Where does Land of the Dead belong?

[zombie04]

Would you say it takes place before or after Day? Personally I think Land is its own movie, but if it were to take place with the trilogy, I'd say it'd be before Day because if it were after then the apocalyptic feeling in the Day would really be reduced.

[AcesandEights]

It's like deja vu all over again. Isn't this conversation currently going on in one or two other threads right now? My opinion on the matter is that, were I to put the 4 films in a timeline, it would run a fashion consecutive with the order in which they were released. The re-organization and nascent crawl back up the ladder as exemplified in Land is one example of humans getting it together enough to stave off, for a time, their final demise. It is an example of one area being able to rally and partially succeed, for a bit, in setting up a somewhat secure living space. It's post-apocalyptic, where as Day is the final swishing of the old order down the drain, the inevitable fall of science, government and the social fabric as we know it (just like they can't save you from death, they can't save socieities from succumbing in the end, as well). Land is a movie about the hard scrabble life, after the fact. Maybe I'll go into more detail later.

[Philly_SWAT]

Well, here is one of the problems that I have with Land. It would only seem logical that it should be after Day, in the same order as the release order for the 4 movies. The debate in some other threads...there is no debate that in chronological order the first three are Night, Dawn, and Day. There is a difference of opinion as to how long apart these are in time, but definately in that order. Problem is, Land seems as if it has to take place before Day. Day appeared desolate. I got the feeling that life on earth was over, and there were only 3 people left alive. But you definately do not get that feeling in Land. There appear to be hundreds, if not thousands, or people still alive, right up the road from one of the initial outbreaks. Therefore, Land must be before Day, but that sucks as far as the timeline goes.

[MinionZombie]

But the people in Day were organised by the government, the government has fallen by the time we're following the people in Day, and therefore is not around in Land. Because the folk in Day were a government/military organised operation, they wouldn't be aware or in contact with Kaufman or anyone like that, who were going around setting up small clusters of survivors. I see Day as the "darkest moment", just when you think it's all over ... you find out it isn't, and the remaining humans have managed to block themselves off and regroup in their small cluster(s).

[EvilNed]

Land takes place after Day, of course. They keep saying it's been "Three years ago" in that film, yet in Day it's absolutly NOT been three years. If it had, they would definetly have moved on. Also, GAR said in the commentary of Land that it takes places after Day. Society has built up again in Land, whereas it has not in Day. etc. etc. etc.

[Guru ofthe Dead]

I agree Land is after Day. Bub was the start of the dead being aware. Big Daddy just grew as well as the dead in that small town. Also at the beginning of the film the commentary deals with this timeline thing. I've answered this on another thread as well. This is cool though an interesting topic.

[Philly_SWAT]

But the people in Day were organised by the government, the government has fallen by the time we're following the people in Day, and therefore is not around in Land. Because the folk in Day were a government/military organised operation, they wouldn't be aware or in contact with Kaufman or anyone like that, who were going around setting up small clusters of survivors. First of all, the facility in Day was a civilian operation. The military's orders were to assist the civilian scientists. Anyway, I dont think that the existence, or lack thereof, of the government has any bearing on the question of which came first, the chicken or the....I mean, Land or Day. In either movie, it is quite possible that the "government", at least what would still be considered the national government, could easily still be up and running in DC, with communication cut off to the rest of the country. Just like Fiddler's Green was protected enough for a multitude of survivors to be there, the same could be happening in Washington. There could have been a base of survivors "101 miles away" from our group down in Florida. It is hard to say. But as movie viewers we do not have enough information in either Land or Day to know if the government is still in operation, and can not use it as a time marker. But like I said, it does make logical sense that Land happens after Day, but the tone of the movies does not seem that way. The argument that "Bub was the first zombie to learn", again we do not know that. We dont even know for sure if he was the first to learn in Dr. Logan's presense. Just that he had the best "learning ability" of all the Z's that Logan saw in Florida. Could be that the Z's around Fiddler's Green had a higher Zombie IQ than those in Florida. They could have been shooting guns and walking underwater long before Bub used a razor on himself. Not saying that it happened that way, only that it could have. Not enough info in the films. GAR himself stating that Land comes after Day in and of itself does not constitute proof within the movies themselves. What I mean is, if a filmaker makes a series of movies about historical life in the US, and says that Part 3 happens after Part 2, yet George Bush is President in Part 2 and Abe Lincoln in Prez in Part 3, the movies themselves would suggest that 3 actually took place before 2, based on the evidence provided in the movies.

[Cykotic]

I have said, and always will say that LOTD take place BEFORE DOTD

[Deadman_Deluxe]

I have said, and always will say that LOTD take place BEFORE DOTD Then you will always be wrong ... on that point at least. It's a nice idea i guess ... but it's just not true.

[EvilNed]

GAR himself stating that Land comes after Day in and of itself does not constitute proof within the movies themselves. What I mean is, if a filmaker makes a series of movies about historical life in the US, and says that Part 3 happens after Part 2, yet George Bush is President in Part 2 and Abe Lincoln in Prez in Part 3, the movies themselves would suggest that 3 actually took place before 2, based on the evidence provided in the movies. While that is true, let's look at the facts. There are no facts whatsoever that support a LOTD before DOTD theory. Whereas there are many that support a DOTH before LOTD theory. Does Day of the Dead take place 3 years after the outbreak? Heck no. I just can't see it happening. Those guys would have given up on their work along time ago. Day of the Dead takes place just when the survivors are starting to realize they are living in an undead world. Land of the Dead takes place after people have realized they are living in an undead world and have started to cope with it. In this case, GARs word is final. Why? Because the films are his word, they are his vision. And according to the films, there are many things that point to LOTD being the last.

[Philly_SWAT]

In this case, GARs word is final. Why? Because the films are his word, they are his vision. And according to the films, there are many things that point to LOTD being the last. I have heard, and by heard I mean actually heard him say in an interview (as opposed to reading something that may have been misrepresented) conflicting things about his movies. By making a conscience choice of letting the public view his movies, the public is then allowed to intrepret things in ways the original movie maker may not have thought about, or thought through. While that is true, let's look at the facts. There are no facts whatsoever that support a LOTD before DOTD theory. Facts that support a LOTD BE DOTD 1. We only see or hear about 12 people in Day (unless you count the 6 that have died before the movie starts, then 18), even though they are actively seeking in 100 miles each direction for others. We see hundreds of people in Fiddler's Green alone in Land. 2. Cholo wants money for when he leaves Fiddlers Green. He would not want or need money unless he believed there were other places that held many people in them, otherwise any money would be worthless. No one in Day has any thoughts that anyone is alive anywhere. Just a couple of examples. Does Day of the Dead take place 3 years after the outbreak? Heck no. I just can't see it happening. Those guys would have given up on their work along time ago. I cant speak for you, or maybe even myself, but I know many people who would continue to try to find a solution until their last breath. They would hold out hope for a solution until they were no longer alive. Especially scientist types I would think would do this, hopefully past three years. If not, I certainly hope we do not have a bird-flu epidemic. Day of the Dead takes place just when the survivors are starting to realize they are living in an undead world. Land of the Dead takes place after people have realized they are living in an undead world and have started to cope with it. I would say that Land of the Dead takes place where people are still plentiful enough to be in a city, and have need of the comforts of life, a world where they are ignoring the problem of the world becoming undead, and just trying to live as normal, even though things are far from normal. Day of the Dead takes place after the survivors realize that things are far from normal, and have no contact with or reason to believe that there is anyone else alive anywhere. They are past the point of wanting the creature comforts of their past lives, and are spiraling into despair and insanity.

[EvilNed]

1. In Land, all the area around Fiddler's Green is barren. There's nothing there. Infact, for all they know, Fiddler's Green is the only place that's left. It's as big as it is because it's been around for three years! Of course people will gather to it. 2. Money can be explained by numerous different situations. For all we know, the "Outpost down in Cleveland" could still be using US currency (If they are still around). I see the sole fact that people are living in Fiddler's Green to show that it takes place after Day of the Dead. Remember, in the original Day of the Dead script there was another outpost like Fiddler's Green, but this one was FIVE years after the initial outbreak. Even further down the line from Land of the Dead. As for GAR pointing out contradicting stuff, please provide some relevant to this matter and I'll consider them. Otherwise, it's his movie. He wrote them and directed them. I too find Day of the Dead to be much more apocalyptic than Land. But to me, all the evidence points that Land takes place after Day, a few years after to be precise. No military assholes Rhodes and those guys would want to risk their asses for more than 3 years, when all their attempts at bringing in zombies just ended up in vain anyway. Major Cooper might have thought differently, but something tells me Rhodes wouldn't have minded putting a bullet through that guys head. He had the loyalty of the men, after all. So yes, Land is definetly the "latest" chapter in the timeline. But I find this to be an interesting discussion.

[Philly_SWAT]

1. In Land, all the area around Fiddler's Green is barren. There's nothing there. Infact, for all they know, Fiddler's Green is the only place that's left. It's as big as it is because it's been around for three years! Of course people will gather to it. Then why were there not more zombies gathering to it? In Day, the entire perimeter fence was back-to-back Zeds looking for a way in. 2. Money can be explained by numerous different situations. For all we know, the "Outpost down in Cleveland" could still be using US currency (If they are still around). That goes to prove my point. In Day, you do not get the impression at all that there is an "outpost up in Orlando" that may still be using greenbacks as a means of trade/item acquisition. You get the impression that there is no place else in the world that has people in it. I see the sole fact that people are living in Fiddler's Green to show that it takes place after Day of the Dead. Remember, in the original Day of the Dead script there was another outpost like Fiddler's Green, but this one was FIVE years after the initial outbreak. Even further down the line from Land of the Dead. I would say that using the original Day script as a timeline marker would not be appropriate. The original Day script was not produced as a movie, therefore is not part of the GAR movie universe. As for GAR pointing out contradicting stuff, please provide some relevant to this matter and I'll consider them. Otherwise, it's his movie. He wrote them and directed them. This would be difficult to provide, as I listened to audio interviews found online. The only proof would be my memory. It that doesnt suffice, seek out interviews and listen to them and make up your own mind if he makes contradictory statements or not. I assume that you may have heard interviews from him before. No military assholes Rhodes and those guys would want to risk their asses for more than 3 years Wouldnt it be more logical to assume that in the face of the worst catastrophy in the history of the world, a group of capable, dedicated people would be put together to enter a research facility? And that they just cracked after being there for years and years with no evidence of any other life anywhere? I mean, what would the thought process have been.... "Mr. President, something must be done or the entire population of the world will be gone." "Well, lets put some people in a secure research facility. Who should we put there? I assume there is some competent people still alive(seeing as the basis of the argument is that Day starts around the same time as Dawn.)" "Yes sir, there is. But I suggest putting in some selfish, assholic military guys with no training who will quickly crack under pressure. It is more likely that a rich guy on his own will put together a system that will survive longer than anything we come up with." Seems more rediculous put that way, yes? How would an apparent renegade like Rhodes be put second in command of the most important research project in history? It would make more sense that he was competent, capable, and sane when he first went underground, but years and years of a hopeless situation finally cracked thru his years of training. But I find this to be an interesting discussion. I find any conversation about GAR movies interesting.

[erisi236]

currently Land belongs on the "L" section of my DVD collection

[bassman]

Then why were there not more zombies gathering to it? In Day, the entire perimeter fence was back-to-back Zeds looking for a way in. During the scene at the electric fence(with Romero's Daughter and the zombie that gets shocked and shot), don't they say something along the lines of "It's like they learned they can't get through the fence"?