Worthy Remake with Updated Flow, Effects and Twists
Added 11/3/2009
I am a huge fan of this genre of movies and have to say that this is one of the best ever. I've been enjoying "Dead" movies since the original "Dawn of the Dead" from George Romero in 1979 which stood completely alone in it's time and is still a great classic.
Having said that, here's what I really like about this wonderful remake:
- The updated setting, story and feel
- Updated special effects - superb!
- Faster flow that makes this a bit easier to watch than the original
- The new level of terror introduced by zombies that run full speed!
- Using the "Mall" motif again
- Celebrity target practice - fun!
- The baby - yikes!
- The acting and character development
- The armored bus
- The chainsaw scene
- Great action and stunts
- The completely screwed up ending - delightful!
All of these elements come together into a very satisfying experience for those who like this sort of thing.
0 out of 0 people found this helpful.
|
Dawn Of the Dead-I hate Remakes.
Added 11/1/2009
I didn't care much for the original and I certainly don't care for the remake, With more Gore to try to out-do the other.If your a fan perhaps you would appreciate, but I don't count Gore as Classic Horror.
0 out of 0 people found this helpful.
|
Dawn of the Dead... Isn't a good remake an oxymoron
Added 10/27/2009
Dawn of the Dead (2004): 10 out of 10: I sympathize with the fan boys that feel any remake of Dawn of the Dead is sacrilegious. You get an emotional attachment to films that scared you in your youth. (One on mine is Assault on Precinct 13 that was remade recently and I just know I will be disappointed with the remake. I am still scared of ice cream trucks as a result of seeing that film when I was 9)
Remakes themselves have a well deserved bad reputation. (Easiest movie trivia question: What is the best film remake? The Maltese Falcon of course. That Humphrey Bogart perennial was a remake of a 1931 film of the same name. I'm sure back in 1941 that there were a couple of people complaining that Bogart was no Ricardo Cortez and the ruined the story by taking out the affair and homosexual subplots. The first film after all was a pre-code affair.)
Dawn of the Dead is in reality a different movie than the original. This is no shot for shot Psycho remake nor is it the same movie with a glossier CGI coat of paint. It is a faster more intense zombie film. It is one of the best action horror films of the last ten years. The opening twenty minutes in simply one of the scariest action packed sequences I have ever seen. By the time our band of protagonists gets to the mall they are not the only one's catching their breath.
It becomes a pretty good sized group at the mall and you end up slogging through some slow bits as the zombies eat it down to a more manageable size. The acting is across the board good and the effects are suitably gory and plentiful. Director Zack Snyder wisely dumps much of Romero's sociological subplots and replaces them with a more timely commentary. (Instead of zombies as consumer motif we have shooting undead celebrities. And instead of an outwardly hostile motorcycle gang, we have a more subtle power struggle between the otherwise powerless.)
The updates honestly work, as a more literal remake would have simply fallen flat. Is Dawn of the Dead better than the original? I won't say. Is it one of the best films of 2004? Yes. Is it better than Romero's own sequel Day of the Dead? Good Lord yes.
0 out of 0 people found this helpful.
|
I HATE ZOMBIE MOVIES.....
Added 10/11/2009
I hate zombie movies, mostly because the thought of the unstoppable living dead who want to feed off your flesh and brains scares the S@!T! out of me.
I thought it was nicely down for a remake. The make-up was great, the special effects where good. It had a solid cast including Clint Eastwood's daughters first major role. They've been making Zombie flicks since the 60's, most of them stink, there like porn you can only go in one direction with it. This was not one of them, this was a good movie and it proved it at the box office.
I say it is definitely worth seeing and purchasing the uncut version. I did both and I hate zombie flicks, its just one of those films that when its on you have to watch.
My one and only complaint it the fact no one ever survives.
0 out of 0 people found this helpful.
|
Horrifying and INTENSE
Added 10/3/2009
"Dawn of the Dead" is the 2004 remake of the original 1978 classic horror film.
THE STORY: When dead people start coming back to life it seems like the end of the world. A group of people (led by Sarah Polley, Ving Rhames, Jack Weber and Michael Kelly) hold up in a shopping mall to survive while the dead increasingly congregate outside. What's going on? What can they do? How can they survive? And is there any hope?
Although the basic plot is the same as george Romero's orginal film the characters and storyline are completely different; hence, this is more of a re-envisioning rather than a true remake. Personally I prefer it this way. We already have the original so let's see a different take. No?
I just saw this film last night and it was so freakin' horrifying and INTENSE I couldn't sleep for two hours. This, for me, reveals the true effectiveness of a horror flick -- whether or not you can sleep afterwards. In this sense "Dawn" is a 5/5 Star film all the way.
What I liked about the story is that it takes the material seriously; there's no, goofy, campy, unrealistic vibe. What would it be like if dead people REALLY started coming back to life and seeking out living flesh to eat? This is the approach the filmmakers take here.
One reviewer complained that it was unrealistic that the characters on occasion would laugh, smile and joke around during such a dire, hopeless situation. But this isn't unbelievable at all. It's a natural defensive mechanism of the human psyche to try to have fun, joke and make the most out of a bad situation. I've seen it numerous times in my life and the lives of others over the years (car accident, hospitalization, destruction of property, serious illness, death, etc.). Besides, the film more than adequately portrays the downside of human reaction -- depression, violence, grief, madness, etc.
The only negative I can cite is the speeding-up effect used in the Third Act. It worked at times but too often it came across as awkward or amateurish and just served to confuse the viewing experience.
Some people didn't like the zombie birth scene but I found it well-done and effective.
The original was filmed at the Monroeville Mall near Pittsburgh, PA, while this remake was shot at the (now demolished) Thornhill Square Mall in Ontario, although the story takes place in Milwaukee.
The threatrical version runs 101 minutes (the version I saw) and the Director's Cut 110 minutes.
BOTTOM LINE: If you're in the mood for a truly intense, horrifying flick you can't go wrong with this 2004 version of "Dawn of the Dead."
0 out of 0 people found this helpful.
|
Worthy Remake with Updated Flow, Effects and Twists
Added 11/3/2009
I am a huge fan of this genre of movies and have to say that this is one of the best ever. I've been enjoying "Dead" movies since the original "Dawn of the Dead" from George Romero in 1979 which stood completely alone in it's time and is still a great classic.
Having said that, here's what I really like about this wonderful remake:
- The updated setting, story and feel
- Updated special effects - superb!
- Faster flow that makes this a bit easier to watch than the original
- The new level of terror introduced by zombies that run full speed!
- Using the "Mall" motif again
- Celebrity target practice - fun!
- The baby - yikes!
- The acting and character development
- The armored bus
- The chainsaw scene
- Great action and stunts
- The completely screwed up ending - delightful!
All of these elements come together into a very satisfying experience for those who like this sort of thing.
0 out of 0 people found this helpful.
|
Dawn Of the Dead-I hate Remakes.
Added 11/1/2009
I didn't care much for the original and I certainly don't care for the remake, With more Gore to try to out-do the other.If your a fan perhaps you would appreciate, but I don't count Gore as Classic Horror.
0 out of 0 people found this helpful.
|
Dawn of the Dead... Isn't a good remake an oxymoron
Added 10/27/2009
Dawn of the Dead (2004): 10 out of 10: I sympathize with the fan boys that feel any remake of Dawn of the Dead is sacrilegious. You get an emotional attachment to films that scared you in your youth. (One on mine is Assault on Precinct 13 that was remade recently and I just know I will be disappointed with the remake. I am still scared of ice cream trucks as a result of seeing that film when I was 9)
Remakes themselves have a well deserved bad reputation. (Easiest movie trivia question: What is the best film remake? The Maltese Falcon of course. That Humphrey Bogart perennial was a remake of a 1931 film of the same name. I'm sure back in 1941 that there were a couple of people complaining that Bogart was no Ricardo Cortez and the ruined the story by taking out the affair and homosexual subplots. The first film after all was a pre-code affair.)
Dawn of the Dead is in reality a different movie than the original. This is no shot for shot Psycho remake nor is it the same movie with a glossier CGI coat of paint. It is a faster more intense zombie film. It is one of the best action horror films of the last ten years. The opening twenty minutes in simply one of the scariest action packed sequences I have ever seen. By the time our band of protagonists gets to the mall they are not the only one's catching their breath.
It becomes a pretty good sized group at the mall and you end up slogging through some slow bits as the zombies eat it down to a more manageable size. The acting is across the board good and the effects are suitably gory and plentiful. Director Zack Snyder wisely dumps much of Romero's sociological subplots and replaces them with a more timely commentary. (Instead of zombies as consumer motif we have shooting undead celebrities. And instead of an outwardly hostile motorcycle gang, we have a more subtle power struggle between the otherwise powerless.)
The updates honestly work, as a more literal remake would have simply fallen flat. Is Dawn of the Dead better than the original? I won't say. Is it one of the best films of 2004? Yes. Is it better than Romero's own sequel Day of the Dead? Good Lord yes.
0 out of 0 people found this helpful.
|
