Talk:Diary of the Dead

Diary of the Dead epidemic

"it is also the first film in Romero's series to explicitly reveal that the zombie epidemic is not a localized event but a worldwide phenomenon"

Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe in the introduction of Land of the Dead, which came out two years previous, a newscaster states that the epidemic is worldwide and not just a regional thing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Larry138 (talk • contribs) 01:45, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Diary of the Dead part of Romero's Dead series?

This isn't part of the 'dead' series —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.132.222.83 (talk • contribs) 15:29, September 3, 2006 (UTC).

You are correct. This is a seperate project from Romero's dead series. I will make the changes on the article, but I'm not sure how to edit the 'Living Dead series' table at the bottom of the page. Hotdoglives 17:40, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

From what I understand, it is a part of the film series. In the lengthy audio interview, linked in the article, he's taking the story back to when it all began, though making it contemporary as the sequels are. This implies that it's still operating within the world he created with Night of the Living Dead. Can anyone point to where he's said that it's unrelated to the original four films? Otherwise it needs to be addressed.--Bacteria 06:29, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Strangely enough, as I am the one who tried to make our current info consistent, I can't think of any reason why this wouldn't be a part of Romero's Dead series. However, since two people seemed to disagree, and I didn't want to start a revert war, I left the info here as originally changed by Hotdoglives. I agree this needs to be adressed. --Azertus 10:22, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

All is cleared up, with references (mind, they were already in the article, I converted them to refs), now... --Azertus 13:29, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't understand how it can be a part of the same series if it's supposed to take place at the time of the original film but it's set in contemporary times. Jon Hart 00:27, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree, in regard to the confusion. The notion of it being contemporary would only make sense if he is considering Savini's remake as his starting point. Then again, the equipment that seems to be featured is going to make even that theory highly inaccurate. --75.2.43.172 19:12, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

It is supposed to be within the same series. Most film franchises don't have a linear timeline. Look at Casino Royale. It is a reboot of the franchise, but it has the most recent M. Should fans quibble that this couldn't possibly take place before Goldfinger since M is played by Judi Dench and not Bernard Lee? IrishGuy ^talk 19:41, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

You are actually blurring the definition of the two there. There's no visible mention that this film is a "reboot", just that it offers a different perspective on the events in an open setting instead of the confined settings that Romero placed the first three of his "dead" films in. Details like this are suspect and ultimately will either be solidified when it is released or debunked wholly, that's the long and short of it. Also, using comparison of actors replacing other actors also doesn't fit into anything that is valid in regard to this confusion, because no issue was raised regarding any such situation. 71.156.85.133 20:53, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

I wasn't referring to actors replacing actors per se. The example I gave is thus: Judi Dench took over as M from the previous M...not the actor but the character. She inhereted Bond as a 007. Now she is still M, but she is selecting Bond as a 007. That makes no sense in any sort of linear timeline. The fact that there were no cell phones or digital camcorders in NOTLD and there are in DOTD doesn't mean that DOTD doesn't take place in the same world, it just isn't using a directly linear timeline as most film franchises don't. IrishGuy ^talk 21:22, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Um, Romero has said himself that he is trying to REESTABLISH the franchise, not create a new one. It IS part of the Living Dead series. 72.206.97.34

Romero is rebooting the series. Its the "same thing" but set in current times. Unless your prefur to believe that he has set this movie in 1968 and failed to notice the cell phone and video camera plot holes. This is Night of the living dead set in 2007. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.57.83.138 (talk) 14:25, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

It's akin to a floating timeline. Makes perfect sense. --Dr Archeville (talk) 16:26, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Sounds like Romero sells out the franchise. Reboots and Retcons have to be the most annoying thing in film series. It could be in the series in the sense that any movies you want can be part of a series because you created it and have say. But also has to either be different series or a major plot hole, you can't have both, no matter what the creator says. so this is basically two series or a major plot hole. I was going to ask the same thing how are there camcorders if this takes place at the same time as the original. --24.94.251.190 (talk) 06:45, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Release Date

So what's the deal with this film? When is it being released? Can we get a more accurate date than, "First Quarter of 2007?" White_Bishop 20:36, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

The movie is set to have a world premier Sept 8th at the Toronto Film Festival. I added the release date to the 2007 in film. I am not completely sure if this release date is accurate, so if the date changes, I'll be alert. AsylumMan 8:00, 6 August 2007

When is it being released elsewhere outside the US? At present it's not even an 'upcoming' movie in Australia. I thought people stopped with the staged release dates due to the fact that we'll all just download it rather than going to watch it at the movies if it's released way later than in it's country of filming? Jachin (talk) 20:52, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Supposedly the film's been out for about two weeks now here in the US, but I can't for the life of me find a theatre that it's playing in. The closest place is NYC, which is over six hours away! Probably gonna have to wait for DVD on this one :-( White_Bishop (talk) 18:50, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Urban Dead

Should have a mention about urban dead doing a limited time map based in monroeville —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.66.77.2 (talk) 16:07, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

That'd be trivia. Non-notable trivia at that. Jachin (talk) 20:52, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Dunno about that. According to the UD site, they currently have "846,476 dead and rising", which I assume refers to accounts created. Of course, this would include those who tried it and quit, as well as those with multiple accounts. Anyways, it looks like the new map is running as an official tie-in with the movie, including the use of video cameras (items specific to that map) to create video diaries. I'd think that would meet the notability requirement (you folks can argue about triviality still though). My opinion is that it merits a mention and even a link, but not more than that. --Reverend Loki (talk) 22:52, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

If the UD tie-in is official then it shows a very interesting advertising campagin and that is notable, even by notability (wikipedia used to be the place to find stuff out till you notability reared its retarded ugly head). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.99.171.94 (talk) 02:42, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Plot Section

This Plot Section needs to be bigger. --83.108.146.226 (talk) 18:36, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

The plot section is CRAP. Subjective, flat out wrong in some spots. It is utter crap. Trying to rework it, which will likely be fruitless as the original author will come in after school gets out to change it back. Tronner (talk) 21:54, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Messed Up Article

I've just noticed that some of the updates a few days ago (dvd release, sequel) have lost the external links and references - i've tried to fix but no luck, this needs sorting out 81.137.203.168 (talk) 12:53, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

It's fixed. There was supposed to be a </ref> at the end of one of the references. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 18:43, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Time

I should this include something about the time, since this takes place at the beginning of a zombie epidemic, but also takes place nearly 40 years after the original Night of the Living Dead? It's a bit confusing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.248.2.245 (talk) 15:38, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Read the discussion at the top of the page. It's the same series but a "reboot", like Casino Royale. On Thermonuclear War (talk) 00:15, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

SoundTrack

I believe that we should create a soundtrack page for the movie and list all songs and artists on it from the movie. Currently at least one editor only wants to plug one artist, and one song from the album to list their myspace page.Jason 14:34, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Last film?

Is this the last film is the series? [[  Demon Hunter Rules ]] (talk) 00:43, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

i wish —Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.89.10.23 (talk) 23:35, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Island of the Dead--Kamikaze14 (talk) 03:21, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Recurring actors

"Shawn Roberts as Tony Ravello *Shawn Roberts also appeared in Land of the Dead, making him the fourth actor to appear in two of Romero's zombie films, after Joseph Pilato, Tom Savini and Taso N. Stavraki".

This is not strictly true. Greg Nicotero has appeared in Day of the Dead (as 'Pvt. Johnson), Land of the Dead (as 'Bridgekeeper Zombie') and also in Diary of the Dead (as 'Zombie Surgeon'). Perhaps we should should make a distinction between featured and minor parts? 86.29.235.11 (talk) 19:26, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Plot Section

Plot section seems to be written by a completely illiterate 12 y/o. Would be great if somebody could clean it up. --217.44.189.24 (talk) 20:44, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Film Budget

In the summary box on the right at the top of the article it has the film's budget at 10 million. However, in the main article under "Production", in the section's second paragraph, it has the budget at 2 million. Both figures are cited to different sources. Unfortunately, the 2 million dollar figures source has been removed by CNN.

Kiru

71.169.77.2 (talk) 13:03, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Confused plot

There are many problems with the plot summary. For instance, who is Mary, why does she try to kill herself, and why is she then being taken to hospital?

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Diary of the Dead. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070607200832/http://www.fangoria.com:80/news_article.php?id=6234 to http://www.fangoria.com/news_article.php?id=6234

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:51, 19 February 2016 (UTC)