I wouldn't consider Diary to be part of the continuity of the first three (and probably fourth) Dead movies. I can't quote him, but I can recall Romero saying as much himself.

Diary isn't exactly a good movie by any means, but it is an interesting mess with some scenes and ideas that should have been expanded (the Amish deaf guy, the urban fortress). Its the kind of messy film that directors with talent make from time to time.

At comic con last year he said they were in the same continuity. He's just going back to the beginning of the outbreak, and the Dead movies always seem to be set "now," even when you go back to the beginning.

Unfortunately, Romero has been making quite a few of these messy films lately. Let's be honest here - Day of the Dead was his last quality film.

Fixed.

I'll admit that the acting and dialog in Day were pretty awful, but the gore effects were spectacular for that time period. Who could forget the dismemberment of Capt. Rhodes?

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/PwvBhpTeSdU&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/PwvBhpTeSdU&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

In general, I really feel that George Romero is an extremely overrated director lionized by fawning fanboys. If you take a look at his overall body of work, it's not a very compelling canon, though he did direct two certifiable classics, Night of the Living Dead and Martin. People who praise Dawn as some brilliantly insightful satire of materialism are overdoing it a bit. Just because you film the movie in a mall and show a few sequences of zombies mindlessly pawing shopping goods does not mean you are engaging in a meaningful critique of capitalist culture.

My problem with Day is that it's 80 minutes of boring acting and drama followed by 25 minutes of sheer entertainment. The ultimate payoff is great, but to watch the entire film is a chore. Romero lays too heavy into the social commentary, which usually I don't have a problem with, but it just makes the first two acts dry.

Dawn of the Dead is a bookmark example of how you make what should be a basic zombie film transcend the "genre" limits. It works extremely effectively at being a horror flick, an action film, and a biting social satire. Not only is it batshit crazy, but it's insanely smart and ahead of it's time.

NIGHT: Nothing wrong with it.
DAWN: Nothing wrong with it.
DAY: Ending left me puzzled but great makeup fx.
LAND: Cheap makeup fx and adds nothing new to series.
DAIRY: Improved makeup and fx, lousy actors, makes 2008 events and 1968 events like everything is happening new. Instead of going to the solution of the zombie problem after this 5th movie. We are at stillwhat's happening in the 1st movie even though it's 40 years later or whatever.

From Bloody-Disgusting:

I guess Romero wants to tie Lucas for having 3 suck movies in a classic series.

What was puzzling about Day? The abrupt ending?

As for Land, it added the idea of what would happen post zombie uprising when society re-establishes, it's fairly pessimistic in that it that it says things will return to what they always were. And the practical FX are the best of the series, nothing cheap about them.

And I really don't think the acting is better or worse in any of them films as a whole (although I think Day has the best performances). Tom and Judy in Night are just as poorly acted as anyone in Diary. Romero is pretty consistent in having poor performances in every film.

I've been atleast satisfied with any of Romero's zombie films, so I look forward to what ever he does next.

I don't know. This is hard to explain but I thought the acting of Tom and Judy in Night fit with the 60's, and it also seemed amateur in a good way that worked with the film.

Thanks for the news, NoirFan. They've updated a little since you posted it:

The links from the update:

"quasi-sequel"

"underwater zombies"

"an island"

I thought Diary sucked, but Romero's built up enough goodwill that I'll check out any new zombie movie from him.

I'm glad it won't be a direct sequel to Diary... Romero, underwater zombies, island? How could I not watch this? Although, unless the underwater zombie fights a shark I don't see how it'll ever top Zombi 2.

I agree in giving the father of my favorite genre every chance.

Zombi vs. shark still blows me away after seeing it 20 times.

Re: Romero returns to 'Dead' zone - "Diary of the Dead"
 

Let me preface my opinion of this movie by first saying that I have never cared much for any of Romero's zombie movies (seen all of them except Day). But I was really in the mood to watch a zombie flick last night so I rented (first time I have rented a movie in about 5+ years) Diary of the Dead and I have to say I thoroughly enjoyed it.
The only thing that bothered me was a poorly written scene in the first half of the movie. They were driving along in the RV when they come across an overturned police cruiser in the other lane and they are all like "OMGZ we'll never get around that, we have to go back to the dorms", then zombie cop shambles out from the wreck and they run him over then proceed to drive around the cop car and continue on their merry way. Uh, what exactly was it that was keeping you from being able to get around it???

Re: Romero returns to 'Dead' zone - "Diary of the Dead"
 

I just saw this a couple nights ago on Cinemax and was actually impressed by the zombies. For the most part they were "believable", though the story in general was a little weak plus they had a magical pistol that never ran out of bullets (I counted 12 or 13 shots if I remember right) - I kept on waiting for it to go "click" but it never did.

Anyway, don't buy this movie but if you see it on a movie channel or for a $1 (or less) DVD rental, sure, I'd recommend it. Lots of blood, OK story, kind of.

Best line: "See! I told you that zombies don't move fast!"

Yep, that irritated me too. Imagine a two-lane highway with shoulders, and a wreck that crosses the center line by a couple of feet. Can't get around it? A Semi-trailor could have easily gotten around that wreck.