aint it cool news posted there review of it:

http://www.aintitcool.com/display.cgi?id=17175

spoiler filled and 60% of it is bitching about running zombies.

jack, are there any scene's that looked like they toned down the gore, to get an R rating?

no, but they weren't going for the blood geiser look either though. the gore is there.

I can't wait to see the first 10 minutes of the movie(uncut) on USA network monday night,this is a new and great idea and i hope more movies start doing this in the future

I love zombies, I even post on a zombie forum daily, running or not, I can't imagine not liking this movie

Can't wait!

i refuse to see this crap!

If only you refused to press Reply and Submit reply.

Whoa...

I was excited to see this no matter what, but after your post Jack, im Uber-Excited now. I have high hopes for this remake and i hope thier met. I mean i really enjoy The Night of the Living Dead remake so i hope this is the same.

Some spoiler clips have been posted on Yahoo.

http://movies.yahoo.com/shop?d=hv&id...170&cf=trailer

Wasn't sure where to put this... since there is going to be a thread about the movie once it opens.

Okay, saw the movie last night. In some instances I can agree with Jack... but only if you take this as a standalone movie and not a remake. As someone has mentioned, the only things these movies share are zombies and a mall.

For THIS movie, the fast zombies seem to work. They bring a frantic nature to this film but it did seem like they moved TOO fast at times.

One BIGGER issue I had with this movie is that

Also some characters show up for no apparent reason other than to take up space. Just seemed needless... or maybe the director had some favors to pay up on


I did like the level of gore... I can always go for more... but there was enough. I did think some of the comic relief was needless (just a personal thing, others seemed to like it).

But, all in all, I liked the movie. It has caused some interesting debate and that's always a good thing. I'll probably even pay to see the movie and will buy the DVD. I'll recommend this.

One final thought hit me this morning. During the Romeo movies, I always felt that the living were completely doomed. No matter how many little victories, the dead would eventually prevail. I got the opposite feeling from this movie... the living will eventually kick ass and win. Of course if you stay and watch the credits, you'll think otherwise (yes, Jack... they apparently kept those intact).

Well, I'm off to my sneak preview. Tell you all what I think in a couple of hours!

just got back. one word; awesome.

i loved it. it wasn't flawless but after the huge disappointment that was RE, a bit of a let down from 28 days, this is the zombie movie that i have been waiting for.

i hope it does very well, i want more!

I thought it was very good.

Not really comparable to the old one, because the only thing straight out of the first one was the mall, but more action packed than the first one. Not as much social commentary, and a little less hokey.

Definitely recommended. If someone doesn't like it, I would suspect that they were either set against it and never gave it a chance, or they expected a shot by shot remake.

Oh my god. This is the best movie EVER

Ok, I'm a huge fan of the first Dead trilogy. Dawn usually gets played at least once a year, every Halloween. I was looking at this remake with a critical eye. Could Hollywood make a good zombie film? After seeing the cinematic abortions that are House of the Dead, Resident Evil (and to a lesser extent, 28 Days Later), could the Studio system produce a gore fest that was pleasing?

In a word - hell yes.

Hell, they had me hook by the time the credits started

Sure DotD-04 didn't have the biting social commentary and underlying themes of DotD-78, and I prefer the Goblin soundtrack from 78 over the hip-hop rock soundtrack provided with 04, so DotD-78 will always edge out 04 in my mind. But you know, as a modern day action horror film, DotD-04 delivers the goods.

(As aside note - any movie with class enough to use Johnny Cash for the opening gets mad props in my book)

Oh yeah, while I'm thinking about it - the other problem I had was with the zombies themselves. No, not the Fast Zombie vs Slow Zombie debate, but that the zombies didn't have character.

Character? For the zombies? Are you mad? you must be saying to yourself. No, not really. Hear me out.

Remember the Hari Christna zombie from 79? Or the fat one that slides into the swimming pool? or the nun? Or the one that loved the barrel of the M-16? That's when I mean by character. The neo-zombies were just a mass of grasping arms and legs, and overwhelming wall of undead flesh with no distinct personality. . Perhaps that's a directorial choice, but I like it the old way.

Oh - and the baby zombie? Creepy as hell. I was expecting an Alien chest burster, but what I got was so much better.

The characters were involving - even the ass-hole mall cop drew sympathy by the end. And poor old Gun Shop Andy - he had a whole 3 lines in the film, but he was the one I felt for the most. And hey - Max Headroom gets a cameo! Very cool to see him getting work.

But you know the biggest telling point that the movie works? I was yelling at the screen. I couldn't help but yell "DRIVE! Drive DAMNIT!" as they just sat there. Now, normally I don't do that. I'm sorry. I have sinned against the movie going audience. But man, I couldn't help it. Yes, it was that good. (It also didn't hurt that the audience was into it also as much as I was).

As for that whole slow, lumbering zombie vs fast, sprinting zombie debate. Yeah, I prefer my zombies slow and lumbering with a claustrophobic sense of dread, that their shear numbers will overwhelm you. It's like they're a force of nature. You can shoot them, you can slow them down but you can't stop them. No matter how fast you run, no matter how far you run, you can never get away. You will tire. They will never stop coming.

The fast zombies however - I couldn't help but jump as they swarmed the transports, or flooded into the stairways after our heroes. I got a real sense of "Oh shit, we're f--ked for sure!" I didn't think I would like it - but I have to admit that it was damn effective.

And I also usually don't like that jitter cam effect - the effect used in the opening battle of Gladiator or the D-Day invasion in Saving Private Ryan. However here, not only did I not mind the effect, I thought that jerky camera actually worked. For some crazy reason, it really helped sell the climax.

In short, I loved it. I didnt think it would, but I went in with an open mind and loved the shit out of it. It's a worthy sucessor to DotD-79, and one I will proudly own come the DVD release.

The Stalled ending through the credits was great.

They first credit roll, everyone stands up, than they cut to a girl in a bikini and she takes off her top, half the audience sits back down

Director Zack Snyder on the new DAWN dvd...

"We will do an unrated DVD that will have probably an additional five minutes of gore, and then another five minutes of more character. Not that anyone wants that, but that's what they're going to get."

Uh, Mr. Snyder, we DO want character development. Your remake needed a helluva lot more of it.

Who the hell was that blonde girl anyway? Could anybody give me her name without looking it up? I didn't think so...

IMO, the new DAWN is a very poor movie. If they didn't want comparisons, they should've skipped calling it DAWN OF THE DEAD, because it doesn't come close to the power, horror, or clean filmmaking of the original.

This is just a 1985 Schwarzenegger action movie relic with an occasional zombie attack placed in it.

I'm positive that the blonde girl's character was left on the editing room floor.

Though I disagree, this film is not a poor movie.

My opinion is:

I think if they titled it ZOMBIED! or DEFINTLEY NOT DAWN OF THE DEAD, I would have a different reaction to the film. But it is a remake, and should be treated as such.

My gripes…

-This is a slick, mouthbreathing 2004 action film, and not a horror film. Romero had dread and soft, quiet terror. Zack Snyder has lovingly detailed close-ups of weapons discharging, a vague sense of basic filmmaking logic, and Bay-like rapid editing. And El-Kabong mentioned that “open shutter” hand held photography… Meet the new “Bullet Time.” Except “Bullet Time” had a point.

-After gloriously introducing the mall in a huge establishing shot (anchor store: Gaylen Ross), we barely get to see it! Snyder has a lot of problems figuring out spatial relationships in this section of the film, and I believe we only saw about 4 stores. Where was the rest of the mall? Such potential in that setting…

-Character development is a big problem with the new DAWN. I think James Gunn puts in about 10 characters at one point, and they have to compete with the vivid zombie footage for Snyder’s attention. The characters lose. The only person we truly understand is the Jake Weber character, since he’s the only role that gets a chance to breathe and talk about his life before the Armageddon began. The rest are loose concoctions, including the worst of them all: the screenwriting 101 yuppie prick character. It approaches STAR TREK ensign territory with some of the supporting roles – you know they’re just there for zombie food. You didn’t have that in Romero’s version.

-It’s a very claustrophobic film, and the only time we get a good look at the geography is when Snyder pulls back to capture a Bruckheimer fireball. Lame. It happens three times in the movie too.

-Funny how Romero’s screen credit is onscreen for about half the time the other credits are.

-This doesn’t reflect the movie, but personally I was disgusted with my screening crowd, who applauded like idiots when Savini and Foree appeared onscreen. Yet nobody said boo when Reiniger showed up for a second… Some fans.

-I knew going in that the remake would drop the consumerist angle and other social issues. But to replace that with A-TEAM sequences and jumbled storytelling? It’s very disappointing that this is best Snyder could come up with armed with a budget larger than the three DEAD films combined.

Like the awful CHAINSAW remake, the best these filmmakers can do is overload the senses. They have the balls to take on such huge titles in horror history, and then completely erase what made the originals classics. Where’s the sense in that? Please, someone explain that to me.

I did like…



And



And I’m not even a Romero enthusiast!

DAWN 78 was a sneaky, DIY gem of the genre. DAWN 04 is an obnoxious, Vivid Video riff on the classic story; all climaxing, no foreplay.

At least they didn’t try to resurrect the pie fight.

that sounds great, is there a point to that or is it just an excuse to have a chick naked in a horror movie.

No, it isn't a direct remake. Therefore, it should be seen on it's own merits. The mall setting is the same, there are zombies...but that's where the similarities stop. They didn't "remake" the first movie.

I find that a very odd thing to write.

Would you only define a "remake" as a film that matches the original shot for shot?

Because DAWN 04, no matter how tarted up it is, uses the same plot as DAWN 78. That's a "remake" to me.

If the filmmakers wanted the old "its own merits" argument, they should've called it something else.

Probably a little of both. But it does a bit to establish one of the characters a little more, I suppose.

I've not seen the original, but I had passes to see the remake last night. This was one of the best movie-going experiences of my life. It was just flat-out fun. The audience was into it and even appluaded at the end. I don't know if I would have the same reaction watching it by myself at home, though. I definitely want to see it again in the theater.