In August of 2019, an odd piece of horror film ephemera made its way across the internet. It was a Letter of Intent confirming Executive Producer status on a project called Night of the Living Dead and the Day After. The letter is addressed to “Joe” and “John” and signed by the late director George Romero. While it would be easy to dismiss as some bored fanboy creation, the fact that it was posted from the LinkedIn account of Night of the Living Dead co-creator John A. Russo gave serious weight to the document. A brief note posted by Russo explained the significance and why it was made public:
“George Romero and I were working on a movie project called NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD AND THE DAY AFTER when he, unfortunately, passed away, and this is the LETTER OF INTENT he gave me when the project started -- IT IS ADDRESSED TO ME, JOHN RUSSO, AND IT IS SIGNED BY HIM! A treasure for serious collectors! $250 by PayPal.”
Regardless of what one might think concerning the sale of such an item, the fact that it existed at all presented a tantalizing tease of what might have been. Fans of Night were torn by the rift between the two creatives; each respected industry professionals who had enjoyed success mainly within the horror genre. Though both men were essentially responsible for diverging Night franchises, neither had attempted a true follow-up dealing with events “the day after.”
While the trail of dead that Romero left behind after Night was easy to follow, Russo’s return to the cemetery was not as well-traveled. The prolific author and filmmaker would eventually find success with a cinematic version of his storyline, Return of the Living Dead. But its origins and the franchise that it created were just as rambling and unsure as the labored steps of the ghouls in that 1968 cult classic.
In the summer of 1985, George Romero’s third zombie film, Day of the Dead, was given a fairly wide theatrical release. Though highly anticipated by fans of his first two undead films, the shrill tone and what many critics felt was a ponderous narrative, did not create the buzz or box-office of his previous entry, 1978’s Dawn of the Dead. However, that same summer, another film related to Night of the Living Dead was unleashed with little fanfare. Return of the Living Dead, which promised a more tongue-in-cheek approach to the zombie mayhem, caught the attention of the late summer movie crowd. Framed as a punk rock take on the already shopworn zombie plague scenario, the young cast and memorable advertising campaign immediately set it apart from Day. It was also a striking change of pace from the often-incoherent horde of Italian zombie films that stormed the U.S. in the earlier part of the decade.
Originally conceived as a straight adaptation of Russo’s novel of the same name, the project took several detours before its final theatrical incarnation. The 1978 paperback was the writer’s direct follow-up to Night, a script that he co-wrote with Romero. Russo also authored a novelization of Night in ‘74, a fairly straightforward retelling of the film. After a lengthy court battle over the copyright ownership of the original film, each went their separate ways. Both moved forward with their own continuations of the Dead saga, with Russo retaining the “Living Dead” descriptor for his work. Romero’s sequel, Dawn of the Dead, also arrived in 1978 and proved to be a huge hit both in the U.S. and worldwide. Russo’s novel would be eclipsed by the popularity of Dawn; a harsh irony in that the Russo novel was based on his own screenplay that had failed to secure financing.
The Return novel takes place ten years after the original zombie outbreak, which did not lead to the apocalyptic reckoning of the Romero saga. Instead, the effects of the disease have been contained by properly disposing of the newly dead. There is also an ambiguity concerning the outbreak, which seems to have also gone into remission. Law enforcement does not believe that it is likely that the dead will rise again, creating a conflict in a small town hit hard by the original occurrence. A religious leader and his followers work surreptitiously to keep the dead from returning by driving metal spikes into the skulls of fresh corpses. When a tragic bus crash results in the death of several people, the fears of the congregation prove to be well-founded. The reanimated dead begin to attack the local population – though the baser instincts of humanity question once again who the real monsters are.
Unlike Romero’s sequel, Return doesn’t cover much new ground. Russo’s narrative feels more like a reboot than a genuine continuation of events. It also offers a group of unappealing characters who make bad decisions – culminating with another bleak ending for the protagonist. The huge success of Dawn created interest in Russo’s property – allowing his original screenplay to rise from the grave once again. The obvious commercial viability of the project attracted Hemdale film Corporation and director Tobe Hooper, who was just coming off the success of Poltergeist. The director of the much-loved Texas Chain Saw Massacre was infamous for waffling on projects and eventually left for a lucrative deal with Cannon Films.
Writer Dan O’Bannon (Alien), who had been hired for a script polish, was offered the role of director. He took on the film, his first as director, on the condition he could essentially re-write the entire script. This turned out to be a wise decision as O’Bannon’s fresh, comedic take on the subject matter not only set it apart from the Romero films, it also broadened the appeal of the subject matter. The Return that was eventually released that summer reflected the more humorous tone that horror films had taken that decade (for better or worse). The revised premise completely jettisoned Russo’s multi-character backwoods narrative; wisely focusing on a small group of people fending off the living dead in close proximity to a gothic cemetery.
O’Bannon’s film begins with the introduction of a new employee at the Uneeda Medical Supply warehouse. Frank (Frankenstein Conquers the Space Monster’s James Karen) gives newbie Freddy (a game Thom Mathews) a tour of the facilities. In addition to medical equipment, the company also sells human cadavers that are kept in cold storage. When Freddy asks Frank about the strangest thing he has ever witnessed working at the warehouse, the seasoned employee gleefully shares the true story of the movie Night of the Living Dead. Evidently the Romero film was based on a true story that happened in Pittsburgh in 1969. A chemical called 2-4-5 Trioxin, created by the military to destroy marijuana plants, had the unpleasant side-effect of raising the dead. A disastrous spill at a VA hospital created an outbreak, which was quickly contained by the army. The remains of the affected zombies were placed in airtight drums and, through a clerical error, sent to Uneeda for storage.
Meanwhile, Freddy’s girlfriend Tina (Beverly Randolph) and their eclectic group of “80s movie punk” friends including Trash (an assured Linnea Quigley), Spider (Miguel A. Nuñez Jr.) and Chuck (John Philbin) wander aimlessly through the streets of Louisville. Tina is waiting for Freddy to get off work later in the evening, while her cohorts just want a place to hang out. They all decide to head toward Uneeda and wait for their friend – who “always knows the best places to party.” Catching a ride from Suicide (Mark Venturini), the bored kids decide to set up shop at the cemetery just across the street.
Frank takes Freddy into the basement where the secret drums are kept. While showing the young clerk how sturdy they are by tapping one, it breaks a seal – setting free Trioxin gas. The toxic chemical knocks the two men unconscious and inundates the warehouse; resurrecting the frozen corpse in cold storage. When Frank and Freddy awaken from their Trioxin-induced sleep, they find an empty drum and hear the wailing of the reanimated corpse. When they realize the consequences of the leak, Frank calls the warehouse owner Burt (A Nightmare on Elm Street Part 2’s Clu Gulager). The famous Romero movie their only reference for defense, they attempt to kill the naked corpse by destroying the brain. When a pick to the head doesn’t do the trick, Freddy memorably yells, “You mean the movie lied?” Beheading the corpse - then dismembering the limbs prove futile as the body pieces refuse to stop moving. Burt decides to take the jittery pieces across the street to the Resurrection Funeral Home where old friend, and embalmer, Ernie (a creepy Don Calfa) agrees to cremate the remains.
The Trioxin-infused smoke, combined with an ill-timed rainstorm, puts a damper on the party plans of Tina and her punk cohorts. The contaminated rain begins to soak into the cemetery soil and reanimates the corpses. The friends scatter in different directions – the rain burning their skin. As the dead begin to crawl out of the ground, on the hunt for brains, their numbers begin to multiply as more people die and are subsequently resurrected. The zombies, who can move quickly and even speak, are a completely different menace than the slow-moving living dead from the Romero films. The attention to detail on their distinctive look and mannerisms (some of which are elaborate animated puppets) add another level of jeopardy to the proceedings. Because they can communicate, the survivors learn that the zombies are compelled to eat brains because it “makes the pain go away.” The Tarman (played with relish by actor Allan Trautman), the first zombie to escape the Trioxin barrel, is more horrifying than any ghoul in the original Night of the Living Dead. His demands for “brains!” is the stuff of true nightmares.
The simple narrative was given a huge boost from O’Bannon’s clever screenplay, which managed to be extremely funny without diluting the horror. In fact, O’Bannon’s directorial debut captured that fine line between morbid humor and genuine suspense that was lacking in so many genre films of that decade. It also pulled off an EC horror comic vibe far more successfully than Romero’s explicit homage Creepshow, released three years prior to Return. O’Bannon also proved himself to be a strong actor’s director, coaxing inspired performances from Karen and Mathews as well as a cast of mainly b-movie mainstays. Scream queen Quigley and softcore veteran Jewel Shepard (who played “valley punk” Casey) were never better. It’s too bad that his career as a director only included one other feature (The Resurrected from ‘91). He died in 2009 after complications from Crohn’s disease. With impressive practical effects and energetic cinematography by Jules Brenner (Salem’s Lot), the inspired horror-comedy remains a classic of the genre.
It should also be noted that although Russo’s plot was completely jettisoned, he ended up authoring the companion novel to the film; effectively making him the writer of two completely different works with the same title. His version loosely follows the plot of O’Bannon’s story, taking a few detours and changing some of the character’s names. While Russo would continue to resurrect the zombie plague narrative in future projects (including graphic novels and various films) this was the only Return in the franchise to receive a novelization. It’s another odd and somewhat ironic turn in Russo’s long relationship with the Living Dead. This work would be his last contribution to the Return franchise until the well-regarded 2011 documentary More Brains! A Return to the Living Dead.
After grossing 14.2 million on a relatively low budget of 4 million, a sequel to the Orion Pictures release was inevitable. However, considering all of the principle characters were killed off definitely made a follow-up a tricky proposition. Instead of attempting to “further the plot” of Return, a “more of the same” approach was followed. Genre filmmaker Ken Wiederhorn, whose credits included the engaging Nazi/zombie thriller Shock Waves (1977) and the cheap Animal House rip-off King Frat (1979), was hired to write and direct. Perhaps because of his work on another unrelated sequel, the bizarre Meatballs Part 2 (1984), Wiederhorn appeared to be the ideal choice to head the production. Taking a far more “kid-friendly” approach to the action this time, Return of the Living Dead Part 2 seemed to set its sights on future VHS rentals driven by the preteen crowd.
A military truck, containing the remaining barrels of Trioxin, accidentally loses one, which falls into a river. A group of mischievous kids including Billy (Thor Van Lingen), Johnny (Jason Hogan) and Jesse (Michael Kenworthy from The Blob remake) stumble upon the barrel after a group initiation in a mausoleum goes awry. Their interest in the contents eventually releases the gas into the nearby cemetery just as grave robbers Brenda (Suzanne Snyder from Night of the Creeps), Ed and Joey (returning cast members James Karen and Thom Mathews respectively) set their sights on looting the mausoleum. Another ill-timed rainstorm ensures that the Trioxin in the air is turned into an acid rain that ends up reanimating the corpses. Missing in this follow-up is the genuine suspense O’Bannon brought to the original – and the chemistry of the eclectic cast of old and new genre actors. Both Karen and Mathews are engaging enough in their new roles, but the shrill script gives them little to do but panic in various levels of hysteria. Even a return by actor Allan Trautman as a new Tarman can’t help the by-the-numbers action.
While the original film effortlessly balanced gruesome scares with broad comedy, Wiederhorn’s film was essentially a kid’s comic book – similar in tone to the previous year’s The Monster Squad, though not nearly as assured. A modest success for Lorimar Pictures, Part 2 had a higher budget (6.2 million) and grossed less (9.2 million) than the original. It would take another five years before a return of the Living Dead franchise, but by then interest had waned in the property - and in horror films in general. In the early 90s, more and more horror titles began to debut on video, a growing market that had helped to kill the drive-in and grindhouse theatrical circuit. A 1990 remake of Night, directed by effects guru Tom Savini (who had created the incredible effects for Dawn) was not a critical or commercial hit. Made to essentially recoup profits cheated from Romero’s original production company Image Ten, it did little to advance either franchise at the time.
However, not even a lackluster Night remake or an underperforming sequel could keep the Living Dead down. Taking a completely different route – in both tone and subject matter, Society director Brian Yuzna took the reins of the third installment. Veering away from the formula of the previous two Living Dead films, Part 3 took a more cold, dramatic approach indicative of new distributor Vidmark’s (a Trimark subsidiary) releases of the time. The same company responsible for Warlock ’89 and The Dentist ’96 – by-the-numbers DTV titles with little cinematic flair. Writer John Penney (Virus of the Dead), working with an idea by Yuzna, crafted a more intimate (and budget-conscious) narrative by focusing on a Trioxin-infused love story. With half the budget of the original Return, expectations were not high.
A military base is experimenting with Trioxin with the intention of turning zombies into weapons of war. Military brat Curt (J. Trevor Edmond from Pumpkinhead 2), and his girlfriend Julie (Mindy Clarke) sneak into the facility and witness his father, Colonel Reynolds (Adam-12’s Kent McCord), and group of military peers experiment on a corpse. The Trioxin is administered and the dead body is quickly reanimated. Because the zombies are driven by their compulsion for eating brains, controlling them is not an easy process. Colonel Reynolds’ plan for keeping them somewhat disciplined is a chemical shot into their brains that can paralyze them temporarily. When the procedure is attempted on the newly-reanimated corpse, the paralysis doesn’t last as long as anticipated and the zombie breaks free. This creates an unfortunate chain reaction where a scientist is attacked and killed – also becoming a zombie.
Reynolds is blamed for the incident and is dropped from the project and immediately reassigned. When Curt is informed they have to move again, he refuses, wishing to stay with his girlfriend. Fleeing on his motorcycle with Julie in tow, Curt loses control of his bike. Julie is thrown off and is knocked into a telephone pole; killing her immediately. Using his dad’s keycard to access the military facility once again, he uses the Trioxin to reanimate Julie’s body. While this brings her back to life, they are forced to deal with the negative effects of the drug – namely the compulsion to eat brains. The newly zombified Julie discovers that piercing her body helps to control her appetite. In a callback to the original film, Julie mentions that “the pain makes the hunger go away.” She starts to mutilate her body with pieces of metal and debris. But an encounter with a gang of ruffians compels Julie to act on her zombie impulses. Her hunger for brains eventually leading to another zombie outbreak.
Yuzna’s film only half-heartedly explored the more intriguing elements of the premise. Attempting to keep Julie’s condition in check, and a secret, could have made for a dark and dramatic thrill ride. However, her self-mutilation and sense of guilt were set aside for a formula revenge scenario and a typically chaotic climax. This created a film that ended up disappointing both fans of the first two Living Dead films – and those looking for a subversive body horror flick (implied in the advertising). Return of the Living Dead Part 3 received a very limited theatrical release, before getting a slightly higher profile video debut. Its more serious tone and unique practical effects (which were created by several different companies) eventually drew an appreciative cult audience.
It would take another 12 years for the Trioxin to begin reanimating the dead once again, though this time they were resurrected by the dubious creative minds at the Sy-Fy Channel (still spelled Sci-Fi back then). Two Living Dead sequels were shot back-to-back under the auspices that any project connected to the franchise would immediately be embraced by horror fans. More Dead is better. Eight Legged Freaks director Ellory Elkayem was enlisted to direct both entries – each of which was written by William Butler (whose acting pedigree includes Leatherface: Chainsaw Massacre 3) and Aaron Strongoni. Shot in Romania and Ukraine, Return of the Living Dead: Necropolis (Part 4) and Return of the Living Dead: Rave to the Grave (Part 5) have very little connective tissue with the original trilogy.
Aside from the Trioxin canisters (now referred to as Trioxin 5) and a group of nogoodniks wanting to weaponize zombies, Necropolis may as well have dropped the Living Dead from the title altogether. Peter Coyote, far removed from E.T., is the marquee name – and most likely where much of the budget was spent. The mysterious Charles (Coyote) travels to Chernobyl(!) to collect some canisters of Trioxin. It turns out that he works for a company called Hybra Tech, a nefarious corporation that intends to create uber-soldiers out of the living dead.
Enter Julian (John Keefe) and Jake (Alexandru Geoana), Charles’ young nephews, whose parents were volunteers at Hybra. The couple died under mysterious circumstances the previous year. While Julian is out motorcycle riding with friends, Zeke (Elvin Dandel) has an accident and ends up dying while at the hospital. Katie (Jana Kramer), another friend of Julian’s who happens to also work at Hybra Tech, sees Zeke being taken into the facility. She alerts Julian and a plan is set to rescue him from the clutches of the evil corporation – which has been experimenting on reanimation under the guidance of Charles. The young friends manage to infiltrate the facility with Katie’s help, but not without creating the requisite zombie horde in the process. Though this time the brain-eating ghouls come equipped with ridiculous weapons of war.
In what felt like a 90-minute setup for the next chapter, Elkayem’s film looked like dozens of other Sy-Fy films from the period. Low production values including a negligible script and a flat made-for-TV aesthetic clearly separated Necropolis from the previous Living Dead entries (even the cheap Part 3). The make-up and special effects, which are essential in these films, were typically rough and poorly executed. Though not quite as banal and incoherent as the Uwe Boll’s House of the Dead (2003), Part 4 of the “Russo franchise” felt much more like the spiritual cousin to that unfortunate video game adaptation.
The companion film, Rave to the Grave, at least attempts to circle back around to the original film’s youth-oriented party focus. A direct sequel to Necropolis, Rave begins a year after the infamous Hybra Tech incident. Charles (a returning Peter Coyote), Trioxin in tow, meets some Russian officials at a mortuary who wish to take it off his hands. Things go awry, as they so often do whenever a Trioxin barrel is involved, and corpses are accidentally revived. During the mayhem, Charles is killed – ridding the production of only the marquee name and the only semblance of quality.
Julian (a returning John Keefe), now in college along with fellow survivors (and additional returning cast members) Cody (Cory Hardrict) and Becky (Aimee-Lynn Chadwick), receives word that his Uncle Charles has been killed. When he and girlfriend Jenny (Jenny Mollen) go through his uncle’s belongings, they inexplicably find more barrels of Trioxin. Like any level-headed people, they decide to explore one of the barrels with their friends. After testing the contents, it is discovered that the mysterious gas has an effect similar to Ecstasy. Naturally, it’s turned into a drug, called “Z” for zombie, which is then sold throughout the campus. It isn’t long until the Trioxin begins to turn the students into the brain-craving undead. A climax at a rave (remember the title?), where the “Z” is liberally distributed, ends in an explosive finale similar to the original.
While Rave was a bit more energetic than Necropolis, the lazy script and poor production values ensured any good will associated with the earlier films in the franchise was completely cremated. Attempts at callbacks to the original hit (including another Tarman) simply reminded the viewer how much better O’Bannon’s film was. Neither of the Elkayem films have any real interest to further the mythos or sense of ghoulish fun of the original Return. And despite the fact that Rave is most definitely a sequel to Necropolis, the two are no more connected to the Russo franchise than the Bulgarian-shot Lake Placid follow-ups made just a few years later (that also debuted on Sy-Fy). They are the kind of disposable films that work more or less as remakes - trading continuity and quality for simple name recognition. It is interesting to note, however, that the nihilistic tone of the later films are more in line with Russo’s 1978 novel.
Although 2005 was the last year to feature a Return to the franchise, much like those brain-craving zombies, Russo’s commitment to the living dead would prove unstoppable. In addition to writing and directing new scenes added to a 30th anniversary edition of Night in 1999, and executive producing the DTV film Children of the Living Dead in 2001, he wrote, co-directed and starred as the title character in the bizarre comedy My Uncle John is a Zombie. Playing off his connection with Night and Return, the 2016 DTV film feels like a hybrid of both franchises; existing within the universe of the 1968 classic while injecting the comic book humor of the ’85 release. None of these productions were embraced by critics (especially the infamous Night redux), but all were driven by continued fan interest in his work.
“They won’t stay dead!” A press release from 2018 trumpeted the production of a film called Night of the Living Dead Part 2. Purported to include the involvement of the original creative team, this “sequel” was evidently written in the 70s but went unproduced. This newest “return” would seem to support the Letter of Intent written by Romero. While we will never get to see a version of the Night follow-up executive produced by the late director, the fact that he had an interest in the project adds some weight to yet another resurrection. A film version of the Russo-inspired 2005 graphic novel Escape of the Living Dead (with the author attached as writer/director) has also been announced. Existing as yet another Night follow-up, independent of both previous franchises, it seems as if the days and returns of the living dead will continue to “rise and walk the earth” over half a century later.
Bradley Harding