do you think ......

[general tbag]

well after listen to the day commentary and reading the original day script do you think the whole zombie learn, and communication of zombies was kinda shoved into land, if day had filmed the zombie armies..... it seemed big daddy and constant howling and crappy performace tried to symboliz that from the original day script. made me wonder if land would of been written differently as the whole ideal of co-op zombies would of already been established.

[bassman]

It's been established slowly thoughout all the films.

In "Night", they were basically babies.

In "Dawn" they were toddlers that are slowly learning and there were several references to the dead having some intelligence("even animals will adopt the use of tools in this manner....", "They remember this place", Etc.).

In "Day", although the original script had to be shortened and the dead armies were eliminated, we still have the most obvious point that the dead can think/rationalize: "Bub".

Then In "Land", Romero has built it up enough throughout the first films and goes all out with it.

Personally, I feel that the "dead gang" from "Land" would have been better had another actor played "Big Daddy"....or Clark just played him better. They needed someone that could pull it off like Howard Sherman did with "Bub".

I think Romero had always wanted to make the dead the protagonists. As he's said several times in interviews: "I love them".

[creepntom]

i seen it simply as evolution, nothing more

[DjfunkmasterG]

i seen it simply as evolution, nothing more

I see it as poor writing, poor directing, poor acting and most of all poor execution.

The zombies in LAND were too evolved. When you have to go 20 years between movies a simple one minute blurb in the opening 15 minutes hinting at evolution of the dead doesn't cut it with todays audience. I know he was screwed in getting the rights to use Night, DAWN & Day to help show the evolution, but it could have been done better. It could have been narrated by Charlie, or even Riley. Telling the story of how it started and where they are at that moment.

I know LOTD is a fan film, but let's face facts only the fans can keep up with the timeline and the mythos surrounding the zombies. Romero should have approached it more for mass appeal like he did with DAWN. Even though Night existed DAWN could stand on it's own. LOTD cannot stand on it's own. It needs the first 3 films, and it needs the viewer to know those films in order to understand it.

Had he used narration from one of the main characters he could have easily told the story of how it all began to where they are at that moment. He already had the footage available it just need a better jump start. Using the news reports and the hillbilly narration shunned viewers and it was easily forgotten once the film rolled on the Uniontown raid. Poor use of narration and sub story telling phucked LOTD from the start.

However, not all is lost you could easily take LAND back into the studio on a $500,000 budget, recut and re-narrate the film and I think it would be better received by wider audiences. You have to get rid of Big Daddy's wailing and a few other tweaks. LOTD could have been fantastic but the overall direction Romero took LAND in regards to using Big Daddy as the zombie leader killed the pacing and scare value of the film.

[Adrenochrome]

I see it as poor writing, poor directing, poor acting and most of all poor execution.

The zombies in LAND were too evolved. When you have to go 20 years between movies a simple one minute blurb in the opening 15 minutes hinting at evolution of the dead doesn't cut it with todays audience. I know he was screwed in getting the rights to use Night, DAWN & Day to help show the evolution, but it could have been done better. It could have been narrated by Charlie, or even Riley. Telling the story of how it started and where they are at that moment.

I know LOTD is a fan film, but let's face facts only the fans can keep up with the timeline and the mythos surrounding the zombies. Romero should have approached it more for mass appeal like he did with DAWN. Even though Night existed DAWN could stand on it's own. LOTD cannot stand on it's own. It needs the first 3 films, and it needs the viewer to know those films in order to understand it.

Had he used narration from one of the main characters he could have easily told the story of how it all began to where they are at that moment. He already had the footage available it just need a better jump start. Using the news reports and the hillbilly narration shunned viewers and it was easily forgotten once the film rolled on the Uniontown raid. Poor use of narration and sub story telling phucked LOTD from the start.

However, not all is lost you could easily take LAND back into the studio on a $500,000 budget, recut and re-narrate the film and I think it would be better received by wider audiences. You have to get rid of Big Daddy's wailing and a few other tweaks. LOTD could have been fantastic but the overall direction Romero took LAND in regards to using Big Daddy as the zombie leader killed the pacing and scare value of the film.

My goodness, I feel sorry for that poor horse. :D

[Deadman_Deluxe]

My goodness, I feel sorry for that poor horse. :D


That poor, poor, poor, old dead horse is now nothing more than a stain of dried blood caked on the roadside, driven deep into the asphalt courtesy of one mans whip ... yet here he still stands flogging the bloodstain as the rest of the population drives past wondering ... "who hell that madman?" and/or "why hell he dressed in the mangirl skin suit?" ;)


In regards to the original question, i think it goes without saying that IF the original DAY script with the black army had been filmed then of course LAND would appear slightly different on screen.

[DjfunkmasterG]

My goodness, I feel sorry for that poor horse. :D

If you want something done right... you do it right. I don't want thing getting back up to chomp on other horses. :D

[ipotts85]

It's been established slowly thoughout all the films.

In "Night", they were basically babies.

In "Dawn" they were toddlers that are slowly learning and there were several references to the dead having some intelligence("even animals will adopt the use of tools in this manner....", "They remember this place", Etc.).

In "Day", although the original script had to be shortened and the dead armies were eliminated, we still have the most obvious point that the dead can think/rationalize: "Bub".

Then In "Land", Romero has built it up enough throughout the first films and goes all out with it.

Personally, I feel that the "dead gang" from "Land" would have been better had another actor played "Big Daddy"....or Clark just played him better. They needed someone that could pull it off like Howard Sherman did with "Bub".

I think Romero had always wanted to make the dead the protagonists. As he's said several times in interviews: "I love them".

i agree with the eugene clark statement - if he had been played a little more subtely (like bub), it would have worked better. i don't mind it as is though. romero's movies are kinda hammed up at parts anyways.

[FleshMask]

The protagonist that eats people...

oh yeah that would work...

[Svengoolie]

well after listen to the day commentary and reading the original day script do you think the whole zombie learn, and communication of zombies was kinda shoved into land, if day had filmed the zombie armies..... it seemed big daddy and constant howling and crappy performace tried to symboliz that from the original day script. made me wonder if land would of been written differently as the whole ideal of co-op zombies would of already been established.

Here and there, I've noticed people saying "If only the original script for Day had made it to the big screen..."

Well people, it has...and it's called "Land of the Dead".

According to GAR himself, the story and characters of his films don't matter--that it's the concept that's really important....and the basic concept of Land of the Dead is the original script for Day, simply retooled.

And personally, I think a filmed version of the original script for Day would've been just as bad, if not worse, than Land. Based on that.

What I personally would like to see is a zombie mini-series. That would give the characters a chance to be well developed enough for us to really care about them, and for us to see the phenomenon's effect on them from start to finish.

[MinionZombie]

It's at times like these you need a real-life Agent 47, lol. :lol:

Now that'd be a mission - "you're mission, Agent 47, is to take care of the self-named DjfunkmasterG. His crimes? Flogging dead horses too long. The client? Anonymous "Land Lovers" from an internet forum. This will be an easy one for you, 47."

:elol:

Speaking of which, it's about time I played more Blood Money! :cool:

[darth los]

Here and there, I've noticed people saying "If only the original script for Day had made it to the big screen..."

Well people, it has...and it's called "Land of the Dead".

According to GAR himself, the story and characters of his films don't matter--that it's the concept that's really important....and the basic concept of Land of the Dead is the original script for Day, simply retooled.

And personally, I think a filmed version of the original script for Day would've been just as bad, if not worse, than Land. Based on that.

What I personally would like to see is a zombie mini-series. That would give the characters a chance to be well developed enough for us to really care about them, and for us to see the phenomenon's effect on them from start to finish.


That's what i have always said. LOTD is basically the fruit of george's obsession with making his original day script a movie. He didn't pull it off very well imo. Personally i liked it better on paper.

A zombie series is probably the only way to get propper character development in today's mtv world.