I'm not trying to be a hero! I'M FIGHTING THE DRAGON!!

Dawn of the Dead (2004)

SPOILER ALERT !!

Hi, everyone. “Moriarty” here with some Rumblings From The Lab…

Next up, we’ve got our friend from Seattle, the one and only Vern…

Boys,

A few months ago I would not think I would be saying this. But I just saw the DAWN OF THE DEAD remake, and I did not want to perpetrate violent acts against anybody afterwards. Not the Scooby Doo guy, not the commercial director guy, not anybody. If the Scooby Doo dude would’ve been standing right there when I came out, and there was a clear opening to punch the guy hard in the balls, or toss him through a windshield like Steven Seagal did to that pimp in the opening scene of OUT FOR JUSTICE, I still wouldn’t have done it. I would’ve been like, “It’s cool man, it’s cool.”

That’s high praise. I would not punch the writer of this movie in the balls. Put that on the poster, fuckers.

Dawn of the DeadTo give the folks at home an idea where I’m coming from, I could not have given the same offer of peace and understanding to Michael Bay or whatsisdick, the kraut guy from the C+C Music Factory videos, if they had been standing outside of the theater after I saw their remake of TEXAS CHAIN SAW MASSACRE. You can read my review on this very web sight, I mean I was fucking pissed. I am not one of these forgiving “just go in with an open mind, don’t hold it to high expectations, just assume it will suck, it’s okay that it is worthless garbage, just have fun!” guys. I fucking despised that moronic pile of filth. That was a movie clearly made by people who had no idea what is good about the original. NO idea. There would’ve been some SERIOUS ball punching after that screening if the opportunity had presented itself. I’m not a guy to roll over.

You see, I come from what the kids call “the old school.” I definitely got a purist side to me. And I still don’t think it’s fucking funny that these jokers somehow got a hold of my list of favorite movies and started remaking them all. Just to fuck with me. “You see this Vern, this is the respect we have for your favorite movie. We’re giving it to the guy who did fucking Scooby Doo. We got the guy who wrote Garfield on deck to remake Once Upon a Time in the West. Ha ha ha, sucker. Have a good life.”

But you know what, their little game backfired because the movie actually turned out pretty good. It’s not the masterpiece that the original is. It’s not as smart or as scary. But it’s not some Brendan Fraser Mummy type shit. It’s not some we-still-haven’t-gotten-over-SCREAM shit either. It’s more like some let’s tell a different story about some guys in a mall during a zombie holocaust type shit. I thought it was better than 28 DAYS LATER, which was decent but definitely overrated. And don’t worry it’s not even worth putting in the same sentence with. RESIDENT EVIL or HOUSE OF THE DEAD. (See, I made that two separate sentences.) This is a real zombie movie.

But you gotta do a zombie movie right. And there are two big time changes in the premise for this one that had me worried. The movie starts out before the zombies show up, for one example. In other words, the beginning of NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD. One thing I love about the real DAWN OF THE DEAD is there is no point where things are going well in the world. When it starts, the world is already overrun by zombies, people are panicking, even the sets of TV shows are out of control. When it ends, things aren’t any better. In this one, they give you a couple minutes to breathe first. And when the shit hits, everybody is just beginning to understand what’s going on. Instead of being at the point where they’ve tried to hold on to society for a few weeks, but have given up hope and decided to run away crying like babies. The way these guys do it works surprisingly well though, and when the title went on the screen I felt like these guys had earned the cheering that it received. Good job so far boys.

The other change that is more important, is what the fuck is up with these running zombies? RETURN OF THE LIVING DEAD had fast moving zombies, and that was cool because you’d never seen it before. It was a way to distinguish it from Mr. Romero’s untoppable masterpieces. But that should’ve been that. People gotta stop doing this shit, because everybody knows that real zombies are slow and lumbering. They don’t run up fences and jump off them! They don’t hang from pipes! That’s fucking bullshit, man! No zombie hangs from pipes! If 28 DAYS LATER jumped off a bridge, does that mean you’d jump off a bridge? Come on Scooby Doo guy, you know better than that.

Seriously, the fast moving zombies changes the whole premise because in the real DAWN OF THE DEAD, the zombies aren’t much of a physical threat. That’s not the point. In fact, our boys are able to run around the mall and shoot these things for fun. They aren’t afraid to go out into the zombies. They do it all the time. But the zombies are scary because no matter how many you kill, there will always be more. And that is a problem, in my opinion. And in the opinion of that guy on the TV in the beginning who says they should nuke the city.

So anyway once again a group of survivors holes up in a mall, barricading themselves away from the zombies. The two main characters are Sarah Polley and Ving Rhames, and these are two reasons why the movie works. Mr. Rhames especially adds alot of credibility to this movie. He looks like a complete badass, and he’s good at giving tough guy speeches. He’s a real actor but he’s paid his dues too, I mean he was in PEOPLE UNDER THE STAIRS. You believe that he would be able to take on even these silly jumping and running super zombies, and that he would be an honorable guy who you’d want to have on your team (the non-zombie team) anyway. And Ms. Polley is a good actress who can pull off the moral center role, the one that tries to take care of everybody because she’s a nurse. Also Mekhi Phifer is good in it but that’s almost not even worth mentioning because it goes without saying, if it’s a movie, there’s a good chance Mekhi Phifer will be in it and do a good job. This guy will do absolutely anything. I mean, HONEY? BRIAN’S SONG? CARMEN: A HIPHOPERA? I really think him and Samuel L. Jackson just have web sights where you pay them a certain amount by credit card or PayPal and then they automatically have to be in your movie. How else would Jackson end up in that Ashley Judd movie? Or BASIC? Or any of those I-can’t-believe-Moriarty-actually-owns-that-on-DVD type movies? Anyway, it’s a good cast.

And it’s a pretty good script too, believe it or not. There are some smart new additions to the story. I especially liked the communication between the mall people and this guy Andy who’s holed up in a nearby gun store. I think Harry even gave this away on here a long time ago, but it still worked for me. They start to bond with this guy by holding up signs for him, and even start to play games with him. This may be the best part of the movie because it has that spirit of the real DAWN OF THE DEAD, that idea that even in the most horrible circumstances us humans can figure out some way to get by and to have a sense of humor about it. There are some smartass lines in this movie, mostly coming from a token asshole character, but fortunately there’s other laughs that are more like the real movie, where it’s funny because you know in the same situation you might do the same thing. It’s funny the same way real life is, not the way a sitcom supposedly is.

The remake goes in alot of directions that the real movie didn’t. They got a pregnant woman in both, and they go for more of a cheap thrill with this one. But not as bad as you might think. There are other things that come up that make you worry. Like at one point there is a dog and you have no choice but to think oh shit, they’re gonna go with a zombie dog. But don’t worry, they take the high road – No Zombie Dog Avenue. Then the last section of the movie they attempt an escape from the mall and hopefully this doesn’t fuck up Mr. Romero’s plans for his next movie. Otherwise I will change my mind about these filmatists.

There are kind of too many characters in here. Some of them you don’t really know who they are and some of them seem to disappear for too long. And one of them goes through a transformation from selfish asshole to self-sacrificing hero, apparently for no reason. But oh well. I liked this idea of alot of people being in the mall. The government’s plans have failed but here these people are setting up their own safe zone.

There’s really not as much subtext as in the real movie. Definitely none of the satire against consumerism. There are a couple of shots of the flag that made me wonder if they were trying to draw some parallels to 9-11. Like we’re gonna pull up our bootstraps and take care of this zombie problem, and put a boot up your ass in the name of the U S of A or something like that. But I don’t know. Obviously not every zombie movie has to be political, but I always liked how each of Mr. Romero’s dead pictures was a story about its time. The racial politics in NIGHT, the consumerism in DAWN, the military themes in DAY. We sure live in some interesting times now so it would be nice to see a dead movie about today. Maybe this is the DAWN OF THE DEAD for our time then – the one that is either too afraid or too stupid to say anything, even though there’s so much to say. Oh well, maybe Romero will get to make his zombie movie for the 2000s.

The style of the movie obviously is more modern, and that can be good and bad. They use the computers for some good little bits where they illustrate the mayhem going on in the distance – overhead shots of car crashes, huge crowds of zombies, burning buildings, explosions, etc. I love the feeling these things give that a constant stream of shit is flying directly into the fan here, and on the next block, and on the block after that, and all the way into downtown. But I do have to say that alot of this stuff looks really phoney, like glorified Grand Theft Auto. You feel a little distanced because it really doesn’t seem real. Cool, but not real.

Most of it is not too MTVed or Michael Bayed up, but I wish they hadn’t gone with the Private Ryan shaky cam for the climax. And the TV stuff didn’t have to have the shit digitized out of it. I woulda liked more TV coverage. And by the way SOMEBODY coulda cheered for Ken Foree’s cameo. I mean come on kids.

I guess some people will be wondering how violent the movie is. After all the real movie was released unrated and here we have an R-rated studio movie in post-Janet’s Boob America. Well, it was possible for this hyped up screening audience to cheer every time there was a graphic zombie head shot. Which was alot of times, but if you think about it you just couldn’t do that in the real movie, because you’d be clapping way too much. Your hands would get sore. Still, this one is alot more violent than most horror movies these days. Plenty of impaling, too. However it could definitely use some intestines and brain eating. Those are two items sorely missing.

I think my biggest criticism would have to be in the zombie department. Which is a pretty big department. I definitely think they coulda done better on these zombies. In the Romero movies, I don’t ever think that these are guys having fun acting like zombies – they’re just zombies. You don’t see guys who don’t have the walk down, or who look like they’re thinking about something. They teach their zombie actors well. They know their zombie shit. I mean think about Bub in DAY OF THE DEAD! These zombies can ACT. In this one though, alot of times I would see these guys and just think yeah, that guy has makeup on, like a zombie. I swear to god there was one crowd shot where a guy right in the middle near the top was doing a zombie saunter, like he was supposed to be a gay stereotype zombie, or a zombie on ecstasy or something. They need better zombie classes for these actors.

It is also worth pointing out that alot of the things that make the real DAWN OF THE DEAD so great are not repeated in this movie. I mentioned before there’s not any scenes where the guys run around and shoot the zombies (or run over them) just for fun. More surprisingly, they don’t take much advantage of the mall. There is one little montage but these people aren’t too imaginative about what to do. One of the great things about the real movie is that it acts out every good materialist’s dream of spending the night in a mall and having all those consumer items at your disposal. You see them running all over the place stocking up on TVs, wearing fur coats, pretending to rob the bank, playing on the escalator, knocking a zombie into the fountain, shooting mannequins on the ice skating rink… it’s alot of fun. And they don’t really do that in this one.

But you know what, this time, I actually think that’s a good thing. Because I know there are still gonna be some stupid kids who will see the real thing and say “Oh, the new one is better.” And they’ll be wrong. But it’s cool that they left alot of the best ideas untouched, so the kids can enjoy them for the first time when their parents sit their punk asses down and make them watch Romero’s movie. With the CHAIN SAW remake, I couldn’t fucking believe they left out the dinner scene, and then didn’t give you anything worthwhile in its place. For this one, they don’t come up with something BETTER than shooting mannequins in the ice skating rink, but they come up with plenty of good things for us to enjoy watching. It’s a good time at the movies, it really is.

No DAWN fanatic is gonna like this one better than the original. Unless they’re a moron. But you can enjoy it in the way some of us enjoy the remake of NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD. It’s not as good but it’s an entertaining alternate take on the same idea. This one is a much less faithful remake with very few scenes that come directly from the real movie(although it has a couple little parts that actually come from NIGHT). I guess that’s part of why it works. For CHAIN SAW they have these characters that they have to recreate. And obviously these jokers who direct JC Penney commercials don’t know enough about characters to make somebody as good as Leatherface, the Cook or the Hitchhiker, or for that matter Chop Top. R. Lee Ermey is good, but he’s no replacement for any of those guys. With DAWN you don’t have the same problem, because as much as I love Peter and the rest of them, it’s really the idea of the movie that makes it so great. The situation of the zombies and the mall and what not. So remaking it isn’t quite as suicidal.

So there you go. When there’s no more room in hell, the assholes will remake perfect movies. And very occasionally, I will let them get away with it. These assholes have a free pass. I’m letting them off. It’s cool man, it’s cool. Go with God.

And if this screening is any indication, this remake’s gonna be a monster fuckin hit. I got there an hour early and the line was clear around the block. And then everybody cheered all through the movie, at the end, and after the credits. I actually didn’t hear anybody saying it was bad (and alot of people were a little TOO excited about it). Of course, it was a pretty rabid crowd. You should’ve seen these kids from the local top 40 station trying to ask trivia questions… about their station! There were 500 people yelling “What does this have to do with zombies?” and even “BRAINS!” (wrong movie, right food). I thought these intern kids were gonna run out the emergency exit and take off in the party van.

Anyway, we can hope this will pave the way for Mr. Romero’s return. If not, maybe they’ll remake DAY OF THE DEAD with less overacting and more everything else. I wanna play the clown zombie. But I don’t do running or jumping zombies so you might have to use a stunt double for that shit.

thanks zombies,

VERN

Originally posted at Ain’t-It-Cool-News: http://www.aintitcool.com/node/17213

View the archived Ain’t-It-Cool-News Talkback

  • March 18, 2004, 5:46 a.m. CST

    I’m sorry, but if the zombies run this movies sucks.

    by Cash Bailey

    It’s been said a thousand times but the threat of the Romero zombies isn’t their mobility or agility, but their sheer number. Sure you can walk right past one. But could you walk past 200. Fuck this movie.

  • March 18, 2004, 6:21 a.m. CST

    Zombies can run. Why must they all be slow?

    by stlfilmwire

    I like the running. Sorry.

    Why must they all be slow?

  • March 18, 2004, 6:31 a.m. CST

    Harry hated the TCM remake? I didn

    by Judge Doom

    I guess he got sick of those banners after all those months…

  • March 18, 2004, 6:33 a.m. CST

    the running zombies…

    by the Grobe

    …are really effective and scary. If you don’t go based on “running zombies” alone, you’re only cheating yourself out of a surprisingly great movie.

  • March 18, 2004, 6:53 a.m. CST

    I’m taking my old dear to see this tommorrow…

    by reni

    Ta…

  • March 18, 2004, 7:51 a.m. CST

    Somebody Go Ahead and Spoil The “After-Credits” Ending!

    by Karl Childers

    I don’t want to have to wait and see a lame-one like Cabin Fever’s!!!

  • March 18, 2004, 8:23 a.m. CST

    Its gonan rock the zombie cock

    by Fight-clubber

    Im glad ppl r starting 2 shut about how much there h8 fucking remakes and are just sittin back and takin in the film and actully liking it.

    I mean who cares if its called dawn of the dead i love it how theve paid homage to the best zombie film ever made, its gonan b a grt ride im lookin 4ward 2 seein some jumping zombie fuckers rippin some necks open.

    Im hopin this new wave of zombie film will give romeros deak rekoning the money it needs 2 be made.

  • March 18, 2004, 8:59 a.m. CST

    Paul Anderson is satan

    by TheNewDirector

    Hopefully this movie will be MUCH better than Resident Evil and all the other B.S. horror/zombie movies of the past couple of years, sounds decent, maybe romero will comeback and make another cult classic. anyways candyman is a great horror movie, get it

  • March 18, 2004, 11:14 a.m. CST

    Ending Credits Spoiler

    by trafficguy2000

    Here is what happens. They begin the jouney to the island. Along the way they find a video camera and begin to record their journey. Fights begin among the group. They come upon an abandonded canoe. Inside a cooler on the canoe they find a severed zombie head. They contiue to the island. They run out of food and gas. It looks pretty hopeless but then there is the island! YAY! Much celebrating as they pull up next to the dock, their boat now out of gas. As soon as they step off the dock they hear it. The zombie screams from within the interior of the jungle. Seconds later, hordes of zombies run at them full throttle! Panic and shooting begins. Low on ammo they try to get back to the boat. Too late, their are too many zombies, everyone dies. The end. (The entire segment is filmed from the POV of the camera so it is interesting.)

    I thought it was a pretty decent flick and I will see it again this weekend.

  • March 18, 2004, 1:39 p.m. CST

    “everybody knows real zombies are slow and lumbering”

    by durhay

    what if an intelligent, talking dragon became a zombie? Would it run fast?

  • March 18, 2004, 4:46 p.m. CST

    Great One *Spoiler Discussion Cont*

    by trafficguy2000

    I wish I was! I think the ending is an hommage to Fulci’s Zombie or Zombie 2 (cant remember which right now!) where the opposite happens. In Fulci’s movie they escape an island of zombies only to arrive in New York to find they have taken over there as well. IF you dont want it to end on a down note, leave the theater before the credits roll. Then they live happily ever after. I did think that it could be a good way to open up a remake of Day of the Dead using Romero’s orginal script. The zombies that attack the survivors from Dawn are the ones that are still on the loose from the military base on the island.

  • March 18, 2004, 5:12 p.m. CST

    sorry vern

    by ReDWasK

    sorry vern, i stopped reading your review when i realized that you had actually watched a Steven Seagal movie…

  • March 18, 2004, 5:24 p.m. CST

    I heard that in the sequel …

    by Glen Quagmire

    they take the brains out of the zombies and put them in the heads of OTHER zombies … to create a race of SUPER-ZOMBIES!!! True Story.

  • March 18, 2004, 5:33 p.m. CST

    My lifelessness without me.

    by Christopher3

    Sarah Polley to the rescue once again. Why is James Gunn still working after “Scooby Doo”?

  • March 18, 2004, 6:22 p.m. CST

    Zombie Dogs: Been there, done that BEFORE the ORIGINAL “Dawn”

    by amrcanpoet

    Why does everyone think that the zombie-dog idea belongs to the original “Dawn?” Richard Matheson wrote in a vampire-dog subplot in I Am Legend, before “Dawn.” The idea of horror plagues affecting animals was done before original “Dawn,” and therefor can be done in Dawn04 without “copying” it’s source.

  • March 18, 2004, 6:22 p.m. CST

    “If 28 Days Later jumped off a bridge would you”

    by manwiththedogs

    Good one. And the answer is obviously yes, they would.

  • March 18, 2004, 6:24 p.m. CST

    by TheDarkShape

    Let’s get to the real remake — let Romero do a back-to-back shoot with his original draft of Day of the Dead, and then Dead Reckoning. It’s a remake that would do the original justice.

  • March 18, 2004, 6:26 p.m. CST

    DOTD

    by SoonerSean

    I have plans to see the remake this weekend. I’m not expecting it to come close to the original, but I need to see a zombie flick damnit! I’m fine with the “running zombies”, but wish they’d stopped there. The idea of having zombies rapidly climbing fences that most “live” people would struggle to do is a bit much. It made sense in 28 Days because they weren’t really zombies, but homicidal maniacs created by an infectious disease. Zombies might be able to run, but leaping fences and shit – that’s going too far. They are DEAD afterall (of course it takes an honest leap of faith and suspension of disbelief with the premise of zombies anyway – let alone why they all have eyes and tongues and other soft tissue that should have long since rotted away – so complaing that they run is a bit silly since we are talking about a silly premise to begin-with). Anyhow… I will say that it’s disappointing that the characterization is lacking. The writer is quoted in Fangoria in regards to really wanting to make a strong character movie and to see how people react in such a horrific situation. Too bad he didn’t get that on paper or that the director couldn’t figure out how to film it. Just having a faceless horde of victims makes it like a slasher movie whereas the original had a much more horrific feel b/c you knew the characters – whether you cared for them or hated them. Anyhow… I’ll be there this weekend… I need to see zombies!!!

  • March 18, 2004, 7:05 p.m. CST

    End Credits

    by MaulRat

    How much do you want to bet that if this movie tanks, then the ending is justified as ‘we were always going to leave it at one movie’… but if the movie makes bank, then the scenes after the credits will open the next film and as soon as ‘everyone dies’ one of the mains will WAKE UP… Stupid and rediculous.. but think of it from a studio’s POV. *BAMF*

  • March 18, 2004, 7:06 p.m. CST

    Should you have biased fans and remake haters write reviews for

    by Darksider

    Thanks to Pyul McTackle for the unbiased review.

  • March 18, 2004, 7:24 p.m. CST

    Ending (Spoilers)

    by Darksider

    That really bites. I was hoping there would be surviors this time around. I hate movies when there is no hope of victory. I just feel like what’s the point? Hate the island idea. How many of us have an island close by to flee to? Hell why not a spaceship for that matter. “We’ll leave the planet! That’ll show’em!” Just kidding. I would like see the military involved. The nuking in Return was the most realistic answer I’ve seen yet. Why do we never see the army or the cops do anything? At least see or hear of a failed stand or something.

  • March 18, 2004, 8:15 p.m. CST

    Hopefully it’s better than the NOTLD remake

    by El Backo

    Even though Romero and Savini were involved with that one, it still stunk. At least this one will be bloody.

  • March 18, 2004, 8:35 p.m. CST

    Stop complaining

    by Coffinjoe

    I read an interview with James Gunn and he said he wanted to do a zombie movie more than anything but no one would give him the money unless it was the Dawn of the Dead remake. So it stuck his characters in a mall and there you have it. I know I know, it’s not “Dawn of the Dead”. How long did it take anyone to figure that one out? Be happy they made a truly awesome zombie flick(which hasn’t been seen since Soavis Cemetery a decade ago) and you’re lucky enough to see it in a theatre.

  • March 18, 2004, 8:37 p.m. CST

    types galore

    by Coffinjoe

    Meant to say it’s the best zombie flicks since Soavi’s Cemetery Man which was released a decade ago.

    I don’t know, I had a lot of fun and honestly think it’s up there with The Thing and the Ring as some of the best horror remakes.

  • March 18, 2004, 9:59 p.m. CST

    My 50 cents and pre-review thoughts.

    by Neosamurai85

    I

  • March 18, 2004, 10:20 p.m. CST

    Hi, thenewpulp, Mentally Disfigured Person here…

    by hal–9–thou

    Tarnish the memory of the original??? No problem there, fellow zombie-movie-lover. I and many others think the original sucks the puss from an infected zombie bite! I’m going to see this new, improved Dawn for the SCREAMS and CHEERS it gets from the audience from watching a fun, gross-out HORROR MOVIE!!! Just like the original was when it first came out, I’m sure, though it is totally dated now (blue face paint; overly long; passe special effects). FINALLY!!! Blair Witch Project be damned… true horror fans have been waiting for something like this for quite some time.

  • March 18, 2004, 10:22 p.m. CST

    Oh the many, many rambiling typos…

    by Neosamurai85

    And I even forgot to do a “Holy_______batman!” number. Sigh…

  • March 18, 2004, 10:58 p.m. CST

    I saw it Monday and it ROCKED!!!!!!!! Fellow Dead Heads Loved IT

    by islander

    Believe me when I say I was seeing this movie with alot of zombie movie fans here in Atlanta on Monday (we all love the original Dawn), and ALL OF US LOVED THIS MOVIE!!! Do not think of this as a remake picking apart the diffrences of this film and the original. Think of it as its own movie and you will love it. None of us liked the idea of a remake when we first learned of it. That has changed. We are so looking forward to a sequal. Lots of blood, bullets to the head, explosions and suprises. My favorite suprise was that I liked it so much. I will see it again this weekend with a civilian audiance and see how the general public likes it. Scary “YES”, Action “YES”, Funny “YES”, A good time at the movies “HELL YES”!!!

  • March 19, 2004, 2:20 a.m. CST

    Saw it tonight, and here’s what’s what

    by omarthesnake

    1. Ving. Kicks. Ass….. 2. It’s a damned good movie. The groaner “you moron!” moments so common in horror movies are few and far between…… 3. These are some scary fucking zombies…..4. And yes, they run. And if seeing them running doesn’t scare the heck out of you, you’re as braindead as they are. Sure, Romero’s lumbering zombies are cool, but these are too….. 5. Solid characters, and despite some idiocy in the reviews above, you do see relationships develop among the characters during their stay, and more importantly they come across as real people. Even the asshole security guards. I’ve known real mall security guards. these guys are dead-on, so to speak…. So in conclusion, don’t be a Zombie Hata just because it’s not the DOTD you grew up on, you shortsighted nimrods. Enjoy the movie on its own terms, and it’s damned enjoyable. It’s a heck of a lot better than the NOTLD retread… at least this one has some new ideas, and man, is that vision of the early days of the plague chilling.

  • March 19, 2004, 3:29 a.m. CST

    American Poet – what in fuck’s name are you talking about?

    by Vern

    I read all the talkbacks and I haven’t seen ANYBODY saying that zombie dogs was an idea that comes from the original DAWN OF THE DEAD. And if they did say that, that would be pretty weird since there are NO ZOMBIE DOGS in either DAWN OF THE DEAD. where did you get that one? What are you talking about? * * * And about the ending. It is not completely clear what happens. If they have to have Ving and Sarah in a sequel it would be fine because they don’t show you that they definitely died, they just heavily imply it. But I agree that they should just hire Romero to shoot his original DAY OF THE DEAD script and pretend that’s the sequel. Maybe throw Ving or his character’s brother in there somewhere to keep the suits happy.

  • March 19, 2004, 3:42 a.m. CST

    HUH

    by OsamaBinBlofeld

    How can the fuck face of a reviewer at the bottom of these write-ups say the music in this dawn is better? How can anyone prefer shitty nu-metal over goblin aka cherry five aka oliver! I’m sure this dawn doesn’t have a kick ass song like “’cause I’m a man”.

  • March 19, 2004, 3:49 a.m. CST

    croquet mallot

    by werewolfbynight

    Why the hell would anybody exchange a crowbar for a croquet mallot when they know they are fighting zombies. A piece of heavy metal for what eventually becomes a wooden stake? I can hear the suits as I write. “The mallot breaks and the shaft can be shoved through a zombie skull.” Whaaaaat.

  • March 19, 2004, 4:18 a.m. CST

    honestly

    by werewolfbynight

    The characters in this movie were extremely stupid. Give me a moment to recall all the dumb ass activity in this film. #1: On at least two occasions the characters checked obviously infected corpses for signs of life. #2 Exchanging a crowbar for a croquet mallot. WTF. #3:Mall security guards do not carry guns. Its called liability. #4: Rigor mortis sets in fairly quickly after death. #5:The gun store owner did’nt have any survival supplies in his store. No food, no water, no bunker? #6: Andy would have shored up the doggy door. #7: I could go on but I am getting bored.

  • March 19, 2004, 5:31 a.m. CST

    has it been so long

    by werewolfbynight

    Has it been so long since weve had a great horror movie that people will settle for this mediocre excuse. This film had no genuine moments, no soul and crappy computer generated gore. 90 minutes and not one real special effect. Tom Savini had a cameo, the least he could have done was give the film makers a shred of advice. This film reeked of suit, and if you can’t smell it I feel sorry for you.

  • March 19, 2004, 6:36 a.m. CST

    Dawn of the Dead

    by SeanHarris

    I can’t believe the world’s willingness to take this movie and embrace it, much less call it “superior” to the original. Fanboys and web critics truly have reached a lowpoint and will swallow anything. If all you saw was blue paint and bad effects and you were bored during the 1978 classic, then you didn’t look very hard at the material. Romero’s trilogy is a remarkable highpoint in the horror genre, and anyone that’s a fan of that in itself should be mad as hell that a “re-imagining” of his vision has been plundered and remade into a slick action movie without even his consent.

    Fuck this watered down remake right in the ass, along with Richard Rubinstein, James Gunn, and Universal. Shame on them all.

  • March 19, 2004, 11:41 a.m. CST

    news flash

    by Coffinjoe

    I don’t know why any one here’s complaining about running zombies, especially people who ARE zombie fans. And by zombie fans I mean people who’ve seen more than just Romero’s zombie flicks. Tonnes of Italian zombie movies from the 70’s/80’s had running zombies(ie. Umberto Lenzi’s Nightmare City, Zombi 3, etc). Even movies like Dead Alive and some of the Japanese zombie flicks like Junk and Versus had zombies that did more than just shamble. Actual zombie fans would know there’s more to zombies than what Romero has done.

  • March 19, 2004, 11:41 a.m. CST

    news flash

    by Coffinjoe

    I don’t know why any one here’s complaining about running zombies, especially people who ARE zombie fans. And by zombie fans I mean people who’ve seen more than just Romero’s zombie flicks. Tonnes of Italian zombie movies from the 70’s/80’s had running zombies(ie. Umberto Lenzi’s Nightmare City, Zombi 3, etc). Even movies like Dead Alive and some of the Japanese zombie flicks like Junk and Versus had zombies that did more than just shamble. Actual zombie fans would know there’s more to zombies than what Romero has done.

  • March 19, 2004, 6:26 p.m. CST

    SEE THIS NOW

    by Homer Jay

    Absolutely kicked my ass. In regards to it’s execution (F/X & acting) it’s definitely the most well-made Zombie flick ever. I’ve seen the original close to 100 times, and I went into this to see a cool zombie flick NOT and strict remake. Do the same, and you’ll dig it too.

    The simple fact that it’s set in SE Wisconsin (i’m from Milwaukee) and I was hearing about places and towns that I know on the TV & radio reports blew me away.

  • March 19, 2004, 7:53 p.m. CST

    Actually, Return of the Living Dead was supposed to be Night’s s

    by Darksider

    Hence the “Living Dead” in the title and the lack of it in Romero’s sequels. Also Night’s events are mentioned in the film as being long ago and covered up. The problem was it didn’t have Romero and the zombies/world had a totally different take so nobody bought into it being from the same story. What happened was when Night was made, they didn’t copyright the title. One of the producers of Night used whatever rights he had and made Return. At the time Romero didn’t know if he was ever going to do anything else with the series so he didn’t contest it. When he decided to continue the story he couldn’t get the rights to the title so it was just “Dead” now. Romero later remade Night in an attempt to get the rights back to get money to finance the 4th film. The movie didn’t make money and I doubt he got any rights back from it.

  • March 19, 2004, 8:50 p.m. CST

    Dead Man Running

    by ed_wood_jr

    I don’t know if this has been brought up in the whole running zombie debate yet; forgive me if it has. But the first zombie in the original NOTLD, while not a sprinter, does get around pretty quickly, chasing Barbara for quite a distance. And the original “Dawn” features a pair of zombie children who are fast enough to take one of the SWAT guys by surprise. So I suppose that, even for Mr. Romero himself, the top speed on zombies depends on the desired effect in the film. So if (emphasis on IF) it works in the new one, no problemo for me.

  • March 19, 2004, 9:01 p.m. CST

    The Bogata Project

    by OsamaBinBlofeld

    The Columbian shows how bright he is by saying Gobin and Argento suck. I could make a comeback and say some Michael Bay joke. I think the fact that he thought this movie was good and is in denial of the snooze-fest that this is shows his rubeness.

  • March 19, 2004, 11:12 p.m. CST

    This is “Deadworld” turned into a movie.

    by ZeroCorpse

    If any of you ever read the original run of the “Deadworld” comic, you’d know what I mean. The only thing missing was talking zombies and King Zombie himself. I loved this, and if you approach from the idea that it’s inspired by the original, and not a remake, you’ll enjoy it too. Jeez- You all like “Blade Runner” and it’s nothing like the book it was based on. It, too, is inspired by the original work, but it made a pretty cool movie in and of itself.

  • March 20, 2004, 1:38 a.m. CST

    Holy dead baby poping christ on a stick batman!

    by Neosamurai85

    Saw the film today

  • March 20, 2004, 1:56 a.m. CST

    Dawn of the Dead

    by SeanHarris

    Woohoo. EW liked it. The original film has a realistic feel to it that no overproduced fast cut action upgrade will EVER achieve. Read some of the other reviews on the movie. “All the guts…but no brains or heart of the original…” Word muthafucker.

    I’m not hugely into Argento either, but I respect the man (and his notorious ego), and Goblin does indeed rock. Romero’s films (all of them) bring something sharp to the table, even when they aren’t shining as bright as his three awesome Dead flicks.

    Enjoy your “new dawn” buddy…I’ll be hanging out with Roger and Peter.

  • March 20, 2004, 3:30 a.m. CST

    Dawn of the Dead

    by SeanHarris

    Actually, yes, all those films you mentioned bring wonderful things together. Even when they fail, their strong ideas genuinely resonate.

    Romero’s a great director but he’s an even better storyteller and editor, and the DAWN realism that I’m talking about has nothing to do with what you see, but what you feel. Obviously you do not. That’s okay. But it doesn’t make me close minded just because I think the slick updated version, with junglecat sound effects on every zombie attack, fast gun action and quick cutting flash is horsecock.

    Also: Blue (cold) zombies with wandering human eyes were much scarier to me. They’ve been made into possessed demons in the remake. <shrug> That’s the progress you’re talking about?

  • March 20, 2004, 4:54 a.m. CST

    Dawn of the Dead

    by SeanHarris

    Let me guess…the blue faced one…as it bit your cock off?

  • March 20, 2004, 5:35 a.m. CST

    P.S. Never defend a movie that you like in a talkback, you will

    by CranialLeak

    So you’re a diehard horror/zombie fan. You find yourself in a strange predicament where someone decides to ‘remake’ your movie. Do you embrace it? Do you despise it? Well, I for one, happened to have an open mind and actually enjoyed both DOTD movies for different reasons. Blasphemy, you say! Yes, that’s right. I ‘liked’ em both, didn’t love either one. Because to love a movie, is to admit you have no real love. Enjoy the “movies” people. Without it, we’d all just have one dvd in our collections.

  • March 20, 2004, 7:53 a.m. CST

    Does the movie explain why the dead are coming back or do they l

    by Darksider

  • March 20, 2004, 11:48 a.m. CST

    Re: Does the movie explain why the dead are coming back or do t

    by Neosamurai85

    “When there’s no more room in hell, the dead will walk the earth.” I don’t mean to sound like a smart ass with that, but basically it’s as good as you’ll get. Oddly, unlike NotLD, dead people don’t come back in this one. they treat it a little more like yet another Virus. Also there is no voodoo in this one. it’s all biblical. I still can’t make up my mind how I feel about Johnny Cash’s “When the Man Comes Around” being used as opening credit music. It was cool as hell, but would Cash really have been down with it? Peace.

  • March 20, 2004, 12:25 p.m. CST

    Adam Portrais’ lame criteria

    by Marco_Xavier

    I’m glad there was one non-geek, spoiler-free review around, but Adam’s reasons for a thumbs up were friggin’ lame. Shorter=better? Faster=better? More victims=better? Not TOO scary=better? Typical scoring=better? What the fuck? While we’re at it, could we trim an hour, tack on some Danny Elfman, work in some more gunplay and add more spot color to the new Schindler’s List remake already?

  • March 20, 2004, 1:26 p.m. CST

    origin of the plague?

    by JohnYaYa

    i remember some allusion back in the 1968 NOTLD to radiation from a satellite acting as catalyst for the plague. can anyone confirm/deny?

  • March 20, 2004, 7:39 p.m. CST

    I’d rather eat my own shit

    by Drunken Rage

    than read another retarded “review” by Vern. As BB would say, “What a maroon.” Dumb fuck!

  • March 20, 2004, 8:22 p.m. CST

    GREAT horror flick!

    by hal-9-thou

    The best times I’ve ever had at the movies have been with a crowd watching a horror movie. Gonna date myself now, but “The Howling”, “Nightmare on Elm Street”, “Hellraiser”, “Fright Night”, and many other horror classics are best seen with an AUDIENCE to participate in the thrills, chills, & laughs. This one delivers. The dead fat lady scene is CLASSIC! Dead mama giving birth scene, CLASSIC! Blonde-chick-meets-chainsaw, well, maybe not classic, but EFFECTIVE audience scream inducer! There are many more great scenes to cringe or laugh at communally. I definitely got my moneys worth. Will probably even go see it again with a crowd next weekend. Good horror movies don’t come along that often, and this is one of them.

  • March 20, 2004, 8:43 p.m. CST

    To Great One

    by ed_wood_jr

    Agree with most of your points–however:

    Re: the cigarette lighter issue. It is a horrible cliche, and apparently it doesn’t work (never tried it myself–I’ll put it on my to-do list) but it seems to me that the use of it in this film does not make Gunn a shitty writer…it makes him unoriginal, which would stand to reason as, after all this is a ‘reimagining’ to begin with.

    Re: Zombies and glass doors. For what it’s worth, much of the original “Dawn” included moments where the characters eluded zombies by heading into a particular store which had glass doors. The zombies weren’t able to pull off breaking those, either.

  • March 20, 2004, 9:06 p.m. CST

    Dawn of the Dead

    by SeanHarris

    Yep, my 12 year old insult. I was so mad at you for figuring me out!

    Truthfully, that was my way of just giving up. I was tired of your antagonizing.

  • March 21, 2004, 10:58 a.m. CST

    remakes, reimaginings and riters

    by ed_wood_jr

    Yeah, but it’s gotta be tough for a screenwriter working on a remake to not want to put his artistic fingerprints all over it. To answer the question, “why are we making another (blank) when we’ve already got a perfectly good one out there”?

    ***

    Thanks for your well-thought and civilly delivered points, Great One!

  • March 21, 2004, 3:20 p.m. CST

    vern’s right again

    by AZJim

    Vern rules. DrunkenRage, bon appetit.

    The movie was okay. Started very strong, with a great, disturbing pre-credit sequence of the world going to hell. But I guess you could have seen that on USA the other night. Polley is good, Weber is good. Irving Rhames is good. Decent acting always helps, but the zombie acting, as Vern pointed out, was subpar. Or maybe that was direction. I dunno. If these zombies are spry enough to run and smart enough to hang from a pipe waiting for their prey, why can’t they talk or drive cars? I do miss the satirical elements of the original, and the two big scare scenes in this remake – ugly fat infected lady and pregnancy – are completely flubbed. Long slow buildups, stretched out unnecessarily even though the dumbest person in the audience knows exactly what is going to happen, and then the payoffs are clunky and anti-climactic. Certainly, more could have been done with that baby. I also don’t know what happened to turn CJ into a good guy. I didn’t buy it. The end credits sequence was annoyingly presented in Blair Witch rip-off style (“get that damn camera out of my face!”) and unnecessary. In any case, the movie’s not terrible, but it would have been nice if it was about something. The bottom line is, anything that knocks that horrible Mel Gibson movie out of the top B.O. spot is okay by me.

  • March 21, 2004, 4:09 p.m. CST

    Romeros Zombies made more sense. Where to the new ones get the e

    by matrix_sux

    Considering they are dead and decomposing. But then again the quick turnaround from dead to living dead might have something to do with it. I know, I’m trying to justify too much

  • March 21, 2004, 5:25 p.m. CST

    Style Over Substance

    by morphous12

    DOTD 2004 carries with it the ghost of the original, that gem directed by George A. Romero that came out in the late 1970’s. Although I am not particularly a fan of Romero’s, I do have a high regard for DOTD. Although Romero’s original pushed the envelpoe with its savage graphic violence, it was also smart. Really smart. It was intentionally paced, giving the audience an opportunity to develop a relation with its characters. Having strong character development insfused the story with power and, as a result, I cared about the story and about what was happening with the charaters. What gives Romero’s DOTD an extra delicious edge was its metaphors about consummerism. Romero’s original was and still is a powerful piece of filmaking.

    DOTD 2004 does has entertainment value. It has some “wow” action sequences, some funny moments, good special effects, and the acting is well done. But DOTD 2004 has a major flaw. It suffers greatly from lack of character development, and thus, lacks the power of the original. Whereas the original had both style and substance, DOTD 2004 is style over substance. And its style is a recycled one, derivitive of other well known horror films – 28 Days Later, The Blair Witch Project, Romero’s DOTD, to name a few. The script for DOTD 2004 also lacks credible motivations for its characters (And I use the term “characters” loosely here). Two examples would be a character leaving the safe confines of the mall, going through throngs of zombies to save a dog, and another character’s sacrifice to save the other characters. There are two standouts though, Kenneth (Ving Rhames) and Michael (Jake Webber). They provide the strongest moments in the film. But the film in plagued with a barrage of “character” incredulousness.

    The two major flaws in DOTD 2004 make it a substandard movie. 4 out of 10 stars.

  • March 21, 2004, 9:37 p.m. CST

    one thing’s for sure

    by Peabob

    well, one thing’s for sure. after seeing the remake of dawn of the dead it’s obvious why the resident evil sequel was pushed back until fall.

  • March 22, 2004, 1:12 a.m. CST

    does the MPAA ban the devouring of flesh?

    by Max Meanie

    All the recent zombie flicks seem to shy away from the biting, ripping and devouring of flesh. While gore is not necessary to make an effective horror film, I thought it would’ve been a safe bet that the remake of “Dawn of the Dead” would have it. I’m sure all would agree that the original had more gore and flesh eating. Does anyone know if this is automatically banned from the MPAA guidelines of receiving a “R” rating?

    If I may put in my two cents on the remake, I was very dissappointed by it. While it had a very impressive opening, after the credits it seemed to fall into mediocrity. There were too many characters without personality – it seemed one was there just to provide a topless scene – while others fell into lapses of stupidity that were meant to add suspense. For example the fat woman who everyone knew was a zombie except for Sarah Polley who should known better than anyone.

    The biggest flaw in the film is why any of them would leave any inch of skin exposed for a potential deadly bite from a zombie. In the original, Ken Foree’s thick jumpsuit saved him at least twice from zombie bites. The film may have taken place in summer but I would’ve had as many layers of clothing on if it meant it would save my life.

    Lastly the mall wasn’t used enough. They didn’t take advantage of the locale at all as the 1st film did. It looked to me like the film company had permission to film inside of it as long as the crew didn’t move from the 3 stores they were in.

    Uninteresting characters and locations and no gore made for a very dissappointing remake. There was no reason to call it “Dawn of the Dead”.

  • March 22, 2004, 2:22 a.m. CST

    I just saw this movie and it’s fucking good. I don’t know what

    by Darksider

    It’s nothing like the original. This was a ride, not a satire. Although not a perfect film, but most of the criticism I feel is unwarranted fanboy backlash. I do agree that the title could have been different and it could have been some place other than a mall. But really, where else are going to find a city within a city? Even without the consumerism bit it made sense to me as a refuge and where it was located at the time in the story. I think Gunn did an excellent job on the writing for the most part. All he had to work from was the title, zombies, and a mall. There was PLENTY of character development. Half of the characters had their arc by the third act. Other characters, like real people, never change or overcome. Also there were too many characters in the 1 hour and 40 minute movie to explore all of them and have really exciting shit happen too. I found out some really cool things in just a line or two that had a great impact on me. The makeup and effects were great. Headshots galore and best of all, no blue face paint. I did have some problems with some of the choices the characters made, but those were just to move the plot along. Another problem I had was with the bites and time it took to change. It was somewhat erratic. Sometimes hours, sometimes minutes. Maybe it could also come down to physiology or metabolism. You couldn’t get too many answers because everything is so new to the characters as well. Anyway, it was a good film for any horror/action fan. I enjoyed this version much more than the original. “Consumerism” WHATEVER. “The zombies lack character.” What the FUCK are these people talking about? This was a survival story with realistic characters trying to overcome the dangers outside by facing them instead of running or trying to pretend they don’t exist the whole time, as well as their own fears and prejudices with the other survirors. Hell, some even started to like each other. I never understood Romero’s low opinion of the people in his zombie films. Has he never been in a dangerous situation with strangers? I don’t think so. I just can’t watch the same shit over and over again. Maybe it’s me. I would very much like to see a sequel to this film than a Resident Evil 2.

  • March 22, 2004, 2:35 a.m. CST

    Gunn aint so bad and this movie kicks ass!

    by Outland

    This movie kicked major fucking zombie ass period. If you liked the original and DONT like this one youre an idiot. This is the best ZOMBIE movie to come out since Day of the Dead and with a budget no less. This is one hell of fun ride. If you dont like this and you DO like the the other zombie films then youre just a geek. And what is with the bashing on James Gunn all of the time? Everyone always whining about Scooby Fucking Doo Part 2; it’s a fucking kids movie and he isn’t the only writer on this film; THE PLAYERS Micheal Tolkin and MINORITY REPORT’s Scott Frank contributed on re-writes. Fuck, I’d write Scooby Doo 3 if I was paid what Gunn was paid. Do you think my 4 year old gives a fuck how Scooby Doo 2 was written?

    This film kicks ass. And if you dont like it, you are a true geek. Period.

  • March 25, 2004, 6:51 a.m. CST

    Amen Brothers & Sisters

    by JustyHakubi

    For those of you who know the true awesomeness of the original. There should have been no remake. There are a million angles from which to do a zombie flick. Why attempt what could not be attempted?

VERN has been reviewing movies since 1999 and is the author of the books SEAGALOGY: A STUDY OF THE ASS-KICKING FILMS OF STEVEN SEAGAL, YIPPEE KI-YAY MOVIEGOER!: WRITINGS ON BRUCE WILLIS, BADASS CINEMA AND OTHER IMPORTANT TOPICS and NIKETOWN: A NOVEL. His horror-action novel WORM ON A HOOK will arrive later this year.

This entry was posted on Thursday, March 18th, 2004 at 11:44 am and is filed under AICN, Horror, Reviews. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

5 Responses to “Dawn of the Dead (2004)”

  1. Chopper Sullivan

    April 14th, 2013 at 4:08 am

    I decided to give this one another shot in light of the EVIL DEAD 13 hullabaloo. I had thought it was sort of pretty good the first time I saw it on DVD. I was wrong.

    The security guys and the smarmy guy are unbearable. There are a bunch of stylistic touches that make no sense. The only characters that are likable are Andy and the dog and that’s because they don’t have awful dialogue. The plot is directionless until the end, and then it’s a bummer and Disturbed kicks in because HOLY SHIT AWESOME BRO HIGH FIVE.

    The smarmy guy is wearing a suit and tie during their escape attempt. The girls all apply heavy red lipstick throughout their horrible experience.

    I started watching it with commentary but I only made it to the point in the opening credits where Romero’s name comes up and Zack Snyder’s comment on the genius who created this genre is: “George Romero. Rockstar.”

    Yuck. EVIL DEAD 13 is a goddamn masterpiece compared to this horseshit.

  2. Chopper – yeah i never got the love for this movie either; it’s easily the least exciting and ambitious of Zack Snyder’s directorial efforts and I think it pretty much got a pass because it wasn’t as bad as people were expecting it to be. But yeah, I never thought it was particularly good, for all the reasons you mentioned.

    I also still never understood their plan to escape to an island – there isn’t much of an explanation as to why they would have thought it was any safer than anywhere else; it’s like the screenwriters watched Maximum Overdrive on TV and figured “hey let’s just do that”

  3. Weird. I think this DofD remake gets better every time I see it.

    Every time I introduce it to someone new, they’re riveted by the opening (which I think even Snyder-haters and the internet has universally decided is pretty fucking awesome), then let down a little by the fact that it’s so brightly lit for a horror/zombie film, then they get into the suspense elements & characters, then they laugh at the wacky musical segment, then they’re laughing & thrilled (not an easy combo of emotions to filmatistically achieve simultaneously) by the zombie baby and all the chainsaw-ing & bus carnage at the end.

    DotD 2004 is among the very few horror-action movies that doesn’t have a single stretch that gives me a headache or puts me to sleep, and, along with maybe Romero’s LAND OF THE DEAD (2005) and John Hyams’s portion of the UNISOL saga, it’s the only recent-ish zombie movie (or tv show) that isn’t terrible and isn’t merely a British comedy. (Sorry, Walking Deadites.)

  4. So I saw WORLD WAR Z and I actually kinda enjoyed it? Mind you this isn’t a horror film or even a zombie film I suppose, just more a decent traditional blockbuster disaster thriller but the doomsday plot device is zombies instead of a new ice age or an Earthquake or whatever. Kinda reminded me of RISE OF THE PLANET OF THE APES from a few years back, a good disposable Sci-Fi entertainment backed with some memorable visuals and inspired FX/action set-pieces minus the great joy of that prison escape moment. (Did any movie before this do zombies on an airplane? That’s creative.) Hell as absurd as it was, that image of the zombies coming around a corner like a tidal wave…yeah I’ll remember that spot. I even loved that scene of Pitt on the edge of the apartment roof, and even his relationship with that soldier which is a good trope of the zombie/post-apocalyptic genre: Buddies on the Run.

    For that matter, now this comparison will come off as bizarre but it makes sense to me: The 1953 version of THE WAR OF THE WORLDS. That one had a lead character trying to find a cure/way to stop this apocalyptic threat, but really he’s just a prop, connective tissue between sequences to show the global impact of this catastrophe, i.e. humanity getting its ass kicked. The comparison also makes sense (only to me) with the lack of any blood at all in WWZ.

    In retrospect I did admire how a movie that starts out with a big BANG, followed by another probably bigger sequence in Israel, then ends with an intimate, low scale climax. I like how the whole 3rd act (rewritten and reshot last year after apparently the original 3rd act involving Russia apparently was a stinker) was basically this bigass budget film revisiting the Romero zombie films with human survivors running down corridors and trying not to alert the walking stiffs, walking through a deserted cafeteria, all that. I wished some more thought was put into that one key moment instead of simply celebrating the miracle of randomality, but eh if that is my biggest complaint I think I’ll live with it.

    Plus the facial tics of some zombies amused my crowd. I won’t spoil it, but I applaud the movie for one well-earned laugh in the climax that had my crowd cracking up. I’m impressed.

    So yeah not a really remarkable entry within the zombie genre. Hell it’s not even the best zombie film of 2013 (that goes to the inspired WARM HEARTS) but this is a solid fun #2.

    P.S. – I fell into the same trap many did whenever the reports of the reshoots and massive rewriting came out last year, we wrote it off. Well honestly now having seen WWZ and read about the original 3rd act….honestly I think they made the right call in retrospect. Someday I’ll learn that reshoots doesn’t equate disaster. At All.

  5. Usually I’d avoid a PG-13 zombie movie on general principle, but the idea of Roland Emmerich style disaster porn with zombies instead of global warming or whatever sounds mildly intriguing. But only mildly.

    Did any movie before this do zombies on an airplane?

    FLIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD (2006), although I saw it under it’s alternate and much shittier title, PLANE DEAD. Eh, it’s okay. Clearly made in that precious time when the world was gripped in SNAKES ON A PLANE mania.

Leave a Reply





XHTML: You can use: <a href="" title=""> <img src=""> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <b> <i> <strike> <em> <strong>