Dawn Of The Dead

[3RA1N1AC]

Originally posted by Busyman@26 January 2004 - 01:00
3. Dawn Of Dead is NOT a sequel of Night Of Living Dead but Day Of The Dead is a sequel of Dawn Of The Dead.

uh... actually, if you watch all three in a row, Dawn Of The Dead is a sequel to Night Of The Living Dead. it's just that they were made so far apart and they're both set in "modern" times (respectively) so the timeline is messed up. i.e. Dawn is supposed to happen shortly after Night, but it's set in the 70s which is just confusing.

it's more of a logical sequel than a direct sequel, since the timeline is kinda screwed up and the characters are completely different... but it is a sequel. it's not just a coincidence that Night & Dawn are both set in Pennsylvania.

[Busyman]

Originally posted by 3RA1N1AC+26 January 2004 - 11:02--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (3RA1N1AC @ 26 January 2004 - 11:02)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Busyman@26 January 2004 - 01:00
3. Dawn Of Dead is NOT a sequel of Night Of Living Dead but Day Of The Dead is a sequel of Dawn Of The Dead.

uh... actually, if you watch all three in a row, Dawn Of The Dead is a sequel to Night Of The Living Dead. it&#39;s just that they were made so far apart and they&#39;re both set in "modern" times (respectively) so the timeline is messed up. i.e. Dawn is supposed to happen shortly after Night, but it&#39;s set in the 70s which is just confusing.

it&#39;s more of a logical sequel than a direct sequel, since the timeline is kinda screwed up and the characters are completely different... but it is a sequel. it&#39;s not just a coincidence that Night & Dawn are both set in Pennsylvania. [/b][/quote]
uh....they are not sequels.

People called them sequels but:

1. The timeline is messed up screwing up the "the sequel part".

2. In Dawn Of The Dead there is no reference to what happened in NOTLD.

3. In Dawn Of The Dead when the dead start to walk it&#39;s understood that it&#39;s the first time it happened.

4. In Day Of The Dead it is clearly set sometime after Dawn Of The Dead and makes reference to the timeline.

5. The only similarities are zombies, Pennsylvania, and George Romero.
Logical.....if relating to the above; yeah ok but it&#39;s not even like the Jack Ryan films...uh.

[3RA1N1AC]

Originally posted by Busyman@26 January 2004 - 04:44
2. In Dawn Of The Dead there is no reference to what happened in NOTLD.

3. In Dawn Of The Dead when the dead start to walk it&#39;s understood that it&#39;s the first time it happened.

4. In Day Of The Dead it is clearly set sometime after Dawn Of The Dead and makes reference to the timeline.

5. The only similarities are zombies, Pennsylvania, and George Romero.
Logical.....if relating to the above; yeah ok but it&#39;s not even like the Jack Ryan films...uh.

2. they don&#39;t have to reference it. what are the Dawn characters going to do, talk about the farmhouse? unless i&#39;m mistaken, there are no shopping mall references in Day Of The Dead.

3. that&#39;s correct. it&#39;s the first time it&#39;s happened-- starting in Night Of The Living Dead. there&#39;s no way Romero would&#39;ve been able to afford to set Dawn in the 60s to make it clearly follow Night, because making sure all the cars, clothes, decor, etc match would&#39;ve cost &#036;&#036;&#036; that he just didn&#39;t have (and prolly still doesn&#39;t have, in 2004). Day Of The Dead is set in the 80s, but it obviously follows shortly after Dawn-- there are still newspapers blowing around in the streets, announcing that the dead have risen. the weather would have destroyed the newspapers already, if any significant time had passed. the 3 movies were made in 3 different decades, but the actual time passed between each one is meant to be a matter of only very few days.

there&#39;s a very straight progression of the story through the 3 movies. the humans are pushed further into corners, the zombies&#39; victories get bigger in scale, and the sense of optimism is in a downward spiral from the start.

*in Night, the zombies first appear, and the people think that maybe they can drive to safety, or just lock themselves up in the house and wait for help to come. in the climax, the zombies overrun the farmhouse. at the end, the zombie-hunters seem pretty optimistic that the zombies can be rounded up & destroyed, but they are underestimating the problem pretty severely. zombies - 1, humans - 0.
*in Dawn, the situation has grown worse, and the city slickers realize that any place with a dense population is going just turn into a zombie mill, so they decide to get outta Dodge. the zombies may be winning, but at least the people can wait for the end of the world pretty comfortably in their secluded palace, taking a cue from Poe&#39;s Masque Of Red Death. the zombies eventually take over the shopping mall. zombies - 2, humans - 0.
*in Day, the zombies have already won, the planet no longer belongs to the humans. from the very first frame, the humans are sitting ducks. if you&#39;re living in a hole-in-the-ground & issuing orders to 3 or 4 guys you&#39;re not even sure you can trust, you&#39;ve lost-- see Saddam Hussein, for "hole = lose" scenario. the zombies taking over the hole-in-the-ground is pretty much a post-game dance in the endzone. zombies - 3, humans - 0.

from the beginning of "Night" till the end of "Day," i&#39;d say that the amount of time passed in the story is definitely less than 2 years, though i&#39;d lean more toward 6 to 12 months.

[lotep]

um, dawn is a direct sequel to night,george always talks about his trilogy night, dawn and day.Plus all the dead are allready alive in dawn.As for 28 days latter, while it is a good movie it does rather blatenly rip off day of the dead. First theres the "zombie" the military guys are experimenting with. Second half the movie takes place in the middle of aplatton of soldiers that are falling apart at the seams. And lastly they want to rape the last remaining women.All this adds up to a nice "tribute" to day. Now i actually think 28 days latter is the better film but it weres its influenses on its sleve. The origonal dawn however is the greatist zombie movie ever, bar none.

[Busyman]

Damn I gotta watch Dawn again (I have it on video).
It&#39;s kinda weird I guess with Night set in the sixties with rampant racism and made in B&W and then Dawn is made in color.
Since they are remaking Dawn and Night has already been remade then we should have Day if Dawn does well.

We&#39;ll probably get folks saying Day ripped off 28 Days Later.

With the Night remake already made, the Dawn Of The Dead remake should look more like a direct sequel. I noticed in the Dawn remake the zombies can run and jump.

I remember when (in the original Dawn) a zombie stood up too tall on some boxes and peeled his own cap on twirling helicopter blades.

EDIT3RA1N1AC - I see the news on Dawn in the beginning IS talking about the dead rising ALREADY&#33;&#33;&#33;

[3RA1N1AC]

Originally posted by Busyman@26 January 2004 - 15:51
Damn I gotta watch Dawn again (I have it on video).
It&#39;s kinda weird I guess with Night set in the sixties with rampant racism and made in B&W and then Dawn is made in color.

this is a good point. i&#39;m not sure if i agree that NOTLD is about racism very much, since the black guy&#39;s skin color does not seem to be an issue for the other characters at all. but you do have a good point, that NOTLD reflects some of the issues of the time when it was made.

the 60s were a time of revolution in politics & society, the tide was beginning to turn, the old institutions and values were beginning to fall away, people were beginning to realize that racism is not okay, old-fashioned america was losing its grip and it could no longer ignore the "other" (be it hippies, minorities, communists, etc), and NOTLD can be seen as a reflection of that.

the 70s were a time of complacency and consumerism. people just didn&#39;t care that much about the big issues, and the most important thing in a lot of people&#39;s lives was to buy & own new stuff. it was a time of lazy satisfaction-- buy a big new car, go to the disco, go to the mall, swap wives with your neighbor, spend spend spend, buy buy buy, try to live the fantasy life that you see in magazine ads. faithful consumers = zombies. Dawn Of The Dead is sort of about that.

the 80s were a time when "looking out for #1" became a popular view. the tone of that decade was a lot more aggressive, much of the world had turned against us politically, we were turning hostile against immigrants/refugees (the starving masses outside the fence, so to speak), militarism was making a comeback in popular culture (see Rambo, etc), and sexism was replacing racism as the hot topic of the day. Day Of The Dead can be viewed as a comment on that.

the social/political commentary of each movie is not a perfect justification for the massively screwed up timeline, but it&#39;s at least a halfway decent excuse for the settings/props jumping several years ahead in a story that really only runs for about a year.