Dawn 78' Vs Dawn 04

[babomb]

Which is evidence that technology makes people lazy. Why be creative and innovative? Most times it's because you're forced to. The moment you have a 100,000,000 dollar budget and cgi in your arsenal it seems as if all imagination goes out the window. And that goes For snyder as well as most everybody else. That's not entirely true. That's only the case when people rely on technology to patch up the holes in an already mediocre script or production ethic. CG is just a tool, just like a camera is just a tool. For instance, Lord Of The Rings. I'm not a fan of that genre and frankly I found those films rather boring. But I do give credit to not only Peter Jackson, but the entire team for pulling off an incredible series of films that utilized digital technology in very creative and innovative ways. This is due almost entirely to having a really great creative coordinator who not only understands the limitations of the technology, but who's input in the whole process from script to distribution is valued highly. You have some directors and cinematographers that are too full of themselves, and see every decision in a selfish way and pride themselves in not compromising their own vision. It's a delicate balance there. Because directors in most cases are not and were never CG artists or coordinators. If you're utilizing CG in a film, it's best to allow the input of those who are familiar with the technology to have the right amount of influence over the decisions made regarding it. That's why the best films that utilize CG are the ones that push the limits of the technology. Because the directors are forced to rely on those who know about the technology in order to pull it off because they run into a wall that the directors themselves are unable to get over otherwise. It's a common misconception with CG that it's an easy fix. It only seems like an easy fix if you don't understand the technology. CG brings together all other disciplines of traditional art. A CG artist doesn't just know how to use a computer and a 3D application, the artist understands the fundamentals of light, color, form, cinematography. My point is that it isn't technology that makes people lazy. Those people were already lazy, and that just shows through by their use of the technology.

[Trin]

I think the general problem here is that filmmakers have new toys and they want to use those toys to the distraction of other things. CGI is not a bad thing, but it has become the vessel upon which creativity succeeds or fails. And there is only so much visual wonderment to a movie. Lord of the Rings is a great example of a franchise that took visuals to a very high level with innovation and creativity and just plain talent. But the story was written for them so they didn't need to spend a ton of time there. Dawn '04 and some other recent films (28 Weeks Later, I Am Legend) devoted attention to the visuals to the detraction of the story. In all those cases the action scenes were fantastic visually but simply made no sense from a plot, storyline, character development or plausibility perspective. (Note that 28 Days Later doesn't fit this profile - it was far more character and storyline driven) Even Romero got sucked into it. Survival has some of the worst CGI zombie gags in the business. Without the CGI toy to play with maybe the movie would've been better. Filmmakers need to remember that a movie is first and foremost a story. Everything else is window-dressing.

[Neil]

So Dawn 04 was on TV last night. I tuned in and it confirmed my memories of its weak script (in places). I turned on and soon I was confronted with the sequence with the group of new arrivals licking their wounds in the mall. The fat girl had been bitten and was incredibly ill, and indeed with a few minutes, she took a couple of last gasping breaths, and then stopped... Dead! So what do the half dozen other survivors do in the room? Knowing the world has gone to hell with the dead rising? They..... put a blanket over her and carry on as if nothing's happened. Who'd have believe it when a minute later up she gets and tries to bite their arses. Are we suppose to buy these individuals are so dim? That they really have so little consideration for their own survival? I don't buy it! And from recollection this is happens over and over...

[Christopher Jon]

So Dawn 04 was on TV last night. I tuned in and it confirmed my memories of its weak script (in places). I turned on and soon I was confronted with the sequence with the group of new arrivals licking their wounds in the mall. The fat girl had been bitten and was incredibly ill, and indeed with a few minutes, she took a couple of last gasping breaths, and then stopped... Dead! So what do the half dozen other survivors do in the room? Knowing the world has gone to hell with the dead rising? They..... put a blanket over her and carry on as if nothing's happened. Who'd have believe it when a minute later up she gets and tries to bite their arses. Are we suppose to buy these individuals are so dim? That they really have so little consideration for their own survival? I don't buy it! And from recollection this is happens over and over... At that point in the movie they hadn't figured out the cause for the zombies. It's actually due to that scene that the nurse chick comes to the conclusion that it's the bites that spread the zombie virus. They discuss it shortly afterwards at the coffee shop. Which is why shortly after, they shoot the dad who had also been bitten. The script isn't as weak as you think it is. Now, hanging ninja zombie... I've got no excuses for that silliness. A big difference between the two movies and the characters actions is the amount of information they had before they got to the mall. In DOTD 78, the zombie thing had been happening for at least a couple of weeks and the characters had some idea of what was happening and how the zombie virus was spread. With DOTD 04, the characters all go to the mall on day 1, they don't really have any idea of what is happening aside from the dead are attacking the living. The characters in DOTD 04 behave very much like the characters in NOTLD, they make dumb some dumb decisions because they don't know any better.

[Neil]

At that point in the movie they hadn't figured out the cause for the zombies. It's actually due to that scene that the nurse chick comes to the conclusion that it's the bites that spread the zombie virus. They discuss it shortly afterwards at the coffee shop. Which is why shortly after, they shoot the dad who had also been bitten. The script isn't as weak as you think it is. I understand that... And it's as week as I think it is - They knew the dead were rising. - Many, if not all of them had seen dead people get up and proceed to chow down on the living. - The fat girl was getting extremely ill, extremely quickly and looked ghastly, from.... a bite from a zombie. ...and none of this resulted in the slightest concern when she died? Not two brain cells in the whole room could fire off to consider maybe, just maybe, she might hop up and bite their arses? It was silly and felt unbelievable that none of these folks would consider it or care about their survival. Almost on par with ninja-silent-pipe-hanging-legless-zombie! I understand what they were attempting in the scene, but it crashed and burned due to characters behaving like a script needed them to behave, rather than how people really would behave.

[SymphonicX]

Oh god, and it continues... Had a discussion about apprehension of anything Snyder touches with a friend the other day....everything he's done that's been good, has been someone else's idea - except this film, which was bad. The thing that was *his* idea, was probably the most offensive movie made in 2011 - Sucker Punch. Everything of his people have enjoyed, have been word for word, shot for shot lifted from another source - and all his good work is really attributed to the writers of the graphic novels he's been charged with adapting. So Superman's saving grace is that Nolan and co. are writing it....but just look at Snyder's back catalogue. This guy, IMO, is much worse than Uwe Boll. This man is a destroyer of licences. Even if you marginally like or even love the remake of Dawn, you shouldn't be able to deny that it's a bit of a shame that the name "Dawn of the Dead" and concept of zombies in malls is now tied up completely for another 30 years....or until they reboot it. Especially as it was so lavishly squandered on this movie....which even if you remove it's massively disappointing title, is actually very shallow and thin on the ground in every aspect except gore and action.

[Neil]

I really really like 300, and really enjoyed the Watchmen!

[AcesandEights]

I really really like 300, and really enjoyed the Watchmen! I really enjoyed Watchmen, and 300 was the highest grossing gay porn of all time. Hard to argue with that sort of success, but Symph nailed it. This guy can make a decent film, but needs some constraints and tight reins, none of which mark him as a good, let alone great, director and certainly not a passable creator of original content.

[Andy]

Oh god, and it continues... Had a discussion about apprehension of anything Snyder touches with a friend the other day....everything he's done that's been good, has been someone else's idea - except this film, which was bad. The thing that was *his* idea, was probably the most offensive movie made in 2011 - Sucker Punch. Everything of his people have enjoyed, have been word for word, shot for shot lifted from another source - and all his good work is really attributed to the writers of the graphic novels he's been charged with adapting. So Superman's saving grace is that Nolan and co. are writing it....but just look at Snyder's back catalogue. This guy, IMO, is much worse than Uwe Boll. This man is a destroyer of licences. Even if you marginally like or even love the remake of Dawn, you shouldn't be able to deny that it's a bit of a shame that the name "Dawn of the Dead" and concept of zombies in malls is now tied up completely for another 30 years....or until they reboot it. Especially as it was so lavishly squandered on this movie....which even if you remove it's massively disappointing title, is actually very shallow and thin on the ground in every aspect except gore and action. I Really dont think its fair to compare Snyder to Boll, for one thing snyder does actually put some effort into his movies. I Dont think its fair to compare him to the classics either, like Romero. Comparing Romero to Snyder is like comparing sirloin steak to a cheeseburger, sure a sirloin is great and more satisfying but that said, i enjoy a cheeseburger. Comparing anything to uwe boll is like comparing it to very rotten dogshit thats come from a very sick dog.. nothing else quite gets that low. Maybe im going soft in my old age but i wouldnt even put Land of the Dead that low..

[SymphonicX]

Uwe Boll wins over Snyder for me not because of the effort they are percieved as making, or not....(in Boll's case) it's just because Boll has destroyed...what? One movie licence? House of the Dead? (I am so not researching this dude's films on IMDB) - so you know what, I can handle losing that one!

[MinionZombie]

Uwe Boll wins over Snyder for me not because of the effort they are percieved as making, or not....(in Boll's case) it's just because Boll has destroyed...what? One movie licence? House of the Dead? (I am so not researching this dude's films on IMDB) - so you know what, I can handle losing that one! I suppose the problem with Boll is, aside from making utter dross, he's ruining numerous videogame franchises in terms of movie adaptations. Such things are usually shite most of the time anyway (Max Payne, and rated PG-13, anyone?), but there are the odd good one now and then (Silent Hill, even though it's not amazing it's still a decent flick) ... Boll has mangled numerous titles such as FarCry and Postal. Snyder, as I've said before, is only good at copying the work of other - much greater - artists. I really dug Watchmen (particular the extended cut), but if it wasn't for the quality of the source material (and Snyder sticking religiously to the pages laid out before him - like he did with 300 aka "the gayest movie homophobes ever called their own") then what do you have? Sucker Punch - that's what ... and what a fetid fart that was. All mouth and no trousers (literally and figuratively), with such a bizarre moral compass. And we all know what I think of Yawn04...

[rongravy]

Dang, Uwe Boll is nuttier than a peach orchard boar, ain't he? I didn't even realize he was the guy who ruined House of the Dead.

[Neil]

Snyder, as I've said before, is only good at copying the work of other - much greater - artists. I really dug Watchmen (particular the extended cut), but if it wasn't for the quality of the source material (and Snyder sticking religiously to the pages laid out before him - like he did with 300 aka "the gayest movie homophobes ever called their own") then what do you have? While I can sort of see what you're saying, that does come across a little harsh on the guy. I mean he didn't just put the comic book infront of a camera and shout action did he? - Give the man a little bit of credit

[SymphonicX]

While I can sort of see what you're saying, that does come across a little harsh on the guy. I mean he didn't just put the comic book infront of a camera and shout action did he? - Give the man a little bit of credit Actually, I think he did.... Each shot storyboarded directly from the comic, and all the dialogue and voice over lifted from the comic too....then the DoP composites the shots to the source material, and Snyder basically says "you stand here, you stand here, I'm off to get a coffee and a donut". Well I'm sure he'll say he did more....personally I don't buy it. The stuff is a direct adaptation and he left no room for any sort of interpretation from the actors nor himself. Watchmen WAS good - don't get me wrong, but it was still too long, almost too much detail, very overblown and sat perfectly with how the graphic novels were written - that's the thing about film, we all know it doesn't directly translate and the ten page monologue from this or that character can be condensed into two shots of clever filmmaking - which Snyder hasn't achieved with any of his movies.... As for Boll -turns out he's also a destroyer of licences but I certainly wasn't queuing up to see Far Cry....video game movies as generally shite anyway, with the exception of Silent Hill as MZ rightly pointed out...

[Yojimbo]

I really enjoyed Watchmen, and 300 was the highest grossing gay porn of all time. Hard to argue with that sort of success, but Symph nailed it. This guy can make a decent film, but needs some constraints and tight reins, none of which mark him as a good, let alone great, director and certainly not a passable creator of original content. Agree that Snyder's sucesses are when he emulates shot for shot from other sources- and still he is such a douche that he borders on a massive fail. The whole telegraphing that Ozymandias is a bad guy the first time you see him on screen in Watchman comes to mind as the act of a cheesy hack of a director.