Dawn of the Dead

When first word on a possible remake of the classic 1978 George Romero film Dawn of the Dead was mentioned, a lot of people shunned the idea and thought it ridiculous. When it was revealed that James Gunn (writer of the Scooby Doo films, as well as Troma's Tromeo and Juliet) was doing the script, it didn't help matters either. Once the first trailer appeared online, people's minds were changed drastically, because it was actually beginning to look like a pretty decent zombie flick. I went in watching this with an open mind, because I personally liked the remake of Night of the Living Dead better than the original, so I thought this couldn't be all that bad either. I came out of the theater very satisfied in terms of entertainment (which is what I primarily based my rating for this movie on) but it is lacking in other ways -- story, character development, etc..

Aside from the fact that a group of survivors bunker up in the local mall, the story is entirely different, which in turns basically makes this a movie on its own simply with the title of the 1978 film. They replaced the SWAT team members from the first film with mall security and a tough police officer played by Ving Rhames. It does have a larger amount of characters than the original, but it doesn't really mean it's a good thing, since it was very lacking in character development, so when someone would die or turn into a zombie, I felt the audience was left emotionless. Then again, I'm sure how the audience felt for the characters was the last thing they were going for here. Nope, the people behind this flick just went out to give us a solid, action-oriented zombie flick, and I have to say that they succeeded.

Although there are some sequences in the original that I wished were in this, like the cool scene where Tom Savini's character as the leader of a biker gang breaks into the mall and causes all sorts of chaos and mayhem, and of course the cool zombie debate that was broadcasted on TV in the beginning of the original. I also thought they could have extended the scenes that involved the people going around the mall and having fun with all the free stuff, much like they did in the original. Instead, in this film there are a bunch of short scenes that involved it, and then fast-forwards by showinh scene after scene of time going by and the survivors coping with the situation and learning to live in their environment. At this point we also see something we rarely ever see, and that's a baby zombie. Sadly, it was nothing we didn't already suspect since the trailer showed a pregnant woman with something bulging out of the belly, as if something inside were trying to escape.

The original movie focused more on human emotion, while this one skips most of that and centers on the action and how to survive and it succeeds in being entertaining and a solid zombie flick. I also liked how it had a lot of sweet-lookin', fast-as-hell zombies that reminded me those smart zombies from Return of the Living Dead (another fav. of mine). Some people wonder why the zombies are so fast in this movie -- well simply put, once the infected die, they immediately resurrect and become one of the undead, and since they haven't been dead long, their bodies are still pretty fresh, thus giving them the ability to move fast.

The movie doesn't shy away from the gore. Nope, we get some good bites and a nice head-exploding here and there, and a cool stab through the head. You'd have to expect this kind of stuff in a zombie film. You can also catch a few cameos from people from the original, like Scott Reiniger, who played Roger as a General; Ken Foree, who played Peter, as a priest who spills the lines "When there's no more room in Hell, the Dead will walk the Earth"; and Tom Savini, who did the effects and played the leader of the biker gang, as a county sheriff, who seems to know everything about the zombies. Sadly you only get to see them all on television broadcasts.

After I saw this movie I kept debating from giving it a 7 or an 8-rating, and in the end I thought I'd give it an 8, since I really enjoyed it. Sure it's not much for emotion or story, but it sure is a fun ride if you're a big zombie fan like myself. The original Romero film still kicks this remake in the balls, but it holds its own in terms of a zombie flick and that's all that really matters. Theres been some small talk on a sequel to this (which would be Day of the Dead), but who knows if it would be a direct sequel to this or and a remake of Day. Either way, it wouldn't surprise me if Day go remade, and now hopefully this will help spark more interest towards the movement of Romero's last and final installment in the Dead series -- Land of the Dead. Be sure to watch the credits for this movie through to the end, because clips will be shown about what happens with the survivors.

OVERALL

In terms of a remake, the original is still better, but in terms of a movie on its own, it holds up and delivers. It's a solid zombie flick and that's all that it is. It's not much for emotion or story, like the original, but it's big on entertainment and zombie-action. It really depends what you're looking for, but I was looking for a fun zombie-ride and that's what I got, and I was pleased.

Comments Page 1 of 1:

CLICK HERE TO COMMENT

Your Name:


Email Address:


Image verification:



Message:

  (Press Once)

If adding spoilers be considerate to others and put a spoiler warning.
You will be deleted & banned if you SPAM or make obscene comments.

Tom

Posted 176 days ago

This is not only one of the best horror remakes of all time, in fact second only to John Carpenter's The Thing, but it is one of the best horror films of the last 10 years. Of course to call this movie a remake may be too general of a label, it is (as many have said already) just a fantastic stand alone effort. I saw this film in theaters the day it came out, and when I walked out.... I felt exhilerated and completely and utterly content. Director Zack Snyder broke into the business with this movie, and in my opinion it is still his best, he has since gone on to do 300 and the upcoming Watchmen. Romero's original is one of the best horror films ever made, there is no question about that, I grew up with it, but did it entertain me as much as this explosive remake? no it didn't. A solid cast and a bigger then average budget did wonders for this movie, it is fast, bloody, scary, politically incorrect, funny and incredibly awesome.

PAZ

Posted 255 days ago

I Agree, As A Stand Alone Film It Did Awesome. As A Romero Remake, It Lacked Something. Yeah, I Did Get A Kick At The Shoot The Celebrity Zombie Look-A-Like Scene and The Zombie Gore, But I Missed The Elements Of Only Four In the Mall and Killing A bunch Of Zombies. Still One Of The Better Zombie Movies In recent Memory, But A Remake It Was Not For It Lacked The GEORGE ROMERO FEEL.

john

Posted 315 days ago

Well this movie is great on its own, it did lose the best parts of the original, growing up after seeing the first one, there were many nights when l dreamt i was in a mall with 3 friends fighting zombies, and reaping all the free stuff, but l must say as a stand alone, its a damn good movie. It just cant be compared to the original they are two seperate entities

jon

Posted 403 days ago

i give this movie a 10 maybe the first one was concidered good when it first came out but compared to todays standards its pretty awful the acting sucks and most of the movie is pretty goofy not even one scare all the way through the remake kicks its ass in every way!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

horror movie fan

Posted 405 days ago

This is a rare case where you actual see a good remake.

Kenneth Terror

Posted 468 days ago

This is probably the best remake I’ve seen - I don’t mind running zombies, and I loved Tom Savini’s and Ken Foree’s cameos.
And shooting zombies because they’re bored? That was pretty funny.

loganman

Posted 480 days ago

yeah this movie was good a little more exicting then the original it had a good line up of charcters and a creative sense when they make those reinforced buses

mike best

Posted 533 days ago

one of my favorites if u like zombies this is a good place start the original is a classic though

The "Dude"

Posted 604 days ago

I hate remakes but, this was pure fun. I still like the mall better in the original. In this one we didn't get to explore it like the original. Still hardcore fan should'nt be disappointed.

UK VOICE OF HORROR

Posted 645 days ago

now i didnt compare this one to the original as the original can never be beaten. what we do have is a good solid zombie movie ,that went in a different direction than the original (apart from been based in a shopping centre for a while of course) it was not a carbon copy of the original as some remakes tend to do .so i was quite surprised how good this was. score 8 / 10

Sean

Posted 723 days ago

I really liked this remake. I was extremly skeptical when seeing it because the original is the greatest zombie film ever made. This was a fantastic film and did keep some of the same material from the original but replaced the satire from George Romeros with just funny humor and that kindof ruined it. Also, I'am not a large fan of zombies running for a few reasons. There dead so how can they run. Thats why I dont like the fact that to kill them you have to shoot them in the head. If there dead how are there brians still working and how would they know to run and how could they run if there rotting away. Other than that it was a very fun and entertianing zombie film. I'd recommend the original verson over this one tho.

blood guts what ever makes me happy

Posted 753 days ago

Zombies did look awesome,but i didn't like the zombies runing fast as the truck,they should of kept the zombies the way they were.....but i really liked this movie Tarintino did a great *** ing job.

J Roark

Posted 756 days ago

very good with awesome looking zombies and cool head explosions. I didn't like the fact the zombies were fast and the character were not that special like in the original.

<1>