Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Grapesoda5k t1_itzcyuf wrote

Reply to comment by CorruptedHannya in ‘Night of the Living Dead’ Sequel in the Works From Nikyatu Jusu by CosmosBazaar

ROTLD isn't a sequel.

The Romero zombies and Trioxin zombies are quite different.

John Russo worked on the original NOTLD also but those films went in totally different directions.

https://livingdead.fandom.com/wiki/Return_of_the_Living_Dead_(film_series)

3

CorruptedHannya t1_itzdvvy wrote

Yeah they did differ but its still basically a sequel all but officially. Wasn't it that Romero wasn't allowed to use the 'of the Living Dead' fixture when he and Russo had differing ideas for the sequel and it's tone, Russo wanted more comedy and talking zombies so Russo kept that title fixture and created Return of the Living Dead, as in return of the zombies from Night, as his sequel, and Romero removed 'Living' from the title and went with just 'of the Dead' with how he wanted the zombies and series to go, and created Dawn as his sequel. Night is even mentioned in the original Return as a cheeky nod.

The zombies in Night are different from those in both Dawn and Return. They're smarter and know to use weapons etc and overall are much more human like, they're arguably closer to the Return zombies than what Romero ultimately went with going forward.

At least that's how I've always understood it.

2

Grapesoda5k t1_itzeh6j wrote

Russo zombies are indestructible, comedic zombies.

Romero zombies are quite easily dispatched unless they're offscreen when they appear from nowhere.

Snyder zombies are just lame.

5

CorruptedHannya t1_itzenvq wrote

Oh the Snyder thing we can agree on, Dawn 2006 is fucking awful and he fundamentally misunderstood everything the original was about.

1

Grapesoda5k t1_itzf6i4 wrote

He's just a silly hack with delusions of grandeur.

4

monty_kurns t1_iu0mm2y wrote

>Yeah they did differ but its still basically a sequel all but officially. Wasn't it that Romero wasn't allowed to use the 'of the Living Dead' fixture when he and Russo had differing ideas for the sequel and it's tone, Russo wanted more comedy and talking zombies so Russo kept that title fixture and created Return of the Living Dead, as in return of the zombies from Night, as his sequel, and Romero removed 'Living' from the title and went with just 'of the Dead' with how he wanted the zombies and series to go, and created Dawn as his sequel. Night is even mentioned in the original Return as a cheeky nod.

The zombies in Return of the Living Dead aren't Russo's, but Dan O'Bannon's. When Romero and Russo went their separate ways, Russo wrote a screenplay titled Return of the Living Dead. In that story, it is a direct sequel to Night and follows the sheriff seen at the end. From what I remember there was also a cult involved. Originally, Tobe Hooper was signed on to direct it. When he left the project, O'Bannon was brought in and he kept the title, but completely rewrote the story and created the talking, running, braining hungry zombies. Russo was able to adapt his screenplay into a novel, also called Return of the Living Dead.

Honestly, Russo's original story isn't that bad. I have the paperback of it and read it maybe 15 years ago. I remember thinking it actually would've made a decent movie, assuming it weren't made by Russo who, by all accounts, is a really nice guy but kind of a hack when it comes to filmmaking. I'm going to need to go back and give it another read, but it was definitely serious in tone and featured the same kind of zombies you saw in Night.

2