|
|
Post by rogueslayer on Sept 21, 2008 11:15:34 GMT -5
Did Romero intended his ghouls to run originally? I just read about the first 47 pages of the original script and when the Truckdriver is talking about Beekman's Diner he said that a gasoline truck went screaming down the lot of Beekman Diner's and said that 15 of those things were RUNNING after it grabing and holding on......What?  Another thing that confused me is that he said that the gasoline truck went screaming(which I take as it moving fast) off the Diner's parking lot but, then says it was moving funny off the Diner's lot and moving slow so that the ghouls could hold on and catch up.......What? Did I just misunderstood and read wrong or did he change his story?  So Mr. Tanner is this what you refer to when you talk about GAR's BS screenwriting? ;D |
|
|
|
Post by tannerboyle on Sept 21, 2008 12:54:30 GMT -5
No. When I'm referring to his screenwriting, I'm talking more about how the stories, characters, and their dialogue are written or constructed. He lacks the writer's instincts for strong character development, cohesive plotting, and dialogue that is both representative of the characters who speak it and vital to the momentum of the plot itself. He's a bullshitter as well, and changes his story on actual events every once in a while...depending on the current climate or who he's getting along with at the time. As are the rest of the Laurel alumni.  |
|
|
|
Post by blackknight273 on Sept 21, 2008 22:30:25 GMT -5
No. When I'm referring to his screenwriting, I'm talking more about how the stories, characters, and their dialogue are written or constructed. He lacks the writer's instincts for strong character development, cohesive plotting, and dialogue that is both representative of the characters who speak it and vital to the momentum of the plot itself. He's a bullshitter as well, and changes his story on actual events every once in a while...depending on the current climate or who he's getting along with at the time. As are the rest of the Laurel alumni. Im inclined to agree. He seems to change his viewpoints on the various movies depending on the current political climates. I think GAR is a director who got very lucky a couple of times but he is far from a genius |
|
|
|
Post by tannerboyle on Sept 21, 2008 23:20:54 GMT -5
I think that he's a guy who started to believe in his own hype.
And, I honestly think that he watches what goes on online, although he claims not to. I think that alot of his "political message" and "social commentary" shit spawned from that--just look how overtly political Land is when compared to Day.
|
|
|
|
Post by rogueslayer on Sept 22, 2008 7:25:08 GMT -5
He's a bullshitter as well, and changes his story on actual events every once in a while...depending on the current climate or who he's getting along with at the time. As are the rest of the Laurel alumni. How so? |
|
rich
Bitten
Zombie Hunter
Posts: 79
|
Post by rich on Sept 22, 2008 11:31:34 GMT -5
Wow! Those are some harsh words directed toward George A. Romero. I don't think I agree with any of them. Were the ghouls (zombies, living dead) intended to run? I don't think so. I think if they were holding onto a vehicle that was being floored, then their legs would naturally move faster. The graveyard ghoul in the beginning of the film seemed to move fast only when going down hill, which makes perfect sense.
George has a unique way of looking at what is going on in the world and expresses it with his films. He is a very intelligent man and it shows in his work.
|
|
|
|
Post by rogueslayer on Sept 22, 2008 17:04:25 GMT -5
Wow! Those are some harsh words directed toward George A. Romero. While I like his first 3 Dead films I just want to make it clear I not really a GAR fan. |
|
|
|
Post by tannerboyle on Sept 22, 2008 17:31:53 GMT -5
How so? Well....let's see here, off the top of my head, the most famous example is the NOTLD remake in 1990. For a period of years, GAR and Tom Savini did not get along. When they were friends, the story was that it was Savini's baby, and that GAR let him do what he wanted to do. When they were fighting, GAR maintained that Savini didn't go to the can unless he got GAR on the phone first to see if it was okay. And, when they finally made up, they blamed any and all problems on John Russo and Russ Streiner. Another example is with the original NOTLD. GAR went around for years saying that there was no message behind it. Years later, when fans tried to attach a message to everything he did, he later said that there was a message...a subliminal anger reflecting the time period...inherant in the film. |
|
|
|
Post by rogueslayer on Sept 22, 2008 17:40:15 GMT -5
Well....let's see here, off the top of my head, the most famous example is the NOTLD remake in 1990. For a period of years, GAR and Tom Savini did not get along. When they were friends, the story was that it was Savini's baby, and that GAR let him do what he wanted to do. When they were fighting, GAR maintained that Savini didn't go to the can unless he got GAR on the phone first to see if it was okay. And, when they finally made up, they blamed any and all problems on John Russo and Russ Streiner. Oh wow never knew this before.  I already knew the Night of the Living Dead thing. Like I said I swear I read an interview where he said Night was uintentional but, now he's all yep I meant it!  Your right though I also though success must off gotten to his head and that is why his recent zombie films have tanked because he's choosing politics over entertainment and making just a plain good film. Sadly I think anything he makes now will never live up to his original trilogy....especially the first 2. |
|
|
|
Post by tannerboyle on Sept 22, 2008 19:01:20 GMT -5
Well...one thing to keep in mind if you're going to look into GAR is to look at the facts and not just what other "fans" are telling you.
A common misconception is that GAR is this kind of uncompromising George Carlin of the Monongahela who never sold out or compromised on any picture he's ever made. That he's always stood up to the studios to get his message out his way.
Bullshit.
He's been a sell out since the very beginning.
When Image Ten first got together to make a movie, they decided to make a horror flick because it would sell well to the drive in circuit. They wanted to make money. It was that or an art house picture they were talking about...and they went with the cash.
You know how the whole "Venus Probe" thing got into NOTLD? The distributors insisted that there be some kind of explanation behind the ghouls. So, GAR changed the script. He also had a GREAT shot of ghouls dotting the countryside around the farmhouse...and at the distributor's insistance they cut that and added more of the ghouls eating Tom and Judy--because even they knew back then that the gore was the main draw to the film.
If you like, I'll tell you about Dawn and Day as well.... ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by The Dead Walk! on Sept 22, 2008 19:22:05 GMT -5
Yes yes, please do... we never get enough of your wisdom around here. |
|
|
|
Post by tannerboyle on Sept 22, 2008 19:26:54 GMT -5
<shrugs> Hey...I'm one of the few people that actually comes around, anymore. |
|
|
|
Post by The Dead Walk! on Sept 22, 2008 19:33:34 GMT -5
Ouch, burn.
Actually there's a very steady flow of people who visits the forum daily. They might not post, but people still come around and check shit out.
|
|
|
|
Post by tannerboyle on Sept 22, 2008 19:48:17 GMT -5
And, what I post is part of what they're here to check out. You don't really think that people wanna read through page after page of people blindly praising GAR, do you? Then again, given your posts... |
|
|
|
Post by Flesh Eater on Sept 22, 2008 20:21:30 GMT -5
blah blah blah flap flap flap
|
|
I already knew the Night of the Living Dead thing. Like I said I swear I read an interview where he said Night was uintentional but, now he's all yep I meant it! 
