Noltd 1990!

[Dawg]

I loathe ALL remakes of any films. And NOTLD '90 is no exception. Do you loathe the remake of 'The Thing'? Dawg That's one way of putting it. From what I was told, an independant outfit in Texas was looking to take advantage of the fact that NOTLD was considered public domain and had a remake in pre-production...hoping to cash in on the original's past success. Then, GAR and the Pittsburgh Pimp Squad heard of this, and rushed their own remake into production--beating them to the punch. So how is it now that they can 'remake' it again with NOTLD 3D? That doesn't make much sense. Dawg

[erisi236]

Night 90 did have some of the most realistic dead people walkin' pretty much ever, the autopsy corpse in the cemetary is insane!

[MinionZombie]

Or Linda Hamilton as Sarah Connor ... in the first film she was hot, in the second you still would but she'd kick your ass.

[bassman]

Or Linda Hamilton as Sarah Connor ... in the first film she was hot, in the second you still would but she'd kick your ass. True....so very true.

[panic]

Yup ... imagine a grudge match, Ripley vs. Sarah Connor. True....so very true. Or Linda Hamilton as Sarah Connor ... in the first film she was hot, in the second you still would but she'd kick your ass.

[Svengoolie]

So how is it now that they can 'remake' it again with NOTLD 3D? That doesn't make much sense. That's a good question. You'd have to ask DeadCentral--he's the one who's claiming that the remake was made to secure the copyright. To me, it looked like they were attempting to beat someone to the punch at a cash-in more than anything, but in the end it just didn't work out that way. What I DID notice at the website for NOTLD 3D is that they're stressing that this latest version is a remake of the public domain film NOTLD--they're stressing that they remade the original, and not Savini's piece, so maybe they were able to do it based on that.

[Danny]

allright people heres a slice of freid crap, theres ANOTHER REMAKE OF NIGHT in the works!!!!!!. for those of you who havent read the latest fangoria (holden mcniel style ,jsbsb,lol.) there was a bit of an uproar as a guy has ripped the idea, purely becuase romero didnt copyright it and changed the whole thing just enough so its "fresh and new" its basically a piece of crap if what ive seen is too be believed, even land AND dawn remake look much better. funking remakes.

[DeadCentral]

Sven, I'm not claiming , it's why it was done, to keep Georges name rightfully attached too it. How and why the new one can be made is beyond me, but a few different "versions" have been released over the years, with variations to it, such as the 30th anniversary edition, and there was another recently with a totally different score to it. Copyrighting a TITLE is almost IMPOSSIBLE, but the meat of the main story isn't. Characters can be changed , re arranged and then put into production under the same title, and nothing can be done legally. BUT if someone were to reproduce a completely new version of the film using the original script word for word without permission, action can be taken to prevent it. There have been many films released over the years with Identical titles that have nothing to do with each other. Prime example: Gladiator - one with Russel Crow Gladiator- another with Cuba Gooding Jr, that has nothing to do with Greece or galdiators ...etc etc.. I'm sure you get my meaning.

[MinionZombie]

"So can you tell why I'm so funking angry?!" "Funk yeh!" ... "Prink" I've so gotta watch that flick again (Shaun I mean ... ooh, and Land actually).

[Andy]

Sven, I'm not claiming , it's why it was done, to keep Georges name rightfully attached too it. How and why the new one can be made is beyond me, but a few different "versions" have been released over the years, with variations to it, such as the 30th anniversary edition, and there was another recently with a totally different score to it. Copyrighting a TITLE is almost IMPOSSIBLE, but the meat of the main story isn't. Characters can be changed , re arranged and then put into production under the same title, and nothing can be done legally. BUT if someone were to reproduce a completely new version of the film using the original script word for word without permission, action can be taken to prevent it. There have been many films released over the years with Identical titles that have nothing to do with each other. Prime example: Gladiator - one with Russel Crow Gladiator- another with Cuba Gooding Jr, that has nothing to do with Greece or galdiators ...etc etc.. I'm sure you get my meaning. on the other hand, the title for the original Night of the Living Dead was going to be "Night of the Flesheaters". but it had to be changed as jack curtis had used the title for a 50's B movie and threatened court action if romero used it

[DeadCentral]

If I'm not mistaken , the film was closer in dates to the launch of Romeros film, not in the fifties and thats why the name was changed. I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure thats what Bill Hinzman told me during my interview with him.

[Deadman_Deluxe]

I also have a very rare savini workprint of this movie on DVD with an alternative music score (tangerine dream i think) which is a fascinating watch. Unfortunately it is taken from a VHS (savinis own copy i would guess) and suffers from additional ADC noise and/or a late gen conversion which does partly spoil the alternative OST. Deadman_Deluxe, Sir, I believe you may have the version that Mr. Savini alluded to when he gave his lecture in Watford a few years ago. Could you please describe the additional scene / gore that is missing from the UK versions. My thanks to those who informed us about the UK DVD. I didn't realise a lot of the missing footage was present there... Sorry man, i didn't have time to analyse and compare it yet so i can't really give you that info right now.

[Trioxin245]

I've always hade an soft spot for the NOLTD 90's version. Tom Savini captures the style and atmosphere of the original perfectly. Yet not the creepiness.

[Omega]

Alright, I strongly disagree with most of what Trioxin said. The original NOTLD is lightyears ahead of the remake in all but make-up. Sure, the remake's zombies look realistic, but that only makes them nice to look at. They're not threatening at all, plus I think their acting stunk. Not once was I creeped out by the remake, because basically the atmosphere is all wrong. It's too clear and brightly lit and is devoid of claustrophobia like the original. What made the original great is missing in this except for the shining moment when Ben is trapped in the cellar near the ednd. That's it. Now, I thought the acting was pretty good, but way uneven. There's Tony Todd (who I love for his acting in this and Candyman) as Ben...and then there's Judy Rose. I also liked how the characters were re-thought, aside from Barbra. I'm not being sexist, but I love how she just shuts down in the original. You have to remember that Barb does snap out of it at the end to help Helen, though it's only for a minute before she kicks it. Plus, at the beginning of the remake, how over-the-top is Barbra's get-up? Talk about overdoing it. The music is annoying, too. Especially how evrytime something...happens basically, we get the same jab of synth. This over zombie head-shots completely kills the tiny effect they have in this movie anyway. While I don't think it shouldn't have been made, as there are a few good parts and some nice acting, I really don't like it very much. Nothing to do with the fact it's a remake, just that it's a mediocre remake. And I don't care for the ending, either.

[Svengoolie]

To DeadCentral: From what I understand, you're right--you CAN'T copyright a title. But, you CAN make it a trademark...