No Dawn of the Dead Sequel??

[Adrenochrome]

How many remakes really have anything to do with the original? They always change the characters in some way shape or form. All you're doing is stating a case of them not bringing back the original story and characters. Guess what... Zack Snyder said it best."That DAWN of the DEAD was already made. There is no need to remake that film". He was right, so he did his OWN version based on the screenplay given to him. However, it is still DAWN of the DEAD! just not THE Dawn of the Dead you want it to be.... and ya know what, "Tough Titty Said The Kitty, But The Milk Is Still Good." DAWN 2004 will always be DAWN of the DEAD 2004, and it will always be titled DAWN of the DEAD and all the ****ing and moaning about it on this forum isn't gonna change the title on the video box or DVD case. Why couldn't Hack Snyder make his own, original zombie movie? Why insist on needing a jumpstart and a name-drop?

[DjfunkmasterG]

Wasn't his choice... He wanted to do an R-Rated film. he turned down SWAT to do this simply because it was R-Rated. When you think about it, it is his own zombie film. Forget the title DAWN of the DEAD having anything to do with the original film. This is a new DAWN of the DEAD. Arguing merits on the title means nothing. I could easily call DEADLANDS Night of the Living Dead or DAWN of the DEAD. Essentially it has elements of both films relating to the context of the title based on the dictorial definition.

[Adrenochrome]

Wasn't his choice... He wanted to do an R-Rated film. he turned down SWAT to do this simply because it was R-Rated. When you think about it, it is his own zombie film. Forget the title DAWN of the DEAD having anything to do with the original film. This is a new DAWN of the DEAD. Arguing merits on the title means nothing. I could easily call DEADLANDS Night of the Living Dead or DAWN of the DEAD. Essentially it has elements of both films relating to the context of the title based on the dictorial definition. But, you DIDN'T call your film that. You gave it an original title. That means alot.

[EvilNed]

How many remakes really have anything to do with the original? They always change the characters in some way shape or form. All you're doing is stating a case of them not bringing back the original story and characters. Guess what... Zack Snyder said it best."That DAWN of the DEAD was already made. There is no need to remake that film". He was right, so he did his OWN version based on the screenplay given to him. However, it is still DAWN of the DEAD! just not THE Dawn of the Dead you want it to be.... and ya know what, "Tough Titty Said The Kitty, But The Milk Is Still Good." DAWN 2004 will always be DAWN of the DEAD 2004, and it will always be titled DAWN of the DEAD and all the ****ing and moaning about it on this forum isn't gonna change the title on the video box or DVD case. Except for the fact that it's a zombie film (and that PART of the film takes place in a mall), it has no resemblence whatsoever. This is obviously what disappointed many people. It's the kind of film that could definetly have been renamed, and the people would just have seen the numerous references to the old film as homages, nothing else.

[Adrenochrome]

Except for the fact that it's a zombie film (and that PART of the film takes place in a mall), it has no resemblence whatsoever. This is obviously what disappointed many people. It's the kind of film that could definetly have been renamed, and the people would just have seen the numerous references to the old film as homages, nothing else. Exactley!!!! Hell, why not one of those SUPER STORES?? Like a Wal Mart type thing?

[DjfunkmasterG]

But you guys are looking at the wrong way. it isn't DAWN of the DEAD. It is another chapter of DAWN of the DEAD.

[Adrenochrome]

But you guys are looking at the wrong way. it isn't DAWN of the DEAD. It is another chapter of DAWN of the DEAD. No. It's a Hack trying to make a buck.

[DjfunkmasterG]

then you should be pointing the finger at Richard Rubinstein, not Zack Snyder. His Paycheck for DAWN was the minimum directors fee for first time Union/Studio backed feature over $10,000,000.00. He made $100,000 to direct DAWN of the DEAD. ($13,500 a week for 8 weeks of work)

[Adrenochrome]

then you should be pointing the finger at Richard Rubinstein, not Zack Snyder. His Paycheck for DAWN was the minimum directors fee for first time Union/Studio backed feature over $10,000,000.00. He made $100,000 to direct DAWN of the DEAD. ($13,500 a week for 8 weeks of work) regardless, why not make an original flick instead of name-dropping? Yawn'04 is a terrible, predictable yawnfest. It SCREAMS Hollywood, NOT originality.

[DjfunkmasterG]

he did make an original flick. Like all of you said it has nothing to do with DAWN of the DEAD.

[EvilNed]

But you guys are looking at the wrong way. it isn't DAWN of the DEAD. It is another chapter of DAWN of the DEAD. No, you're looking at my argument the wrong way. I'm simply saying that if someone says they were let down by the film itself (because of the title), they have a good point and they have an argument. I believe the film would have made alot of zombie fans happier had it not struck out as trying to be a remake of the original flick. And saying that it's another chapter of Dawn of the Dead doesn't make sense, since you've been saying it's a remake in your other posts (but not a direct remake). So how can it be both?

[Svengoolie]

I'm simply saying that if someone says they were let down by the film itself (because of the title), they have a good point and they have an argument. Why is that a good point? Being "let down" by a film simply because of the title is the dumbest reason to trash a film I've ever heard. I believe the film would have made alot of zombie fans happier had it not struck out as trying to be a remake of the original flick. That statement might apply to the people posting here, and the die-hard GAR fans at large...but the general public (and most horror fans by and large) didn't care--and the film was a success that brought in a whole new fan base for the zombie genre who ultimately prefered the remake to the slow-moving original.

[Tri0xin]

One would expect a Dawn '04 sequel. Money talks in Hollywood, and if I remember right, Dawn '04 was a hit at the box office. By that rationale, there will be a sequel. I wouldn't expect anything like the first one though. It will probably be something along the lines of the From Dusk Till Dawn sequels, straight to video or something. I also wouldn't get your hopes up about Zach Snyder and James Gunn having anything to do with it either.

[NumberOneGARFan]

A little bit off topic from the original thread but what the hell. I believe that Dawn '04 was original in the fact that it has all new scenes, ideas, and charactors. I don't think its such a slap in the face to GAR because it kinda pays tribute to the film he created 26 years earlier. He enjoys the fact that someone would want to do a film based on his work because he never does remakes of his own. Also the remake helps sales of the original masterpiece believe it or not. So a remake or a sequal to a remake is not so bad as long as it doesn't effect the originals reputation. which it doesn't. It was something new and entertaining. Don't agree with the idea of running zombies though. A sequal might not be so bad as long as it is done right.

[DjfunkmasterG]

A little bit off topic from the original thread but what the hell. I believe that Dawn '04 was original in the fact that it has all new scenes, ideas, and charactors. I don't think its such a slap in the face to GAR because it kinda pays tribute to the film he created 26 years earlier. He enjoys the fact that someone would want to do a film based on his work because he never does remakes of his own. Also the remake helps sales of the original masterpiece believe it or not. So a remake or a sequal to a remake is not so bad as long as it doesn't effect the originals reputation. which it doesn't. It was something new and entertaining. Don't agree with the idea of running zombies though. A sequal might not be so bad as long as it is done right. This is exactly my point as well. Everyone needs to quit their bitching about DAWN 04. It only helps the original film. When the Ultimate DVD box set came out, that week it was the #12 seller in the USA. Not bad for an almost 30 year old film. The remake only helps the original. Of course Romero sees peanuts out of it because Rubinstein owns the rights.