Dawn 78' Vs Dawn 04

[luke404]

Hey, As a big Romero fan and recentely watching the 2004 remake of Dawn of the Dead, wanted to know your opinions on the updated version. Im 100% sure that the original was far better and that there was no need for a remake. Thanks Would like to know your thoughs..........

[AcesandEights]

Welcome, Luke404! There has been a lot of talk here, and on the old boards before the upgrade, about this subject. Some folks doggedly hate Dawn04, some really enjoy it and others appreciate it as something that is more of an action film with zombies, as opposed to a full fledged horror movie. Me? I love Dawn04, but--as many here will agree--it doesn't touch the original. Remakes are often discussed in the 'Remake' section of the forums and talk relating to both Dawn and Dawn04 (some call it Yawn 04 around here ) spills over into the 'Dead Discussion' forum from time to time. Some of the threads that feature opinions (pulled from a quick forum search) are as follows: First Second Third Fourth Fifth Sixth Cheers.

[walkingdead04]

I agree, the orignial is simply a masterpiece. Dawn 04 isn't a zombiefilm, it's an actionfilm. It's fast-paced, annoying and riddled with cheap scares. It plays too much on clichés for me to enjoy it as anything else than popcorn fun. And when a zombiefilm steeps to that level for me, it ceases to be a zombiefilm. Or even a horrorfilm.

[Deadman03]

When i heard a ramake of Dawn was in production i was really excited. I love the 1978 G. Romero version of "Dawn of the Dead", but it 'dawned' on me that this was another lame remake. Whereas Romero's favourite monsters are a slow, rotting, shuffling horde whose sheer number and relentless advance is very much part of their creepy menace, Snyders zombies are ridicolously fast. They have no problem racing at 25MPH toward their victims. There are some who find this particular addition to "zombie attributes" exciting, but I found it to be a completely absurd.

[fleshy]

Zack Snyder's "Dawn of the Dead" is not a bad film overall but it suffers from a number of mis-steps and ideas that could have / should have been dropped in the first place, like the ridiculous zombie childbirth and the running corpses themselves...and where Romero's long script and running time leaves the viewer satisfied at its end, Snyder's film seems rushed at its end.

[walkingdead89]

I think Dawn 04 did a good job of not messing with the predecessors. Sure, we have our little niggly things like how long it takes a bite to kill someone, how long it takes a zombie to reanimate - yes, those things are somewhat inconsistent in the later movies compared to earlier ones. But by and large (so far - crosses fingers) none of the later movies bring into doubt major events or series defining behaviors from the earlier ones.

[MoonSylver]

Agree w/ all of the above (welcome all new members BTW!). Decent action flick. Not deep. Not really horror. Shallow. 78 is Coca Cola, 04 is Coke Zero.

[clanglee]

Ahhhh. . and so we can now pass the torch to the next generation for the Dawn debate. I think I just dropped a tear.. . . .

[bigticket]

I must be one of the few who actually enjoys Dawn 04...Diary was okay, and so was land, but the overall feeling i got from them was "wow, This is the 1st George Romero movie I've seen in theaters". And that is it. I saw it because it was a George Romero film, not because it was a zombie film, and that is the type of fanboyism I am so against- seeing and supporting a movie because of an attached name. I hope Zach gets behind the seat and directs another zombie film- perhaps continuing where Dawn 04 left off, or maybe pull a Romero and tell another story in the same setting. It's sad to say, but i'm more excited at the prospect of Zach helming another film then Romero

[Mike70]

welcome one and all. this is going to be our monthly new dawn/old dawn hate fest thread. i don't care for yawn 04 at all. i think it vacuous, obvious, and devoid of merit. in fact, i just got rid of my copy of it along with a bunch of other shit i didn't want anymore (thank you half-price books). isn't slightly weird that all these folks joined within an hour of one another and posted in the same thread within minutes of one another? in all my years here i don't remember that happening before. oh and by the way, this thread is in the wrong place. should be over in dead discussion.

[Crappingbear]

I didn't really have a problem with Dawn 04, its ok for what it is and Sarah Polly is ok to look at. But, its a "watch once" and put away while the original we have viewed bajillions of times. On the flip side, I prefer Night 90 over the original and think its a good homage to the original. Day is my least favorite of the original trilogy, land was kind of bleh and I didn't like Diary at all; in fact I barely sat through it once and have pretty well erased the memory from my mind. So, here are my favs of Romero and the remakes 1. Dawn 2. Night 90 3. Night original 4. Day 5. Dawn remake 6. Land 7. I guess Diary by default since I don't have anything else to put before it.

[slickwilly13]

I just took notice of the number of 1st time posters that registered this month in this thread. Rather odd.

[Yojimbo]

isn't slightly weird that all these folks joined within an hour of one another and posted in the same thread within minutes of one another? in all my years here i don't remember that happening before. I was just thinking the same thing...odd and unlikely, though I have to admit that there are some interesting points brought up, albeit it on the wrong part of this site. Welcome all of you new members...or possibly bots with good taste!

[Kaos]

Thread moved.

[Trin]

I think Zach Snyder is posting as all the new members trying to drum up discussion in hopes of getting interest in a sequel in the works. Hey Zach, if that works for you please do a couple of things in the next one: - No zombie babies - A little more justification to leave the safe place - Everyone who dies comes back, not just the infected - Make sure the zombies eat cows (hahahahaha - j/k)