Dawn of the Dead | | Cast : | Mekhi Phifer, Sarah Polley, Ving Rhames, Jake Weber | | Director : | | | Studio : | Mca Home Video | | Format : | AC-3, Color, Director's Cut, Dolby, Dubbed, Subtitled, Widescreen, NTSC | | Released Date : | March 19, 2004 | | DVD Released Date : | October 26, 2004 | | Language : | Spanish (Dubbed), English (Original Language), French (Original Language), French (Subtitled), Spanish (Subtitled) | | Audience Rating : | Unrated | | | BUY THIS DVD FROM AMAZON |
Customer Reviews
| Rating |  | | Date | December 01, 2005 | | Summary | What a shock . . . | Content
 | I rarely write reviews for anything -- but I thought I'd let any other fans of this genre know that, if you're on the fence about checking this out, it was much, much, much better than I expected, and completely eclipses "28 Days Later" in terms of approach and intensity.
As many have pointed out, the original "Dawn of the Dead" is often advertised as an intense horror flick, but is really more of a dark comedy -- a bit goofy and dated, these days. Romero's next flick, "Day of the Dead," I thought was better & more involving, as far as the genre goes. But I gave up on seeing this "DotD" remake after "28 Days" was such rubbish. Where to begin? In this new "Dawn of the Dead," yes, the zombies are sprinters, just like in "28 Days" -- which is a necessary upgrade from the staggerers, in keeping the protagonists trapped. But unlike "28 Days," which spoils any tension by having lots of speed metal guitar and post-produced faux-camera-shake, "DotD" has very convincing "mob of zombies" choreography (sorry, don't know quite how else to put it) which holds up on its own without excessive post-production tricks. Also, in "28 Days," the script was a complete wash-out -- whenever the writer knew that a scene would not result in a zombie attack, the characters would somehow magically know this as well, and would get off a bunch of cheery one-liners -- example: one of the most frightening places in a zombie-plagued city would be, of course, any kind of large store, with lots of long aisles and restricted vision and all that. In "28 Days," since the writer did not plan a zombie attack in the market, he has the characters happily shopping & pushing their little shopping carts around, cracking screenwriter-showing-off jokes at each other, bright as a summer's day -- not even having checked the market out first with guns drawn -- you know, the obvious "this whole city is filled with zombies, maybe we should be careful going into this deserted market". Nope. The market is magically safe, because the script knows that it is going to be safe. This is so wrong-headed a dramatic choice, words can hardly convey. But here in "DotD," every bit of the city (& the mall in particular) is a complete threat until the characters fully investigate, so you keep the tension nice & simmering. Plus, add to that the really fantastic casting, with actors who are more concerned with conveying the experience of their fictional situation & not simply trying to get themselves noticed, and a script that strives for twists & tension, not sassy one-liners & fakey speeches & other TV-type infections, and a director who keeps his actors at a high-quality low boil, but who can also really flip the visual style switch when necessary (check out the creative choices made during the end credits -- fascinating) . . . and lo and behold, as much as I expected this flick to be another member of the whole "28 Days" crowd of bumbling Nike-commercial-meets-gore attempts, I was utterly stunned by how compelling this flick was. This is a zombie flick given not only the royal treatment of an apparently decently-sized budget (just guessing here, but it looks rather well-funded), but also guided by a writer, director and actors who are committed to the flavor of, "What if this really happened?" Trust me -- it isn't drenched with the usual "let's play to the MTV demographic" crap, and how many horror flicks nowadays can you say that about? For folks who dig this genre played straight, this is worth a purchase . . .
|
| Rating | | | Date | December 01, 2005 | | Summary | Leave classic films alone................. | Content
| Wow, zombies now wear Nikes and have Carl Lewis speed, I think not. They are dead, not track stars. I'm alive and can't move that fast. Effects are fantastic, but this film sucks. The original had more social satire, and a better story. This is just a stupid gorefest for punks that don't even know it is a remake. Gee lets remake The Godfather with Mexicans and bad hair dos. Same crap here. Rather have my unit choped off by a machete then watch this crap. |
| Rating | | | Date | November 12, 2005 | | Summary | Spooky ooky | Content
| Those original Romero zombies --slow, relentless, and visibly hungry-- are already one of the scariest things I hope to ever see. So when I heard that the zombies can RUN in the new one, I thought, That'll just give me a heart attack.
The opening sequences (including the credits) are one scary bit of film, and the rest of the movie lives up to that tone throughout. This is a shocker from start to finish, virtually guaranteed to freak you out.
Romero's original "Dawn of the Dead" was something special: simultaneously a great horror film, a great black comedy (on par with "Doctor Strangelove") and a truly mean piece of black-hearted Swiftian social satire. In short, it's a bona-fide work of art, with a lot more 'Artistic' merit than any number of costumey, old-timey Merchant-Ivory films. The new film can't possibly live up to this tall order, so wisely, they don't even try -- instead they just make a hard-core, lock-and-load, scary scary movie. Which is hard enough to do. It's not profound, but it's pretty compelling.
The one thing that mars the film is the truly tasteless and blameworthy sub-plot about a pregnancy. The actors should have simply refused to participate in this segment. Some things just shouldn't be put on film, ever, and this movie has one of them. Find where your fast-forward button is, and USE it. It's really too bad someone didn't have the brains and the courage to refuse this sequence.
|
| Rating | | | Date | November 11, 2005 | | Summary | Enjoy The Sunrise | Content
| When I heard that Dawn Of The Dead was gonna be remade, I wasn't happy at first. But, when I saw it the first day it came out, it was an awesome remake.
Alot of people say that this remake is too different than the first Dawn Of The Dead film. It's a remake, you're suppose to make a change and still keep the feeling of the original. The Thing remake is way different from The Thing From Another World. And The Fly remake is also way different from The Fly {1958}.
Then, some people talk about the zombies running in this film, saying that was too crazy. Zombies aren't real in the first place, so what if they ran. Besides, this isn't the first film with running zombies, remember Nightmare City and The Return Of The Living Dead? They ran in those films.
The characters in this film are cool, especially Kenneth {Rhames}, Michael {Weber} and CJ {Kelly}. Also, it has one of the best last fight scenes of all time. For one, the scene when CJ throws the propane gas tank and one of the zombies catch it, he grabs his shotgun and shoots the propane gas tank. After that, a huge explosion comes and knocks down 1000 zombies sso they can pass through them.
What makes a film great is a great ending, and the ending of this film is disturbing and cool.
One of the best remakes of all time and fans of Dawn Of The Dead should see this ultra-cool remake of Romero's classic zombie masterpiece.
|
| Rating | | | Date | November 07, 2005 | | Summary | A Good start for people who just started with Zombie Films | Content
| Really,this is a character oriented Zombie Film,like Romero's Day of the Dead.There may not be enough zombie screen time overall,but they still suffice enough to make a successful film.The Original Dawn was much better than this "remake".This remake is more like a retelling of sorts.They should've left the Dawn title out of it and create their own zombie picture in the same way.The characters who come in the middle were unnecessary,making the movie pace a lot slower than it was originally.I enjoyed Land of the Dead better than this.In the 110 minutes of the film,the zombies only appear for about four sequences in great numbers,and with no gore and just splashing blood,it doesn't satisfy the hardcore gore fan at all.See Land of the Dead more than this movie,and the original is even more nice.
ANd to the person who posted below me,Everyone has their interests.Don;t slam on other people's likes.Its a movie. |
|
