Kevin Smith a Fan of DAWN of the DEAD remake

[darth los]

Zombi 2, Return of the Living Dead 1 & 2, Undead, Braindead (if you consider it a zombie-zombie movie), Living Dead At Manchester Morgue are but six zed-flicks which kick Yawn04's whore-ass up and down jump street. My personal opinion is that ROTLD 1 & 2 (and 3, 4, 5) were all crap. I cannot stand to watch them. Long story short - I'm no huge fan of Dawn '04. But I believe that weighed solely on its own merits it is watchable. Weighed against all the non-GAR zombie movies out there it does well. Weighed against its namesake it is a turd. Exactly, that's my whole point when I say name me 5 consensus picks of Non-Gar zombie films that are better than Dawn 04'. I doubt that we all can agree on that. People are going to have different opinions on what films are good and what films aren't. The only films that are without a doubt/no brainers are Gar's films and Shaun of the Dead, but what else is there really?

[MinionZombie]

So does that make the 133,149,814,944 times (I did a forum search and counted ) you've used the term 'Name Rape' with regards to Dawn 04 superfluous? No - it is name-rape - but I was taking umbridge to pro-Yawners who use that one element of hatred as the basis/be-all-end-all for the entirety of anti-Yawner's hatred of that steaming pile of turd. It is name-rape, but it's also a shitload of other things ... bad things. ... Also - can't believe I forgot Shaun of the Dead as an awesome non-GAR zed flick - so, without further ado - add that one to my aforementioned list of "more awesome than Yawn but which aren't GAR" list.

[krakenslayer]

Meh... I don't really side with either camp on Dawn 04. It wasn't terrible, in fact I thought it was very entertaining the first time I saw it in the cinema. I don't really care too much either way with regards runners and shamblers; I have a leaning towards shamblers for nostalgic reasons and because I prefer the more sedate, eerie atmosphere and pacing of "slow" zombie movies to the high octane athletic zombie movies, but I do love 28 Weeks/Days Later. However, Dawn 04 is extremely shallow, and doesn't really have any real sense of desperation or menace. The characters don't ring true at all, they go through the motions of mourning or being afraid, but they are so undeveloped and (in several cases) stereotypical, and the character-led scenes so perfunctory, that it really didn't carry any weight. I just didn't give a shit about them. All the smart social satire was stripped out, too - there is no message about mindless consumerism, the mall is no longer a gilded cage, it's just a cool place for the characters to hang out and take whatever they want and be happy while everyone outside suffers - the message, if anything, is pro-consumerist and in opposition to what the original stood for. Last but not least, the gore and black humour that made the original so memorable is notably absent. Oh yes, there's lots and lots of blood (mostly shooting out of bullet wounds - the same effect used over and over and over again), but the trademark slapstick gut-ripping is totally missing. Now gore isn't everything, but part of what makes Romero's films scary is that we actually see the horror of the zombies' flesh eating habits up close. How can you make a movie about cannibalistic zombies and NOT show them eating people!? Oh... and the less said about the zombie baby the better. As I said earlier, I didn't totally hate it. It was a fun action movie, but it wasn't a film with anything memorable or re-watchable about it. I've seen it once since 2004 (on special edition DVD), and to be honest that's probably the last time I ever will. I wasn't a total waste of celluloid, bit I certainly wouldn't waste time or effort defending it.

[Trin]

Well, as we know it takes as many as 20 years for a zombie movie to overcome its initial knee-jerk resistance. Everyone walked into the theaters for Dawn '04 with such high expectations built up from what Dawn '78 was, they were bound to be let down. Even though people hate it today eventually those same people will love it and it will take its place as a classic. What?? Those arguments work for Land but not for Dawn '04?? Hey, even a turd will stink less after it dries out a while.

[darth los]

Well, as we know it takes as many as 20 years for a zombie movie to overcome its initial knee-jerk resistance. Everyone walked into the theaters for Dawn '04 with such high expectations built up from what Dawn '78 was, they were bound to be let down. Even though people hate it today eventually those same people will love it and it will take its place as a classic. What?? Those arguments work for Land but not for Dawn '04?? Hey, even a turd will stink less after it dries out a while. What's good for the goose...right? Meh... I don't really side with either camp on Dawn 04. It wasn't terrible, in fact I thought it was very entertaining the first time I saw it in the cinema. I don't really care too much either way with regards runners and shamblers; I have a leaning towards shamblers for nostalgic reasons and because I prefer the more sedate, eerie atmosphere and pacing of "slow" zombie movies to the high octane athletic zombie movies, but I do love 28 Weeks/Days Later. However, Dawn 04 is extremely shallow, and doesn't really have any real sense of desperation or menace. The characters don't ring true at all, they go through the motions of mourning or being afraid, but they are so undeveloped and (in several cases) stereotypical, and the character-led scenes so perfunctory, that it really didn't carry any weight. I just didn't give a shit about them. All the smart social satire was stripped out, too - there is no message about mindless consumerism, the mall is no longer a gilded cage, it's just a cool place for the characters to hang out and take whatever they want and be happy while everyone outside suffers - the message, if anything, is pro-consumerist and in opposition to what the original stood for. Last but not least, the gore and black humour that made the original so memorable is notably absent. Oh yes, there's lots and lots of blood (mostly shooting out of bullet wounds - the same effect used over and over and over again), but the trademark slapstick gut-ripping is totally missing. Now gore isn't everything, but part of what makes Romero's films scary is that we actually see the horror of the zombies' flesh eating habits up close. How can you make a movie about cannibalistic zombies and NOT show them eating people!? Oh... and the less said about the zombie baby the better. As I said earlier, I didn't totally hate it. It was a fun action movie, but it wasn't a film with anything memorable or re-watchable about it. I've seen it once since 2004 (on special edition DVD), and to be honest that's probably the last time I ever will. I wasn't a total waste of celluloid, bit I certainly wouldn't waste time or effort defending it. Good post. Valid points. However, I have to correct a couple of things. We did indeed see a zombie feeding on a human. When they first get to the mall there's a janitor feasting on someone's guts in a closet (co-worker?) Now admitedly that's just one instance and it pales in comparison to what Romero puts in his films. Also, in terms of the social commentary on consumerism, I would argue that there just wasn't enough time for that aspect of the story to develop. Yes they did have a good time with all the material excesses in the mall. Who wouldn't? The protagonists from the original certainly did, or did we convieniently forget that? Let us not forget that they reveled in decadence for MONTHS until they became tired of it all. That's when the mall became a prison for them. Life is about so much more than material things and they got to a point to where they were just existing instead of living. I get all that. However, the protagonists from the remake were still at the stage where they were enjoying what the mall had to offer. When it was all said and done they weren't there even a month. The characters from the original were there 5 or 6. Big difference. As a matter of fact, even with the month or so that they were there they were running out of supplies so chances are that never would have gotten to the point of boredom with material excess because they just didn't have the time or resources. So for that reason, as well as others, the anti-consumerist message was absent to a large degree in this film. Also, let's not forget that this is NOT the original. Thus it doesn't and perhaps shouldn't share the same message. It has it's own message. But for those who are going to hate the film no matter what I write I guess there's no sense in getting carpal tunnel syndrome trying to explain it.

[bassman]

I've come to accept Dawn04 by thinking of it as a mindless action film. Not that I like it....but it can be entertaining for one viewing. It's like Crank....but with screaming "zombies" and worse actors than Jason Statham.

[Trin]

I've come to accept Dawn04 by thinking of it as a mindless action film. Not that I like it....but it can be entertaining for one viewing. It's like Crank....but with screaming "zombies" and worse actors than Jason Statham. Yeah, that's pretty much how I view it. And when I'm flipping through the channels and it's on I get sucked in. And feel bad about myself later. The only part I refuse to watch is zombie baby. To be honest, if I ignore the things I dislike in Land I can enjoy it. I've recently watched it a couple of times focusing strictly on the atmosphere, characters (the ones I like), and setting. I'm even more convinced that the first 15 minutes of Land are the best 15 minutes of any zombie movie evah imho.

[DjfunkmasterG]

Yeah, that's pretty much how I view it. And when I'm flipping through the channels and it's on I get sucked in. And feel bad about myself later. The only part I refuse to watch is zombie baby. To be honest, if I ignore the things I dislike in Land I can enjoy it. I've recently watched it a couple of times focusing strictly on the atmosphere, characters (the ones I like), and setting. I'm even more convinced that the first 15 minutes of Land are the best 15 minutes of any zombie movie evah imho. Weird, its those same 15 mnutes that ruined LAND for me. Everything once they get back to the city feels good, and ok, its that opening 15 minutes that bothers me immensly. I attribute it to the cinematography, its too claustrophobic, when you compare it to the rest of the movie. The rest of the movies cinematography feels very open and wide, while the opening 15 minutes in Uniontown seems to tight and constrained which set the wrong tone for a zombie film in a world overrun with zombies 3+ years after the outbreak.

[Trin]

This really should not be terribly surprising. You're a cinemetography guy and I'm a plot/storyline guy. To me it was brilliant. In the start of Night we saw people fleeing and reacting. Same for Dawn on a larger scale. Day started with people safe but shell-shocked, hunkered down. Land started with the humans on the offensive. They roll into town with a plan and use the zombie weaknesses against them. They loot with purpose and preparation. I was in the theater thinking, "Hell Yeah!! This is how you survive!!" Not only was it a great way to start the movie where the humans have had time to prepare, it was also a great way to restart the Dead series after 20 years. It introduced great characters. We see Riley as a methodical, by the book guy, yet caring of the fellow scavengers. We see foreshadowing of the conflict between Riley and Cholo, we see the bond between Riley and Charlie, and we see the young guy kill himself after being bitten. These are guys that are past the whole soul-searching phase. To quote Roger, they're dealing with it. The fireworks was genius. It makes complete sense that the near-mindless zombies would fixate on fireworks - just like we do. At the same time it's wonderful subtext - classic exploitation of the masses while giving them a show to watch. This is the only facet of the social commentary that doesn't interfere with the plot. For my part I loved the atmosphere. Yes, it was shot tight and we didn't see as much of the outside world as I would've liked, but I really didn't notice that in the theater. I was too busy just soaking it all in. Seeing how Uniontown was "living" in the absence of humans was really cool. The music was great too. Really creepy and mood enhancing. It started downhill for me when they got to the Green and there were no zombies around. Back on topic, someone said Dawn '04 had a great opening, and I agree with that too. They did a good job of dropping little hints of what was going on while showing the nurse (Anna??) going through her routine. Then it went full on intense which laid the groundwork for the movie as a whole.

[Phenia Films]

You mean the big time overated Smith...who cares what he thinks

[AcesandEights]

You mean the big time overated Smith...who cares what he thinks Oh, snap! Straight from the mouth of someone from Jersey!

[Phenia Films]

Oh, snap! Straight from the mouth of someone from Jersey! thought youd like that Ace8, your avatar/sig shows you my appreciation for the guy (lol)

[DjfunkmasterG]

You mean the big time overated Smith...who cares what he thinks Yet here you and I sit trying to get a smidgen of the success he currently has. I care what he thinks, if he could make it, so can we and obviously he knows what going on, and was smart enough to have a 15+ year career with Hollywood. You can't even tell me you wouldn't want to be in his shoes, especially if you are making films.

[MoonSylver]

Meh... I don't really side with either camp on Dawn 04. It wasn't terrible, in fact I thought it was very entertaining the first time I saw it in the cinema. I don't really care too much either way with regards runners and shamblers; I have a leaning towards shamblers for nostalgic reasons and because I prefer the more sedate, eerie atmosphere and pacing of "slow" zombie movies to the high octane athletic zombie movies, but I do love 28 Weeks/Days Later. However, Dawn 04 is extremely shallow, and doesn't really have any real sense of desperation or menace. The characters don't ring true at all, they go through the motions of mourning or being afraid, but they are so undeveloped and (in several cases) stereotypical, and the character-led scenes so perfunctory, that it really didn't carry any weight. I just didn't give a shit about them. All the smart social satire was stripped out, too - there is no message about mindless consumerism, the mall is no longer a gilded cage, it's just a cool place for the characters to hang out and take whatever they want and be happy while everyone outside suffers - the message, if anything, is pro-consumerist and in opposition to what the original stood for. Last but not least, the gore and black humour that made the original so memorable is notably absent. Oh yes, there's lots and lots of blood (mostly shooting out of bullet wounds - the same effect used over and over and over again), but the trademark slapstick gut-ripping is totally missing. Now gore isn't everything, but part of what makes Romero's films scary is that we actually see the horror of the zombies' flesh eating habits up close. How can you make a movie about cannibalistic zombies and NOT show them eating people!? Oh... and the less said about the zombie baby the better. As I said earlier, I didn't totally hate it. It was a fun action movie, but it wasn't a film with anything memorable or re-watchable about it. I've seen it once since 2004 (on special edition DVD), and to be honest that's probably the last time I ever will. I wasn't a total waste of celluloid, bit I certainly wouldn't waste time or effort defending it. Give that man a ce-gar. Cut & paste the above & add the name "MoonSylver" to it & that's pretty much it. Only difference is I bought the DVD when it came out & have watched it a few times since, but other than that *meh*. The only time I get pissy about it is when it gets compared to any GAR flick in the "better than" context, just because even thought the last couple of flicks were not his best work, I still don't think there's any room for comparison

[Mike70]

Okay, hack is probably the wrong word, but I dislike Smith... the right word is overrated. extremely overrated. the most overrated director in the last 50 years. some of his films have their moments but all in all, i don't really enjoy "movies" done by a person who apparently feels that having his characters say "fuck" every 3 words along with copious scatological references to be the height of comedic sophistication. the guy's movies are for people who are perpetually stuck in their freshmen year in high school. i wonder if he said that he was a big fan of covering himself in camel shit and wallowing in sawdust with badgers would that make that activity cool?