Land Of The Dead

[Dilmo]

From DVD Answers:

Title: Land of the Dead
Starring: Simon Baker
Released: 18th October 2005
SRP: $29.99

Further Details
Universal has announced rated and unrated editions of George A. Romero's Land of the Dead which stars the likes of Simon Baker, John Leguizamo, Dennis Hopper and Asia Argento. Both discs will be available to own from the 18th October this year, and should retail at around $29.99 a piece. The rated edition (runtime 1 hour 33 minutes) will be available in full frame only, whereas the unrated edition (1 hour 37 minutes) will be presented in 2.35:1 anamorphic widescreen. Each will carry English Dolby Digital 5.1 and DTS 5.1 Surround tracks. Universal has yet to reveal the extra material, or the official artwork, for these titles I'm afraid, but we'll bring you further details very shortly. Stay tuned for that.

[Riddick]

I am so all over this , saw it in the theatre , excellent movie

[Dilmo]

I skipped it because of the R rating. Romero hates the MPAA. Can't wait for the Uncut.

[Monrozombi]

saw it a total of 8 times in the theater including the premiere in pittsburgh, everytime i went w/ my fiance she'd always try to pick me out, i'm in the Fiddler's Greene scene

[raptors661]

i am definately buying this. i saw this 3 times in the theater. i was suprised how much gore was in the R rating

[Monterey Jack]

While I was going to pick up the unrated cut anyways, I find the recent trend of releasing the theatrical cuts of movies in full-frame only to be irritating (see also Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle). Why not just do seamless branching? Anyways, I'll pick this up for sure, and am hoping for another fun Romero commentary.

[Gator MacReady]

I thot the film was rather tame and only earned a 15-rating here in the UK. How much new footage is in the DC as the tepid 93 minute running time disappointed me?

[Morticia]

Originally Posted by Dilmo

the unrated edition (1 hour 37 minutes)

Nobody reads Dilmo's posts either.

[Volcane]

Even though I've not seen this film, and didn't really like Day of the Dead, I will blind-buy it just to complete the set!

[Dilmo]

Originally Posted by Morticia

Nobody reads Dilmo's posts either.

You noticed that?

[Morticia]

Originally Posted by Dilmo

You noticed that?

We're in the same boat, silly.

[Dilmo]

Originally Posted by Morticia

We're in the same boat, silly.

You guide us and I'll row.

[billnye97]

I probably will pick it up but I must say I was dissappointed with the film overall. Still I'm a sucker for any zombie movie. Hopefully the extra four minutes will be worth it

[Drag Princess]

I saw it twice in theater and loved it. I don't understand he disappointment some/many fans seemed to have had with it. Oh well,more for me to enjoy then

I was also surprised at how gruesome it was in R rated form. Sure some stuff was obviouslly cut,but it was still quite meaty so to speak.


Though I have to agree,the trend of releasing the rated/theatrical verions in pan & scan only is just not right. Both versions should be made available in there OAR. Since what if the 'extended' cut is not as good as the theatrical cut?

Case in point,the 4 hour version of Dances with Wolves compared to the 3 hour theatrical version.

MGM releases the 4 hour version as a SE in widescreen. While the theatrical version gets a P&S bare bones version only release. This is a best picture winner of all things to boot!

I had to go track down a copy of the Image release of the theatrical version to have the film in 16.9 widescreen.


Now in Lands case,I doubt the unrated version will be 'inferior'. Since it will mostly be a more gruesome version of the film than what we saw theatrically. So that is a good thing in my opinion

Meanwhile the longer version of Dances is not a 'directors cut' or anything,and just a 'special extended edition' to milk the film with an hour of extra footage. Yet it really harms the flow of the film severely.

Hence why no matter what, ALL versions of a film should be made available in there OAR!!!!

[Dilmo]

From Davis DVD:

Final and official specs have arrived from Universal Studios for George A. Romero's Land of the Dead. Presented in 2.35:1 anamorphic and Dolby Digital 5.1 & DTS Surround, extras will include an audio commentary track (with Romero, producer Peter Grumwald and editor Michael Doherty), "Undead Again: The Making of Land of the Dead," "A Day with the Living Dead," "When Shaun Met George" and "The Remaining Bits" featurettes. Extras available only on the Unrated Edition will include "Bringing the Dead to Life," "Scenes of Carnage," "Zombie Effects: From Green Screen to Finished Scene," "Bringing the Storyboards to Life" and "Scream Tests: Zombie Casting Call" featurettes. Retail will be $29.98.

[raptors661]

sounds great. i was going to pick this up barebones or not

[Dilmo]

Cover art is here.

[raptors661]

its nice they kept to the poster, but the 'unrated' banner is kinda annoying

[mrcoaster]

Great news! I'm a big fan of Romero and the Dead movies, but never got the chance to see it in the theaters. I will definitely be picking this up.

[Dilmo]

Revised art work: Land Of The Dead

[FamilyGuyfanBOY]

I'll blind buy

[raptors661]

Originally Posted by Dilmo

Revised art work: Land Of The Dead

ooohhhh.... I LIKE!!!!! but do you think that people wont complain about the severed arm?

[Drag Princess]

I really like that cover!!

I will be surprised if Wal-Mart carries it though Unless Universal puts a giant sticker covering the 'offending' portion?

For example,the soundtrack to Tromas Terror Firmer has the sticker covering the severed legs shown on the cover at Best Buy.

[Dilmo]

Menu screens for the unrated version: LOTD

[Al Pacino]

Damn, I might be the only person here sort of disapointed with it. I liked Dawn of the Dead the remake much better, but I will still buy this and hopefully enjoy it better. I might have not enjoyed it as much because I saw it alone and was the only person in the whol theater, but I'll see if I find more enjoyment this time around.

[wahlers]

You're not the only one disappointed. I just watched it for the first time on DVD, having bought it to complete the set. And I would definitely same I expected a lot more.

The plot was straight out of 1983, and was some sort of terrible combination of "Escape From New York" and "Dawn of the Dead". Terrible and boring.

And, Romero has shown, yet again, that he just can't seem to get actors to deliver performances. Or maybe it's his casting. Either way, I've sure you could get better deliveries and more developed characters at your average high school play. I know that I have.

His leads were either insipid and boring or pretentious. You couldn't get a more 1-dimensional character if you cut it out of paper.

Outside of the original "Night of the Living Dead", I liked "Day of the Dead" better than all the others, primarily because it had Bub, who was the most developed and best acted part in the last 3 films.

Romero needs to get over himself and either listen to some constructive criticism or get some honest people to give him some.

=====================================================

This is how I personally rank his "Dead" movies:

1. Night of the Living Dead
2. Day of the Dead
3. Dawn of the Dead ('Zombie' version) *
4. Land of the Dead

* Dawn of the Dead is last if you're talking about the theatrical version though.

[Monrozombi]

Originally Posted by wahlers

Romero needs to get over himself and either listen to some constructive criticism or get some honest people to give him some.

Wow, I really just belive you just said that. Your opinions are valid and if you didn't like LOTD so be it. But Romero personally is one of the most down to earth and humble people I've ever met. I've had the pleasure of meeting him many times, even on the set of Land I got to tell him how grateful I was to be a part of his movie. His response, "well if it weren't for people who see my movies, this wouldn't happen" I know people close to Romero as well and they all say the same thing. If Romero didn't have people around him, you could sit and talk his ear off all day and he'd do the same w/o even thinking of leaving. He loves his fans and is very genuine in everything he does. Romero doesn't care what people think, well he might, but he doesn't let that dictate how he's going to make his movie. Want to know why people probably don't like LOTD? Because it's not the same over the top, sex field bullshit that is shoved down our throats in the theater. Romero spent years revising this script to get it to what it was. I personally loved the film, it has grown on me. Of course it has it's weakenesses but so does everyone of his movies and everyone else's movies to boot.

Originally Posted by wahlers

And, Romero has shown, yet again, that he just can't seem to get actors to deliver performances. Or maybe it's his casting. Either way, I've sure you could get better deliveries and more developed characters at your average high school play. I know that I have

I think you need to go back and check out Rober Joy's performance. He played "Charlie" He stole the show from all the actors and zombies combined. He just played that part just like it was written. Also, I'd give a nod to Hopper for playing the Kaufman role very well indeed. Romero said he wanted Hopper to play that role in kind of a Rumsfeld-ish style, which he told Hopper he was. So I think George can still get his actors to deliever the performances he needs.

Now if you had said "he seems like he needs to get over himself" I probably wouldn't have a problem with your post. I saw George sign autographs from 10am till 7pm on saturday. And not once did he take a break or leave for lunch, he stayed the whole time and talked to every fan and refused no one. Maybe you should try meeting him, I think that would change your opinion

[Dilmo]

Absolutely loved it! Romero makes great use of a bigger budget.

[Monrozombi]

Originally Posted by Dilmo

Absolutely loved it! Romero makes great use of a bigger budget.

I love Dilmo (in a male heterosexual way )

Dilmo for President

[raptors661]

Originally Posted by Monrozombi

Wow, I really just belive you just said that. Your opinions are valid and if you didn't like LOTD so be it. But Romero personally is one of the most down to earth and humble people I've ever met. I've had the pleasure of meeting him many times, even on the set of Land I got to tell him how grateful I was to be a part of his movie. His response, "well if it weren't for people who see my movies, this wouldn't happen" I know people close to Romero as well and they all say the same thing. If Romero didn't have people around him, you could sit and talk his ear off all day and he'd do the same w/o even thinking of leaving. He loves his fans and is very genuine in everything he does. Romero doesn't care what people think, well he might, but he doesn't let that dictate how he's going to make his movie. Want to know why people probably don't like LOTD? Because it's not the same over the top, sex field bullshit that is shoved down our throats in the theater. Romero spent years revising this script to get it to what it was. I personally loved the film, it has grown on me. Of course it has it's weakenesses but so does everyone of his movies and everyone else's movies to boot.



I think you need to go back and check out Rober Joy's performance. He played "Charlie" He stole the show from all the actors and zombies combined. He just played that part just like it was written. Also, I'd give a nod to Hopper for playing the Kaufman role very well indeed. Romero said he wanted Hopper to play that role in kind of a Rumsfeld-ish style, which he told Hopper he was. So I think George can still get his actors to deliever the performances he needs.

Now if you had said "he seems like he needs to get over himself" I probably wouldn't have a problem with your post. I saw George sign autographs from 10am till 7pm on saturday. And not once did he take a break or leave for lunch, he stayed the whole time and talked to every fan and refused no one. Maybe you should try meeting him, I think that would change your opinion

i envy you.....

and for performances, the best zombified hand ever put on film was yours, Monrozombi!

[Dilmo]

Originally Posted by raptors661

i envy you.....

and for performances, the best zombified hand ever put on film was yours, Monrozombi!

I still am partial to Dawn Of The Dead, but liked this more than Day. Romero rocks!

[raptors661]

Originally Posted by Dilmo

I still am partial to Dawn Of The Dead, but liked this more than Day. Romero rocks!

agreed. its growing on me more and more every time i watch it. i think i am going to listen to the commentary tomorrow.(which i dont normally do)

[Monrozombi]

Originally Posted by raptors661

agreed. its growing on me more and more every time i watch it. i think i am going to listen to the commentary tomorrow.(which i dont normally do)

Dawn is the reason I got into the horror genre, so its always my favorite. But Land is special because not only was I in it, but its a film that was demanded by fans and thats what the fans got.

The commentary is good on Romero's part. Everyone else on the commentary sucks. They needed to get Nicotero, Rober Joy, Hoffman, and Simon Baker to contribute. Universal dvds suck ass and this suffers from it. There needed to be a full disc of extras, Anchor Bay needs to get their hands on this for a dvd deserving of this title.

Here's a quick shot of my hand and pick axe smashing the window. Its on the right. If you pause the movie at exactly 1:17:00 you can see my face, ha, my .2 seconds of fame

[Monrozombi]

Guess this picture would be appropriate for this thread:

[raptors661]

Originally Posted by Monrozombi

Guess this picture would be appropriate for this thread:

nice! that looks brand new, when did you get it done and about how much did it cost?

[Monrozombi]

Originally Posted by raptors661

nice! that looks brand new, when did you get it done and about how much did it cost?

Got it done in July, and it cost around $175 before tip. I might add on to it. I might get the skyline from the poster added to it. My fiance thinks I should get my "character" on there somehow, we'll see.

[raptors661]

Originally Posted by Monrozombi

Got it done in July, and it cost around $175 before tip. I might add on to it. I might get the skyline from the poster added to it. My fiance thinks I should get my "character" on there somehow, we'll see.

you should add "MY HAND WAS IN" above the tattoo

[Monrozombi]

Originally Posted by raptors661

you should add "MY HAND WAS IN" above the tattoo

[wahlers]

I didn't post what I did to start an argument, but was simply stating my opinion as somebody who hadn't seen any of Romero's "Dead" films (except for Night of the Living Dead) until about 2 months ago.

So, my opinions are from somebody who's seen a lot of films and who's enjoyed many different types of films, but doesn't have a biased view towards these films as parts of a series as many people who have watched and enjoyed them for a decade or more seem to have.

And, I really have to say that for all the attention and praise that this series gets, I found (and still find) it, for the most part, incredibly disappointing.

I saw other people trying to say this in various places and getting ignored or talked down, almost as though they were wrong or "missing something" by not acknowledging "Dawn of the Dead" and the others as masterpieces or something.

Personally, I found Dawn of the Dead as the weakest film of all in it's theatrical form due to terrible pacing and characters. And, regardless of which version you watch, the coloring of the zombie make-up is terrible and ruins any chance of my even just enjoying the zombies.

As for my statements about Romero, I could be wrong. I don't know him, but unless you spend a regular amount of time with him, I don't know how you can claim to actually know the man, rather than just the public image of him.

In fact, I've read reports online that he gets very impatient and irate with people and events on the set, especially when people contradict or question him, and that he also has a habit of yelling.

That's contrary to reports here, but who am I to believe?

As for the script, it shows that he's worked on it for a long time because it was incredibly overworked, and, as I stated before, was horribly 80s.

For God's sake, he couldn't even give his characters real names. They all had to have their stupid "G.I. Joe" nicknames. It was absolutely embarassing to watch.

I'm not asking to change peoples' opinions, I'm just tired of people treating Romero like he's some sort of deity who can't possibly do a bad movie. I can at least respect the people who just say, "the plot was crappy, but that chick was hot, and I like zombies".

I see that as taking off the rose-tinted glasses and just seeing the movies for what they are, and not giving Romero more credit than he's due.

P.S.
I thought all the "head splat" effects and digital compositing/grading in "Land of the Dead" looked fake and distracting and took away from the wonderful visceral legacy of the effects in the previous films.

[Monrozombi]

Originally Posted by wahlers

I didn't post what I did to start an argument, but was simply stating my opinion as somebody who hadn't seen any of Romero's "Dead" films (except for Night of the Living Dead) until about 2 months ago.

So, my opinions are from somebody who's seen a lot of films and who's enjoyed many different types of films, but doesn't have a biased view towards these films as parts of a series as many people who have watched and enjoyed them for a decade or more seem to have.

And, I really have to say that for all the attention and praise that this series gets, I found (and still find) it, for the most part, incredibly disappointing.

I saw other people trying to say this in various places and getting ignored or talked down, almost as though they were wrong or "missing something" by not acknowledging "Dawn of the Dead" and the others as masterpieces or something.

Personally, I found Dawn of the Dead as the weakest film of all in it's theatrical form due to terrible pacing and characters. And, regardless of which version you watch, the coloring of the zombie make-up is terrible and ruins any chance of my even just enjoying the zombies.

As for my statements about Romero, I could be wrong. I don't know him, but unless you spend a regular amount of time with him, I don't know how you can claim to actually know the man, rather than just the public image of him.

In fact, I've read reports online that he gets very impatient and irate with people and events on the set, especially when people contradict or question him, and that he also has a habit of yelling.

That's contrary to reports here, but who am I to believe?

As for the script, it shows that he's worked on it for a long time because it was incredibly overworked, and, as I stated before, was horribly 80s.

For God's sake, he couldn't even give his characters real names. They all had to have their stupid "G.I. Joe" nicknames. It was absolutely embarassing to watch.

I'm not asking to change peoples' opinions, I'm just tired of people treating Romero like he's some sort of deity who can't possibly do a bad movie. I can at least respect the people who just say, "the plot was crappy, but that chick was hot, and I like zombies".

I see that as taking off the rose-tinted glasses and just seeing the movies for what they are, and not giving Romero more credit than he's due.

P.S.
I thought all the "head splat" effects and digital compositing/grading in "Land of the Dead" looked fake and distracting and took away from the wonderful visceral legacy of the effects in the previous films.

I know you didn't mean to start an argument and your opinons are yours so please don't think I'm saying your right or wrong. My thing is that you don't seem to have all the information to formulate the opinion you did. Now I never claimed to know the man personally. I have met him almost a dozen times over the past 5 years. I know some of the people around him personally (assistant, managers, producers that he's worked with on dvds etc) and I trust them and I know that what they tell me of George is accurate. If I mention that I heard something that he supposedly said or did, I'm either corrected because I have wrong info or i'm asked to where I got that, and if i'm wrong I find out the correct information.

The man is not flawless, many of his movies have flaws. I'm partial to Dawn of the Dead (DOTD). You're right the make up of the zombies is kinda comical, but if you just look below the surface at the context of his movies you'll see there are many reasons for that (the main reason incase you didn't know was budgetary). For what his movies lack, the message he plants within them make up for them IMO. You're about some of the digital stuff in Land of the Dead (LOTD), it does stand out more then the practical effects. And depending on which ones your talking about, will either help or hinder the film over all. As for the names in LOTD, they used their real names. Riley was Rily Dembo, Cholo was Cholo Demora. Yeah Asia used the name Slack, but what does it matter. How many movies just use "GI Joe" names, does that make it a good or bad film, no, and you shouldn't base the quality of the movie on names or we'd be making fun of half the movies out there.

I believe the praise the series gets is definately worthy of it all. Before 1968, what kinds of cookie cutter movies were we getting. how many aliens, mutated house bugs or mad scientists were there. George revolutioned the horror genre, brought it into the present, ask just about any director about horror and you'll see an overwhelming majority agree.

I do agree, like i stated before that the man is not perfect, nor are his films. Some of characters are rememberable, some are borderline likeable, and some are just forgetable. Romero nor his movies can be taken at face value. Talk to anyone that has worked for him and they'll do nothing but say good things, they won't try to change your opinion but they will make sure you know that George is the genuine article.

Land has more weaknesses then his other zombie films. So does Day, Dawn and Night but they all have their strengths and can stand on their own as good movies. Just because someone doesn't mention or acknowledge another of his films doesn't mean that they're horrible or that they don't want to bring them down a notch by including them in a LOTD comparision discussion. in my opinion, DOTD is the best of the series followed by night, then day then land. In case you didn't know, he considers Day of the Dead his favorite of them all. Each film is good and bad in its own way, but George is a director that just can't taken for face value, there is more to him then most people give him credit for. Do people give him more credit then is due? Honestly, in my opinion, I don't think so. I believe we need to give credit to movies like 28 days later, Shaun of the Dead, Dawn of the Dead 2004 because without this recent revival in horror, Land of the Dead would probably not exist now but on paper. But, talk to anyone involved with the aforemention films and they'll tell you, "George helped influence these films" So his influence is elsewhere and thats not always a bad thing