running zombie chaos!?

[Andy]

Just a thought, how would you guys of felt about dawn'04 if it wasn't branded as a remake?

i mean, same characters, same plot, same zombies, same effects.. imagine if it was just named something different and the few links to the original dawn were removed.

would you of liked it more and given it a higher rating in the community?

just wondering..

[jdog]

that might make me like it a bit better, but i still hate running zombies.
it would not change the fact for me that it was a so so movie with weak characters and a stupid plot. like really ,leave the mall for an island! what the f@#$ is that!

[Skold]

i'd have liked it better, but still would've thought of it as a no-brainer action film. But trying to compare it to the scoial satire of DOTD just makes this film look ridiculous. i wish they'd have called it "Mall of the Dead" or something so i would have known to stay away. Ugh.

[Tullaryx]

I don't think it would've made me like it more, even though I did enjoy it. In fact, not calling it a remake would've made me hate it since I would've thought the producers were ripping off Romero's original and not even doing a good job about it. At least, by saying it was a reimagining of the original and admitting it as such it gave made me give them a chance.

[MinionZombie]

Nope, I'd have still felt the same. I have the flick on DVD and can enjoy it rarely when I'm in the mood for a seriously-no-brainer, dumb-as-f*ck, ACTION 'zombie' flick with *sigh* running zombies. Poor direction, terrible script, naff acting, they go all 'Saving Private Ryan' with the cinematography near the end - and like jdog also pointed out - they make the UTTERLY RETARDED decision to leave nice safe mall for zombie island - geez. If only that dumb bitch hadn't gone running after a friggin' dog, jesus christ!

The most I watched this movie was when I was using it as part of my final year Dissertation on post-millennial horror movies...since then I've only seen bits of it on Sky and the DVD is collecting dust...

[prettycorpses]

I liked it anyways...ok this'll shock you all..my hubby prefers it to the original...I know, im ashamed for him!!...maybe that gives me ground for divorce :D ;) :p

[MikePizzoff]

Yes, I would have enjoyed it more if it weren't holding the name "Dawn". Although I enjoyed it, regardless of it's title. I thought it was a fun action flick and the first ten minutes are probably the best opening 10 minutes I've seen a movie have in a very long time.

[Trencher]

Yes! I would have liked it very much more if it had nothing to do with dawn of the dead! On its own its a good movie. Slightly better than 28 days later actually.

I liked it anyways...ok this'll shock you all..my hubby prefers it to the original...I know, im ashamed for him!!...maybe that gives me ground for divorce :D ;) :p Hmmm.. I must say no. Prefearing the dawn 04 to the original is not ground for divorce. :shifty:

[Apocryphism]

My initial opposition to the film settled into a humble acceptance of the facts that the original film is unchanging and unsurpassable, and that any remake, revisioning, or ripoff is never going to change those constants. Nothing will change what the original film means, particularly what it means to me personally... so why should I be concerned about a remake? I saw it, I enjoyed it to a certain extent for what it was in itself (and I certainly appreciate its inspiration) and that's that.

Use whatever verbage you want. It is what it is and giving it a different title wouldn't have changed the film, or my perspective on it.

[erisi236]

I liked it as Dawn04 just as much as I would have liked it if was called Army of the Dead :cool:

[Craig]

Nope, I love it how it is.

[axlish]

I enjoyed it a great deal. Had it not had the name Dawn of the Dead, it would have taken me longer to get around to seeing it. If anything, that would have made the film a nice suprise and perhaps I would have liked it better. By any name it is a damn good film, direction, characters and all.

[Zombieapocalypse]

My saving grace for this movie was the sheer fact that :D Ken Foree:D
Had his 30 second cameo with the obvious catch line from the original film.

[Tullaryx]

The one thing that sold me on the remake was the first 10 minutes. If it had begun slower I would've been less enthused and hooked.

[Svengoolie]

Personally, I thought it was the best zombie flick since 1985's Return of the Living Dead...and whether the GAR die-hards want to accept it or not, it set a new standard for all zombie flicks to come.

[axlish]

My saving grace for this movie was the sheer fact that :D Ken Foree:D
Had his 30 second cameo with the obvious catch line from the original film.

His dialogue (more specifically, in the extended cut) was awesome. It was realistic. That is exactly what those evangelist types will be saying when the schick hits the fan.

[p2501]

i think it still would have been crap.


i give it more credit than i should because they did term it as a remake, and actually try to do new things. if nothing else i respect that.

but the film on the whole is plotted like a bad first person shooter, the characters in addition to being free range sterotypes are impossibly dumb. and the overall films lacks any coheiriant story. the fact the resolution was just "we'll get a boat" ****es me off to no end.

I do agree than KEn Foree rocked ass, but then when doesn't he?

[Zombieapocalypse]

His dialogue (more specifically, in the extended cut) was awesome. It was realistic. That is exactly what those evangelist types will be saying when the schick hits the fan.


Exactly! He was perfect. His look, his dialogue, even the background in the scene at his desk was perfect. He was my favourite part of the film by far.

[Tullaryx]

Exactly! He was perfect. His look, his dialogue, even the background in the scene at his desk was perfect. He was my favourite part of the film by far.

I always wondered if his character survived or not.

[Svengoolie]

but the film on the whole is plotted like a bad first person shooter, the characters in addition to being free range sterotypes are impossibly dumb. and the overall films lacks any coheiriant story. the fact the resolution was just "we'll get a boat" ****es me off to no end.


Yeah, but P...similar stuff could be said about the original.

The Fab Four were really nothing more than two-dimensional stereotypes without much development, and most of the action pretty much boils down to a Wild West Show with zombies. They're safe in the mall for months with less and less contact with the outside world (which eventually stops altogether), until an army of bikers just happens to show up and raid the place--the bikers' only purpose in the film is to jump start the action and showcase more grisly deaths.

And, the remake survivors' choice to make a break for it via the boat makes about as much sense as Stephen's plan to just steal the chopper and fly west--they had no clear destination in mind, no plan, and little in terms of food, water, fuel, or ammo....

[Zombieapocalypse]

I always wondered if his character survived or not.

He must have...Not sure why really, he just kicks so much ass! :p

[Tullaryx]

With the extra in the dvd about finding Andy's video diary, I always wondered just how long before the survivors retook the planet.

[Zombielord69]

i would think they would take back the planet after about 10 years i would say. by then all the zombies would be rotted away or atleast enough to be no trouble at all.

[roger_19]

hm I might appreciate it a little more. but the fact that It's titled dawn of the dead bothers me. we all know that there is only one dawn of the dead and It was directed by george romero.

[tju1973]

None of the movies really scare me anyway-- so the only problem I had was calling it a remake. taken as a stand alone movie and not part of the trilogy--now quadrilogy-- I enjoyed it. It is what it is-- 1.5 or so hours of fun zombie stuff-- not a great plot, but enjoyable to me. I still watch it from time to time.

I do like the first 10-15 min the best. All the news footage and the shot of the helicopter flying over the highway, the wrecks, the explosions-- the music fit perfectly --

The rest of the movie? Popcorn fare-- but still ok by me.

[MinionZombie]

It's also daft to call it Dawn of the Dead - in a non-marketting, money-men way - because it has nothing in common with the original (and best) - there's a mall with people in it and there's zombies - but the zombies run, his and scream like kids looking for their next Ritalin fix. I've got more in common with a tree than Yawn04 does with Dawn...

[jdog]

It's also daft to call it Dawn of the Dead - in a non-marketting, money-men way - because it has nothing in common with the original (and best) - there's a mall with people in it and there's zombies - but the zombies run, his and scream like kids looking for their next Ritalin fix. I've got more in common with a tree than Yawn04 does with Dawn...
i totaly agree with you on that. it has nothing at all to do with the real "dawn of the dead" , except the mall and a few lines that they ripped off from the original dawn (a true clasic). the name was no doubt just to trick all the fans of the original into going to see it, because of the world wide popularty of the original dawn. and it no doubt worked or else this film wouldn't of done as well as it did. it tricked me as i'm sure it tricked many of you into seeing it when you saw the name "dawn of the dead".
as soon as i was finished watching this movie a had to get home to watch the original just so i could get this movie out of my head. the only parts of this movie that i really enjoyed are the 2 mins of comeo's with original dawn cast.

[Zombieapocalypse]

the only parts of this movie that i really enjoyed are the 2 mins of comeo's with original dawn cast.[/QUOTE]

Here Here! :)

[BlueRoseRomeo]

Either way I would still say I like the movie...The title means not much to me...

BUT I will agree i prefer slow moving zombies

[p2501]

Yeah, but P...similar stuff could be said about the original.

The Fab Four were really nothing more than two-dimensional stereotypes without much development, and most of the action pretty much boils down to a Wild West Show with zombies. They're safe in the mall for months with less and less contact with the outside world (which eventually stops altogether), until an army of bikers just happens to show up and raid the place--the bikers' only purpose in the film is to jump start the action and showcase more grisly deaths.

And, the remake survivors' choice to make a break for it via the boat makes about as much sense as Stephen's plan to just steal the chopper and fly west--they had no clear destination in mind, no plan, and little in terms of food, water, fuel, or ammo....


Yes and no. In the original what ever the "fab four" attempted to do they did so in (atleast for the time period) in an effective manor. the new group was just half assed about everything (excluding ving rhames). they didn't use any of the available materials within the mall to either A) help effect their escape. B) recon thier boating options or C) implment supply operation with the gun store.

from start to finish they were just laying low untill the script up and said "whelp time to leave the mall".

as for plot devices, the bikers alteast within the context of the film make "some" sense. armed bands of raiders would most certainly be a reality within this fiction. with dawn 2k4 it was just one scripted event after another.

the plan to steal the chopper was on a basic level more improvosational than anything else. and while not well planed, stephen had the basic fallback of the helicopter allowing for a more intuitive or fly by sight system of navigation. futher the "fab four" had the foresight to arrange prestocked supplies on the chopper. to that end they demonstarted an ability to plan for contingencies. the new group again failed to do any of this.

[Svengoolie]

Yes and no. In the original what ever the "fab four" attempted to do they did so in (atleast for the time period) in an effective manor. the new group was just half assed about everything (excluding ving rhames). they didn't use any of the available materials within the mall to either A) help effect their escape. B) recon thier boating options or C) implment supply operation with the gun store.

from start to finish they were just laying low untill the script up and said "whelp time to leave the mall".


Not quite.

In the remake, the survivors fortified the shuttle buses with improvised materials looted from the hardware store in a music montage. They also came up with a couple of ideas of clearing the ghouls out of the way during their escape--including using the snow plow blades, IEDs (the propane tank/road flare bombs), and chainsaws.

As for your point b...what kind of recon operation were they supposed to implement when being actively chased down by a city full of zombies? They knew where they were going and whose boat they were looking for. In their situation, they had more of a plan than Stephen did when he flew out into the night sky....

They knew they were going to have to get to Andy's gun store one way or the other--to both save Andy and get what they needed. That plan had to be modified when Andy got bit and they had to save Nicole, but they still needed the guns. When they went back to the mall through the sewer, everybody was armed to the hilt, and I remember at least one character carrying a bag of guns an ammo.


as for plot devices, the bikers alteast within the context of the film make "some" sense. armed bands of raiders would most certainly be a reality within this fiction. with dawn 2k4 it was just one scripted event after another.

I disagree on that. People in fortified areas were disappearing into the stomachs of ghouls one after the other...but a group of bikers out in the open were able to survive? Maybe...but then again, maybe not. They had to stop sometime, and I just don't see them surviving longer than groups in well stocked, fortified locations. They'd be a reality, sure. At the beginning. Personally, I always felt that the roving bands of police and vigilantes on search and destroy missions at the end of NOTLD and the beginning of Dawn would degenerate into these types of bands...but I wouldn't see them lasting months into the phenomenon. No. The bikers' sole purpose was to jumpstart a stalled story and showcase more grisly deaths.


the plan to steal the chopper was on a basic level more improvosational than anything else. and while not well planed, stephen had the basic fallback of the helicopter allowing for a more intuitive or fly by sight system of navigation.

That's one way of putting it. He stole the chopper with no plan whatsoever, except to fly west. As Fran put it "Jesus Christ...we don't even know where we're going. We don't have food, we don't have water...we don't even have a radio." What you call "improvisational", I'd call "reckless" (to say the least)...especially when you're flying in a stolen chopper out into a land of ghouls, looters, and trigger happy cops. They could've ran out of fuel and landed in a sea of ghouls, a group of either type of humans...or out in the middle of nowhere--where eventually they'd still encounter one or all of those three.

But, somehow, to you that made more sense than the Dawn04 survivors getting on a boat. Okay.


futher the "fab four" had the foresight to arrange prestocked supplies on the chopper. to that end they demonstarted an ability to plan for contingencies. the new group again failed to do any of this.

Stephen didn't stock the helicopter until several months after they'd been in the mall, when he was teaching Fran to fly. Coincidentally, it was the same day the bikers broke in...so it was all in all a lucky move. Too bad they leave the mall without much else...including fuel.

As for the new group--we saw them fortifiying the buses, so I think it'd be safe to assume that they'd stashed other supplies in there as well. If they got the chance--you've gotta remember, they were still in the final stages of their plan (Marcellus Wallace held up that sign to Andy that said "5 more days") when the zombies got in and they had to make a run for it.

As for what they got at the gun store, they had to leave with what they could carry themselves through a sewer...and they ultimately had to to it while being chased by ghouls.

THAT'S what I'd call "improvisational".:D

[Tullaryx]

I disagree on that. People in fortified areas were disappearing into the stomachs of ghouls one after the other...but a group of bikers out in the open were able to survive? Maybe...but then again, maybe not. They had to stop sometime, and I just don't see them surviving longer than groups in well stocked, fortified locations. They'd be a reality, sure. At the beginning. Personally, I always felt that the roving bands of police and vigilantes on search and destroy missions at the end of NOTLD and the beginning of Dawn would degenerate into these types of bands...but I wouldn't see them lasting months into the phenomenon. No. The bikers' sole purpose was to jumpstart a stalled story and showcase more grisly deaths.

Actually, it is wholly plausible that such a nomadic convoy of raiders and bikers would've survive that long in the outside. Remember, when watching the scenes when they flew over the countryside and back roads the zombies were out there but never in large enuogh numbers that they bunched up. I'm sure the raiders lost people to negligence and sometimes just being overpowered. But I think they mostly just went from station to station and probably even siphoning gas from abandoned cars, or from fleeing people they killed for supplies, weapons and women. Even in the end of Dawn where the bikers were set upon by the zombies, it looked like alot of them still got out of the mall to continue their nomadic ways. They just didn't care about anyone who may have been left behind and/or injured and needs help. This is one type of group that would survive for a long time since they act to survive by any means necessary.

[Arcades057]

My beefs with the movie revolve, mostly, around one character: Steve, AKA Poor-man's Bruce Campbell. I didn't like him. Every line he had was a joke, taking away from the movie (which was supposed to be horror, by the way). I understand that these days you have to have comedic relief, but he was a little over the top. I didn't much care for the running zombies either, but I'm getting used to them.

The best part of the movie was the beginning montage, showing scenes from around the world. I think this was the first movie to do that and I rather enjoyed it. Also, the part where the president's guards start mowing down reporters, I loved that too. Hell, my personal opinion is that you could've made the whole movie following the president's people mowing down zombies all across the country on their way to Disney Land and it would've been all good. Leave out Steve and it would've been better than it was to start with.

[Svengoolie]

The best part of the movie was the beginning montage, showing scenes from around the world. I think this was the first movie to do that and I rather enjoyed it. Also, the part where the president's guards start mowing down reporters, I loved that too.

I couldn't agree with you more.

It's one thing to HEAR about the ****e hitting the fan, like we did in GAR's flicks...but it's another thing to SEE it happening.

The riot footage intermingled with the news casts and ghouls was truly a seminal point in the zombie genre, IMO.....:D

[Tullaryx]

I also liked that credits montage after that crazy first 10 minutes. I think what made it great for me was Johnny Cash singing "When the Man Comes Around" in the background. Everytime I hear that song now I keep thinking I should start oiling up my guns, checking the supplies, check the truck to make sure it has a full tank and start for things to go down.

[axlish]

I think the best part of the film was the final sequence, beginning with the crew hauling ass over to Andy's Gun Shop and ending in the "credits". This sequence took it above and beyond what Return of the Living Dead was able to do. We went out into the ruins of the city and saw what was going down in the unpopulated areas. Some complain about the jumpy camera work (similar to Private Ryan) but I think that helped the tension in this case. It was a successful portrayal of a place I don't want to be anywhere near. The only part that really irked me in that sequence was Ving running full speed through the fence and barrelling into the dock, thus screwing them over and basically causing CJ's death. What was Michael thinking allowing a perfectly healthy CJ remain behind as a martyr while he has his cheeze moment on the dock? He should have remained at the truck crash site and held off the zombies while everyone else made it ok.

[Arcades057]

Dude, good point, Axlish, I never thought about the whole CJ thing before. That is crazy, what a selfish prick.

[glazedoverdead]

Nope, I love it how it is.

I totally agree. It was a fun film...BTW, I love the avatar, Craig! That priest totally rocks!
"I kick arse for the Lord!":elol:

[general tbag]

nother bumpage

[AcesandEights]

Doesn't matter to me, either way. Great, fun flick. Despite what people bent on hating it have to say, and the film's obvious blemishes I enjoyed, and continue to enjoy it, thoroughly.

[EvilNed]

**** for brains, **** for characters, **** for script. But damn fine direction, I tell ya. Damn fine direction.

The script and characters is obviously very sub-par. Most of the decisions they make throughout the film is just unremarkably bad. Especially that asshole Steve, who is arguably the worst character ever to be written down on paper.

But I like what Zack Snyder did with what he had at his disposal. Using Johnny Cash music, realizing that this script was **** and just went all out action with it, etc. etc.

So I'd still think that the film was really crappy. But I'd like it's style, and enjoy it as a no-brainer. Much as I do now.

[Maitreya]

The only part that really irked me in that sequence was Ving running full speed through the fence and barrelling into the dock, thus screwing them over and basically causing CJ's death. What was Michael thinking allowing a perfectly healthy CJ remain behind as a martyr while he has his cheeze moment on the dock? He should have remained at the truck crash site and held off the zombies while everyone else made it ok.

Hahahaha. It bothered me that Michael would even let him drive after he flipped the last shuttle.

CJ's death sucked, but it showed his development from being a total prick to a self-sacrificing, good person. It also wasn't planned for him to stay behind and die. I think he just realized he wanted to go down fighting rather than running. Plus Michael was gone before he said anything about staying if I recall.

Yea. Michael in my opinion was my favorite character. I really like the actor, always have since I saw him in Medium.

Well, I never get why people flip out over Dawn '04 to begin with. It appeals to a modern day audience and it's actually the movie that got me into GAR's movies and zombies in general. I mean, the zombie genre was really dying out. Name off a prominent zombie flick in the 10 years before Dawn '04 (Haha, and you can't say Night '90, 28 Days Later doesn't apply either: It's not really a zombie movie, more post-apocalyptic).

Just my thoughts. I am a full defendant of Dawn '04.

[Rolfus]

I really enjoyed both versions of dawn they are very differen. In some ways i like the running zombies they add a whole lot more excitment and really make you think that there is no hope where as with shamblers its hard to concieve them taking over the world to the point you see in day/land and are much more suited to a night scenario. But no the title makes no difference to me at all

[Brubaker]

I couldn't agree with you more.

It's one thing to HEAR about the ****e hitting the fan, like we did in GAR's flicks...but it's another thing to SEE it happening.

The riot footage intermingled with the news casts and ghouls was truly a seminal point in the zombie genre, IMO.....:D

That is what I liked most about the movie. Sometimes it is better to show it than to have it implied or left up to the imagination.

It could be argued that Ving's character was more selfish than CJ. Why? Rhames spent the first half of a movie not caring about anything or anyone but his brother. He wanted to leave and say to hell with everyone else, typical of the mentality that would allow an outbreak to escalate. CJ at least cared about the two other guards in the mall with him and did come around by the time he was killed.

As for the original question, chances are I never would have watched this one if the name Dawn hadn't been on it. After all, I did love the original :D Regardless of the name, I would have enjoyed it, though. The characters are no worse than some of those in Land. I've never warmed up to the likes of Charlie (who I just loathe), Slack or Riley. I never believed them as types who would survive for the long haul, compared to characters from earlier GAR movies. Foxy, Brubaker (for his limited screen time), Kaufman and Pillsbury, I could understand but the rest of them? I never believed Cholo would stick around in an outbreak but at least I liked Leguizamo's work in Land, so I give him a pass.