seen it

You can't fairly compare them. They are 2 completely different movies. One is horror and one is action.
And it has nothing to do with whether it's dumbed down for the 'MTV generation' or not. It's matter of how you prefer your zombie flicks, horror & suspense or action & gore. Simple as that. It's quite foolish to hate the remake simply 'cause you like the original - after all one doesn't destroy the other.

I for one was very dissappointed with the original, I simply found it boring and the zombies were the worst looking ever.
And it's not just because it's dated, because the original 'Night of...' is still great!

And before you give me the usual 'Oh you probably watch alot of MTV and listen to Linkin' Park, and don't know anything about quality films', let me tell you that shit is getting old!

Back on topic: Can't wait! The Gorier the better.

Obviously, YMMV. I thought that the score was ineffectual in setting the tone for the scenes. The words flat and uninspired come to mind.

Yes, well chosen for the MTV crowd.

It seems like you have to keep comparing Dawn04 to Dimensions films in order to support the notion that it wasn't an MTV-style cr@pfest. Sorry, but the film doesn't stand on its own merits...

Too many characters with no rhyme or reason. With no screentime to develop characters, the filmmakers were reduced to superficial, cardboard caricatures to strain to get some semblance of any depth. The only purpose they served was as "Purina Zombie Chow".

Again, any positive comments about it only come about by comparison to other junk. When compared to truly impressive horror films like "28 Days Later", Dawn04 stands out as the swill that it is.

Was "When the Man Comes Around" by Johnny Cash aimed at the MTV crowd? I didn't know they were religious country songs were that market's thing. How about Jim Carroll's "People Who Died?" 20 year-old punk from an obscure author doesn't scream "hot."

the funny thing about this... THERE IS NO SOUNDTRACK TO SELL. yup. it was a rare thing to come by since it was never put together and sold at any B&M or online store. infact, the only way you can get your hands on a copy of it is if you picked up the promotional copy of it. So they were marketing a product that was never to be sold.

Who are these kdis that the use of Cash for an opening pissed off so much? It seems like you like creating conflict for no reason. I talked to many and the song fit perfectly and no one I talked to ever felt the need to have a techno mix into it. Or for that matter missed some sort of trance into.

Well I was not that impressed with 28 Days Later. Then again I am not a fan of Danny Boyle and find his films too pretentious for their own good. All style,little substance,despite attempting to be 'artfilms' with 'deep meaning'.


Anyway I happen to be a huge fan of the original,and thought the remake was terrific as well.

Oh Scracer,Johnny Cash is not MTV.

The only MTV music in it,was the original version of 'Sickness' durring the very end credits,and possibly the 'Have a Nice Day' song briefly heard at the starting.

So comparison to other hollywood films horror or othewise, using many many MTV/pop radio flavor of the moment music that does'nt fit in with the films,and were just placed in an attempt to sell to mindless drones who buy anything new & current.

Then I think Dawn actually did well with finding the right music/songs for the film,never overdoing it,and making sure all the songs are not out of place and work with the film,rather than detract from it.

So you can thank god Harvey & Harry Weinstein were not in charge of the music selection,or we would have had some lame rapper shouting "DAWWWN na na na na OF nah na nah THE Dead nah na nah"...like the lame attempt at a movie title song durring the end credits of Scream 2 "SCREAMMM NA Nu Nah SCREAMM Na Nu Nah"

New Line is guiltly of this as well with the Elm Street series,TCM 3('LEATHERFACCCCEE screams an annoying horrible wannabe metal song!)..and recent horror films like Freddy Vs Jason.

That is a great feat when you look at the likes of Dimension films among others.

Let's not forget the harmonic sounds from the theme in "House of the Dead." lol

Anyone know about how long it takes to get an order from those HK places?

Horror? I would call this more of an action movie.

Exactly! That's all it is, and it's a damn good one. There really isn't supposed to be any deep characters, just blood, death and mayheim!

Now DOD 2004 is an action movie?? Did I miss something here? The movie I saw had necks being ripped off, zombies running amuck (zombies are the living dead, see they're dead but they are still able to eat you), a head in a cooler, a dead "twitcher" etc......

I remember seeing a very old movie, I think it was called Dawn of the Dead by some guy named Romero - it had a swat team, tons o' guns, the military was in it and I remember people running around in a mall shooting what looked like to be zombies - hell of an ACTION flick...........................Oh wait, maybe it was DOD 2004, man I'm confused now.

i went to the site and couldn't see nothing...happen to anyone else? can someone just post them in this thread? thanks.

Well I read some posts on the imdb.com Dawn forums,which may be some trolls,but were hilarious nonetheless in their cluelessness.

scott - the bandwith on her photo hosting site has been exceeded - just have to wait a little while to see if it will be back up again.

.....unless there is an original site where she got them from.

That's like taking what is said on AICN seriously. both are filled with fanboys who would bitch about anything.

I think I'm one of the few people who thinks the remake beats the hell out of the original. Like someone already mentioned, I think it all comes down to what you're looking for in a zombie movie. The social commentary and character development of the original is good and all, but it takes the place of kickass zombies and gore. Yes, it has gore, but the effects are horrible, and the zombies are just guys with blue faces. It's almost like the zombies take second stage to the point Romero's trying to get across.

True,but since some people are labeling this film an 'MTV horror film',which I don't see making any sense.

I used some examples of what would make it an MTV film soundtrackwise,and how lame it would really be then,if polluted with rap,techno,one hit blunder attempts at hard rock and so forth.

All of which the film did not fall into the trap of being,yet some people still ignorantly choose to say the music in it is 'MTV'.

So far I have not seen an 'inspired by' soundtrack like New Line did with The Texas Chainsaw Massacre remake,or Universal with the Scarface hiphop inspired 'soundtrack'(thank god they never went through with the idea of rescoring the film with hip hop!!).

Nor have I seen a soundtrack with the songs in the film itself,along with many 'bonus' tracks by lame bands attempting to make a buck and crossover.

This was the one film of the year,I wouldn't mind buying a soundtrack to for the songs used in the film. But since they were very little. There is not a huge track selection,unless they combined it with the score,or added lame 'bonus' tracks.

So I did the next best thing,I went out and bought alot of Johnny Cash,since I have been meaning to pick up alot of his stuff for quite sometime

..meanwhile I will try to find the albums someday with the other songs on them.

remake = sucks

original = genius

its quite simple really...

Well then I guess

Invasion of the Body Snatchers:1978
The Fly:1986
The Blob:1988
The Thing:1983

Must be sucky pieces of shit then?

Whoever calls this film an "MTV horror movie" with an "MTV soundtrack", has no idea what they are talking about!

The poster was referring specifically to Dawn of the Dead... nice try at deflection though.

You think there is more gore in the remake?! And the effects in the original are horrible?!

Well, yeah.


A) Character development = Good movie

B) Social commentary = nice addition, provides deeper meaning, enriching already epic movie.

C) Kickass zombie action = a wonderful byproduct of A and B. Not the point of DAWN 78, just part of the fun.

I remind everybody that Romero didn't need an "Unrated" DVD to tell his whole story. His did it through careful direction (sans pie fight).

DAWN 04 is lacking in A and B, so it doesn't earn C. It's an empty experience, a week "horror" film (though it looks and sounds like an action relic from the 1980s), and a clusterf**k of dangling plot threads and undeveloped characters.

I don't care if the guns "went boom," if Johnny Cash was on the soundtrack, or there was a quicker pace to the remake, DAWN 04 is a terribly made film from a filmmaking standpoint.

Even HAPPY GILMORE had a stronger dramatic arc than DAWN 04.

IMO, of course.

Mine shipped today... man this looks like it is going to be great!! I missed it in the theaters, so I really can't wait!

Are you forgetting that the film was released Unrated theatrically,since the MPAA would have mutlated the film to get it an R rating?

Are you forgetting there was a mutilated R version released in the early 80's? It was so massacred and confusing(from what I am told by those who have seen it) running in the 90-100 minute range. That it was quickly taken out of theatrical exhibition and the distributors vowed to only release the film unrated from now on after much fan uproar!

So yes the film DID need an unrated release to truely view the intended work and get the full impact.


In a similar way,Dawn 2004 suffered some heavy MPAA editing and that resulted in a few major plot holes and jarring obvious edits. Those will be leveled out in the unrated version it appears.

So while you may still hate the remake. Rated vs Unrated still is about the same with the original. Since they were both heavily compromised at one time or another to meet an R rating.

If people want to see these:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...eted%20Scenes/