An official name for the saga

[The Alive Man]

Pentalogy of the Dead - please. It sounds bad. Everyone can come up with something so trivial. Space/Time saga of the Dead - with the release of DIARY, this name should drop! Saga of the Dead - oh my God. No. What's about... Chronicles of the DEAD or even The Dead Chronicles - I know, it's not so "original" but at least the term "chronicle" can apply to space (LAND), time (NIGHT/DAWN/DAY) and the story-telling element (DIARY). What do you say?

[bassman]

I think they should all just use their individual names. A name for the entire series is not needed. They're not direct sequels. They'll probably never all be released together in one package, anyway....so no need for a collective name. As far as talking about all the films around here....I just say the "Dead Films" or "Romero's Dead Films".

[The Alive Man]

Bassman, I understand your perspective, even if I don't agree. In my mind, Romero created another conception of the "sequel".

[bassman]

In my mind, Romero created another conception of the "sequel". How did he do that? The 007 films have been doing indirect sequels ever since 1963 with the second in the series "From Russia With Love". That's five years before "Night" and fifteen before "Dawn". Aside from a character or two....these films are basically not related. Same with Romero's. Or if you want to go in another direction, Sergio Leone's spaghetti western, "A FistFul of Dollars"(1964) started a non-dorect sequel trilogy with Clint Eastwood as "The Man With No Name". This was four years before "Night" and fourteen before "Dawn". There are many others that just aren't coming to mind right now. I'm not trying to be a douche, here.....just saying that I don't think the films should be related by a collective name. They're best being viewed as seperate films.....the way they were each conceived.

[The Alive Man]

Bassman, Both the JAMES BOND and the DOLLAR TRILOGY cinematic series feature ONE CHARACTER - and the same one - as absolute centerpiece of any movie in the related saga. It's slightly different. Then, the background scenario is the same for each saga (Old West for Leone, UK for Bond). In Romero's Dead movies it's very different. A parallel dimension which I use to call 'The Stretch', where different ages (counterparts of the decades of our universe) are "mixed-up" in one single combo. So every Dead sequel is truly the continuation of the previous one(s): DIARY - hour zero. NIGHT - 3 days since the 'Incident', fourth night. DAWN - 3 weeks since the 'Incident', fourth week. DAY - 3 months since the 'Incident', fourth month. LAND - 3 years since the 'Incident', fourth year. Different ages are channeled into one "universal decade"... '60ies, '7oies, '80ies, '00. If it sounds too sci-fi to you, it is done intentionally. I respect your view, anyway.

[Philly_SWAT]

Bassman, Both the JAMES BOND and the DOLLAR TRILOGY cinematic series feature ONE CHARACTER - and the same one - as absolute centerpiece of any movie in the related saga. It's slightly different. Then, the background scenario is the same for each saga (Old West for Leone, UK for Bond). I understand what you are saying here, but I would think that "Romero Dead Series" does center around ONE CHARACTER. Not a specific character like "James Bond" or "The Man With No Name", but more of an etheral character, namely "the undead". Like the masses of the undead themselves, the main "character" of the GAR movies blends into the background, everpresent and dangerous. By the same token, the background scenario is the same for each saga (Old West for Leone, UK for Bond, "Modern Day" for GAR). In Romero's Dead movies it's very different. A parallel dimension which I use to call 'The Stretch', where different ages (counterparts of the decades of our universe) are "mixed-up" in one single combo. So every Dead sequel is truly the continuation of the previous one(s): I totally disagree with this point. The GAR universe is not one of a parallel universe where different decades are intermixing. As I mentioned above, the GAR series takes place in "modern day", whenever that happens to be. Thirty years from now, a person watching these movies for the first time will still have to see them as happening in "modern day", even if the modern day of thirty years from now is very different from what appears to be modern day in the movies. GAR made a purposeful decision to have no "time markers" in his movies. He simply used styles of clothing, music, ahirstyles, etc. that were popular at the time he made each movie. He was not trying to imply that styles changed so quickly in a shory period of time, or that some "parellel dimenson" opened up bringing in these different periods. He was illustrating that these evens are happening "now", whenever now is. DIARY - hour zero. NIGHT - 3 days since the 'Incident', fourth night. DAWN - 3 weeks since the 'Incident', fourth week. DAY - 3 months since the 'Incident', fourth month. LAND - 3 years since the 'Incident', fourth year. This is a simple way to describe the timeline, but most would say inaccurate, some with wildly different views of what happened when. If Night happened 3 days since the "incident", what the heck were Johnny and Barb doing in the first two days to know nothing at all about it? Dawn was definately 3 weeks in, but if you search the archives, there is wide discussion about when Day and Land take place in relation to the start of the outbreak, and even when they take place in relation to each other. Different ages are channeled into one "universal decade"... '60ies, '7oies, '80ies, '00. If it sounds too sci-fi to you, it is done intentionally. The only way this makes sense to me is if you actually mean what I am saying, that the movies are "timeless". By using the term "sci-fi", it seems that you dont mean what I am saying, but you actually think that different timeperiods are interacting in a parellel universe. I would respectfully suggest to re-think this. I respect your view, anyway. I will respect you view a lot more once your view is the same as mine! Welcome to the board, btw.

[The Alive Man]

Philly, We have two different takes on the same subject. Mine is a theory... just this. Yours is based on GAR's view. I'm not claiming that my theory is the only one possible. Anyway, remember & take care, the work of an artist DIVERGES from the author himself (and his opinions or basic intentions), becoming an indipendent entity of its own. "But you actually think that different timeperiods are interacting in a parellel universe." - well, it's just this way, I like to think this way, that's all. A miscellanea of cultural styles channeled into one 'container' decade, belonging to the timeline of an alternative Earth version. Sci-fi. Thanks for the welcome! I came from Italy...

[Philly_SWAT]

Philly, We have two different takes on the same subject. Mine is a theory... just this. Yours is based on GAR's view. I'm not claiming that my theory is the only one possible. Mine is not based on GAR's view, but my own view, which I submit is the correct view (or course, I guess we all feel our own view is the correct view). Quite the contrary, I do not mindlessly agree with all of GAR's views, in fact, in relation to the Land/Day timeline issue (which if interested, I suggest you search and read past posts rather than trying to start new discussions in this area, for some reason, certain mods tend to close those threads for some reason) I totally disagee with GAR's views. Anyway, remember & take care, the work of an artist DIVERGES from the author himself (and his opinions or basic intentions), becoming an indipendent entity of its own. I just stated that I totally disagee with GAR's views in relation to the Land/Day timeline, and one of the main points that I use to back up my views is exactly what you said here. Nice to see someone agree with my view on the work diverging/becoming an independent entity of its own thing. "But you actually think that different timeperiods are interacting in a parellel universe." - well, it's just this way, I like to think this way, that's all. A miscellanea of cultural styles channeled into one 'container' decade, belonging to the timeline of an alternative Earth version. Sci-fi. That being said, I still cant agree with you at all here. Yes, people can think whatever they want. But that doesnt mean that any view could in fact be accurate. For example, lets say I had a theory that the whole undead outbreak was a big practical joke, and that a few years later the President was going to go on TV and say "OK joke over. There was no outbreak, we did this to just mess with you for a few years and to drive real estate prices down" and that all of the shambling dead were going to pull off there masks and reveal that they were just kidding. If that was my theory, I would of course be entitled to my opinion, but everyone else in the world would say I was wrong, and perhaps rediculous. Thanks for the welcome! I came from Italy... Ah ha, that explains it! Just kidding. The main thing I know about Italy in relation to GAR dead movies is that Dario Argento totally didnt get what Dawn78 was all about, and that is blatantly evident when you see how he edited it.

[The Alive Man]

About the "joke theory", there's nothing in the movies that remotely suggests such incredible theory Jokes apart, it's not good to make-up theories with NO FACTS backing them. My view is not "one of those" theories not backed up wherever you find in the movie(s), neither is one of those fully confirmed by facts. FANON anyone? After all, it seems that according to Romero fans they (the Dead movies) are definitely placed in a single "continuity", so mine is a sci-fi explanation to such "continuity" often vindicated by Dead Fans (including me). As far as Italy is concerned... ARGENTO had his vision. Unfortunately, 'ZOMBIE' is my only "Dawn"; I never watched the other two GAR versions. Gonna purchase the box-set. But this is another story...

[Philly_SWAT]

About the "joke theory", there's nothing in the movies that remotely suggests such incredible theory Jokes apart, it's not good to make-up theories with NO FACTS backing them. Agreed. My view is not "one of those" theories not backed up wherever you find in the movie(s), neither is one of those fully confirmed by facts. What "facts" are you using to back up the "mulitple dimensions converging" view? FANON anyone? After all, it seems that according to Romero fans they (the Dead movies) are definitely placed in a single "continuity", so mine is a sci-fi explanation to such "continuity" often vindicated by Dead Fans (including me). What is FANON? I'm not trying to be funny, I dont know what that means. Romero movies are in a single "contintuity". The differences in styles, etc from the 60's,70's 80's etc is due to the "timeless" nature of the series, not mutli-dimentional convergence. Where is there evidence of your view being vindicated by Dead fans? As far as Italy is concerned... ARGENTO had his vision. Unfortunately, 'ZOMBIE' is my only "Dawn"; I never watched the other two GAR versions. Gonna purchase the box-set. But this is another story... You have missed a lot my friend as far as GAR movies go. By only having Argento's version of Dawn to go by, you have definately missed the whole point of Romero's master work.

[Bubdotd]

World Of The Dead. Time of the dead.

[axlish]

George A. Romero's Dead Saga

[bassman]

Just to defend my previous statements without having to go into excruciating detail.......I'm on the same page as Philly.

[Bubdotd]

Films of the dead.

[The Alive Man]

I'm doing a lot of researching tonight. That's quite interesting, taken straight from IMDB (author: Writer5): "I interviewed George A. Romero last year and he said the only way this could in is with a detent between the living and the living dead. He told me that his hint was this was when Riley looked at Big Daddy and Big Daddy seemed to look back at him as if there was some form of mutual acknowledgement. Big Daddy is leading his zombies out of the city while Riley is heading for Canada. That is why Riley stops Pretty Boy from blasting the zombies with Big Daddy. He recognizes that they are looking for a place to go just like they are. About the only other hints of how it could end can be found in Day Of The Dead. The mad Doctor doing the behavorial experiments on Bub theorized that it would take about three years before the decomposition would begin to effect the motor functions of the brain. So figuring that zombies seem to rot at a slower rate, I'd guess it could take at least twenty years before the first generation of zombies would no longer be able to function and experience "final death" as Romero has noted it." Anyway, I'm not against your opinions, Bassman and Philly. They are valid. I'm just running on an alternative route, since I love sci-fi so much (I'm a sci-fi writer myself). I think there's really nothing wrong with it. That's the coolness of being such a passionate and vocal "fan" about something: to elaborate new ways to "see" your object of passion through new eyes everyday. PHILLY, The only "backing fact" to my theory is the presence of somewhat of a "continuity" (the movies seem to encompass an arc of 4-5 years). I love this multi-dimensional convergence theory so much! As far as 'ZOMBIE' is concerned, I'm planning to see the GAR edit as soon as I can. Now I can't judge without comparison, but I actually like Argento's version.