PDA

View Full Version : a romero day sequel?



acealive1
28-Nov-2007, 03:24 AM
would it work? i mean seriously they could bring everyone back but the doc literally. i'd wanna see da whirly bird man in it

Mike70
28-Nov-2007, 03:29 AM
i don't know. i am pulled in both ways. i would like to see those characters again BUT i do feel a certain sense of completion about day. a weird sense of completion. the ultimate fate of those folks is up to my imagination and in my mind i think that things worked out for the 3 of them (or at least 2 of them-mcdermott's death by DTs/alcohol withdrawl nonwithstanding-i think that was hellsing's original idea)anyway, i think they end up just fine.

acealive1
28-Nov-2007, 04:11 AM
i don't know. i am pulled in both ways. i would like to see those characters again BUT i do feel a certain sense of completion about day. a weird sense of completion. the ultimate fate of those folks is up to my imagination and in my mind i think that things worked out for the 3 of them (or at least 2 of them-mcdermott's death by DTs/alcohol withdrawl nonwithstanding-i think that was hellsing's original idea)anyway, i think they end up just fine.


just looked that up. one name for "DT" is "rum fits" :lol::lol:

jdog
28-Nov-2007, 04:15 AM
i would love to see this done. the odds are almost 100 percent it will never happen but what the hell

acealive1
28-Nov-2007, 04:38 AM
i would love to see this done. the odds are almost 100 percent it will never happen but what the hell

even put em in a new movie to show they survived. it did wonders for ken foree's career to be in the dawn remake

7734
28-Nov-2007, 04:43 AM
it did wonders for ken foree's career to be in the dawn remake

how so?

MaximusIncredulous
28-Nov-2007, 08:56 AM
how so?

Black Santa's Revenge. Could never have happened without the Dawn remake.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2196/1896088491_606abd18e5_o.jpg

clanglee
28-Nov-2007, 09:09 AM
OMFG

That is glorious!!!

Danny
28-Nov-2007, 10:03 AM
... i must see that movie.:eek:

Mike70
28-Nov-2007, 12:23 PM
here is a short trailer for black santa's revenge

possible greatest tagline ever:
merry christmas you naughty motherfu..ers

http://www.horror-movies.ca/horror_8900.html

this is the myspace page for the film. it says that the DVD should be available for order at the end of nov/early dec.

http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=150493575

AcesandEights
28-Nov-2007, 12:27 PM
Wow...that was horrible. Horrible in a good way? I'm not too sure.

acealive1
28-Nov-2007, 02:47 PM
how so?

well he was in a lot more stuff after he appeared in that movie. the devil's rejects for one. and his name was all over shaun of the dead.

bassman
28-Nov-2007, 02:52 PM
well he was in a lot more stuff after he appeared in that movie. the devil's rejects for one. and his name was all over shaun of the dead.

He was in Devil's Rejects(as well as Halloween) because Rob Zombie is a huge fan of the original Dawn. His name is all over Shaun for the same reasons...

Mike70
28-Nov-2007, 02:58 PM
DJ has just given me an idea with his bee gees cover post.

the day sequel could start out with a pimped out bub strolling down the street to "stayin alive." :D

jim102016
28-Nov-2007, 05:25 PM
would it work? i mean seriously they could bring everyone back but the doc literally. i'd wanna see da whirly bird man in it

How could you have a sequel, they all die horrible deaths except for John, Sarah and McDermott who have to be pushing 60 by now!

It would have been neat, say a few days after the original, to have had a sort of rescue team show up at the facility. Better late than never, right? Maybe they could have had a nice conversation with Bub and that fat chef zombie who liked to chomp on Steel's arm. Dr. Frankenstein didn't look like he took a round to the head, maybe he could have gotten up and told them what them the story of what happened.

DubiousComforts
28-Nov-2007, 05:30 PM
He was in Devil's Rejects(as well as Halloween) because Rob Zombie is a huge fan of the original Dawn. His name is all over Shaun for the same reasons...
Foree had much better roles prior to Rob Zombie's hack films which scream "warning: fanboy masturbating!"

You can't beat the ensemble of Jeffrey Combs, Barabara Crampton and Ken Foree in From Beyond.

bassman
28-Nov-2007, 06:02 PM
Foree had much better roles prior to Rob Zombie's hack films which scream "warning: fanboy masturbating!"

You can't beat the ensemble of Jeffrey Combs, Barabara Crampton and Ken Foree in From Beyond.

Yeah...I know. He's had a long career. I only explained those three films because that is what Ace was talking about.

And Devil's Rejects is most definitely not a hack film.;)

acealive1
28-Nov-2007, 07:30 PM
How could you have a sequel, they all die horrible deaths except for John, Sarah and McDermott who have to be pushing 60 by now!

It would have been neat, say a few days after the original, to have had a sort of rescue team show up at the facility. Better late than never, right? Maybe they could have had a nice conversation with Bub and that fat chef zombie who liked to chomp on Steel's arm. Dr. Frankenstein didn't look like he took a round to the head, maybe he could have gotten up and told them what them the story of what happened.


and uh.......theres a few people over 60 still acting. so why not? think about how old dennis hopper was when he filmed land


He was in Devil's Rejects(as well as Halloween) because Rob Zombie is a huge fan of the original Dawn. His name is all over Shaun for the same reasons...


meaning his career was made bigger by the interest again.

DubiousComforts
28-Nov-2007, 07:35 PM
And Devil's Rejects is most definitely not a hack film.;)
The Devil's Rejects is truly awful cinema. Perhaps if Rob "Zombie" (yeah, that's not too fanboy) would quit subjecting us to his idiotic wife who is the most unconvincing serial killer in the history of motion pictures, his movies would be far less hack.

You know, while these Hollywood fanboy freaks fall over one another to make modern "grindhouse" cinema, someone should explain to them that the best exploitation films of the 60s and 70s were made for relatively little money using unknown actors that didn't look like fashion models, and the filmmakers had to rely on skill and creativity to produce a marketable product that could compete with the major studios.

capncnut
28-Nov-2007, 09:11 PM
The Devil's Rejects is truly awful cinema.
Your opinion, but a bollocks one nonetheless. :D:p

But I do admit that Rob's missus gets on my tits too, as much as I would like to bang her.

DubiousComforts
28-Nov-2007, 11:15 PM
Your opinion, but a bollocks one nonetheless. :D:p

Ha, at least I can provide countless reasons why my opinion is closer to fact than your misguided view of reality. :moon:



But I do admit that Rob's missus gets on my tits too, as much as I would like to bang her.
Now, now, I never said poor acting ability is detrimental to bangability. The main problem I have with these ho-bags that believe they can act, sing or be artistic in any way shape or form is that it takes them far too long to pose for the inevitable nude photo spread. They typically shirk from their one true talent until no one cares to look at them any longer. :D

jim102016
29-Nov-2007, 04:31 AM
and uh.......theres a few people over 60 still acting. so why not? think about how old dennis hopper was when he filmed land




meaning his career was made bigger by the interest again.


No kidding, but if you're gonna pick up Day exactly where it left off, how are you gonna account for them looking so damned old? Stress?

acealive1
29-Nov-2007, 04:37 AM
No kidding, but if you're gonna pick up Day exactly where it left off, how are you gonna account for them looking so damned old? Stress?


sequel doesnt have to pick right up. none of the die hards did.

jim102016
29-Nov-2007, 05:11 AM
sequel doesnt have to pick right up. none of the die hards did.

They sure weren't twenty years later, in the dead universe anyway.

acealive1
29-Nov-2007, 06:30 AM
They sure weren't twenty years later, in the dead universe anyway.




day and land are pretty close to 20 years apart if not just over 20

Neil
29-Nov-2007, 09:18 AM
here is a short trailer for black santa's revenge

possible greatest tagline ever:
merry christmas you naughty motherfu..ers

http://www.horror-movies.ca/horror_8900.html

this is the myspace page for the film. it says that the DVD should be available for order at the end of nov/early dec.

http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=150493575

Dear God!

DjfunkmasterG
29-Nov-2007, 11:14 AM
The Devil's Rejects is a great psychological thriller. I actually dig it alot. This Black Santa's Revenge looks completely ****ing stupid and horrible. Everyone is now trying to make Grindhouse flicks, like it means something to copycat what Rodriguez and Tarantino did. Grindhouse films have had very little resurrection, even with the Grindhouse flick because people just don't like low budget films. a Majority of people will not sit through something that looks subpar to what is available at the local cinema, it is a sad fact.

Now on topic, I had always wished there was a follow up to each of the Dead films so you knew what happened to each character. Did Fran and Peter make it, did they become lover's? Did Sarah hook up with John or McDermott? Are they still alive? Since seeing those films I have ran through 100's off different scenarios in my head and to be honest I want Romero to provide some closure dammit.

Doc
29-Nov-2007, 12:15 PM
day and land are pretty close to 20 years apart if not just over 20 If you mean the series universe, then when did this happen was there a theory I missed? I always though Day-Land was about 2 years and maybe several months...

bassman
29-Nov-2007, 12:23 PM
If you mean the series universe, then when did this happen was there a theory I missed? I always though Day-Land was about 2 years and maybe several months...

:mad:

They're not direct sequels, people!!!

:dead:

Mike70
29-Nov-2007, 06:24 PM
Dear God!


you know are you are going to get a copy at first chance. fess up now.:D:p

jim102016
29-Nov-2007, 08:29 PM
day and land are pretty close to 20 years apart if not just over 20

In the years they were filmed yes, but not in the dead universe!

Mike70
29-Nov-2007, 08:33 PM
:mad:

They're not direct sequels, people!!!

:dead:


haysoos christoos- didn't we just hash this out in another thread not too very long ago?

bassman
29-Nov-2007, 08:33 PM
In the years they were filmed yes, but not in the dead universe!

In the dead universe they aren't connected at all. The only thing the films have in common with each other is that they both have zombies. Even Romero has stated this numerous times....why do people keep trying to put them in a timeline??

Mike70
29-Nov-2007, 08:38 PM
In the dead universe they aren't connected at all. The only thing the films have in common with each other is that they both have zombies. Even Romero has stated this numerous times....why do people keep trying to put them in a timeline??


it is the star trekization of the romero films. anybody at work on that tech manual for dead reckoning?

bassman
29-Nov-2007, 08:42 PM
it the star trekization of the romero films. anybody at work on that tech manual for dead reckoning?

I think your saying that people read too far into the films, but I'm not a star trek fan....so what are you really saying?:lol:

Doc
29-Nov-2007, 09:44 PM
In the dead universe they aren't connected at all. The only thing the films have in common with each other is that they both have zombies. Even Romero has stated this numerous times....why do people keep trying to put them in a timeline?? The why is it that people keep saying Dawn is a sequel to Night.:|

Mike70
29-Nov-2007, 11:01 PM
I think your saying that people read too far into the films

maybe they do just a little bit.:D

Legion2213
29-Nov-2007, 11:05 PM
The why is it that people keep saying Dawn is a sequel to Night.:|

Unless you have actually read/heard GAR say they aren't, it is a natural conclusion to make...also remember that when the original trilogy came out, there was no www, people saw three zombie movies, each one of them seemingly set further into the crisis than the other.

clanglee
30-Nov-2007, 01:08 AM
Come on, essentially they are sequels. Granted they don't follow a set time line, or have the same characters, but they are set in the same scenario, and they are made by the same person one right after another.

It's kinda like a series of books, The Riftwar saga for instance, Many stories set in the same fantasy world. But many of the later books didn't have the same characters, or same storyline. I would still call them sequels in passing.

Semantics

Mike70
30-Nov-2007, 01:16 AM
Come on, essentially they are sequels. Granted they don't follow a set time line, or have the same characters, but they are set in the same scenario, and they are made by the same person one right after another.

It's kinda like a series of books, The Riftwar saga for instance, Many stories set in the same fantasy world. But many of the later books didn't have the same characters, or same storyline. I would still call them sequels in passing.

Semantics

brother we're not saying that they aren't sequels just that they don't have a set
"timeline."

right from romero's mouth:

HW: Many horror sequels bring back previous survivors to fight the evil once again...
George: Yeah
HW: ...yet you have never done this in your Dead films.
George: No.
HW: Is there a reason for that?
George: Well you know, they were never... I never did anything with the period. I could have set them all in 1968 [laughs] and since they weren't connected in time... Well, in other words, I just used the period. I shot one in the 70's and the background was 70's - I shot one in the 80's and the background was the 80's - and this one this background will be 2000. So I don't feel that you can continue the same characters. The thing that continues is just the phenomena and I try to put a different spin on it that reflects the time when the film is made, rather than try to keep the same characters going, it just wouldn't make any sense unless they were all done in the same period.

DubiousComforts
30-Nov-2007, 04:32 AM
George: Well you know, they were never... I never did anything with the period. I could have set them all in 1968 [laughs] and since they weren't connected in time... Well, in other words, I just used the period. I shot one in the 70's and the background was 70's - I shot one in the 80's and the background was the 80's - and this one this background will be 2000. So I don't feel that you can continue the same characters. The thing that continues is just the phenomena and I try to put a different spin on it that reflects the time when the film is made, rather than try to keep the same characters going, it just wouldn't make any sense unless they were all done in the same period.
Believe me, I'm not trying to connect the DEAD films as direct sequels/timelines/whatever, but in all honesty, he's only given a reason why the characters don't continue from film to film. Not having continuing characters (like Star Wars, for example), allows Romero to inject some commentary which reflects the decade. That's all he's saying there.

clanglee
30-Nov-2007, 06:35 AM
No No, I hear you. The only obvious timeline so far is the length into the outbreak. This new one breaks from that obviously.

Trin
30-Nov-2007, 11:36 AM
My personal opinion after following these movies for years and reading/watching everything GAR has said on the topic - GAR doesn't care about universe or timeline issues. His answers to interview questions tend to contradict themselves over time, and are more based on how the question was asked then anything concrete that he's thought through.

When Dawn came out GAR made it very clear that we were seeing the events from the perspective of a different group of survivors a few weeks later into the outbreak. Anything he's saying today that contradicts that is revisionist history to try to put off the timeline nit-pickery.

bassman
30-Nov-2007, 01:10 PM
My personal opinion after following these movies for years and reading/watching everything GAR has said on the topic - GAR doesn't care about universe or timeline issues. His answers to interview questions tend to contradict themselves over time, and are more based on how the question was asked then anything concrete that he's thought through.

When Dawn came out GAR made it very clear that we were seeing the events from the perspective of a different group of survivors a few weeks later into the outbreak. Anything he's saying today that contradicts that is revisionist history to try to put off the timeline nit-pickery.

It seems like I remember reading somewhere that Romero surfs the internet from time to time......I wonder if he came here and saw us bitching about the timeline and decided "AHH f*ck it.....They're not connected at all. I'm starting over with a new one.":p

jim102016
30-Nov-2007, 04:26 PM
haysoos christoos- didn't we just hash this out in another thread not too very long ago?

Yes, it was a hell of a battle. I think Philly Swat put some people in the hospital! Obviously, nothing was settled permenantly!

Mike70
30-Nov-2007, 04:30 PM
Yes, it was a hell of a battle. I think Philly Swat put some people in the hospital! Obviously, nothing was settled permenantly!

nothing seemingly ever is on this and a variety of other subjects on here.

oh well i am waiting for the inevitable return of the it's 2am, your mercedes is out of gas, you have two shells left and are surrounded by zombies - what do you do thread.:D

jim102016
01-Dec-2007, 12:31 AM
nothing seemingly ever is on this and a variety of other subjects on here.

oh well i am waiting for the inevitable return of the it's 2am, your mercedes is out of gas, you have two shells left and are surrounded by zombies - what do you do thread.:D

Have no fear, my friend, it shall return!

clanglee
01-Dec-2007, 12:49 AM
It seems like I remember reading somewhere that Romero surfs the internet from time to time......I wonder if he came here and saw us bitching about the timeline and decided "AHH f*ck it.....They're not connected at all. I'm starting over with a new one.":p

:lol::lol::lol: That would be so great!!

Mike70
01-Dec-2007, 01:19 AM
Have no fear, my friend, it shall return!

dude i am soooo tempted to start up this thread. i do fear mailbombs from some of the other old board members.:D

acealive1
03-Dec-2007, 02:37 PM
dude i am soooo tempted to start up this thread. i do fear mailbombs from some of the other old board members.:D




:eek::eek:

Doc
03-Dec-2007, 09:54 PM
Are you all talking about that Land is before Day thread? If you are I guess it would be heresy to say that I at one time was actually thinking of a theory that Day may come before Dawn:confused::shifty:

jim102016
05-Dec-2007, 05:23 AM
Are you all talking about that Land is before Day thread? If you are I guess it would be heresy to say that I at one time was actually thinking of a theory that Day may come before Dawn:confused::shifty:

Brother, just let sleeping dogs lie for now. They'll be a better opportunity, the smoke still hasn't cleared from the last time.

bd2999
09-Dec-2007, 06:44 PM
I would say no. It would just be like Dawn. The characters were great but the fate of them is best left up in the air. At least I think so. I mean if they did it I would be there but I think to much time has passed and the movie would not have the same feel anymore.