Dawn of the Dead (1978) [No 3D Blu-ray]

[Jsmith82]

Dawn of the Dead, Romero's 1978 follow up to Night, is midway through a conversion per an announcement made at SDCC:

In what is probably the most unexpected news of the San Diego Comic-Con, word has come that George A. Romero's seminal classic, Dawn of the Dead, is next in line for 3D treatment!

According to Deadline Richard P. Rubenstein, who produced Dawn of the Dead and owns the rights to Romero’s 1979 classic, is in the homestretch of a 3D conversion of Romero’s groundbreaking followup to Night Of The Living Dead. Rubenstein started this crusade in 2007, and while he’s not sure what he will do with the refashioned film, he so far has one hour and 31 minutes converted of a two-hour, six-minute film. He expects the conversion to be done by early fall.

"It is proving to be more 3D friendly than many films, because George’s style was to compose within the frame, rather than across frames,” Rubenstein says. “That means there is a lot of action within each frame, from front to back and it makes the conversion process more friendly. It’s like you’re moving the audience closer to the movie. What I didn’t want to do is not edit anything George did in his original movie, and nothing has been altered in this process,” with the exception of a couple of technical credits of the conversion companies that became partners in this effort. They are the Korea-based Stereo Pictures Media Inc conversion house with backing from DNext Media. Converting the film has cost in the $6 million range, which is something considering the original cost around $685,000.

Rubenstein said the next step is figuring how to theatrically re-introduce the forerunner to zombie films who weren’t born when Dawn Of The Dead came out. He is content to move as slow as a Romero zombie if necessary to do it right. “We want to get our partners’ money back but since no financing came from distribution sources, we’re totally free,” he said. “It is getting the same kind of care, love and attention to detail that went into converting The Titanic,” Rubenstein said.

Hot damn! 6 million spent on the conversion? Sounds like they are attempting to get it done right - and I LOVE the fact they are in nobody's pockets but the company that put up the cost to convert. Claiming it's getting the TLC that Titanic saw, those are big words and big shoes to try and fill, we shall see about that.... To me, it seems like a risky investment for a cult classic, but I guarantee them one sale right here . Though it's not native I am happy to see more "classics" being resurrected, this will be a great addition to the 3D collection. I love horror, I love zombies, I love 3D. Winnner!

Sources:
http://www.dreadcentral.com/news/687...ersion-its-way

http://www.deadline.com/2013/07/comi...s-3d-makeover/

http://www.horror-movies.ca/2013/07/...-3d-treatment/

[Taygan315]

Rubenstein's last sentence spoke VOLUMES to me (getting the same care and 3D treatment Titanic got)!!!!!

I'm so in on this! Any confirmed release date yet....or best guess??

[Jsmith82]

Originally Posted by Taygan315

Rubenstein's last sentence spoke VOLUMES to me (getting the same care and 3D treatment Titanic got)!!!!!

I'm so in on this! Any confirmed release date yet....or best guess??

Not that I have found, per that article they hope to have the conversion done by fall and then try to find a way to run it theatrically. It would kick a ton of ass if this thing goes into an IMAX theater, what a throw back that movie night would be. Hopefully they have a midnight showing haha

[formula_nebula]

Hell yea! Definitely buying this

[Spaulding]

OK I'll buy it even if the 3D turns out so-so I don't have it in 2D yet anyway.

[BleedOrange11]

Seems risky to go with a relatively unknown conversion company, but there might be potential here.

[tigermoth]

Well this is certainly interesting. I love this movie and haven't watched it since I was a teenager. It definitely made a big impression on me as it has many others. I'm buying this for sure. If the conversion work is Titanic or Jurassic Park quality it will take the movie to another level.

[Jack_Ryder_2012]

Nice i hope they do the remake in 3d also

[Zivouhr]

Dawn of the Dead 78 is a great classic zombie epic set in a Pennsylvania indoor shopping mall. I have the collector's set from Anchor Bay, with Argento's cut, Romero's extended cut, and the theatrical cut included. I'm guessing this 3D treatment will be for the theatrical cut, which was great.

I can imagine the non 3D fans crying foul, but just because there's a 3D version doesn't mean the 2D version all of a sudden disappeared from existence. 2D and 3D can exist at the same time without one having to take over the other, much like apples continue to exist alongside oranges.

The real trick is should they go straight to video with the 3D or go for a theatrical run?
There are a lot of DawnOTD fans out there, but re-releases (in 2D or 3D) are a risk at the box office. For Halloween, that's the time I'd release it if it's going theatrical.

$8 million to convert it. That is a lot of money invested. I'd like to hear how Romero feels about 3D, considering he's a fan of video games like Carpenter.

Cool news, thanks! If the 3D is medium or strong (as with Titanic), I'll be there.

[mseeley]

This is wonderfully unexpected and exciting news! I've never see Dawn of the Dead and this sounds like a killer(no pun intended lol) way to experience the film for the first time

[dogofwar]

This is great news. I'm sure this is going to look amazing.

[Taygan315]

Originally Posted by Zivouhr

Dawn of the Dead 78 is a great classic zombie epic set in a Pennsylvania indoor shopping mall. I have the collector's set from Anchor Bay, with Argento's cut, Romero's extended cut, and the theatrical cut included. I'm guessing this 3D treatment will be for the theatrical cut, which was great.

I can imagine the non 3D fans crying foul, but just because there's a 3D version doesn't mean the 2D version all of a sudden disappeared from existence. 2D and 3D can exist at the same time without one having to take over the other, much like apples continue to exist alongside oranges.

The real trick is should they go straight to video with the 3D or go for a theatrical run?
There are a lot of DawnOTD fans out there, but re-releases (in 2D or 3D) are a risk at the box office. For Halloween, that's the time I'd release it if it's going theatrical.

$8 million to convert it. That is a lot of money invested. I'd like to hear how Romero feels about 3D, considering he's a fan of video games like Carpenter.

Cool news, thanks! If the 3D is medium or strong (as with Titanic), I'll be there.

For re releases, I think they should go straight to video. I think audiences are getting wise as to what 3D movie to watch in 3D and what 3D movie they can afford not to watch in 3D,imo. I like 3D conversions as a whole...but there have been more poor 3D conversions than good 3D conversions,imo.

For example, I believe a person, couple, or a family will likely spend the $$ on a 3D movie if that movie is 1) a new release (like Despicable Me 2, World War Z, or Man Of Steel) and 2) the 3D is good by word of mouth or critics (like Pacific Rim, The Croods, or The Great Gatsby).

When people hear of a older film being re released in theaters with 3D, I think they are not too enthralled to spend the $$ to see it in theaters. If it is priced right, I think people would be more willingly to spend the $$ on the home release than the theatrical release. Just my $1.75...everyone says 2 cents,lol. I'm trying to be a bit different,lol.

[Nighteyes]

I'm game. One of my all-time favorite films, this could be interesting if they do a decent job with the conversion. I hope they won't DNR it to death, though.

[skyofcrack]

We've been through this before with the colorization of b&w films. If a movie is shot in b&w or 2D that's the way it's supposed to be seen. The only 3D films that should be available are those that are shot in the 3D process.

[Nighteyes]

Originally Posted by skyofcrack

The only 3D films that should be available are those that are shot in the 3D process.

If the director approves and supervises the conversion, I don't see anything wrong with it.

[skyofcrack]

Originally Posted by Nighteyes

If the director approves and supervises the conversion, I don't see anything wrong with it.

There's no evidence George approves this. Rubinstein is doing it. Even if directors approve 3D conversions, I still don't think it's right.

[Zivouhr]

Originally Posted by Taygan315

For re releases, I think they should go straight to video. I think audiences are getting wise as to what 3D movie to watch in 3D and what 3D movie they can afford not to watch in 3D,imo. I like 3D conversions as a whole...but there have been more poor 3D conversions than good 3D conversions,imo.

For example, I believe a person, couple, or a family will likely spend the $$ on a 3D movie if that movie is 1) a new release (like Despicable Me 2, World War Z, or Man Of Steel) and 2) the 3D is good by word of mouth or critics (like Pacific Rim, The Croods, or The Great Gatsby).

When people hear of a older film being re released in theaters with 3D, I think they are not too enthralled to spend the $$ to see it in theaters. If it is priced right, I think people would be more willingly to spend the $$ on the home release than the theatrical release. Just my $1.75...everyone says 2 cents,lol. I'm trying to be a bit different,lol.

I might go with a few limited releases in certain theaters and see how that takes. Otherwise, I agree that going straight to video 3D is probably going to be the safest route for making money for a re-release, as Disney found out with Finding Nemo 3D.

Originally Posted by skyofcrack

We've been through this before with the colorization of b&w films. If a movie is shot in b&w or 2D that's the way it's supposed to be seen. The only 3D films that should be available are those that are shot in the 3D process.

Originally Posted by skyofcrack

There's no evidence George approves this. Rubinstein is doing it. Even if directors approve 3D conversions, I still don't think it's right.

I can understand the idea of respecting a film as it was originally shown and intended. But if we want to get picky about it, we could say Dawn of the Dead, and countless other movies that were made before home video, were meant to be seen on the big theater screen. Taking them to VHS blurred the quality, but that was the only way a lot of us were able to see it, rarely if ever being on TV or in theaters.

That example is stretching the rule of a movie being sacred in its original form, but 3D isn't altering the original no more than Blu Ray made it look a hundred times better than my old VHS Dawn of the Dead version, because the original movie remains uncut and intact. Whether in 2D, 3D, VHS, DVD, Blu Ray, 4K, etc...

[Nighteyes]

Originally Posted by Zivouhr

I can understand the idea of respecting a film as it was originally shown and intended. But if we want to get picky about it, we could say Dawn of the Dead, and countless other movies that were made before home video, were meant to be seen on the big theater screen. Taking them to VHS blurred the quality, but that was the only way a lot of us were able to see it, rarely if ever being on TV or in theaters.

However it could be argued that we are trying to recreate the original cinematic experience at home as closely as possible. Subject to the limitations of technology at the time. Now we are pretty damn close to the cinematic experience.

[levcore]

Originally Posted by Zivouhr

I might go with a few limited releases in certain theaters and see how that takes. Otherwise, I agree that going straight to video 3D is probably going to be the safest route for making money for a re-release, as Disney found out with Finding Nemo 3D.





I can understand the idea of respecting a film as it was originally shown and intended. But if we want to get picky about it, we could say Dawn of the Dead, and countless other movies that were made before home video, were meant to be seen on the big theater screen. Taking them to VHS blurred the quality, but that was the only way a lot of us were able to see it, rarely if ever being on TV or in theaters.

That example is stretching the rule of a movie being sacred in its original form, but 3D isn't altering the original no more than Blu Ray made it look a hundred times better than my old VHS Dawn of the Dead version, because the original movie remains uncut and intact. Whether in 2D, 3D, VHS, DVD, Blu Ray, 4K, etc...

Great post and I agree!

[Jsmith82]

Originally Posted by Zivouhr

I can understand the idea of respecting a film as it was originally shown and intended. But if we want to get picky about it, we could say Dawn of the Dead, and countless other movies that were made before home video, were meant to be seen on the big theater screen. Taking them to VHS blurred the quality, but that was the only way a lot of us were able to see it, rarely if ever being on TV or in theaters.

That example is stretching the rule of a movie being sacred in its original form, but 3D isn't altering the original no more than Blu Ray made it look a hundred times better than my old VHS Dawn of the Dead version, because the original movie remains uncut and intact. Whether in 2D, 3D, VHS, DVD, Blu Ray, 4K, etc...

Great post, Zivouhr. And a great point as well - why is it okay to rescan a film, clean it, and release it on Blu Ray as clear as a cloudless sky, but it is not okay to take a film, rescan and clean it, then covert it to 3D? Neither actually recut the film, or reorder scenes - both enhance the film in their own way.

Back on DOTD's 3d debut, "When there is no more room in hell, the dead will walk the earth". Quite possibly one of the BEST movie taglines of all time. That simple sentence just spews terror The more I read on this film, the more it looks like Rubinstein isn't going to drop the hammer right away so hopefully we're not in for too long of a wait.