George A. Romero's Land of the Dead

Two Lane Blacktop · July 02, 2005, 01:37:31 AM

Oh man... I just saw this tonight (at a drive-in, no less) and fucking loved it. I'd deliberately read nothing about it in advance, so I couldn't believe it when I saw Dennis Hopper's name in the opening credits. He wasn't the best thing in the movie, but he was still awesome.

It seemed a little weird seeing a Romero pic with some actual money on the screen, but not (as I'd feared before seeing it) in a bad way. He's still got it... a little social commentary, a lot of squishy chewy gore scenes, a straight-ahead style, and bits of humor that don't turn the whole movie into a joke (something a lot of directors never get about the mixing of horror and comedy.... it's easier to do a comedy with a little horror than to do a horror movie with a little comedy, apparently).

Also SPOILER BELOW

the "headless" zombie that turned out to have a head after all, attached on a bit of spinal cord, was just fucking brilliant. :D

2LB

GodDamnImDaMan · August 04, 2005, 01:05:50 PM

I love Romero's films, I loved Land of the Dead. However in all honesty, I'm really bummed that nothing will ever live up to 78's Dawn of the Dead. I mean honestly, how great was that fucking film?

I'm kinda bummed Romero didn't get to do the resident evil film he was promised years ago and that they decided to go more main stream by hiring Paul Anderson.

::sigh::

what could've been...

GodDamnImDaMan · August 04, 2005, 04:10:24 PM

So could Land of the Dead be considered a success? I was checking out the IMDB page and well here are the numbers.

Apparently, the Budget was estimated at $18,000,000

To this date it's grosseds $19,954,230

Almost a 2 million dollar profit.

I know it's not a HUGE profit, but a profit is a profit right? Could this movie be considered a success? Also, would it mean more possible zombie films from Romero?

GoneSavage · August 04, 2005, 04:23:47 PM

Does that budget figure factor in all of the promotion they did for the film?

hedwig · August 04, 2005, 05:01:09 PM

Quote from: God Damn Im Da ManSo could Land of the Dead be considered a success? I was checking out the IMDB page and well here are the numbers.

Apparently, the Budget was estimated at $18,000,000

To this date it's grosseds $19,954,230

Almost a 2 million dollar profit.

I know it's not a HUGE profit, but a profit is a profit right? Could this movie be considered a success? Also, would it mean more possible zombie films from Romero?

He's stated that he'd like to do a direct sequel, characters intact, to "Land of the Dead."

modage · August 04, 2005, 06:24:15 PM

with ads they probably havent quite made their money back yet but will do really well on dvd so it will then be a success.

MacGuffin · August 04, 2005, 06:55:20 PM

Quote from: themodernage02with ads they probably havent quite made their money back yet but will do really well on dvd so it will then be a success.

Along with foreign BO and cable sales.

72teeth · August 04, 2005, 07:02:29 PM

Don't forget the "Land of the Dead" cereal flakes!

GodDamnImDaMan · August 08, 2005, 04:24:21 PM

Quote from: 72teethDon't forget the "Land of the Dead" cereal flakes!

I hate you all.

socketlevel · August 09, 2005, 10:44:14 AM

Quote from: God Damn Im Da ManI love Romero's films, I loved Land of the Dead. However in all honesty, I'm really bummed that nothing will ever live up to 78's Dawn of the Dead. I mean honestly, how great was that fucking film?

it's the greatest!

agreed.

-sl-

MacGuffin · August 18, 2005, 05:46:31 PM

Universal has announced George A. Romero's Land of the Dead for release on 10/18. There will be three different versions of the film on disc (SRP $29.98 each). Look for the R-rated theatrical cut in full frame only, while an Unrated director's cut will be released in both full frame and anamorphic widescreen. Audio on all three versions will be available in both Dolby Digital and DTS 5.1. There's no word yet on extras.

modage · August 18, 2005, 05:51:02 PM

sweet. i guess it's better to have waited to get the FULL ON experience when i watch it. actually, no i'm still pissed i missed this in the theatre.

MagnoliaFan25 · August 19, 2005, 01:31:51 AM

I liked the old green faced zombies with pink blood...

matt35mm · August 19, 2005, 02:02:51 AM

I think it's very weird to have the theatrical cut be available in full screen only... I've never really seen a major film be released in full screen (that was shot in widescreen) only. I know they just assume that the majority of the people would want the director's cut anyway, including the people that would demand a widescreen DVD, but still... the theatrical cut will now never be seen as intended again.

The only thing I can think of that's even close is when Willy Wonka was going to be released in full screen only and people got mad and got the studio to release a widescreen edition as well.

analogzombie · August 21, 2005, 04:03:06 PM

Full Screen only for the theatrical? I guess this'll be the Blockbuster Video edition. This seems like another in Universal's long line of missteps with this film. Putting it out inbetween Batman begins and War of the Worlds, was sheer stupidity.

anyone know the running time of the Director's cut? I heard it's not that much different from theatrical.