![]() |
| THE LIVING END by James Robert Smith. |
Musings on genre writing, waterfall wandering, and peak bagging in the South's wilderness areas.
Showing posts with label John Russo. Show all posts
Showing posts with label John Russo. Show all posts
Saturday, November 21, 2015
THE LIVING END: A Zombie Novel.
I haven't posted a promo for this book in a while. This was my first zombie novel. I wanted to play with some of the mythology first developed by John Russo and George Romero. Now there is a truly monstrous flood of zombie novels. The sub-genre seems to be more popular now than vampire fiction was back in the 90s. The racist gun-porn crowd who seem to be attracted to the zombie scene in huge numbers had issues with the book. But the sales were good and the response from the folk who aren't neo-Nazis was positive.
Friday, April 05, 2013
This Movie Needs Extra Love.
I just read the announcement that George A. Romero is going to remake the original NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD. This mystified me for mainly one reason:
The film was remade in 1990 with Romero producing and Tom Savini directing. Why would Romero want to remake it yet again? To cash in on the zombie craze that he created? Hard to say.
But the thing is, that remake is one of the single most effective horror films I've ever seen, and it gets only a fraction of the respect that it deserves. By now, everyone is familiar with the original NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD directed by George Romero with screenplay by John Russo and George Romero. That film is a classic of paranoid fantasy and one of the most psychologically effective horror movies ever made. That it was filmed on a shoestring budget in black and white actually enhances the effectiveness of the movie.
However, because Romero, Russo, and company were inexperienced in dealing with distributors, they were ripped off and saw almost none of the massive profits that the movie generated for its eventual distributor. Thus, they all felt the need to remake the movie with a bigger budget in 1990 so that they could all, at long last, actually see some profits from the sweat of their brows.
I very much admire the remake. It is similar enough to the original to make it a powerful social statement, just as the first one did. And it was different enough to make further social and political statements in ways that make it different enough from the original for each to remain unique. The movie has a number of exceptional performances and is absolutely brilliantly directed by Tom Savini. After I saw this movie on its initial run, I figured that the door would be opened for Savini to direct many movies and receive funding for any number of projects to which he would be attached as director. His vision for the movie was just about flawless.
However, while the movie apparently did moderately well, it did not break any records, did not end
up making the producers much wealthier; and, worst of all, it was not the beginning of a long line of Savini-directed features.
Well, shit. There ain't no justice.
If you've never seen the 1990 version of NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD, give it a look. It's a truly creepy and effective horror movie. The film deserves a wider following, and Savini deserves a lot of respect and a lot of credit for the excellent work he turned in as director.
The film was remade in 1990 with Romero producing and Tom Savini directing. Why would Romero want to remake it yet again? To cash in on the zombie craze that he created? Hard to say.
But the thing is, that remake is one of the single most effective horror films I've ever seen, and it gets only a fraction of the respect that it deserves. By now, everyone is familiar with the original NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD directed by George Romero with screenplay by John Russo and George Romero. That film is a classic of paranoid fantasy and one of the most psychologically effective horror movies ever made. That it was filmed on a shoestring budget in black and white actually enhances the effectiveness of the movie.
However, because Romero, Russo, and company were inexperienced in dealing with distributors, they were ripped off and saw almost none of the massive profits that the movie generated for its eventual distributor. Thus, they all felt the need to remake the movie with a bigger budget in 1990 so that they could all, at long last, actually see some profits from the sweat of their brows.
I very much admire the remake. It is similar enough to the original to make it a powerful social statement, just as the first one did. And it was different enough to make further social and political statements in ways that make it different enough from the original for each to remain unique. The movie has a number of exceptional performances and is absolutely brilliantly directed by Tom Savini. After I saw this movie on its initial run, I figured that the door would be opened for Savini to direct many movies and receive funding for any number of projects to which he would be attached as director. His vision for the movie was just about flawless.
However, while the movie apparently did moderately well, it did not break any records, did not end
up making the producers much wealthier; and, worst of all, it was not the beginning of a long line of Savini-directed features.
Well, shit. There ain't no justice.
If you've never seen the 1990 version of NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD, give it a look. It's a truly creepy and effective horror movie. The film deserves a wider following, and Savini deserves a lot of respect and a lot of credit for the excellent work he turned in as director.
They're coming to get you, Barbara.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)



