|
|
Post by Flesh Eater on Aug 24, 2008 19:32:43 GMT -5
I watched the Day special features disc today.
In the 39min doc, GAR talks about the original script and the reasons for the watered down version. He also directly talks about the social implications for the film, very interesting stuff.
I enjoyed the first half of the original script, but it lost me after one of the soldiers was deported to a populated city. That really lost my interest. I thought the whole reason they were looking for a hideout was due to lack of population? The militaristic zombie idea was great along with some of the other things in the original.
It's a shame that GAR couldn't get the required funding for it, rather odd as well. Dawn was succesful at the theaters, who wouldn't want to give up meesly 7 mil for a sequel?
|
|
|
|
Post by The Dead Walk! on Aug 24, 2008 19:37:34 GMT -5
You, sir, have just inspired me to go pop it in and watch it since I haven't in a while. Thank you!
|
|
|
|
Post by Flesh Eater on Aug 24, 2008 20:08:32 GMT -5
I got my copy in the mail on friday. Watched it today before coming into work. Until then I was chomping at the bit. It's starting to grow on me, dangit.
|
|
|
|
Post by tannerboyle on Aug 24, 2008 20:20:16 GMT -5
I watched the Day special features disc today. In the 39min doc, GAR talks about the original script and the reasons for the watered down version. He also directly talks about the social implications for the film, very interesting stuff. I enjoyed the first half of the original script, but it lost me after one of the soldiers was deported to a populated city. That really lost my interest. I thought the whole reason they were looking for a hideout was due to lack of population? The militaristic zombie idea was great along with some of the other things in the original. It's a shame that GAR couldn't get the required funding for it, rather odd as well. Dawn was succesful at the theaters, who wouldn't want to give up meesly 7 mil for a sequel? Well...in those days, 7.5 million wasn't peanuts, like it is today (in terms of film making, anyways). By comparison, the budgets of a couple of Steven Speilburg pics released around the time he was trying to get funding were damned close to what he was asking (namely Poltergeist and ET: The Extraterrestrial). In those days, you could still make a low-budget flick for a million or less, and the big boys got 7.5 to 10 million for major Hollywood productions. The original Dawn of the Dead wasn't the major success that it looks like. It made money, sure....but alot of the figures that people cite were actually accrued over a period of years. It was a big enough success for GAR to get a three picture deal, but his first post-Dawn release was a major bomb, and the second performed mediocre. GAR insisted on keeping creative control, and he insisted on keeping the gore--which, let's be honest here, is the real bread and butter of the series....not social commentary. To keep the gore, they'd have to release it without a rating, like Dawn....and that meant that alot of theaters wouldn't even touch it in terms of distibution. Also, having a NR flick turns alot of people off, and they avoid it. He was given a choice--tone down the gore, and he'd get the 7.5 million to make his picture....or keep the gore and get the lower budget. Now, GAR knew that the series depended on the gore. So, he gutted a script that was near and dear to his heart...turning it into nothing more than a vehicle for Savini SFX. He was hoping that the gore would give him another hit, but he was wrong. |
|
|
|
Post by Flesh Eater on Aug 24, 2008 20:43:16 GMT -5
Without the gore, would these films be as enjoyable... probably not.
They are what makes the series popular. Fans like to see zombies get their gourds shot to smithereens.
|
|
|
|
Post by tannerboyle on Aug 24, 2008 21:10:41 GMT -5
I would honestly say yes and no to that.
When I was a kid, the gore was a major draw.
But, I still found NOTLD 90 entertaining, and still love it...even though it has a minimum of that type of shit.
I think GAR's mistake with the original theatrical version of Day is that he overestimated the draw of Savini SFX. He probably thought that over-the-top gore would be a draw for fans....without realizing that it just wasn't a novelty anymore.
|
|
|
|
Post by Flyboy on Aug 26, 2008 9:23:26 GMT -5
The 2-disc Day DVD has some great special features. It's one of my favourites in my DVD collection.
The Many Days of 'Day of the Dead' is a great documentary. I can't count how many times I've watched it. This was before we got Land & George was unsure about there being a fourth film, which he touched upon near the end.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Dead Walk! on Aug 26, 2008 9:54:44 GMT -5
I'm so glad he didn't call it Dead Reckoning. Land of the Dead is much more in line.
|
|
|
|
Post by tannerboyle on Aug 26, 2008 12:56:11 GMT -5
Both titles were crap and stuck out in the series like a turd in a punch bowl.
"Twilight of the Dead" or "Dusk of the Dead" would've been in line.
He probably went the route he did because he sold the rights to his old flicks and couldn't legally produce a direct sequel to the series in that respect.
|
|
|
|
Post by Flyboy on Aug 26, 2008 13:13:45 GMT -5
I thought Twilight of the Dead & Dusk of the Dead would've been better titles than Land of the Dead.
|
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Tongue on Aug 26, 2008 13:19:49 GMT -5
I thought Twilight of the Dead & Dusk of the Dead would've been better titles than Land of the Dead. Twilight of the Dead, is Land of the Deads Alternate Title. |
|
|
|
Post by The Dead Walk! on Aug 26, 2008 13:27:11 GMT -5
Out of Twilight and Dusk, I would easily prefer Dusk of the Dead. Both titles do easily trump Land though.
With Dusk, you sort of get the whole sunset idea, and it would be the exact opposite of Dawn... much in the same way Night and Day are opposite. When I think of twilight, it just makes me think of darkness, and that's way too similar to Night.
It would have been even better if after Day, they made Dusk... and then after Dusk, made Twilight. According to the dictionary, twilight is:
1. The diffused light from the sky during the early evening or early morning when the sun is below the horizon and its light is refracted by the earth's atmosphere.
2. The time of the day when the sun is just below the horizon, especially the period between sunset and dark.
Would have made perfect sense.
|
|
|
|
Post by tannerboyle on Aug 26, 2008 13:48:00 GMT -5
And...if he'd had a better script, a title like "Dusk of the Dead" would've been a great way to end the series--which was his intention with the original version of Day.
It honestly pisses me off that the original script was a fucking masterpiece of zombie action/horror, and instead of anything close we got what we did.
The first time I read the original script I litterally couldn't stop--I read it all the way through in one sitting.
While I've always blasted GAR's screenwriting ability, and for good reasons, that script was great! ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by captainrhodes on Aug 26, 2008 15:45:20 GMT -5
I liked the original script 2,would have loved to have seen it been made,the special features on day are really good,Many days of dotd is exellent and ive watched it about a dozen times so far,behind the scenes is pretty good 2,i bought a 3 disc behind the scenes of day on ebay last year,i think it was leaked from savini's private stash,but it shows how all of the sfx were put 2gether and lots of other cool stuff,its on for over 6hrs total.
|
|
