Any interest in "LIVING DEAD" fan edits?

[TheLivingDead]

-Deleted-

[beat_truck]

Not interested in the least bit. I don't need or want classic movies "reinterpreted" for me. I can't speak for everyone, but I doubt you will find anyone else here that will appreciate it either. I am not part of today's ADD generation that can't pay attention to or enjoy a movie that isn't constant action and special effects, or is "old and dated", or gasp..... B&W.

[Neil]

I'd be interested in seeing the result(s)

[MinionZombie]

Romero himself was very egalitarian and most of his earlier work is in the public domain is one sense or another. So I think he'd applaud any effort to draw attention to his work and legacy, as long as it was sincere. You know? I'm not trying to make a buck off of this, so I plan to bow out and now draw attention to myself or anything. What I'm doing comes from a place of pure love for the art of Romero. In any case, interested in seeing if there is any interest in this sort of thing from the fans...or if I should expect a backlash, etc. Again, I wanted to (re)introduce the audience of today to Romero's best work, many of which are unfamiliar with his incredible pandemic epic. 1) Only Night of the Living Dead fell into public domain - and only accidentally. The owners have since done many things to 're-establish' copyright, and none of the creators were at all pleased they were screwed out of a lot of money due to an oversight. 2) Expect a backlash. 3) Today's audiences shouldn't be 're-introduced' to something - you yourself describe the Living Dead films as an "incredible pandemic epic" - via some re-edit that has nothing to do with the original creators. Indeed, Romero's own editing style is one of the joys of watching his earlier films and in-part tells the story of his filmmaking style. Trying to 'rejig' older works to pander to people who are probably not that interested in Romero's films already is a pointless exercise, to put it bluntly. They wouldn't be seeing Romero's intended vision, so a re-edit would simply obscure - or quite possibly, denigrate - Romero's true work. Anyone who doesn't like old movies because they're in black & white, or they have a different pace, simply shouldn't be watching 'old' movies and should stick to whatever the latest cookie cutter blockbuster is. Part of the joy of cinema is seeing the history of cinema - and the history of mankind, of technology, of the ever-evolving socio-political landscape, etc etc etc - play out on-screen. Plus, sometimes folks can be 'too young' to see a movie in the right light. I've been that myself with numerous movies - which I have then had the pleasure of re-discovering years down the road. It's the same movie, but I have changed, and I find things I didn't see before and come to it with a new understanding. Discover the original work - or nothing. Simple as. Sorry if that's blunt, but new audiences should discover filmmakers' work as the original filmmakers intended.

[JDP]

Re-editing the original works is only acceptable for introducing footage shot by the director himself, but which for one reason or another was left out from this or that cut of the films in question, and adds something "new/fresh", but without compromising the integrity of the original film. Like the "Extended Mall Hours" fan cut of Dawn, for example, which, despite some mistakes, it pretty much managed to "squeeze in" almost all the available footage from that film that has been used in its several cuts. Otherwise: DO NOT FUCK AROUND WITH THE ORIGINALS.

[Neil]

I don't mind re-edits, if only as novelty factor. ie: To see how else something we know and love can be arranged...

[TheLivingDead]

-Deleted-

[JDP]

As for what is acceptable, that's debatable. Nothing in the way of content ever really belongs to anyone person. Romero concedes that his story was essentially a rip off of "I AM LEGEND" and even went as far as to apologize to the author. Artists are broadcast antennae for consciousness and culture. Their job is to pick up what is in the zeitgeist and be a paintbrush for God or whatever you choose to call it. When you say, "DON'T FUCK WITH THE ORIGINALS", well.... they've already been fucked with. Thriller....The Return of The Living Dead...Fulci's work....TWD all wrongfully stole from Romero when they should've become a community that sought him out rather than shun him. As Romero put it, "the BIBLE was already written" and he wasn't happy that he was ripped off. I think there is nothing wrong with "stealing back" and trying to refocus and recast the older not antiquated films in a way that make it obvious that those movies were the Gold standard. Nothing against TWD or those other films. But Romero's movies were great cinema FIRST and cool zombie shit SECOND. I'm only interested in the film experience here, and not the zombie shit as much. Incidentally, Romero once established a website around 2000 with the hope of making his films free for people to watch and enjoy, and had a wonderful 'fuck it' attitude about the whole thing.haha... He simply wanted his counter-culture contribution to succeed somehow. But he quickly took down his website when he ran into trolls and the monarchy of mob rule of angry fans who wanted to possess Romero's films rather than enjoy them as an audience. Romero was a very egalitarian kinda guy, very generous man, unfortunately at his own expense and his own career. He was fighting corporate rule and didn't expect fan fundamentalism to be the new tyranny. So I can't blame him for taking down his website and saying fuck it. However, I understand and fully expected your POV. And I appreciate it!! Just to be clear, I wasn't putting together some lame extended cuts that haphazardly squeeze in every piece of footage or stuff like that. For example, in Dawn of the Dead, a change I made was to clarify that Stephen (aka.flyboy) murders the dock operator and keeps it a secret, one that clearly haunts him for the rest of the film and makes him a pill to be around. Murder ruins a man, and eventually he faces that karma when he loses it in the mall shootout and pays for his crime with his life. That wasn't clear when I first saw the film, and it's still not clear. However, by clarifying that, it gives the movie a great Neo-noir edge. Plus, it helps to flesh out David Emge's acting since without that flourish he just seems wooden and with too much glower. He comes off as a less interesting and less talented Harrison Ford, which hurts the film. But I first saw the movie, that is how I interpreted it, that Flyboy was a murderer (i.e."we are thieves and we are bad guys and that is exactly what we are!" - says Peter) and lent the film this gravity that was super dramatic, elevating the material. A more fun change I made was to make "Dawn of the Dead" into a living comic in the style of Sin City, since that's essentially what it was as Romero indicated in interviews, making the film candy colored and in a storyboard style. I used a painstaking post-process discipline to transforms the film in this way. And it's subtle enough that it doesn't distract. It really does bring out the best of the movie, etc. And, again, a purist or fundamentalist fan might disagree. But as a movie lover, it just makes the film fresh and relevant for me. As if someone made a 70s film in bellbottoms and afros and make candy colored zombies as a deliberate style. Now the film is timeless rather than dated, which is how David Lynch and Tim Burton make their movies. Anyhow, I get where you are coming from. So, no problem. If you change your mind and want to check it out, hit me up in a PM and I can send you a link. Thank you for the valuable research! Fulci, O'Bannon, TWD, etc., did not go around re-editing Romero's works and changing its characters and plots, they just borrowed some elements from his movies (mostly the idea of the cannibalistic zombie, which is Romero's #1 contribution to zombie lore) and did their own thing with them. That's not "fucking with the originals". Turning one of Romero's characters into a murderer, though, is definitely "fucking around with the originals" !!! There's no suggestion whatsoever in Dawn that Flyboy killed the radio operator at the docks. And BTW, it was actually Romero (or more exactly his make-up team) who "borrowed" from Michael Jackson's Thriller. The look of the zombies in Day of the Dead was in fact inspired on the zombies in that 1983 video. In Romero's previous movies the zombies had been very basic, they had a "fresh cadaver" look to them. But since Day is taking place at a later time in the zombie apocalypse, they wanted a more "decayed" look to them, but also not fully "rotten" yet (a la Ossorio, Fulci or Bianchi's heavily decomposed or almost skeletal centuries old corpses), so Jackson's video gave them the look they were aiming for.

[MinionZombie]

Fulci, O'Bannon, TWD, etc., did not go around re-editing Romero's works and changing its characters and plots, they just borrowed some elements from his movies (mostly the idea of the cannibalistic zombie, which is Romero's #1 contribution to zombie lore) and did their own thing with them. That's not "fucking with the originals". Turning one of Romero's characters into a murderer, though, is definitely "fucking around with the originals" !!! There's no suggestion whatsoever in Dawn that Flyboy killed the radio operator at the docks. And BTW, it was actually Romero (or more exactly his make-up team) who "borrowed" from Michael Jackson's Thriller. The look of the zombies in Day of the Dead was in fact inspired on the zombies in that 1983 video. In Romero's previous movies the zombies had been very basic, they had a "fresh cadaver" look to them. But since Day is taking place at a later time in the zombie apocalypse, they wanted a more "decayed" look to them, but also not fully "rotten" yet (a la Ossorio, Fulci or Bianchi's heavily decomposed or almost skeletal centuries old corpses), so Jackson's video gave them the look they were aiming for. Agreed on both counts. ... Re-framing Flyboy as a murderer is a silly idea, to be quite frank, and very much "messes with" the original material, especially if you're trying to introduce new viewers to these movies - you're presenting a false version of the narrative, and I really don't see any actual point in this whole exercise. The radio operator killed himself - that's the truth of that scene - but it's interesting to note that Flyboy actually bothers to report it - "Operator dead. Post abandoned." - and does so with remorse. The world is in the early stages of crumbling and this guy is one of no doubt many who'd be topping themselves, exiting the nightmare early. Flyboy's nature is well explained throughout the film. He's not the gung-ho action men of Roger and Peter, he's likely also in an awkward position not knowing what kind of man to be at that time of great social change - he'll have grown up with very traditional men and families, but he's not of that generation, so he's kind of out-of-synch with the whole thing. When he tries to propose he gets shot down. He falls into malaise. His relationship with Fran crumbles. He gets seduced by the shiny things in the mall - "We took it. It's ours." - and he pays the price of not seeing the path he should have taken throughout the movie. And plastering on some 'Sin City'-esque comic book look, or whatever, again seems totally pointless. The candy coloured nature of Dawn is as much inspired by the disco era than anything else, so why not slap in a load of disco tunes? "The Warriors" had a director's cut which inserted 'comic book scene transitions' as this was supposedly what the director wanted (I do wonder if he'd even thought of that idea at the time of making the movie, though) - and you know what? It makes the movie worse. Romero did his comic book movie - Creepshow - and that's what he intended that project to be. Dawn was never intended as some 'comic book' movie. He was capturing the glamour of the time of the disco era, he said it himself.

[TheLivingDead]

-Deleted-

[MinionZombie]

Doesn't mind "blunt" talk ... then starts calling you an "asshole", "rude", and a "fundamentalist" 'cos you were honest. Uh-huh.

[JDP]

I would have to see a citation on the flyboy stuff. In the Cannes cut, with Pilato and his outlaw gang, it is clear that everyone was murdered by outlaws pretending to be police. There’s several bodies in that station. Are you telling me that they all killed themselves? Lol In the tighter edit, there is no indication the dock operator shot himself. The shotgun damage to his head clearly was from a distance, and Savini was nothing if not accurate in his depiction of violence. Unless you are referring to some non-canon book or an actual statement on Romero, which I’d love to see the citation, it’s open for interpretation at this point. To which I say, to each his own. As for the rest, TWD and the others did more than “fuck with the originals”. They outright plagarized from him. Romero “fucked with” I am Legend, by his own omission and even went as far as to apologize for it. You actually haven’t seen my fan edit, which is actually something many people do for fun with several movies. Check out FAnedit.org. As this comes from a hobby as opposed to some kind of official release, this isn’t the offense you are making it out to be. So, lighten up? Lol Christian Whitehead “fucked with” the original Sonic the Hedgehog series by making unsolicited fan interpretations of Sonic games. As you could see from the backlash over the movie, fundamentalist fans don’t like it when something that they feel belongs to them is messed with. Yet Whitehead’s work is so good that it was accepted as canon by the audience and he was even allowed to re-edit Sonic 2. As for Thriller, yes I already know it Day of the Dead ripped off their zombies. I also read Lee Karr’s book. But you can’t blame ‘em when Jon Landis stole from Romero first, something Romero gripped about every now and then in interviews. Again, it’s a philosophical disagreement. The fan edit community is a real thing and largely accepted, so regardless of whether purists fear of some original work being “fucked with”, they don’t have to watch it. For everyone else, it becomes another way to enjoy the same movie and even celebrities like Topher Grace and Stephen Soderberg join in for the fun. Obviously I just won’t direct my work to you or other zealots. Thank you again for the debate, and take care! How exactly did Jackson/Landis "fuck with" Romero's movies? Romero doesn't own a "patent" or "trademark" on zombies! The concept of the zombie existed long before Romero was even around. Just because a movie or video features zombies in it doesn't mean that someone has "fucked with" Romero's movies. But altering Romero's own storylines definitely qualifies as such. TWD & others simply took Romero's idea of the cannibalistic zombie and just made their own thing with it. Again, that's not "fucking with" Romero's own movies. They did not change anything in Romero's own movies. Romero also did not "fuck with" the movies he drew his inspiration for Night of the Living Dead. "Borrowing" some elements is not "fucking with" the original movies. No, the dead people at the docks did not kill themselves, obviously, but the movie and script make it is obvious that the #1 suspects are the rogue cops that are lurking there, certainly not Fran and Flyboy. When they get there those people were already dead. Finding them comes as a surprise and shock to both of them. There is no insinuation whatsoever in the movie or script that Stephen and Fran had anything to do with those murders.

[TheLivingDead]

-Deleted-

[JDP]

I'm only going off of what Romero says. It quite clearly said in many interviews that he stole from Richard Matheson, who conceived of vampire horror of taking place in a banal setting (like a military base or on the streets), and even went as far as publicly apologizing. Matheson was a good sport over it too. That wasn't done in jest and if that is how Romero felt about it, then he's declaring his intention. Take it up with his estate. It doesn't bother me. I'm just saying that it's par for the course. Tarantino steals all the time from others. "From Dusk Till Dawn" and Reservoir Dogs" are great examples. But his attempt to reframe a previously done narrative or story was done so in an artful way...so more power to him. As far as altering Romero's storylines, you'd have to see my fan films before you could make such a credible statement. You haven't... and I've done enough research on this with still living cast and crew that I'm confident that I'm honoring the source material and Romero's own ballzy sense of experimentation. He retconned his own work several times - just look at the abandoned Venus probe subplot? Or the fact that many years pass between zombies films but the whole story essential takes place over only a few years. Each film is different and surreal enough that it is silly to obsess over such things. As for Flyboy.... I think it is clear that Fran is in the dark on that. That explains WHY her relationship suffers for the guilt eating away at Stephen. He's this quiet brooding asshole for most of the movie, until he faces his karma at the end. Because the rogue cops are cut from the final cut of the film, the theatrical cut, there is NO indication that the dock operator "killed himself". You wouldn't point a shotgun point blank at your own forehead in the way he did. Plus, there is no subtext or motivation for that. In fact, the cut from the previous shot of Peter shooting a zombie to the head of the dock operator flying back from some force inflicted upon him suggests his death just happened. Forget about the extended cut since Romero's final cut changes A LOT of things. The cops, for instance, now return to being probably normal cops who are also abandoning their posts. They are no longer outlaws. Again, if you can point to some citation saying otherwise, maybe your stance would have more credibility. But I can't find evidence that the dock operator "killed himself". To my knowledge Romero doesn't mention it in his DVD commentaries. As far as TWD, Romero is quite adamant that he was offended by them not including him. Also, not only is Romero's zombie ripped off, but some narrative elements that are unique to Day of the Dead and Dawn show up. As Romero said, angrily, "the bible was already written". TWD did more than just borrow from Romero. I guess I'm on the side of Romero and his estate on that subject. We will just have to agree to disagree. In any case, as much as I like a good debate on this stuff, it starts to become like something out of "Gulliver's Travels" where people are in a civil war on how to eat a softboiled egg, cracking the bottom or the top. Stupid shit.lol I get your possessiveness over this stuff. But my artistic choices here, like to have Flyboy murder the dock worker, or to color correct DAWN so it looks more like a comic book, has more to do with the art of movies themselves. If it makes for a better movie, then I can care less over the nerd shit about "Greedo shot first". It's like the Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter movies. Too much arguing over stupid esoteric details about how to stay true to the book. A filmmaker should make the best possible film possible without having to worry about that shit, otherwise he's diluting it. All that matters is what is the best possible version of the art IMAO. Everything else should take a back seat. To be clear, I came to a filmmaker's forum (as opposed to a general forum) since I was hoping to have an objective civil conversation about the practical side of this. I don't mind the fun debating here and there, but I'm not looking into getting into it with haters. SO this will be my last postings on this. But thanks again for your feedback. Always valuable. Cheers! Romero can say what he wants, the fact is that he only borrowed some elements from such movies as I am Legend and The Killer Shrews for his own movie, which was not about mutant vampires or large mutant flesh-eating shrews but about flesh-eating zombies. That, I repeat, is not "fucking with" any of the movies that Romero drew inspiration from. He never in no way made any attempts at "remaking" those films. So, there's no real "fucking with" the films here. Just "borrowing" some elements from them and incorporating them into an otherwise different movie. I don't need to see them; if you are planning on altering the look, feel, characters, plot, sub-plots, etc. of any movie, that immediately spells "fucking with" it. The theatrical cut is based on the same script as the extended cut, where it is very clear who the main suspects for those murders at the docks are. And even in the theatrical cut it is still pretty obvious that Stephen had NOTHING to do with those murders. For starters, he doesn't even have a gun with him when he finds the dead radio operator. Then, when he answers those trying to establish contact with the post, he is very clearly shocked by what he has just discovered (which would hardly be necessary since the people he is talking to can't actually see him, so no need to put on a "I am shocked" act that no one can see. In fact, had he murdered the radio operator, we should expect that he would actually avoid answering the radio call in the first place.) Plus had he really murdered the radio operator EVERYONE at the docks, including Fran, would have easily known about it: they would obviously have heard the shot, and would also naturally inquire what the hell just happened and investigate. You are not being very observant here and actually seeing things that are simply not implied anywhere. There is absolutely NOTHING in any cut of this movie that suggests anything about Stephen being a murderer. On the contrary, he is plainly portrayed as a nice fellow, and kind of "wimpy" actually, that's why he is made fun of by his two more combat experienced companions. It was actually Romero who declined to participate in TWD. He disparagingly referred to the show as "a soap opera with zombies" (even though the first few seasons of that show were actually better than all of Romero's later zombie efforts, ironically.) Aside from the cannibalistic aspect, and the "damage the brain in order to kill a zombie" bit, which are elements first introduced into zombie lore by Romero's Night of the Living Dead, TWD does its own thing with the genre. They simply borrowed those two elements from Romero's movies. It is in no way, shape or form "fucking with" Romero's original movies, though, which stand just as they are. TWD is not a "remake" of any Romero movie.

[TheLivingDead]

-Deleted-