Day of the Dead Casting news: Ving Rhymes is cast as....

[Flexo]

Like I said too, it is slightly hypocritical to make such a point about commercialism making a commercial product (ie a movie) with a million bucks of someone else's cash, is it not?

The film's point was more about greed.

 

[Horrorfan]

The film's point was more about greed.

It's still VERY indulgent to make a movie about greed with 1 million of someone else's cash about greed. at least if it was his own money, it wouldnt come off as hypocrtical (to me anyway).

I have never really heard it from romero about greed. from all I have seen him say it was about was mindless commercialism, but the irony still applies with greed.

 

[Majik1387]

But you don't understand...it's an OBVIOUS metaphore. It doesn't take a genius to understand how simple it is. Im not taking away from the movie, but it isnt exactly something you have to be a rocket scientest to think up.

Like I said too, it is slightly hypocritical to make such a point about commercialism making a commercial product (ie a movie) with a million bucks of someone else's cash, is it not?

Just because something is obvious doesn't mean everyone can see it. I know it doesn't sound like I'm helping my point of view but it's true.

He only had $500,000 to make the movie; Half was from Argento, the rest he got himself.

 

[Flexo]

It's still VERY indulgent to make a movie about greed with 1 million of someone else's cash about greed. at least if it was his own money, it wouldnt come off as hypocrtical (to me anyway).

I have never really heard it from romero about greed. from all I have seen him say it was about was mindless commercialism, but the irony still applies with greed.

The bikers invaded the mall. Instead of respecting the other people, they just tried to take it all for themselves, and Flyboy died fighting for his precious mall. Materialism and greed go hand in hand.

And making a film isn't that greedy, since you make a film hoping to be able to pay everyone back with the profits, and to entertain the audience in exchange for their time and money. And a film isn't that material, since it can be played over and over and inspire ideas. George gave up money so that he could make the film.

 

[Horrorfan]

Just because something is obvious doesn't mean everyone can see it. I know it doesn't sound like I'm helping my point of view but it's true.

He only had $500,000 to make the movie; Half was from Argento, the rest he got himself.

Dont get me wrong, i respect the hell out of romero, and even though his films have aged terribly , they kicked off the zombie film sub genre. But knocking commercialism when you depend on it for a living...it just always struck me as a tad ungreatful, even if it is a worthy idea.

But you can see metaphores everywhere, if you like. like int he remake, you could easily say the zombies represent the even more violent society we live in today, spreading their violent, malevolent plague in epedemic terms. Even in resident evil, the zombies all work for a faceless coporation. Metaphores are there everywhere, you just need to see something in the right way. Not all of them are even put in conciously, but you can draw the comnparison anyway.

and I am assuming he raised $500, 000 from someone else's pocket and not his own, since he always beamoaned (rightfully) he didnt get a penny from the original night, so I always assumed he could have never been that well off, financially, since his films were never really box office hits.

 

[Horrorfan]

The bikers invaded the mall. Instead of respecting the other people, they just tried to take it all for themselves, and Flyboy died fighting for his precious mall. Materialism and greed go hand in hand.

And making a film isn't that greedy, since you make a film hoping to be able to pay everyone back with the profits, and to entertain the audience in exchange for their time and money. And a film isn't that material, since it can be played over and over and inspire ideas. George gave up money so that he could make the film.

But you're making a product intended to make money. No one makes a film wanting it to flop. You want it to suceed. Im not saying its down to just greed, but you don't want to make a film that makes nothing.

Im not saying a film is just a product, its not, its got artistic value. But I dont believe anyone who says they dont want a movie to reach a large audience and wants it to make money. If your films dont make money, eventually thenyou will get no more work. Its just the way it works. Im not blaming Romero, at all, but you can still see the irony of it.

 

[Majik1387]

Dont get me wrong, i respect the hell out of romero, and even though his films have aged terribly , they kicked off the zombie film sub genre. But knocking commercialism when you depend on it for a living...it just always struck me as a tad ungreatful, even if it is a worthy idea.

The way I saw it is that he wasn't knocking commercialism entirely, he was knocking where commercialism is heading; Basically the people who took it too far.