Review: Dawn of the Dead

Average:

Your Views: Responses

dikky boy on April 6th, 2004
This is by far the best interpretation of the original text by the great George Romero that has been filmed to date. Obviously a labour of love for director no expense has been spared in graphically portraying the sacrifice made by a Ving Rahmes to save us all from brain eating Zombies. There has been a lot of controversy surrounding this film. Mostly concerned with how the zombies are shown in a bad light and as a result there may well be a zombie backlash. However I feel the film concentrates on the redemptive actions of one man rather than the violent actions of the undead. I advise you to make up your own mind and see this film.

search&destroy on April 5th, 2004
I'm not usually one to complain about sex in films but just how did the doggie-style bonking half way through have any context in this film? And the bra waving during the closing credits? I didn't like the original, which was a disappointment after Night of The Living Dead, and from the reviews (stand up Mark Kermode) I expected more. A total waste of time.

George A Romero on April 5th, 2004
Well to be honest I quite liked it. It was dawn of the dead 'flavor', similarities to the previous film, but a film in its own right. Worth seeing ? Do you like zombie films? Then yes. Is it scary.. err no, is it gory ? a bit. It is what is its.. 1:30ish mins of holywood entertainment. Its not gonna win any prizes, but it will keep you entertained. Shawn of the dead will be better!

Spaceman on April 4th, 2004
Go see Shaun of the Dead instead, at least that makes you laugh!

Miss_World on April 1st, 2004
I found the film highly flawed over all, hardly any room for characters to evolve, or hell, hardly talk to each other as it was all go from the start up until its Camcorder ending. The trailer promised something so much more, but the film, as they tend to do nowadays, never lived up to it. The girl with the red hair and her amazing Dog rescuing antics also highly pissed me off...

Stuificus on April 1st, 2004
It could have been so much better, although I am still kiinda miffed that the only simularities are the Zombies, its title and the them being in a Mall. I get the feeling though that there are millions of Directors/Special/Anniversary Editions planned since it felt rushed over all and there was hardly enough time for any of the characters had enough screen time to justify them being there.

Paul on March 31st, 2004
It could have been better if it had been about 20 mins longer. There was some terrible editing in this film eg How did they get out of the gun shop? It just jumped straight from the shop into the street. There were a lot of inconsistencies which were really annoying. But the action scenes are great and its nice to see a film with an 18 cert instead of one toned down to get a 15. I'm still waiting for Romero to get funding for a new film.

gblinkhorn on March 30th, 2004
Dawn of the Dead was one of the seminal movies of my youth, along with Night of the Living Dead and John Carpenter's The Thing. So with heavy heart I saw they were making a new version. Tonight I saw the new version and was Blown away! It is not a remake of the original it is more of a alternate universe version of the original. Imagine what may have happened elsewhere in the USA at the same time the original Dawn of the Dead was playing out and imagine the effects on the dead were differnet for some reason. IF you are a horror movie fan go see it with an open mind - no it is not as good as the original - and for us who have grown up with george and Tom's fantastic vision and story - nothing ever will be that good, however it does impress and I think the big open shots of the city the night after the crisis starts (a personal fav subject for me) will have you impressed.

nannet on March 30th, 2004
I was sorry to have paid to see this pallid remake of a suberb original. I can only wonder at how much more money was spent on this modern version than the Romero classic; unfortunately the extra dollars seem to have only had a derogatory effect. Dawn of the Dead (2004) is a fluffy teen horror flick at best, good only as an excuse to sneak to the back row and otherwise amuse yourself. My advice is to rent the original. A tense, gory and well written film with a strong social commentary, something which the remake seem to completely bypassed.

Dave on March 29th, 2004
The original was a classic. The remake doesnt feel like a remake - although good, it did not seem to follow the original.

Wardster on March 29th, 2004
Blood, Gore, Special Effects and not quite the best of storylines. Too much like 28 days later at the start, with the "news clips" and the fast switching of them, and not enough story as in what happened at the start - where did they come from etc. If more imagination went on the film than the emphasis on "oh look at us, we've got $xxx million to spend on special effects" then this could have been a contender on par with the original. 7 out of 10.

Doctor Evil on March 29th, 2004
Although this film would never live up to the original, I think that it's about time zombie films came back into the arena. Very good attempt....

mtsu_av8er on March 29th, 2004
I really liked the new one, but I'm still a fan of Romero's work. After all the years of waiting for a remake, nothing beats the original!!!

Rob Zombie on March 28th, 2004
The original wipes the floor with this flawed remake. More emphasis has been put on the special effects than on the actual story. If you want to see a good zombie film, pick up one of George Romero's classics; this title simply does not cut the mustard.

damndirtyape on March 28th, 2004
Whilst the remake is fun, frothy hollywood horror, it simply doesn't have the strong symbolism and unwritten tension that the original has. Add in the terrible number of cliches the remake has (the invincible dog, the patriotic/non patriotic survival ratio and numerous 'let's go in and explore on our own without guns' moments) and its clear who the winner is.