Noltd 1990!

[Princess Flesh Eater]

Does anyone else like this remake? i personally think that it was quite sympathetic to the original, but with not nearly enough Savini gore! Why do so many people think it shouldn't have been made?

[a1150]

I think it's a great film, the zombies are very realistic looking and the plot has a few interesting twists that play on the original. The gore is sadly missing, but it's not too much of a dissapointment. It'd be nice if they released a version with all the cuts put back in.:)

[MinionZombie]

It was alright, but Judy Rose really, really, really annoyed the crap out of me. One minute she's being Rambo, the next she's a complete wet flannel about everything ("You shot Mr Magruder!"). The zombies were good though, quite realistic ... shame a lot of the gore got cut out, but that was the climate of the MPAA at the time I guess - it would be great if an uncut version came out, but if I remember correctly those excised bits of footage are no longer around. :(

[Sir James Forbes]

Personally, I prefer NoTLD '90 over the original (waits for outcries to die down).

Mr. Savini did state during a lecture in Watford some years ago that he did his print was far superior and that it was available should the right occasion ever present itself.

I have seen a version where the character Tom, from the back of the truck, shoots a zombie, giving us that trademark Savini head-explosion, but that's as far as I got in the hunt for the 'real' version.

Anyone fared any better?

[Philly_SWAT]

I dont think that there are that many people, if any, that think it shouldnt have been made. The only people I have ever seen take the position that it shouldnt have been made are under the false impression that Romero had nothing to do with it and that is was somehow unfair to him. The movie was made with his blessing, and if I remember right, he redid the script, and was responsible for the different ending. Night 90 is a great flick!

[bassman]

How could they think it was made without Romero? His name is stamped all over the credits and advertising:rolleyes:

I think most complaints would probably boil down to what happened with Savini, the MPAA, and the other partners in the film. Seems more like Romero wrote the new treatment, gave Savini his blessing, and then pretty much went about his way. It's a shame that Savini didn't necessarily get the film he was hoping for....but he should still be proud.

[Skold]

Yeah, i love this flick too. It compliments the original nicely, and the little changes (such as the trowel, the cemetary zombie, and the ending) are great. Even though it wouldn't be the same without seeing the original a bunch of times, i think this is one remake that is actually better.

[Danny]

i liked it however it was so nineties to let the blond/ginga survive,lol.

[axlish]

I loathe the remake. For starters, the music is not good. There are a couple of 15 second bursts of decent music, but that is about it. The first film's atmosphere was set up by the music, and then by the dark settings. This film was deflated by a lame synth score, and then the mood was ruined by the larger, more revealing scope. The acting was uneven, something that the first film did not suffer from. The threat was constantly defanged by Barbara's "They're so slow" comments. The cemetery zombie is not memorable in the slightest, as opposed to the Hinzman zombie image which is permanantly burnt into our minds. The zombies looked pretty good overall but that doesn't excuse the rubber uncle Rege dummy. Judy Rose's screaming doesn't take long to distract from the film. The plot changes are about the least offensive alterations really. The strongest points of the film are Todd and Towles' acting, the locations and the set decorating.

[Dawg]

Personally, I prefer NoTLD '90 over the original (waits for outcries to die down).

Mr. Savini did state during a lecture in Watford some years ago that he did his print was far superior and that it was available should the right occasion ever present itself.

I have seen a version where the character Tom, from the back of the truck, shoots a zombie, giving us that trademark Savini head-explosion, but that's as far as I got in the hunt for the 'real' version.

Anyone fared any better?

...where the skinny bald head zombie had more gore and headshot when he was trying to come into the house.

And the head shotgunned from the back of the truck as mentioned. It was on the dvd release deleted scenes/making of, etc.

What really surprises me is how the MPAA is letting a lot get by nowadays. I just saw Slither and the Hills Have Eyes yesterday, and I was surprised by the amount of gore allowed! I think the thread has been going on for the past two years or so, with the likes of: House of 1,000 Corpses, Devil's Rejects, Texas Chainsaw Massacre remake, Hostel and now the Hills Have Eyes remake.

Thank God that trendy teenie-booper '90s horror is dead!! :skull:

:dead: Dawg

[bassman]

The zombies looked pretty good overall but that doesn't excuse the rubber uncle Rege dummy.

That's my biggest problem with the effects. And on the DVD special features, Savini is talking how they show the real fireplace poker to the dummies head, and then a rubber fireplace poker on the real head......like it looks so great? Came out horribly, if you ask me. Come on Savini....you used to do that stuff for a living:rockbrow:

[Andy]

on the uk DVD, isnt some of the deleted scenes shown on the extra documentry?

[axlish]

on the uk DVD, isnt some of the deleted scenes shown on the extra documentry?

Yeah, it is on the USA DVD too. Tom shotgun blasts a zombie in the head, Wooley style, from the back of the truck. It shows MacGruder get shot in the back of the head. The skinny bald zombie has a juicier headshot, and there was another headshot in the front doorway after the Harry and Ben gun battle.

[EvilFlyingCow]

Night '90 was so much better than the DotD remake.

[Creepshow]

I loathe ALL remakes of any films. And NOTLD '90 is no exception.

[Eyebiter]

I liked Savini's director commentary on Night 1990. While some of the effects were lacking - it makes sense with the MPAA troubles.

[Wooley]

I really enjoyed the Night '90 remake. It was my first dead flick. It was what hooked me on zombie flicks. Plus, Tony Todd, Tom Towles, and Patricia Tallman were really enjoyable in their preformances. I could have done without screaming Judy Rose but you can't have everything, and the lack of gore when compared to Romero's Dawn and Day were just the demands of the MPAA to have the R picture that the studios wanted. Gore doesn't make a good horror movie without decent writing/acting/directing, so it's not a big thing to me as Night '90 had those other three things.
I liked the compare/contrast of the remake and the original.

[Deadman_Deluxe]

I thought it was great, and i also prefer the remake to the original for many reasons.

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.

So far as i am aware it was this remake which finally and "officially" cleared up the issue relating to the fact that a person does NOT have to be the direct victim of an infectious bite in order to come back from the dead ... but then it is 7.50AM and i didn't sleep yet so maybe i am not thinking straight.


Why do so many people think it shouldn't have been made?

On a side note ... who are all these people?

[Svengoolie]

It is what it is.

If you can ignore all the politics and bs surrounding it, you'll find that it's really not that bad.

I still take it down off the shelf every once in a while.

[Princess Flesh Eater]

On a side note ... who are all these people?

Sorry i was a bit general: when the film was about to be made fans thought that it was just being made for money (for the original investors in NOTLD 68that got screwed). Also from the very start they knew it was going to be R-Restricted - so minimal gore. Both these things meant people were a bit dubious about them doing a remake...

Personally I love the remake as much as i love the original!

[DeadCentral]

Actually the film was made to secure the copyrights, George was on the set through out the entire film, and the gore shots ..well actually anything with moving blood were pulled by the censors due to the period...keep in mind this film was released the same week the Gulf War began.
I have a very long in depth interview with Tony Todd that I'm going to release on DC.com soon and he goes into some really cool detail about it.
I've been working some incredibly outrageous hours so I haven't had time to finish it up, but I hope this weekend ...

[panic]

I have to disagree. The Dawn remake at least offered a new interpretation of the material. Night '90, while I enjoy it, was just a retread of Night '68.

~panic


Night '90 was so much better than the DotD remake.

[MinionZombie]

But Night90 offered a new take on the role of women in society. Barbara was bumped up to someone much more tough and capable in the remake rather than in the original when women weren't seen in such a light ... or at least nowhere near as much.

And where's your sig pic from?

[Sir James Forbes]

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...

[MinionZombie]

What?! The UK DVD has extra stuff the USA DVD doesn't have?! Blimey...that's a turn up for the books, wonder if its the same version they showed on Bravo here in the UK?

[Svengoolie]

Actually the film was made to secure the copyrights

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.

[panic]

You're right that Barbara was tougher in Night90, but many movies (Alien anybody?) had already taken us there.

My sig pic is a grab from the opening credits of Dawn '04.


But Night90 offered a new take on the role of women in society. Barbara was bumped up to someone much more tough and capable in the remake rather than in the original when women weren't seen in such a light ... or at least nowhere near as much.

And where's your sig pic from?

[bassman]

You're right that Barbara was tougher in Night90, but many movies (Alien anybody?) had already taken us there.


Lt. Ellen Ripley is THE female hero. There is no other:p

"Get away from her, you B*tch!" Classic...

[Arcades057]

I like the remake more. Something about black and white films not holding my interest I guess. The zombies in the original just look like people walking around in a daze; the zombies in the remake look as much like rotting bodies as possible.

[Svengoolie]

Actually, I just got done watching it on DVD.:D

Like I said--it is what it is...but one thing's for certain:

While most die hard fans feel that the best look for ghouls came from Day, the NOTLD remake's ghouls set the new standard, and were the most copied, in all zombie flicks (GAR or not) to come.

[Dawg]

I loathe ALL remakes of any films. And NOTLD '90 is no exception.

Do you loathe the remake of 'The Thing'?

:dead: Dawg :skull:


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.

:dead: Dawg :skull:

[erisi236]

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

[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.

:lol: True....so very true.

[panic]

Yup ... imagine a grudge match, Ripley vs. Sarah Connor. :evil:


:lol: 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 (http://imdb.com/title/tt0172495/)- one with Russel Crow
Gladiator (http://imdb.com/title/tt0104346/)- 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 (http://imdb.com/title/tt0172495/)- one with Russel Crow
Gladiator (http://imdb.com/title/tt0104346/)- 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 :p

[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...

[EvilNed]

First off, I just want to make something very clear. It's been brought up before in this thread (and other places) and I want to set the record straight once and for all:


Ripley would kick Sarah Connor's ass.


Now, onto the remake. I don't really know what I feel for this film. It's kinda dull, really. Not scary, not enough zombies, not enough gore, horrible music and no good lines or characters except for Tom and Todd. But one thing that really puts it in the lower case "b" box for me is the amount of screaming. I mean, look at Evil Dead 2. Great flick. But watching the last twenty minutes is like going through hell because of that ****ing chick screaming her lungs out everytime she sees a rat or breaks a nail!
In NOTLD '90 Judy Rose does a fair bit of screaming, Tom and Todd are ALWAYS screaming at each other, and often silenced by someone else yelling to tell them to shut upp. Barbara screams sometimes. Screams, screams, screams. It's like watching a italian comedy with a fat dad and a large family.

The music is a total turn off. The scene where Barbara is running towards the house in the beginning just makes me sink into my chair and go "oooye... This is not good." There's one nice little piece in the film, and that's the one that sometimes plays when we see zombies lurking in the woods. But that's it. The rest is utter crap. And I agree with the poster who said that this film lacks claustrophobic feeling, becuase it does. Never once did I really get that "tight space, **** those zombies are gonna get them now!" feeling. Maybe it's because never once is a zombie actually let into the house (until the end)? Maybe it's because Tom Savini is a bad director? Maybe it's both.

Anyway, overall I find the film pretty dull. If a zombie film doesn't give me the characters from Romero's films, then it better give me the action or atmosphere. This film doesn't do that. But sure, we have nice zombies. To bad we never see any of them get blown to pieces.

So no. I'm not totally against it, but it's just... Dull. I rewatched it again recently, and was totally unengaged and kept looking at the timer, wondering when the film would end.

[DeadCentral]

To DeadCentral:

From what I understand, you're right--you CAN'T copyright a title.

But, you CAN make it a trademark...

Thanks Sven, glad to see you've done your homework...
I learned that while I was playing in a band full time and we tried to get a title copyrighted...wouldn't happen...I had to learn about copyrights when I began doing web design...some 8 years ago..it's a funky process.

[axlish]

Evil Ned, that sound you are hearing is the hammer hitting the nail square on the head.

[Svengoolie]

Thanks Sven, glad to see you've done your homework...
I learned that while I was playing in a band full time and we tried to get a title copyrighted...wouldn't happen...I had to learn about copyrights when I began doing web design...some 8 years ago..it's a funky process.

As I was flipping through Paul Gagne's "The Zombies that Ate Pittsburgh" the other day, it cited a court case won by (I believe) Laurel which blocked another film company from releasing "Messiah of Evil" as "Return of the Living Dead".

You seem pretty familiar with the GAR story--how were they able to do that, and yet these other guys are able to release another NOTLD?

[DjfunkmasterG]

Evil Ned, that sound you are hearing is the hammer hitting the nail square on the head.

:lol:


I can't say I loathe the remake as much as some of you. i agree it ain't the best, but in my opinion still better than LOTD. However, I am inagreement with Evil Ned, the score to this film is very annoying.

[axlish]

I can't say I loathe the remake as much as some of you. i agree it ain't the best, but in my opinion still better than LOTD. However, I am inagreement with Evil Ned, the score to this film is very annoying.

Land is more fun than Day, and is more interesting than the Night remake IMO. It is an easier watch, and the dialogue is a little better.

I know that Russo owns "Living Dead", so perhaps he can throw up a cock block, idk.

[DeadCentral]

The Laurel group (no longer existant...now known as Taurus..yes the very same ...) was part of the United film Artist group who also produced the original DAY... not quite sure about the reasons.... but I'm willing if I did a little research on it... I could find out.

[MinionZombie]

Ripley would most likely kick Connor's ass indeed ... but Sarah's poodle-perming-ass is far sexier :p

[terrywastecake]

what mz said and then some.

*jumps onto kazaa to download "that" scene from t1*

[Griff]

Its common knowledge that post production time on NOTLD90 was greatly reduced. Its no wonder the music kinda stinks. I'm sure it was thrown together so haphazardly out of necessity - not disregard.

I've got a few old Fangos with NOTLD90 interviews that detail some subsequently abandoned concepts - though the cast and crew describe them with a conviction as though they had already been filmed. Harry Cooper was originally supposed to have the top of his head cut off and Helen was to die by the trowel. There were some bigger moments that got scaled down or thrown out altogether but things must've really been tight if they couldn't even stage such simple concepts as these.

[panic]

Anyone else dig the music that plays during the closing credits of Night '90 with all the pictures of the chaos? I kinda dig it ... The rest of the score it utter garbage, though. :dead:

[DeadCentral]

Yeah I actually like the closing music. It's the erie-est creepy sound in the film. I have a loop of it kicking around somewhere on my hd. good horror setting music.

[axlish]

Anyone else dig the music that plays during the closing credits of Night '90 with all the pictures of the chaos? I kinda dig it ... The rest of the score it utter garbage, though. :dead:

Yeah, I've been known to drop a freestyle verse on that dope beat :o

[Philly_SWAT]

Word up

[panic]

Anyone have a link to this music they'd be willing to point me toward?


Yeah I actually like the closing music. It's the erie-est creepy sound in the film. I have a loop of it kicking around somewhere on my hd. good horror setting music.

[MinionZombie]

Yeh the final track which plays over the end credits is my favourite track from that OST - actually I won the CD here at HPOTD - and that track was the best one on it ... the first track is also pretty good.

But you can't beat the Day of the Dead OST, next is the Dawn OST.

[scoracrasia]

"Would any of you c*nts like a drink?"

[Omega]

In response to what some of you said, I think the closing theme is by far the coolest part of the movie. Love that peice of music, and the credits withe the grainy photos is a good homage, too. Weird, if you just showed me the closing credits to the movie, I'd believe it was great, but any other scene turns me off.

[MinionZombie]

I still can't get over Judy Rose - she just makes me wanna hit myself repeatedly with something blunt and heavy. It's one of the reasons I rarely watch the Night remake. One of the other things is that it has that *ponders* kinda hazy at the beginning, naff music, TV movie feel - it feels and looks cheap, whereas the original Night really was cheap - but looked rich in texture. But I doubt you had people bathing in a stream and peeing in a bucket on the remake like you did on the original.