Dawn has no antagonist....

[SymphonicX]

Ever notice how Night has Cooper, Day has Rhodes, Land has Hopper - but Dawn has no one in terms of an antagonist...no one to set the group at odds with each other...it seems in this film the situation is purely the antagonist...

The bikers don't really count because they're not part of the development of the characters...more a situation that our developed characters must overcome, a final hurdle, so to speak.

Maybe that's one of the reasons why Dawn is so loved? It's not a battle of wits as much as an adventure movie...

I mean Stephen could be considered the antagonist if one was really looking for one (just for that smarmy reaction he does to the interest at his map of the tops of the stores...."I saw it on the map" *SMIRK*)

But then Diary....who was the antagonist in that? To be honest I don't care for the movie so it's not been played more than once...but the closed I can think of an antagonist is the idiot filming his mates die....!

[Philly_SWAT]

Ever notice how Night has Cooper, Day has Rhodes, Land has Hopper - but Dawn has no one in terms of an antagonist...no one to set the group at odds with each other...it seems in this film the situation is purely the antagonist...

Maybe that's one of the reasons why Dawn is so loved? It's not a battle of wits as much as an adventure movie...


I have noticed that before, and I do believe that is one of the reasons why Dawn is so loved. You are right....the situation itself is the antagonist, which is an interesting thing for a filmmaker to do. I am sure there are other movies that do this to, but none spring to mind right away. I think that the very concept is one that treats the audience with respect. Not to say that all uses of an antagonist treat the audience as if they are stupid, but some movies I think feel forced to even have a "jerk, idiot, traitor,etc" within a group of protagonists just so the simple minded audience has someONE to root against, as if a horrible situation wasnt enough. To put it in wrestling terms...would the masses have loved Hulk Hogan as much if they didnt have Roddy Piper to hate?

[sandrock74]

True enough...I suppose there isn't a single antagonist in the film. I never even realized it before, truth be told. It is the only film in which the main characters work together with a minimal amount of internal resistance. They don't fight with one another, but they fight together against events of the film.

[Andy]

In the dawn novel, peter is played as an antagonist in the beginning, before the other 3 get to know him, he has a real rivalry with stephen and they almost hate each other.. which is touched on in the film like at the private airfield when stephen nearly shoots peter then peter comes out and aims his gun at him, but never goes as deep as it does in the novel.

[Trin]

I mentioned once a while back how I believe Dawn is loved due to the camaraderie amongst the 4 and got my shiite jumped.

[darth los]

In the dawn novel, peter is played as an antagonist in the beginning, before the other 3 get to know him, he has a real rivalry with stephen and they almost hate each other.. which is touched on in the film like at the private airfield when stephen nearly shoots peter then peter comes out and aims his gun at him, but never goes as deep as it does in the novel.


Talk about being ungreatful, huh? I mean the man only saved him from a zombiefied population center. :rolleyes:

:cool:

[krakenslayer]

Talk about being ungreatful, huh? I mean the man only saved him from a zombiefied population center. :rolleyes:

:cool:

In the novel, it goes a lot deeper into the characters' heads than the film does. Peter sees Steven, initially, as basically like a little kid playing at "survivalism". He thinks that Steven is cocky because he's the pilot and the big important guy who saved everyone's lives.

This cockiness comes out a little in the Euro cut of Dawn, when Steven goes off on a rant about how easy it is to kill zombies and take everything they want. Peter chastises him and poses the question - if Fran died; could he chop off her head before it was too late? This was all in the novel too, but played up much more.

[EvilNed]

Actually, having no antagonist isn't all that unusual. Take any disaster film, for instance. Most of them are about surviving the disaster, not some villain. Same goes for Dawn.

[Philly_SWAT]

Actually, having no antagonist isn't all that unusual. Take any disaster film, for instance. Most of them are about surviving the disaster, not some villain. Same goes for Dawn.

Dont most disaster films have one survivor who is kind of an asshole.....wanting to leave behind the injured man, discounting the old person as unimportant because they have "lived a full life", argue that the plan is too dangerous, dumb, wont work, etc., without offering a plan of his own? To me, that character would be the antagonist.

[MoonSylver]

Dont most disaster films have one survivor who is kind of an asshole.....wanting to leave behind the injured man, discounting the old person as unimportant because they have "lived a full life", argue that the plan is too dangerous, dumb, wont work, etc., without offering a plan of his own? To me, that character would be the antagonist.

See...I almost included Night along with Dawn as having no antagonist, because Cooper is or isn't depending on your POV (& even if he IS, he isn't one in the traditional sense of the "villain"), but I decided not to because Cooper DOES fit the above mold to a "T".

Great observation about Dawn BTW SymphonicX.

[sandrock74]

Even the Dawn remake had an antagonist. The dickhead who owned the boat was a pain in the ass.

[Trin]

Even the Dawn remake had an antagonist. The dickhead who owned the boat was a pain in the ass.

Don't forget idiot dog girl or CJ in the earlier portions or even Ving as he decides to leave them all to go to Fort Pastor. The movie had lots of cross purposes causing antagonism. Push comes to shove and boat guy caused way fewer deaths than idiot dog girl.

[deadpunk]

Actually, having no antagonist isn't all that unusual. Take any disaster film, for instance. Most of them are about surviving the disaster, not some villain. Same goes for Dawn.

The problem here is; once the troupe have the mall secured, there is still zero friction. In my opinion, this was the most unrealistic part of Dawn.

When you're at home, surrounded by people you love and with the bonus of being able to leave at any time, friction still emerges. (I don't care how happily married you are or how much you love your kids) The idea that these four people could band together with nary a single issue for so long is pretty hard to swallow. Add in the fact that there were three men and only one woman... Come on now.

I personally do not hold Dawn to be the greatest of the 3. And honestly, the main reason for this has always been that I felt the characters lacked any real depth. Each of them seems designed to serve a purpose in the movie, rather than having a true personality. Even under normal circumstances, people are generally filled with some type of inner strife. They lash out at those around them in dire situations and they often perform actions/ make decisions that do not match their personality-type. Dawn did not show any of this.

It's reasonable to assume that the 4 would have gone absolutley stir-crazy once the mall had been secured. The sheer size of the place might have helped sway Cabin Fever for a bit, but, eventually, it should have caught up to them.

I would agree that most disaster movie show the situation as being the antagonist, but there is generally one happy asshole who pops up with that good, old fashioned "Every man for himself" mentality that sets him/her apart from the other potential survivors.

However, I would be amiss to not point out that the antagonists in Night, Day, and Land were little more than plot devices themselves. They were incorporated into the scripts to give the Living Dead a chance to do their stuff. :skull:

While I'm not a huge fan of Dawn04, I did feel that the character development was a tad more realistic. Those people were constantly at each other's throats, even the among their cliques. Truer stuff, in my opinion.

[EvilNed]

Dont most disaster films have one survivor who is kind of an asshole.....wanting to leave behind the injured man, discounting the old person as unimportant because they have "lived a full life", argue that the plan is too dangerous, dumb, wont work, etc., without offering a plan of his own? To me, that character would be the antagonist.

Yeah, asshole characters are usual. But asshole characters aren't antagonists. Antagonists want the exact opposite of the main crew. The asshole characters are usually just cowards who bite it halfway through.

[krakenslayer]

The problem here is; once the troupe have the mall secured, there is still zero friction. In my opinion, this was the most unrealistic part of Dawn.

When you're at home, surrounded by people you love and with the bonus of being able to leave at any time, friction still emerges. (I don't care how happily married you are or how much you love your kids) The idea that these four people could band together with nary a single issue for so long is pretty hard to swallow. Add in the fact that there were three men and only one woman... Come on now.


Well, Roger seems like an extremely easygoing guy for a cop (look at how his reaction to Fran and Stephen's argument before the truck run), Peter is super-self-disciplined. However, there's plenty of friction in Dawn, but it's more low key than in Day and Land. For example, Fran and Stephen's relationship problems, the petty squabbles over the TV, and so forth. Peter meanwhile, works out his frustrations playing squash, etc.

[EvilNed]

I'd also like to point out that Dawn of the Dead does TOO have an antagonist. The zombies are antagonists.

[SRP76]

I'd also like to point out that Dawn of the Dead does TOO have an antagonist. The zombies are antagonists.

As it should be! This is why it's my favorite. Keep the zombies the enemy. I don't want my movie monsters "cuddly".