The 30th anniversary edition reviewed

[darth los]

I didn't see much mention of this version of "NOTLD" so I'm posting this for anyone who might come across it and be interested. In 1998 a "New" version of "NOTLD" was created and released. Of course such releases have become common practice lately, dating back to "Close Encounters" in the early 80's and the complete re-thinking of the most recent "Exorcist" film. But in this case, rather than uncovering new "never before seen footage" as most expanded editions do, this version promised new footage conceived and shot by the original author of the screenplay, John Russo, and a new score in full stereo. I'm not a big fan of revisionist film-making--if the changes are noticeable it affects the experience of the movie, if they're not, then why bother? But I don't have a problem with messing with a movie as an alternative experience, like the "green zombie" colorized version of "NOTLD"--if the original was that good (example: the original Star Wars) there's not much you could do to it that will erase that success. The changes to the original re-released films like "The Abyss" and "Terminator 2" didn't really affect the overall experience much, they were more or less like "extended mixes" of a pop song rather than "re-mixes." Less is more, but if you're a fan more can be a fun alternative. Here, the case is different, a serious "re-thinking" of a revered and classic (albeit low-budget) film. It's obvious that the motivating factor behind such an unusual move (was there really something "missing" from the movie originally?) must be money--yet to read the accompanying materials with the DVD package certainly makes a case that the new concept was done with a lot of love. In other words, it worked well on paper and appeals to the curious film fan, certainly. Then, of course, you watch the damn movie, and understand--within 30 seconds you realize the concept wasn't viable, at least not with the budget and talent gathered for this project. I'm glad I saw it, I'll say that, because I'm a fan of film both good and bad, especially THIS film which was already good and bad, and sometimes seeing something truly terrible teaches more about how a good movie is created than seeing a "revered classic" that is flawless. The 30th Anniversary edition of "NOTLD" points out several things that are wrong with movies today, and movies in general: 1)over-foleying of sound f/x. I know it keeps foley artist's employed, and the technology is there,but we don't really need to hear ants hiccup, the way movies are today. 2)Always use real actors, no matter what your budget. The use of the new soundtrack composer in a pivotal role was a serious error: he looks like the uglier brother of Edward Norton in "American History X" and can't act. 3) A soundtrack shouldn't stand out. Here, the new music sounds like little more than demo patterns on a cheap Casio keyboard someone left running. Simple themes repeat over and over until you want to cry out "Uncle," or turn the power off, and the composer, with due respect, needs to learn that soundtrack music shouldn't be "songs," but atmosphere. The effect here is of watching a silent film with your stereo playing in the background. The bursts of the original score only highlight how miscalculated the new score is. 4)Showing is better than telling. It was scarier when we didn't know the history of the first zombie we see, or even that he was a zombie at all, and it's redundant to show zombies eating flesh so early in the film, while the radio broadcast is informing us that people are being cannibalized. It's no longer scary, it's dull, and this movie was dull enough already--if it was going to be re-thought, care should have been taken to improve the dull "talky" moments in between zombie attacks. In the final analysis, this "new" version (that's several years old now) has a couple of moments of good gore and make-up, but nothing worth checking out. The music is obnoxious, obtrusive and cheap, as well as the new scenes which do not in any way fit in with the old ones. And the new "slant" that the book-end scenes with the preacher give to the film push the "When hell is full the dead will walk the earth" theory over the "radiation created the zombies" theory. It's a whole other movie, and not one I'm interested in. I never cared why the zombies were around in the first place and adding "God's judgment" into the mix ruins the "fun," frankly. This "new" version has probably been forgotten already, and that's a good thing, but for some reason I still give the creators a nod of respect for trying something different, even if they failed miserably. The person who posted this review is obviously not a fan of gar's work. The misquote "When hell is full the dead will walk the earth" gives them away. That said i thought it was an interesting read to see how an "outsider" viewed this turd. One thing i believe they're dead wrong on is that the original film was boring. They complain about how there were too many talking scenes in between zombie attacks. Another telltale sign of their non fandom. As most of us know, Gar's dead films are not really about the zombies at all. They're about human nature and the conflict that ensues. Gar uses the gouls as a vehichle to suit his satirical purposes. No doubt they play a prominent role in the films, but they are not nescesarily the centerpiece. However, i did agree with them on the god awful soundtrack and the apparent contradictions in theory as to why the plauge came about. Each of the dead trilogy had it's overiding theory as to why the dead were rising. In night it was the radiation from the venus probe. In dawn the curse/voodoo mysticism angle was mentioned and in Day a more scintific angle was pursued suggesting a virus. In night 30th the two theories of radiation and god's judgement horribly clashed and seemed off, imo. Not to say that more than one theory can't exist though. Any thoughts on the article?

[Danny]

my thoughts are still the same, no one likes that version, it opens with a 'priest' whos supposed to be believable with an earing adn a soul patch

[Legion2213]

Jesus, I own that donkey on VHS...I watched it once, only once!

[Yojimbo]

All those involved in NOLD 30th should be embarassed, though they vehemently defend their decision to do this. Awful!!! I'd rather have a painful boil on my ass then see this film again! I hate nearly everything that they did to this film. Specifically that "original music" composer who's failure as a composer is exceeded only by his failure as an actor -- what the hell was that? I feel better about watching Contagium than I did about NOLD 30th, and Contagium practically made me think about sniffing glue! I mean, sure it causes brain damage, but hell, I saw NOLD 30th so it can't be so bad in comparison, right? Those who were involved in the 30th are nothing more than maggots opportunistically feeding off of a helpless corpse. Their attempts to justify or rationalize it any other way are laughable!

[capncnut]

Specifically that "original music" composer who's failure as a composer is exceeded only by his failure as an actor -- what the hell was that? Oh you know you guys all liked the priest, don't deny it. "May your soul burn in everlasting fire!" Strange that a priest should look like Anton LaVey.

[clanglee]

Yeah right, he does sort of sort of look like ed norton screwed a rat, had a baby, and shaved it. . . . . .then raised it to suck.

[EvilNed]

I want to see this version, mostly because I want to see just how badly the new footage blends with the old footage.

[bassman]

I want to see this version, mostly because I want to see just how badly the new footage blends with the old footage. Don't put yourself through that torture, man. Please....for your own good. Stay away.

[DubiousComforts]

I want to see this version, mostly because I want to see just how badly the new footage blends with the old footage. Why do you have to see it to know that it sucks? The new footage does not match at all. Even the simplest of concepts, like the original cemetery scenes being shot on an overcast day, were completely lost on the filmmakers, who shot the new cemetery scenes on a bright, sunny day. I would have welcomed new material if done properly and in good taste. For example, why couldn't you have seen Bill Hinzman's ghoul violently breaking out of a coffin without actually seeing his face? Editing out necessary character development in order to add nonsensical characters like Reverend Hicks and then claiming that the film "flows better" is NOT exercising good taste. And Debbie Rochon adds absolutely nothing to the film and shouldn't be allowed to appear in any movie unless she's naked.

[capncnut]

I want to see this version, mostly because I want to see just how badly the new footage blends with the old footage. Ned you owe it to yourself to watch this turdfest. I bet that after you've seen it, you own it anyway because it will serve as a reminder to never go near stuff like this again. In fact, it's so crap you might even enjoy it as a comedy. But Night 30 is like Dawn of the Dead compared to the sequel, Children of the Living Dead. That movie is so s**t it defies words, even Savini's Popeye impersonation cannot save it.

[DjfunkmasterG]

The only piece of new footage in that redux that was semi worth while was the zombies walking up the road. Otherwise that movie is a disgrace. Some people hated the music, but I did like some of it.

[SymphonicX]

My review of NOTLD 30th: John Russo is a c**t. End: (ed: its amazing how someone can update a movie and be shown up by the original footage)

[capncnut]

The only piece of new footage in that redux that was semi worth while was the zombies walking up the road. Otherwise that movie is a disgrace. Some people hated the music, but I did like some of it. I agree with everything in this comment totally.

[DjfunkmasterG]

Russo missed the mark with that because A. he uses ****ty actors. B. a lot of Romero's footage was slightly overexposed at times or the lighting on certain zombies was very hot, Russo match nothing like this, which was a massive mistake. Another big issue was using a 60 year old to play the zombie he played in 1967... Come on, all the Lucas Magic in the world wouldn't have fixed that massive **** up.

[capncnut]

Using Hinzman was a nice touch I guess but I'll be the first to raise my hand and say that it didn't work. What did work however was the zombie corpse in the car with it's brains hanging out and the music they used for the outdoor zombie feast after Tom and Judy went up in smoke. The re-recorded radio broadcasts weren't too shabby either. Oh also Ben and Cooper's fight had some real punching sounds instead of that irritating CKKKHHRRR noise.