer Sandy King Carpenter NEW Horror's Hallowed Grounds – a look at the film's locations today NEW The Whisperer of the Dark – an interview with actress Julie Carman NEW Greg Nicotero's Things in the Basement – a new interview with special effects artist Greg Nicotero including behind-the-scenes footage NEW Home Movies from Hobb's End – Behind the Scenes footage from Greg Nicotero Audio Commentary with director John Carpenter and cinematographer Gary B. Kibbe Vintage Featurette – The Making of In the Mouth of Madness Theatrical Trailer TV Spots Optional English SDH subtitles for the main feature Our boy Nicotero comes through with providing special features yet again! It’s great that they made a NEW commentary with Carpenter, as the previous track is quite popular as an example of a bad commentary. Looking forward to trying the bad track, too!

[MinionZombie]

I've never seen "In The Mouth Of Madness", but if this got ported over here I'd be intrigued to give it a spin. Nicotero took on Savini's idea of shooting lots of behind the scenes video, which has ended up being a film fan's wet dream as we've had such excellent glimpses behind the scenes (e.g. Evil Dead 2). Soooooo glad they were shooting so much video back then.

[bassman]

I've never seen "In The Mouth Of Madness", but if this got ported over here I'd be intrigued to give it a spin. Nicotero took on Savini's idea of shooting lots of behind the scenes video, which has ended up being a film fan's wet dream as we've had such excellent glimpses behind the scenes (e.g. Evil Dead 2). Soooooo glad they were shooting so much video back then. Indeed, it’s really paid off for us fans/collectors. It’s great that even after all these years, Nicotero hasn’t lost sight of his love for the genre and film in general. You definitely should see if there’s a way you can view “Madness”. I’m really glad that I recently discovered it! Great stuff

[shootemindehead]

Since the laws were so loose that anyone could make a "sequel" (whether really related or not to the plot of the movie it was claiming to be following), it could have been the case that a given production company simply was not communicating its ideas and intentions very well with the scriptwriters, and the final product was promoted with the incorrect term "sequel" nonetheless, despite not really fulfilling its intention as a "sequel" in the proper sense. I can't explain this any simpler either. Why are you trying so hard to make an argument out of this? It's ridiculous. There is, literally, no argument to be had here. It has nothing to do with the script. Once a script is bought, that's it. The script writer gets paid and gets a credit. The film maker can then do, pretty much, what they want with it. The script means nothing in this case. There's no "communication" problem and there's no "whoops, we didn't mean it" going on. There were no good faith accidents happening. These movies were DIRECTLY produced and financed as "sequels", because the film companies wanted to cash in on a box office hit. It really is that simple. Italian cinema was notorious for it. There are loads of "sequels" to famous films that came out in Italy, none of which had much to do with the original film.

[bassman]

So wait....are YOU telling ME that Titanic II is NOT an official sequel?!?

[shootemindehead]

Sorry to break it to you lad.