Page 13 of 13 FirstFirst ... 3910111213
Results 181 to 192 of 192

Thread: So which Night film is canon to George's series, original or remake?

  1. #181
    Dead
    Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    596
    United States
    Quote Originally Posted by EvilNed View Post
    No, they're not. That's where you're mistaken.
    They are not open to interpretation.
    Yes, they are. Cholo wasn't referring to the zombies but to his business relationship with Kaufman. Where are the zombies unambiguously mentioned or even alluded to here??? The bum/wino/whatever was talking about the last time he drove a car. Again, where are the unambiguous references to the zombies here??? Neither one of those remarks takes place in a dialogue involving the zombies. Compare that to the very clear and unambiguous 3 week reference in Dawn, which happens during an argument regarding the zombies and thus leaves no doubt whatsoever about what those 3 weeks refer to.

  2. #182
    Zombie Flesh Eater EvilNed's Avatar
    Zombie Flesh Eater

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    5,527
    Undisclosed
    Quote Originally Posted by JDP View Post
    Yes, they are.
    No. They are not open to interpretation.
    It is exposition given to us within the frames of a zombie apocalypse. Romero is not trying to tell us anything about Cholo's dayjob 3 years ago. To sugges so is absurd.
    Your argument is meaningless.

    You can make the case that these lines do not refer to the start of the apocalypse but that would be on the same absurd level as suggesting that Night could potentially take place after Day.
    Last edited by EvilNed; 2 Days Ago at 09:00 PM. Reason: sdfsdfs

  3. #183
    Dead
    Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    596
    United States
    Quote Originally Posted by EvilNed View Post
    No. They are not open to interpretation.
    It is exposition given to us within the frames of a zombie apocalypse. Romero is not trying to tell us anything about Cholo's dayjob 3 years ago. To sugges so is absurd.
    Your argument is meaningless.

    You can make the case that these lines do not refer to the start of the apocalypse but that would be on the same absurd level as suggesting that Night could potentially take place after Day.
    No, it is not, and no matter how many times you try to pass this "Day of the Dead happens before Night of the Living Dead" fallacy as "equivalent" it simply won't pass muster. Cholo could very well have been working for Kaufman before the zombie thing happened and he would be referring to that, there is nothing "weird" or "impossible" about that. But it is totally impossible that the events in Night could possibly have happened after Day. Why? Once again let me point out the very obvious impossibility for you: in Day everyone knows about the zombies, they are not a "novelty" to anyone, while in Night no one knows anything about the zombies and everyone is totally caught by surprise by their appearance. We don't need anything else to see where the impossibility of your proposition is, it is plain as day to everyone. It is pretty similar to those people who absurdly want to claim that Lucio Fulci's Zombie is supposedly an unofficial "sequel" to Dawn or Night. Why is that impossible? Well, the exact same reason: in that movie no one except the inhabitants of Matul know anything about zombies being real. By the end of the movie everyone in the world is starting to realize how real they are since the zombie plague has made its way to New York and the media is reporting the events. That by itself prevents that movie from being any kind of sequel to the two Romero movies, where we plainly see that everyone became very well aware of the zombies and the media reported their reality to the whole world. People can't simply go from knowing something to mysteriously and bizarrely not being aware of it again. The world does not work that way.
    Last edited by JDP; 2 Days Ago at 12:41 AM. Reason: ;

  4. #184
    Zombie Flesh Eater EvilNed's Avatar
    Zombie Flesh Eater

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    5,527
    Undisclosed
    Quote Originally Posted by JDP View Post
    No, it is not, and no matter how many times you try to pass this "Day of the Dead happens before Night of the Living Dead" fallacy as "equivalent" it simply won't pass muster.
    It's an absurd statement. Just as absurd as stating that the lines in Land are open for interpreration - which they obviously are not. They are said in context. The context is the raging zombie apocalypse. It's obvious to everyone.
    Last edited by EvilNed; 2 Days Ago at 09:52 AM. Reason: köllkölkö

  5. #185
    Chasing Prey shootemindehead's Avatar
    Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Dublin
    Posts
    3,196
    Ireland
    Quote Originally Posted by EvilNed View Post
    No, they're not. That's where you're mistaken.
    They are not open to interpretation.
    I don't think Romero was the kind of filmmaker to throw such things into his movies without justification. Those "three years" comments are in there to make a point. Otherwise there's absolutely no cause for them to be in the film. Romero deliberately has his characters mark a timeframe.

    "No, no, no. Three years! Three
    years I been cleaning up after you,
    taking out your garbage, and you
    tell me I'm not good enough? You're
    the one who's no good. You are no
    fucking good. And you are gonna let
    me in. You know why? Because I know
    what goes on around here. How many
    of your fucking "members" know
    what's in that garbage I take out
    for you?"


    "How long have I been working
    for you? Three years?
    Taking out your garbage,
    cleaning up after you
    and then you're going to say
    I'm not good enough?
    Let me tell you something,
    you're going to let me in
    because I know what goes on
    around here. Do your committee
    members know what the fuck is
    going out with the garbage?"

    Cholo says this for a reason in both the original and the shooting script, and he not talking about his "old" job before the zombies started chomping on people.

    Also, Asia Argento's character says she's "never been out" of the city. She says that for a reason too. It's to indicate that Pittsburg has been in the midst of the zombie apocalypse for a considerable amount of time and it isn't some recent phenomena that's just happened a few months ago.
    I'm runnin' this monkey farm now Frankenstein.....

  6. #186
    Dead
    Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    596
    United States
    Quote Originally Posted by EvilNed View Post
    It's an absurd statement. Just as absurd as stating that the lines in Land are open for interpreration - which they obviously are not. They are said in context. The context is the raging zombie apocalypse. It's obvious to everyone.
    Sorry, but no, the context of those lines in Land is NOT about the zombies. Keep trying.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by shootemindehead View Post
    I don't think Romero was the kind of filmmaker to throw such things into his movies without justification. Those "three years" comments are in there to make a point. Otherwise there's absolutely no cause for them to be in the film. Romero deliberately has his characters mark a timeframe.

    "No, no, no. Three years! Three
    years I been cleaning up after you,
    taking out your garbage, and you
    tell me I'm not good enough? You're
    the one who's no good. You are no
    fucking good. And you are gonna let
    me in. You know why? Because I know
    what goes on around here. How many
    of your fucking "members" know
    what's in that garbage I take out
    for you?"


    "How long have I been working
    for you? Three years?
    Taking out your garbage,
    cleaning up after you
    and then you're going to say
    I'm not good enough?
    Let me tell you something,
    you're going to let me in
    because I know what goes on
    around here. Do your committee
    members know what the fuck is
    going out with the garbage?"

    Cholo says this for a reason in both the original and the shooting script, and he not talking about his "old" job before the zombies started chomping on people.

    Also, Asia Argento's character says she's "never been out" of the city. She says that for a reason too. It's to indicate that Pittsburg has been in the midst of the zombie apocalypse for a considerable amount of time and it isn't some recent phenomena that's just happened a few months ago.
    Your very own quotes show my point: where is anything said here that Cholo is talking about the zombies? All he mentions is the fact that for 3 years he's been doing Kaufman's "dirty work". Where does it say or imply anything else??? Kaufman is a crook, he could easily have been doing illegal stuff long before the zombies came about, and Cholo was one of his "handymen". Where is the "impossibility" in this??? As it stands, that dialogue proves nothing about how long has it been since the zombies first appeared. Now compare those lines with the truly specific and unambiguous dialogue in Dawn:

    - Do you believe the dead are returning to life?
    - I'm not so...
    -Do you believe the dead are returning to life and attacking the living?
    -I'm not so sure what to believe, doctor. All we get is what you people tell us. And it's hard enough to believe...
    -It's fact...! It's fact...!
    -It's hard enough to believe without you coming in here...
    -You're not running a talk-show here, Mr. Berman! You can forget pitching an audience the moral bullshit they wanna hear!
    -You're talking about abandoning any human code of behaviour...

    -You're not listening! You're not listening! We've had this situation for the last 3 weeks... What does it take? What does it take to make people see?
    -People aren't willing to accept your solutions, doctor, and I for one don't blame them!
    -Every dead body that is not exterminated becomes one of them. It gets up and kills. The people it kills, get up and kill!


    There are no "ifs" or "buts" here: the 3 week reference is unambiguously about how long the zombie situation has been going on at this point in the movie. It is simply impossible to interpret it any other way. There is no such equivalent in Land (or Day.)

    As for Slack's statement: many people actually live their whole lives in one city or town, without going anywhere else. It doesn't prove anything. But the same character does in fact say something regarding the zombies themselves which again argues against the idea that they could really have been around for 3 years: she has no idea how long does it take for a bitten person to die and come back as a zombie. Does it sound reasonable to you that a person could possibly live through 3 years in this zombie crisis and NOT know something so basic and vital for survival??? I don't think so! You don't have to tell any of the characters in Day such a well-known thing, though, they are all very familiar with what exactly the zombie bites do to people.

    As I said many times before, if Romero did indeed intend this movie to happen after Day, he did a very lousy job at trying to convey that idea. Seen that way, the movie has many contradictions and paradoxes. But most of these problems vanish by simply inverting the order.
    Last edited by JDP; 1 Day Ago at 07:47 PM. Reason: ;

  7. #187
    Chasing Prey shootemindehead's Avatar
    Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Dublin
    Posts
    3,196
    Ireland
    Quote Originally Posted by JDP View Post
    Your very own quotes show my point.
    It doesn't even remotely coincide with your point.
    I'm runnin' this monkey farm now Frankenstein.....

  8. #188
    Zombie Flesh Eater EvilNed's Avatar
    Zombie Flesh Eater

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    5,527
    Undisclosed
    Quote Originally Posted by JDP View Post
    Sorry, but no, the context of those lines in Land is NOT about the zombies. Keep trying.
    I don't need to keep trying. It's obvious to any and all that Land is a continuation from Day. Romero said so himself, go back a page or two, that Big Daddy was an "uber bub".

    Besides all of that, it's mentioned in the film that Land takes place 3 years after the outbreak. It's in the film. You can't ignore it and at the same time make a case for yourself.

    So your argument holds as much water as saying that Night takes place after Day. Which is an equivalent comparison, according to you.

  9. #189
    Dead
    Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    596
    United States
    Quote Originally Posted by shootemindehead View Post
    It doesn't even remotely coincide with your point.
    Yes, they do, as there is no reference to the zombies in those quotes whatsoever. Again, that's just you and Ned ASSUMING that it must be in reference to them, but if you read the quotes without this ASSUMPTION you will see that there is no explicit implication about them anywhere. Plus the idea that these movies could not have references to things that go back to events before the zombies, on which this invalid argument solely rests, is false too. There's a number of references to events in these movies that can also easily be interpreted as having happened before the zombies (like Cholo's or Dr. Logan's comments about their fathers and what they did, which though not specifically said to be from pre-zombie times they can also be easily interpreted as such, since there is nothing in these dialogue lines to prevent them from being so; same thing as Cholo's lines about him working for Kaufman.)

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by EvilNed View Post
    I don't need to keep trying. It's obvious to any and all that Land is a continuation from Day. Romero said so himself, go back a page or two, that Big Daddy was an "uber bub".

    Besides all of that, it's mentioned in the film that Land takes place 3 years after the outbreak. It's in the film. You can't ignore it and at the same time make a case for yourself.

    So your argument holds as much water as saying that Night takes place after Day. Which is an equivalent comparison, according to you.
    An "uber" whatever does not mean it happened "after", plus I am judging the movie by what it shows, Romero's intentions apart.

    There is no such reference in the movie that it has been "3 years after the outbreak". Again, find me such a line which unambiguously states so. It does not exist.

    Nope, because you already know how impossible and incorrect your "comparison" is. It is you and you alone who bizarrely thinks they are equivalent. The chronological order of Night ----->Day is NOT open to any kind of question as it relies on self-explanatory/evident things which the filmmaker does NOT have to clarify to anyone, unlike when exactly is Land supposedly happening, which needs specific addressing or else it's anyone's guess. Your "reduction to absurdity" kind of arguments do not work. So keep on trying. Maybe one day you will manage to get a proper counterargument that does not rely on a fallacy.
    Last edited by JDP; 15 Hours Ago at 08:14 PM. Reason: ;

  10. #190
    Chasing Prey shootemindehead's Avatar
    Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Dublin
    Posts
    3,196
    Ireland
    Quote Originally Posted by JDP View Post
    Yes, they do, as there is no reference to the zombies in those quotes whatsoever. Again, that's just you and Ned ASSUMING that it must be in reference to them, but if you read the quotes without this ASSUMPTION you will see that there is no explicit implication about them anywhere. Plus the idea that these movies could not have references to things that go back to events before the zombies, on which this invalid argument solely rests, is false too. There's a number of references to events in these movies that can also easily be interpreted as having happened before the zombies (like Cholo's or Dr. Logan's comments about their fathers and what they did, which though not specifically said to be from pre-zombie times they can also be easily interpreted as such, since there is nothing in these dialogue lines to prevent them from being so; same thing as Cholo's lines about him working for Kaufman.)
    Just because it doesn't mention zombies, specifically, doesn't mean anything.

    In the context of the film, Cholo has been dumping bodies and whatnot for Kaufmann for three years. He states clearly that Kufmann's henchmen doesn't know about it. And he (Cholo) is working for a place in Fiddler's Green. He also states later that without "this truck" (Dead Reckoning), he'd just be another Mexican bum pushing a lawnmower. So his relationship as Kaufmann's dirty worker and his use of Dead Reckoning has given him a certain elevation that wouldn't have existed pre-apocalypse.

    Three years is marked as a specific timeframe, not just for a laugh, or for some nebulous want. It's marked by Romero (twice) for a reason. That dialogue means something and isn't what you want it to mean.

    You're just ignoring obvious stuff, because it doesn't support the narrative you want in your head.
    I'm runnin' this monkey farm now Frankenstein.....

  11. #191
    Rising Moon Knight's Avatar
    Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    1,206
    United States
    Quote Originally Posted by shootemindehead View Post
    Just because it doesn't mention zombies, specifically, doesn't mean anything.

    In the context of the film, Cholo has been dumping bodies and whatnot for Kaufmann for three years. He states clearly that Kufmann's henchmen doesn't know about it. And he (Cholo) is working for a place in Fiddler's Green. He also states later that without "this truck" (Dead Reckoning), he'd just be another Mexican bum pushing a lawnmower. So his relationship as Kaufmann's dirty worker and his use of Dead Reckoning has given him a certain elevation that wouldn't have existed pre-apocalypse.

    Three years is marked as a specific timeframe, not just for a laugh, or for some nebulous want. It's marked by Romero (twice) for a reason. That dialogue means something and isn't what you want it to mean.

    You're just ignoring obvious stuff, because it doesn't support the narrative you want in your head.
    Perfect, baby.
    "That's the deal, right? The people who are living have it harder, right? … the whole world is haunted now and there's no getting out of that, not until we're dead."

  12. #192
    Zombie Flesh Eater EvilNed's Avatar
    Zombie Flesh Eater

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    5,527
    Undisclosed
    Quote Originally Posted by JDP View Post
    An "uber" whatever does not mean it happened "after"
    In a narrative sense: Yes - it does. Read Romero's quote again. He explains how a zombie by the end of day grasped a Rifle, then came Bub, then came Big Daddy. Case closed.

    Quote Originally Posted by JDP View Post
    There is no such reference in the movie that it has been "3 years after the outbreak". Again, find me such a line which unambiguously states so. It does not exist.
    There is a reference in the movie. Have you seen the film? Have you noticed it takes place after a zombie holocaust? That's the reference. It's there for all to see. It's not open to interpretation.
    But if you insist that it IS open to interpretation, then you also agree that Night could possibly take place after Day - as that would also be open to interpretation.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •