NetNews Usenet Archive 1993 #3/NN_1993_3.iso/spool/alt/horror/5663

Text File | 1993-01-28 | 1.9 KB | 39 lines

Organization: Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Path: sparky!uunet!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!paladin.american.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!news.sei.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!crabapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu!andrew.cmu.edu!tb0o+
Newsgroups: alt.horror
Message-ID: <QfNi2Ge00WB_E=[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 14:20:50 -0500
From: Todd Keenan Bowman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Dead movies
Lines: 29

[e-mail] (Darryll Hobson) writes:
>> Although the prequel, NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD (in B/W) pulls a
>> close second. And the sequel, RETURN OF THE LIVING DEAD II just
>> SuCkEd immensely (nothing more degrading than trying to make a
>> comedy out of a horror)

[e-mail] (Russell Fischer) writes:
> actually, ROTLD has nothing to do with romero's 'dead' films, other
> than the title and the general genre. fun film though. the only two
> 'real' sequels to the masterful 'night of the living dead' are 'dawn
> of the dead' and the unfortunate 'day of the dead'.
I would tend to disagree with this last statement. Return of the Living
Dead has just as much right to be a legitamate "Living Dead" film as
Dawn of the Dead or Day of the Dead. Sure, it might not by a Romero
'dead' film, but it is an official sequel to Night of the Living Dead.

I'm not sure how the story went, but, Romero and another author (John
Russo?) had written Night of the Living Dead together. After the film
they basically went their seperate ways. The other author kept the
legitamate right to the "Living Dead" part of the title, while Romero
just used 'Dead'.

So while Romero developed a sequel in Dawn of the Dead, Russo(?) made
a sequel of his own in Return of the Living Dead. Each is really as
'official' as the other (except that Dawn came out first).

Are there any other films that have 'alternate' sequels?

todd