DAWN 04 question...

[MissJacksonCA]

Now i'm not sure if this is just a mere discrepency or what but... whilst watching Dawn 04 before bed this morning I noticed that Jayne Eastwood and Mekkhi Pfeiffer were both shot but never turned...

So my mind immediately went to Land of the Dead when the guy in Fiddlers Green hung himself and turned into a zombie and eventually went on to bite his son before John Leguizamo bashed him to death...

My question is... discrepency or ?

[jim102016]

Now i'm not sure if this is just a mere discrepency or what but... whilst watching Dawn 04 before bed this morning I noticed that Jayne Eastwood and Mekkhi Pfeiffer were both shot but never turned...

So my mind immediately went to Land of the Dead when the guy in Fiddlers Green hung himself and turned into a zombie and eventually went on to bite his son before John Leguizamo bashed him to death...

My question is... discrepency or ?



Don't they have to be bit to turn in this version?

[MissJacksonCA]

If its based on the origionals... and in those ones anyone who dies in any way turns... shouldn't they have turned too?

[DeadJonas190]

They made it so that in order to turn one must be bitten. Very lame.

[MissJacksonCA]

ohhhh k ....yes very lame

[jim102016]

ohhhh k ....yes very lame

Its a remake, can't expect much......they were running after all like Olympic sprinters.

[MissJacksonCA]

Them running was like an update to a classic flick... but not reanimating everyone? wtf?

[jim102016]

Them running was like an update to a classic flick... but not reanimating everyone? wtf?

I don't think it updated it at all, I think it took away from it. Perhaps the biggest thing that hurt it in my opinion.

[MissJacksonCA]

Well how similar do you expect a remake to be... we all saw how the Omen tanked

[clanglee]

yeah, in the original movies, the bodies of the recently dead came back AND the virus was spread on a bite. In the remake it was JUST the bites. I didn't mind the running so much, added a new fear factor for todays world.

[jim102016]

yeah, in the original movies, the bodies of the recently dead came back AND the virus was spread on a bite. In the remake it was JUST the bites. I didn't mind the running so much, added a new fear factor for todays world.



I think remakes are a waste of money. They'll never be as good as the original, so why waste the time and money trying? Hollywood has become lazy or simply run out of ideas.

A perfect example is the remake of Day, what a piece of shi*t. That guy should have come out of his shell by branching off with his own idea. Show some creativity by having an original thought!

[bassman]

I think remakes are a waste of money. They'll never be as good as the original, so why waste the time and money trying? Hollywood has become lazy or simply run out of ideas.

A perfect example is the remake of Day, what a piece of shi*t. That guy should have come out of his shell by branching off with his own idea. Show some creativity by having an original thought!

In most cases you would be right, but there are exceptions where a remake is just as good, if not surpasses the original. A few that come to mind are "The Thing", "The Fly", and "Ben Hur".

And about the topic of this thread.....the creators of the Dawn remake just don't know what they're doing, used Romero's good name to make money, and probably only saw his film only once....

[jim102016]

In most cases you would be right, but there are exceptions where a remake is just as good, if not surpasses the original. A few that come to mind are "The Thing", "The Fly", and "Ben Hur".

And about the topic of this thread.....the creators of the Dawn remake just don't know what they're doing, used Romero's good name to make money, and probably only saw his film only once....

Good point with "The Thing", that was a good movie. But, you're talking John Carpenter's early days....not made like that anymore.

About the topic....exactly why the Day remake shouldn't have been made. Quantity over quality.

[clanglee]

Ok, so you are a purist. That's quite alright. I have to admit though that I liked, even loved, Dawn'04. In NO WAY does that reduce my love for GAR and his movies. It was just a different take on the same story. It shouldn't be discounted just because of that. A lot of older folk might say the same stuff about the Thing and the Fly. They both are far superior movies to the original to me, but maybe not to someone else. Now Dawn'04 is NOT superior to the original, but it doesn't suck either. And to some of these kids today, who have less patience with a dated movie, Dawn'04 may actually Be a superior movie to them. They are dead wrong, but that's their opinion, and they are welcome to it.

[Cody]

To be honest I couldnt answer that question, ive only seen land once and was incredibly stoned. that movie ruined my high.

[DjfunkmasterG]

I think remakes are a waste of money. They'll never be as good as the original, so why waste the time and money trying? Hollywood has become lazy or simply run out of ideas.


Just remember if it wasn't for the remake of Dawn being financially successful there wouldn't have been that **** bomb called Land of the Dead most of you love so much.

The remake of Dawn and the success of 28 Days Later... really helped revive the zombie franchise.

I am getting tired of people bashing the dawn remake yet praise that turd Land. Romero might be a zombie god, but don't embrace the man for medicore films while tearing down remakes of his own work that outshine his most recent effort on every level. Even Shaun of the Dead, a $4,000,000 fan film outshined Land. Pretty sad when your fans turn in better films.

I also don't want to hear comebacks of how the producers were on him, or Universal didn't understand how he needs creative control. Regardless of what happened on set the concept failed and came off more as a spoof than a genuine Romero zombie film. The Dawn remake is more horror based than Land will ever be.

[jim102016]

Just remember if it wasn't for the remake of Dawn being financially successful there wouldn't have been that **** bomb called Land of the Dead most of you love so much.

The remake of Dawn and the success of 28 Days Later... really helped revive the zombie franchise.

I am getting tired of people bashing the dawn remake yet praise that turd Land. Romero might be a zombie god, but don't embrace the man for medicore films while tearing down remakes of his own work that outshine his most recent effort on every level. Even Shaun of the Dead, a $4,000,000 fan film outshined Land. Pretty sad when your fans turn in better films.

I also don't want to hear comebacks of how the producers were on him, or Universal didn't understand how he needs creative control. Regardless of what happened on set the concept failed and came off more as a spoof than a genuine Romero zombie film. The Dawn remake is more horror based than Land will ever be.


I wasn't so impressed with land so I'm not in the 'most category'. Both the Dawn remake and Land could have been better. Maybe the directors should have combined their efforts for Land.

[bassman]

Just remember if it wasn't for the remake of Dawn being financially successful there wouldn't have been that **** bomb called Land of the Dead most of you love so much.

The remake of Dawn and the success of 28 Days Later... really helped revive the zombie franchise.

I am getting tired of people bashing the dawn remake yet praise that turd Land. Romero might be a zombie god, but don't embrace the man for medicore films while tearing down remakes of his own work that outshine his most recent effort on every level. Even Shaun of the Dead, a $4,000,000 fan film outshined Land. Pretty sad when your fans turn in better films.

I also don't want to hear comebacks of how the producers were on him, or Universal didn't understand how he needs creative control. Regardless of what happened on set the concept failed and came off more as a spoof than a genuine Romero zombie film. The Dawn remake is more horror based than Land will ever be.



*clears throat* ....OPINION....?

;)

[clanglee]

i have as much Romero loyalty as the next guy here. But I have to say. While I liked Land, I liked Dawn'04 more. Land was just too. . . fake I guess. I couldn't get past why money was so important in a zombie apocalypse. Why, tell me. why? What the hell was Cholo gonna spend his 4 million on? Or where for that matter. What use is money in the land of the dead? ahhh, well. That's just one of the problems with Land. Dawn was better constructed and better acted, not as good as the original, but better than Land.

[Yojimbo]

They made it so that in order to turn one must be bitten. Very lame.

DeadJonas is right. VERY EFFING LAME.


GAR rules: Every dead body is supposed to come back to life and kill, etc.

BS new poop head rules: Anyone who is bitten or has blood to blood contact with a ghoul will eventually die and come back to life to kill. Merely dying is not enough to become a zombie.

[MissJacksonCA]

Buuuuut technically if everything that dies reanimates then technically you shouldn't be able to kill a zed without 'em coming back ROTLD style but a lil slower...

[Cody]

ROTLD zombies suck. (not suck as in they stink) just the fact that you cant get away from them. smelling you and jank. impossible to kill all that good stuff

[clanglee]

ROTLD zombies could not BE killed, aside from burning or acid or whatever. Which does suck, yes. Very bad situation.

However, in GAR movies if you destroy the brain, the zombie goes down. period. there is no coming back, because the brain is destroyed.

[Yojimbo]

Buuuuut technically if everything that dies reanimates then technically you shouldn't be able to kill a zed without 'em coming back ROTLD style but a lil slower...

Again, Romero's rules: Kill the brain and you kill the ghoul.

DJ has a point with which, begrudgingly I agree on some level in that the sucess of Dawn 04 did make large studios more willing to make zombie films. But I say that commercial success does not always indicate the quality of the product.

I hear High School Musical was a commerical success too, but it doesn't make the film any less lame.

Yes, LAND had some problems, and it wasn't as good as DOTD or even DAY. But I remind everyone that DAWN 04 was given a very large promotional budget, and had the association with GARs classic film, giving it the benefit of attracting a large lay audience in addition to GAR diehards who, panning it or not, contributed to it's box office success.

I do acknowledge that LAND is not GAR's best work, which I do attribute to GAR not editing the film, and the interference of corporate interests, but at the core, I think that GAR misfired with his portrayal of the cute, intelligent zombie. This is where he lost me, and I know this is what bummed most of the folks here out.

But to take a prexisting franchise and then change the rules, turn it into a music video, and the condescend to pretend to do it with reverence to the original-- this is where DAWN 04 lost me.

[AcesandEights]

They made it so that in order to turn one must be bitten. Very lame.

Is it lame? Sounds like your personal preference and, to me, by-bite-only transmission and across the board reanimation are just as im/plausible.

[Yojimbo]

Is it lame? Sounds like your personal preference and, to me, by-bite-only transmission and across the board reanimation are just as im/plausible.

Well, maybe lame in the sense that it goes against the original rules in a remake that purportedly was made with reverence to the original.

[AcesandEights]

Well, maybe lame in the sense that it goes against the original rules in a remake that purportedly was made with reverence to the original.

I can buy that, as a matter of personal taste, especially when people are already *cough* looking for reasons *cough* to further illustrate their dislike of something.

I can't help but wonder, however, how many of the hpotd regulars would survive their assorted strokes and aneurysms if GAR's next installment, which is purportedly starting out on somewhat of a new slate, broke some of his own 'rules'. :lol:

[Yojimbo]

I can buy that, as a matter of personal taste, especially when people are already *cough* looking for reasons *cough* to further illustrate their dislike of something.

I can't help but wonder, however, how many of the hpotd regulars would survive their assorted strokes and aneurysms if GAR's next installment, which is purportedly starting out on somewhat of a new slate, broke some of his own 'rules'. :lol:

True that. We will probably all drink the kool-aid. Or put on our nikes eat the apple-sauce.

[AcesandEights]

True that. We will probably all drink the kool-aid. Or put on our nikes eat the apple-sauce.

Nah, if we can survive Episodes I, II and III (fvck you, Lucas!), then we can survive anything :p

[bassman]

Nah, if we can survive Episodes I, II and III (fvck you, Lucas!), then we can survive anything :p

Ever seen "Manos: The Hands of Fate", "Overdrawn At The Memory Bank", or "Space Mutiny"? Try watching those and THEN you can watch anything.:eek: Oh yeah....throw "Batman & Robin" in there, as well.

[Yojimbo]

Nah, if we can survive Episodes I, II and III (fvck you, Lucas!), then we can survive anything :p

Agreed.

At the very least, whether or not you like Zack Snyder or GAR, or think DAWN 04 to be superior to LAND, I think we can all unify under the banner of disdain for Lucas.

And if GAR goes the way of Lucas, then I will be among the first in line to recommend retirement.

[bassman]

At the very least, whether or not you like Zack Snyder or GAR, or think DAWN 04 to be superior to LAND, I think we can all unify under the banner of disdain for Lucas.


I enjoy Episodes 2 and 3. I think people give the new trilogy a hard time because they're not the same as the original trilogy. As stand alone films I think they're pretty damn entertaining...

[AcesandEights]

I enjoy Episodes 2 and 3. I think people give the new trilogy a hard time because they're not the same as the original trilogy. As stand alone films I think they're pretty damn entertaining...

Oh, my god. This has pointed out to me...I have become that which I had so valiantly fought against earlier in this thread...a hater :( Oh, how quickly the innocence of my good intentions faded away (only took 30 minutes) ;)

[ProfessorChaos]

i've never had a more memorable movie-going experience than when i saw episode three in theaters on opening day. it was surreal.

but i agree, bassman...episode one was lame, aside from darth maul. episode two was a definite improvement. to see the formation of the future imperial stormtroopers was killer. and episode three, while still not as good as episodes 5 or 6, is much more enjoyable to me than episode 4.

back to the subject though, although dawn 04 is not dawn 78, it outshines land, which i can't even stand to watch these days. dawn 04 has way more staying power...of course, it pales in comparison to GAR's original trilogy, but it can stand alone as a good zombie movie, if you can get past the running concept.:|

[MissJacksonCA]

I'm starting to get the impression you people wouldn't be happy with any remake that didn't pull an Omen and do everything identical to before

[clanglee]

I'm starting to get the impression you people wouldn't be happy with any remake that didn't pull an Omen and do everything identical to before

Those kind of remakes are the worst. Did anyone watch the Psycho remake? Ohhhhh the horror. (and not in a good way)

[MissJacksonCA]

ooo the psycho remake was so bad and it didn't help that I just dont like Anne Heche as an actor... i'm still hoping the martians are coming for her and travolta and cruise...

[Yojimbo]

back to the subject though, although dawn 04 is not dawn 78, it outshines land, which i can't even stand to watch these days. dawn 04 has way more staying power...of course, it pales in comparison to GAR's original trilogy, but it can stand alone as a good zombie movie, if you can get past the running concept.:|



Professor Chaos, while I don't necessarily agree that Dawn 04 outshines LAND, I must say that I agree with what you said about it (Dawn 04, that is) being able to stand alone as a good zombie movie. Honestly, I wish it had attempted to stand alone rather than pass itself off as a remake/reimagining of 78. I have said before and still feel that had Dawn 04 called itself Attack of the Killer Zombies, or Ghouls-R-Us, or Ghoulie-goo-goo, or whatever-- anything BUT DAWN OF THE DEAD -- then I think many who were put off would not have had a problem with the film and in fact would probably be extolling it's virtues rather than picking at the small scabs on it's imperfect body.


I'm starting to get the impression you people wouldn't be happy with any remake that didn't pull an Omen and do everything identical to before

Screw OMEN remake. And that BS Psycho remake. Why did they even bother? Honestly, that would have been worse.

But I think to myself, why not then, for that matter, try to remake I Love Lucy? Because no one can do what Lucille Ball did, and anyone who tries to take her place is most likely going to fail because the public loved Lucile Ball much too much to accept someone else in that role. And for those of you out there who watched the Our Gang original shorts, or the Little Rascals original films: did you like that remake that was done in the early 90's? It failed pretty miserably because,yeah sure you can get some chubby kid and make him up to look like Spanky or make some skinny kid up to look like Alfalfa, but in the end there is in most fan's no way to replace the original actors. So, in this regard, DAWN OF THE DEAD, while an entertaining music video/zombie film, can never and will never live up to the original, let alone replace the original, in the hearts and minds of the fans of the original.