Romero's next to be The Zombie Autopsies?

[bassman]

In a recent interview wit io9 (http://io9.com/5851502/why-george-romero-rejected-the-walking-dead-to-make-the-zombie-autopsies) Romero reveals that he has optioned the rights to the book "The Zombie Autopsies" and is currently scripting in hopes of turning it into a film. Of course he needs some sort of ham-fisted message and this time it's zombie economics...


I would love to do something about the economy. But zombies are not good mathematicians — I don't think they're going to be out selling cheesy mortgages or anything like that. So it's tough for me to see that. A friend of mine recently wrote a novel called The Zombie Autopsies, and it's about an isolated group of people doing autopsies on zombies during the zombie apocalypse and trying to figure out what the hell caused this. They come upon this discovery.

[Edit Note: SPOILERS Ahead]

The scientists discover that this is not a naturally occurring virus, they deduce that it must have been created by somebody. And they later discover that it was created by people who were trying to topple the economy. So that's a unique way in to talk about the economy, but it's not my story. Steven C. Schlozman is the guys name, he's a Havard Psychologist who has somehow been swept into the zombie craze and is writing zombie novels.

So an economic collapse zombie Noir film?

How do you do that, man? The Noir part might be OK — zombies all hunkered around not being able to find any food anywhere. But see their food is not our food… I don't know how to do it. The closest I could come is the Zombie Autopsies — just the way Wall Street engineered mortgages someone has engineered a great big collapse of society. Someone said, "The world is way too populated. We're going to kill off half the population of the world and as a result we're going to get richer!" It's the only way I can see doing it.

You should option that book.

We have. We have done it, and I'm working on the screenplay right now.

So are you going to do it Noir style?

I may decide to do it that way, I don't know. This is Steve's story, not mine. It's more like The Andromeda Strain. It's very tense and very medically correct. This guy's a doctor, it's all about being medically correct. I think about it like the first Hammer Frankenstein film, which was all about very graphic scenes of brains floating in blood and things like that. I want it to be perfectly accurate, almost shockingly so.



In the same interview he also speaks about turning down the chance to direct The Walking Dead(thank god) and why he would never do a sequel for Dawn.

[AcesandEights]

I know just how I'd prepare for the premiere...

http://syaple.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/drunk-guy1.jpg?w=500&h=355

[bassman]

I know just how I'd prepare for the premiere...

http://syaple.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/drunk-guy1.jpg?w=500&h=355

:lol::lol::lol:

I have no intention of seeking this one out in theater. I'll wait for TV or Instant Netflix...

[Mike70]

for goodness sake do something else, george. anything.

[shootemindehead]

...and why he would never do a sequel for Dawn.

You mean he's not going to make 'Day of the Dead'?

Hey, wait...what?

http://danicaavet.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/confused-animals-are-funny15.jpg?w=279&h=242

[JDFP]

Wow, I absolutely can't wait to not see this!

At this point I have more faith in Zach Snyder making a good zombie film as opposed to Romero.

He already made one far better than "Land" and "Survival".

j.p.

[Sammich]

I still have faith in Romero. He just hit a bump in the road with his last few movies, which I didn't think were as bad as some people claim.

[kidgloves]

Its Uncle George. Of course i'll watch it

[blind2d]

I'll see it, and I hope it's not boring or too wordy or... whatever the hell his last two films were. No more of that.

[Wyldwraith]

A "bump in the road" is not 3 straight movies of ever-worsening quality, while making comments to major publications about wanting to make still MORE crappy movies featuring minor Diary characters as the leads.
If you still adore anything Romero, it IS your life. But, let's stop short of trying to sell that fan-love as being the reasonable position to take k? Everything done in the last 12+yrs has been mediocre at best (Land) and "Oh please God, invent bleach I can use on my memories. Muuuuuulllllldooooooooonnnnn!!!" (Survival)

[Danny]

really george? another bloody zombie film? jesus...

-- -------- Post added at 08:12 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:08 AM ----------


I still have faith in Romero. He just hit a bump in the road with his last few movies, which I didn't think were as bad as some people claim.

this aint a bump in the road. we are talking like almost 2 decades now of movies about on par with uwe boll. Theres being a fan, then there's being a yes man. Film is an art, and filmmakers are artists. i wish i could say i dont know why the man is resorting to this.
-but every one of us know why. don't we?

[Thorn]

Meh I would watch it, but I will watch pretty much anything with zombies in it. If George does it, it will at least have that going for it and even if it is bad I still feel I owe the guy my support after YEARS of entertainment and for what he did to create and maintain this genre of Hollywood film making.

[Geophyrd]

http://io9.com/5851502/why-george-romero-rejected-the-walking-dead-to-make-the-zombie-autopsies

[AcesandEights]

Merged threads.

[Wyldwraith]

That interview...
Gah, how is it not glaringly obvious to anyone who reads such an interview from Romero that the man is OBSESSED with message, and that zombies are just the bait he uses to get his fanbase to sit around and listen to a rant about his current anti-social trend?

I mean, some of the other interviews were a bit more ambiguous. Like the one he did for Fangoria several months ago. That focused very much on the craft used to make his movies. That said, EVERYTHING the man has said about purpose/theme/plot in relation to anything with zombies in the last 12+ years can be boiled down to one sentence. "I (George), don't get why people are in love w/ "zombie movies", but I'm more than willing to use that to bury my socio-political (and now socioeconomic apparently) message in images of staggering ghouls."

I see NO, not one minute particle of evidence that Romero concerns himself whatsoever with the question "Is this a good enjoyable horror/zombie film I've written the script for and am directing?"

That's fine if that's what he wants to do. Go make these movies Indie-style George. Show them at film festivals or whatever. Just STOP TAKING ADVANTAGE of the memory of the Dead Trilogy, because that's what it is you're doing George when you announce in every forum that will give you a voice that you think Survival Horror is childish drek at the same time you use said forums as free advertising to whip the fans of your Trilogy into BLIND FERVOR over your newest project.

Let's look at what George said as Fear Fest host to preface the airing of Diary of the Dead "This is a continuation of my exploration of social themes and the Undead condition. In other words its a (cue mockery-laden faux spooky voice) ZOMBIE MOVIE!"

He's making fun of us. He really, truly is.

[childofgilead]

I wish I didn't kind of agree with you Wyld..

[bassman]

That interview...
Gah, how is it not glaringly obvious to anyone who reads such an interview from Romero that the man is OBSESSED with message, and that zombies are just the bait he uses to get his fanbase to sit around and listen to a rant about his current anti-social trend?


If you like that interview, you should love this one: http://blog.zap2it.com/frominsidethebox/2011/10/george-romero-not-particularly-a-fan-of-the-walking-dead.html


"Frank [Darabont] and [Greg] Nicotero were calling me and asking me to do one of these," he says. "I don't have any desire to do one because it's not -- my zombies live in sort of my universe and they're political and they're different from whatever that is."

He continues: "I'm not trying to capitalize on a trend. When I want to write about something, I try to use zombies to do it because it's easier than trying to write a piece about citizen journalism. It's easier to put zombies in it and make fun of it."

Is he just sick of zombies in general?

"I'm not really a fan of the fact that they've become as popular as they've become because I used to think that I had them in my pocket somewhere," says Romero. "And now they're sort of all over the place and I'm not thrilled."

What drew him to zombies?

"Nothing," says Romero. "I wanted some sort of a catastrophe -- I wanted to write a story about how humans behave in the face of catastrophe and how they fail to recognize what's going on. I've made six films, but they're really all about the human characters and really political. They're not slash-em-up zombie movies. Even though there's gore in them, that's not what they're about. Whereas some of the video games are more first person shooter and have fun with killing these zombies."




.....

[Ragnarr]

"Night of Living Zombie Autopsies?"

While I always wish GAR success in whatever he does, my gut is telling me that this endeavor will be an "epic fail."

[Wyldwraith]

Wow, just...wow,
Now the men, who purports to HATE TRENDS, has made a hypocrite of himself. In one of the very recent interviews someone posted on here, Romero was quoted as saying "I wanted to catch Season 1 of TWD, but I've been traveling, so I'm looking forward to seeing them (the Season 1 Eps.) before they air the 1st episode of Season 2."

So which is it George? Do you like TWD, or is it as you say and you hate how "zombies are all over the place" now? Either way, that's a politician-worth flip-flop there. Good catch on that interview Bass. I keep hoping that if sufficient volume of the man's own words make it to the community that the majority will finally make the leap to belief in the fact that Romero is not some Grand Protector of the Zombie Mythos, and that in fact he resents the fact that others have "horned in on his action" (to turn a phrase) and that zombies have become a major trend in the last few years.

Do I think most here will ever see the truth about Romero? Of course not...., but I keep hoping. However, I understand that some people (emotionally speaking) don't separate their love of the Dead Trilogy from their reverence for the progenitor of said Trilogy. That's fine, this is America and all. What I have a problem with are people being DECEIVED about what Romero is all about these days by his almost weekly major flip-flops in perspective.

For the record: I have NO problem with Romero wanting to interject meaning into the plot of his works. That's great, because all great movies are about something subtext-wise. It's when he makes the jump to prioritizing meaning over story quality, while professing to be enthusiastic about making another film in the spirit of the original Dead Trilogy that I grow discontented. Why? It's probably because I'm in it as a viewer for the vistas new movies open up into what the most nightmarish of Survival Horror scenarios can look like. Those vistas inspire me in my writing, but on a more basic level are the core It that sparks my imagination and leads to my enjoyment of a good zombie flick.

Guess that pretty much says it. Again, thanks Bassman :)

[Mike70]

Wow, just...wow,
Now the men, who purports to HATE TRENDS, has made a hypocrite of himself. In one of the very recent interviews someone posted on here, Romero was quoted as saying "I wanted to catch Season 1 of TWD, but I've been traveling, so I'm looking forward to seeing them (the Season 1 Eps.) before they air the 1st episode of Season 2."

romero's entire career has been about trends and socio-political bullshit, there should be no secret to anyone there.

let's run down the list:

night - an angry 60s movie with a black protagonist, a white asshole antagonist and we could go on about the connections to 60s culture but others have so let's move on.

dawn - 70's consumerism. malls were springing up everywhere and changing the way people shopped and guess who made a movie about it.

day - the cold war. the early to mid 80s were a rather dark time when everyone was afraid of nuke destruction. guess who made a movie with those overtones about a group of people surviving calamity underground.

land - fucking obvious and i'm not wasting another keystroke on it.

diary - fucking obviously about the whole rise of viral media. guess who made a movie about it.

the man's entire career has been an attempt to capture decade trends. he's said it himself in countless interviews; how he has a "conceit" that his films reflect the times.

[Sammich]

It is no different than Invasion of the Body Snatchers (the original 1956 version), which many believe was really about the "red scare" paranoia during the early cold war. There were "commies" everywhere and they looked just like your neighbors.

In 50 years after George is long gone, his zombie movies will probably be shown in the same manner.

[rightwing401]

Yeah, sorry, but I'm going to have to agree with Wyld here. Romero hasn't really done anything in his last three zombie movies to really make me jump up and scream 'wow'. Honestly, I feel the reason his first three films totally blow the water out of the last three he's made is based on one simple fact.

He wasn't really trying to send a message with them.

And I base this on the fact that not only have I watched all the movies practically a millions times, but I've also read all three of the scripts that the movies were directed off of. His main focus was on the characters and making them amazingly fleshed out. That's what I loved about those first three movies, all of his characters were believable for who they were, even Cooper and Rhodes. Shit, he even managed to make the seemingly asshole character of Steele very human at various points.

But Land, while a character or two was well done, had none of that. It felt rushed and to the point where I couldn't give a damn about anyone and what happened to them. Both Diary and Survival had the same feel for it, that Romero was trying to send some half-assed message based on his political views, and to amp up as many off the wall zombie kills as possible.

God's honest truth, I feel that Romero has completely bought into all the BS that has formulated around all of his films and what 'he was really trying to say'. It aggrivates me to all hell to keep hearing people say about how much of an amazing pioneer he was to have a black man casted as the leading role in his orinial Night movie when the only damn reason he had Duane Jones in the role was because, in Romero's own words, "He gave the best performance".

Tell the truth, from all the stories that I've read over the years on this website alone, and now seeing the Walking Dead on AMC, I can safely say that the students have now surpassed the master in this genre.

[Danny]

Yeah, sorry, but I'm going to have to agree with Wyld here. Romero hasn't really done anything in his last three zombie movies to really make me jump up and scream 'wow'. Honestly, I feel the reason his first three films totally blow the water out of the last three he's made is based on one simple fact.

He wasn't really trying to send a message with them.

And I base this on the fact that not only have I watched all the movies practically a millions times, but I've also read all three of the scripts that the movies were directed off of. His main focus was on the characters and making them amazingly fleshed out. That's what I loved about those first three movies, all of his characters were believable for who they were, even Cooper and Rhodes. Shit, he even managed to make the seemingly asshole character of Steele very human at various points.

But Land, while a character or two was well done, had none of that. It felt rushed and to the point where I couldn't give a damn about anyone and what happened to them. Both Diary and Survival had the same feel for it, that Romero was trying to send some half-assed message based on his political views, and to amp up as many off the wall zombie kills as possible.

God's honest truth, I feel that Romero has completely bought into all the BS that has formulated around all of his films and what 'he was really trying to say'. It aggrivates me to all hell to keep hearing people say about how much of an amazing pioneer he was to have a black man casted as the leading role in his orinial Night movie when the only damn reason he had Duane Jones in the role was because, in Romero's own words, "He gave the best performance".

Tell the truth, from all the stories that I've read over the years on this website alone, and now seeing the Walking Dead on AMC, I can safely say that the students have now surpassed the master in this genre.

I agree, look at land, the mmost engaging part of it was cholo and kaufman. and thats put of the back burner for the generic vanilla action star and his supporting shitty a team. That could have been a good story about corruption and vendettas that just happened to be in a a zombie driven world. Instead it was some fucking shitty take on 'the man' in the most shallow way.
-and i like land quite a bit, but fuck if he focused on a character study and not 'everyone says im only good at subtext, so how do i take a commentary and loosely drap a plot over it like so much damp laundry on a clothesline?' that could have been a good film.

[krisvds]

Yeah, sorry, but I'm going to have to agree with Wyld here. Romero hasn't really done anything in his last three zombie movies to really make me jump up and scream 'wow'. Honestly, I feel the reason his first three films totally blow the water out of the last three he's made is based on one simple fact.

He wasn't really trying to send a message with them.

And I base this on the fact that not only have I watched all the movies practically a millions times, but I've also read all three of the scripts that the movies were directed off of. His main focus was on the characters and making them amazingly fleshed out. That's what I loved about those first three movies, all of his characters were believable for who they were, even Cooper and Rhodes. Shit, he even managed to make the seemingly asshole character of Steele very human at various points.

But Land, while a character or two was well done, had none of that. It felt rushed and to the point where I couldn't give a damn about anyone and what happened to them. Both Diary and Survival had the same feel for it, that Romero was trying to send some half-assed message based on his political views, and to amp up as many off the wall zombie kills as possible.

God's honest truth, I feel that Romero has completely bought into all the BS that has formulated around all of his films and what 'he was really trying to say'. It aggrivates me to all hell to keep hearing people say about how much of an amazing pioneer he was to have a black man casted as the leading role in his orinial Night movie when the only damn reason he had Duane Jones in the role was because, in Romero's own words, "He gave the best performance".

Tell the truth, from all the stories that I've read over the years on this website alone, and now seeing the Walking Dead on AMC, I can safely say that the students have now surpassed the master in this genre.

On night: chosing Duane as his lead because he gave the best performance, during the end of the sixties, is in itself quite political. This was the era where Captain Krik kissing Uhura was a big deal. And how can you view the ending of that film without noticing that here is a director at work who is trying to say something?

Dawn: the undead swarming a mall because it is a place that held great meaning to them back when they where still alive... How is that not a comment on consumerism?

Day: the last of humanity in a bunker clinging on to memories while the whole world seems destroyed. The arguments between the army and the scientists... In the eighties where people where scared by films like 'The Day after' and the threat of nuclear war was everywhere it was hard to not miss the political tone of this film.

Romero was never very subtle. Not even in his original trilogy. It was very much in your face. What makes those films so much better than the recent ones is that they were more than that. The characters were indeed better written, much more sympathetic than say those annoying youngsters in Diary. If you wanted to see those films as fun horror films with a sense of adventure and lots of gore. Well, there was that too. Those recent films of his seem so preoccuppied with 'social commentary' that all else went out the window.
But still, GAR has a truelly unique voice in the genre. If he doesn't make a zombie film on the economical crisis whe are facing today it is pretty safe to say that no one will. For better or worse, that is why I am looking forward to it.

The Walking Dead is way more popular nowadays. That much is true. But it isn't without it's faults either. At heart it's a soap opera. But a damn enjoyable one as well. At it's best it raises some interesting questions on human nature and ethics as well. Take the whole debate on 'suicide' concerning the Andrea subplot for example. I love it when the genre does that. Though on an emotional level TWD can be very blunt as well with stereotypical characters and tired love triangles.
Apart from the undead, you can't really compare it to the GARfilms. Different beasts. Very cool shamblers.

[Ragnarr]

I can't help but wonder why anyone making a movie (simply meant to entertain) would feel the need to use it as a vehicle for their social commentary. Like the old saying goes, "opinions are like assholes; everybody has one." Who the heck cares what a movie writer/producer/director of a horror flick thinks about the social issues of the day? If a dude feels so strongly about a particular social issue, grow a pair and make a documentary openly saying what you want to say.

It would be like Al Gore doing a zombie flick. Can you guess what the cause of the zombie outbreak would be in his movie? Yup!

"An Inconvenient Zombie" coming to a theater near you!

[blind2d]

Wait... so in Gore's zombie movie (awesome name for someone who would make one, by the way), the cause of the outbreak is... inconvenience?
Oh! Global change... climate warming...
GAR's movies used to be good.
Hey look, I summed up this whole forum in one sentence!

[Thorn]

romero's entire career has been about trends and socio-political bullshit, there should be no secret to anyone there.

let's run down the list:

night - an angry 60s movie with a black protagonist, a white asshole antagonist and we could go on about the connections to 60s culture but others have so let's move on.

dawn - 70's consumerism. malls were springing up everywhere and changing the way people shopped and guess who made a movie about it.

day - the cold war. the early to mid 80s were a rather dark time when everyone was afraid of nuke destruction. guess who made a movie with those overtones about a group of people surviving calamity underground.

land - fucking obvious and i'm not wasting another keystroke on it.

diary - fucking obviously about the whole rise of viral media. guess who made a movie about it.

the man's entire career has been an attempt to capture decade trends. he's said it himself in countless interviews; how he has a "conceit" that his films reflect the times.

I am pretty sure that that was not the plan, that the part was originally written for a white guy. Am I incorrect in that? I seem to recall an article/interview where they had someone lined up and then used Duane at the last minute.

This is it and I think we are finally to the point where need to face it...

In my opinion and based off a lot of interviews they were just trying to make a movie (He changes his story a lot) and OTHER people like critics and pseudo intellectuals tagged it as this deep bit of film making with sociopolitical commentary.

So from that point on George has to put it in EVERYTHING he does because it is his claim to fame, it is what made night MORE than Attack of the killer tomatoes. So here is George trying to be given credit, taken seriously, viewed as "good" so he shoehorns a message int everything even when it completely flies against common sense, logic, or when it is so obvious it doesn't even need to be discussed.

Amateur journalism and the fact people record and share information is somehow controversial or news worthy? To whom? Who is unaware of it? Who thinks for a minute Fox news is unbiased? Or MSNBC or any of them? This is like saying water is wet. It certainly isn't deep, or smart it is just something we all know talking about the sun being hot is pointless we all know it. Give me a ring when it is cold. That is news.

I love George, and I love his movies. But at no point have I ever sat and thought the man was brilliant, or deep. Sorry George. Still love your movies though ;) And hell the guy who invented the microwave.. that was an accident too, making something great that is unplanned is okay... it still makes you cool.

[Ragnarr]

Yeah just think about it. Al Gore (master of horror) creates his new zombie flick. In his story, a zombie virus of extraterrestrial origin has been trapped in polar glaciers for millenia. Global warming (aka. "gwobew wawming" in Elmer Fudd's accent) melts the ice and releases the plaque. The first outbreaks occur in Canada, Iceland, Greenland, northern Siberia, etc.
Who could have thought Al Gore to be a horror genre genius, eh?

[Sammich]

Zombiprogenic Global Warming (ZGW) could be the root cause of the rise in world temperatures, due to the undead emissions of large amounts of methane and co2. It is because of that high in protein diet they are all so crazy about.

[bd2999]

I loved the original movies and have not liked the newer ones much. I think Survival and Diary could have been really good movies actually but sort of lost their way. Especially Survival which I liked better than Diary.

That said I notice a backlash against message in movies. Honestly, most of the greatest horror movies are about something. They are expressing something else and either demonstrating the horror of it or using it as a vehicle to say something else. Wether it be a commentary on human nature, politics of the time or thoughts on any number of other things. This sort of thing typically gives a movie a heart and soul. The movie still has to be good to even care what it says about any of those but to seperate a movie from that sort of thing is to make it lifeless and lack staying power IMO.

Many horror fans will look back very fondly at earlier films, even if they were not around to see them initially, but really dislike modern movies. The message can be very overhanded but that does not mean it is bad in and of itself.

[Danny]

I loved the original movies and have not liked the newer ones much. I think Survival and Diary could have been really good movies actually but sort of lost their way. Especially Survival which I liked better than Diary.

That said I notice a backlash against message in movies. Honestly, most of the greatest horror movies are about something. They are expressing something else and either demonstrating the horror of it or using it as a vehicle to say something else. Wether it be a commentary on human nature, politics of the time or thoughts on any number of other things. This sort of thing typically gives a movie a heart and soul. The movie still has to be good to even care what it says about any of those but to seperate a movie from that sort of thing is to make it lifeless and lack staying power IMO.

Many horror fans will look back very fondly at earlier films, even if they were not around to see them initially, but really dislike modern movies. The message can be very overhanded but that does not mean it is bad in and of itself.

theres using a message to push a story.

then there is poorely constructing a story around a message.

[Andy]

In a recent interview wit io9 (http://io9.com/5851502/why-george-romero-rejected-the-walking-dead-to-make-the-zombie-autopsies) Romero reveals that he has optioned the rights to the book "The Zombie Autopsies" and is currently scripting in hopes of turning it into a film. Of course he needs some sort of ham-fisted message and this time it's zombie economics...

http://www.411mania.com/siteimages/noooooo!_63286.jpg

[Thorn]

I loved the original movies and have not liked the newer ones much. I think Survival and Diary could have been really good movies actually but sort of lost their way. Especially Survival which I liked better than Diary.

That said I notice a backlash against message in movies. Honestly, most of the greatest horror movies are about something. They are expressing something else and either demonstrating the horror of it or using it as a vehicle to say something else. Wether it be a commentary on human nature, politics of the time or thoughts on any number of other things. This sort of thing typically gives a movie a heart and soul. The movie still has to be good to even care what it says about any of those but to seperate a movie from that sort of thing is to make it lifeless and lack staying power IMO.

Many horror fans will look back very fondly at earlier films, even if they were not around to see them initially, but really dislike modern movies. The message can be very overhanded but that does not mean it is bad in and of itself.


Please do not think I personally am against message in film, or subtext. I love it. I love the use of classic story telling techniques in film, and I really want my fiction to be smart fiction that offers more than men walking away from explosion and lot's of car chase scenes.

That said if it is obvious and overt it is not subtext, and if you force the issue it just hurts... ask any woman about anal. She knows what I mean here... you have to ease the message in you can't go ramming it in there.

((If you do not like my analogy you could see Danny's post he explained it much more succinctly than I)

[Ragnarr]

Ohhh, I get it. It's like paying taxes. Some governmental taxes gradually stick it to ya, while other taxes or legislation are just rammed into ya. And in the same place too amazingly enough. Got it.

[AcesandEights]

Ohhh, I get it. It's like paying taxes. Some governmental taxes gradually stick it to ya, while other taxes or legislation are just rammed into ya. And in the same place too amazingly enough. Got it.

:lol: I think that illustrates how some people feel pretty well, Ragnarr. :D

[krisvds]

On subtext: a black man wh gets brutally murdered by rednecks, zombies shambling through a mall and a military man who threatens scientists while the undead wlak the earth is hardly subtext. Those initial dead films were way better than the recent ones but were just as in your face.

[bassman]

In a new interview with Twitchfilm, Romero says he's still working on this as well as a comic for Marvel?...



"I am in fact adapting a novel right now, and it is a zombie novel, but it's not my kind of zombies. It's a novel called THE ZOMBIE AUTOPSIES written by a Harvard medical doctor. It's a wonderful book and I'm having a wonderful time adapting it into a screenplay. I am also working on an original story, which I guess if I had to categorize it, I would say it's a psychological thriller. it's....mmm, Psycho like? But it's not really. I don't know how to tell you anything more without giving it away. But in reality I don't actually know for sure what the next one is going to be. It often comes up out of the blue. You just don't know which one the money is going to come through for. I am also writing a comic for Marvel. I'm writing it now, but it's plot is a secret."

http://twitchfilm.com/2012/10/here-come-da-judge-george-a-romero-speaks-from-the-lund-ifff.html

So maybe the recent "Road of the Dead" we've heard about was just rumors?