>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.