Will the new Dawn of the Dead be any good?

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

I've been very outspoken about remakes of great horror films, most of them have been awful. But I'm a sucker for 'living dead' movies (bad or not), and the original is classic, and the trailers for this one look pretty good. Whaddyall think?

― roger adultery (roger adultery), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 04:51 (twenty-two years ago)

it might be! the trailer was pretty good!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 04:54 (twenty-two years ago)

yeah - it genuinely looks kinda scary!

― roger adultery (roger adultery), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 04:55 (twenty-two years ago)

I mean I'd be the first to cry heresy! on this one, but still... good trailer.

(in all fairness the trailer for the recent texas chainsaw remake was awesome and apparently the movie not so much. but I didn't see it so what do I know.)

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 04:56 (twenty-two years ago)

I think Zombie movie remakes don't really count as remakes.

I'll see it. I hope it's funny and gory (I'll laugh if it isn't as gory as The Passion is so maybe it doesn't have to be too much of either.)

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 04:56 (twenty-two years ago)

texas chainsaw remake - not very faithful. It sorta became a different movie altogether halfway through. Not awful, but...not good either. I forgot I even saw it. One of THOSE movies.

― roger adultery (roger adultery), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 05:01 (twenty-two years ago)

are these the new fast zombies

― ryan (ryan), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 05:01 (twenty-two years ago)

yeah!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 05:02 (twenty-two years ago)

it would be good if they were really fast but only took little steps.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 05:03 (twenty-two years ago)

because that is funny.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 05:03 (twenty-two years ago)

haha

― ryan (ryan), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 05:11 (twenty-two years ago)

The preview look okay. It seems more like that British fast zombie movie than Dawn of the Dead though.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 05:20 (twenty-two years ago)

there is something scary about random people just all-out attacking you with manic intensity as fast as they can.

― ryan (ryan), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 05:22 (twenty-two years ago)

As opposed to slow people attacking you hungrily and distractedly which is just sort of silly.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 05:28 (twenty-two years ago)

I haven't seen the Texas Chainsaw Massacre remake, and I'm not really into horror movies, but I thought the original was really, really, annoyingly dumb. All the worst cliches of crazy people and screamy girls and retarded helplessness and backwoods backwardsness. Terrible.

That being said, yeah the new Dawn of the Dead trailer definitely rocks.

― Stuart (Stuart), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 05:34 (twenty-two years ago)

Stuart, you just mentioned nearly everything that made the original Chainsaw so unnervingly great!

― Eric H. (Eric H.), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 06:14 (twenty-two years ago)

Stuart - are you crazy? It's perhaps the finest horror film ever made. It set precedent, and, by merely insinuating certain acts / situations, did what hundreds of movies since have tried (in vain) to do - make a "scary" movie that genuinely creeps out EVERYONE. It's a classic all the way.

Watch it again, man, taking into account the time it was made.

― roger adultery (roger adultery), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 06:14 (twenty-two years ago)

So are they going to remake every zombie movie and have the zombies run instead of walk?

― Dan I., Wednesday, 25 February 2004 06:31 (twenty-two years ago)

Oh man I hope the zombies in the Dawn of the Dead remake are all super-swift mallwalkers

― Nate in ST.P (natedetritus), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 06:44 (twenty-two years ago)

and instead of a pie fight there will be an XTREEEM shaken-up Mountain Dew 2-liter bottle spray assault

― Nate in ST.P (natedetritus), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 06:45 (twenty-two years ago)

The eternal question: where did they get the pies!?

― Dan I., Wednesday, 25 February 2004 06:56 (twenty-two years ago)

i would just like to say that the texas chainsaw massacre remake was definitely the worst movie of last year and quite possibly the worst in the last 10 years.

― todd swiss (eliti), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 06:57 (twenty-two years ago)

I don't trust horror remakes, but I don't think I've ever disliked a movie with Sarah Polley - she has great taste in scripts.

― miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 07:10 (twenty-two years ago)

Zombie movies, even when they suck, are kinda good. Resident Evil, case in point. Sorta cheesy, but damn fun.

― Gear! (Gear!), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 07:29 (twenty-two years ago)

milo have you ever seen half of the output of canadian cinema ever?

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 16:44 (twenty-two years ago)

wow that was poorly phrased.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 16:44 (twenty-two years ago)

Shawn of the Dead to thread, obv.

― Ste (Fuzzy), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 17:00 (twenty-two years ago)

Ha! I'm looking forward to that.

― Matt (Matt), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 17:24 (twenty-two years ago)

Urgh, I'm worried, as the old Dawn of the Dead is one of my favorite horror movies of all time. And I haven't seen the preview.

― NA (Nick A.), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 17:47 (twenty-two years ago)

the original is so beautiful and so sad and i just know that the new one won't be as beautiful or sad. especially the long version of dawn of the dead which is just so perfect and staggering.i didn't even bother watching the texas chainsaw remake cuz i knew there would be no way they could capture the brilliance of the original. they should have just put the original back in the theatres. Or just remade Tobe Hooper's Eaten Alive which is a great creepy movie, but one that could be improved upon with a remake.

― scott seward (scott seward), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 17:54 (twenty-two years ago)

I don't think the new DOTD will hold a candle to the original, but it could still be fun.

― Gear! (Gear!), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 18:09 (twenty-two years ago)

the trailer looked like an american 28 Days Later which means it's useless

― anthony kyle monday (akmonday), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 18:13 (twenty-two years ago)

i'd rather watch the crazies. or day of the dead. or night of the living dead. or the remake of night of the living dead or burial ground or night of the zombies or or or...ah, hell, i'll probably rent it. i'm a sucker for zombies. fast OR slow.

― scott seward (scott seward), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 18:26 (twenty-two years ago)

I love the original so much and while this probably won't hold a candle, I mean, why not?

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 18:28 (twenty-two years ago)

I could make a movie where balls-out ridiculously insane people chop up girls in hot pants that scream and stumble everywhere they try to run. It's not scary. I can't imagine people in the 70s thinking it was scary, either. I spend the whole time watching these movies going "well if i was in that situation its obvious that i could get away. All these people are dead because they're idiots dying for the plot." But i can come up with a million scenarios where an average joe protagonist can be pitted against an antagonist they might not be able to overcome and make it as scary as all get out. To me it seems almost like the people who create most horror movies are more students of the genre looking to recreate past cliches rather than pursue anything original with the goal of creeping people out.

― Stuart (Stuart), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 18:36 (twenty-two years ago)

why haven't they done a movie of stephen king's "the mist"? it's a great play on that scenario...

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 18:45 (twenty-two years ago)

I'm also looking forward to Resident Evil 2.

― Gear! (Gear!), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 18:53 (twenty-two years ago)

i'll wait for the skipping zombies, thanks.

― badgerminor (badgerminor), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 19:05 (twenty-two years ago)

What about Chinese hopping zombies?

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 19:06 (twenty-two years ago)

they're hopping on one leg, right?

― badgerminor (badgerminor), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 19:18 (twenty-two years ago)

undead zombies have to shuffle. they're decomposing. this should be obvious.

i'm going to have to put my money where my mouth is and become a horror movie director. what a hassle.

― Stuart (Stuart), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 19:20 (twenty-two years ago)

I have to be honest and say that Texas Chainsaw Massacre is a work of art. It really is. And it's by far the greatest thing that Tobe Hooper ever did.(especially if you believe like a lot of people do that Spielberg had a big hand in making Poltergeist). It was a fluke, i think. An amazing accident that it came out the way it did. There is really no reason why it should be such a beautiful film. But it is. Romero on the other hand, is just gifted all around and has made many amazing movies.

― scott seward (scott seward), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 19:42 (twenty-two years ago)

(i did really like eaten alive and salem's lot and funhouse and TCM 2 a lot as well. but they can't compare. poltergeist compares. Does anyone know why he remade The Toolbox Murders?! I'm assuming it's a remake. Maybe i'll go see that instead if it plays in movie theatres.)

― scott seward (scott seward), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 19:49 (twenty-two years ago)

Horror movies, at their best, are a lot more artistic and beautifully crafted than your average run-of-the-mill Mystic River/House of Sand and Fog/Cold Mountain shite. Horror is a genre that gets pissed on because it's "disreputable". Romero gets no love except from the cultists, whereas Ang Lee is considered to be a great director despite the fact (or because of?) he's boring and has no style.

I'd take the directing in movies like Below, Candyman, The Devil's Backbone, and 28 Days Later over the directing in any Oscar winner the past few years.

― Gear! (Gear!), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 20:01 (twenty-two years ago)

Well I'll be happy hanging out in the "I just don't get it" line.

― Stuart (Stuart), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 20:01 (twenty-two years ago)

What movie is showing at the end of that line?

― Gear! (Gear!), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 20:06 (twenty-two years ago)

I think a lot of people who watch movies are hung up on plot. they want movies to be like books. Me? i don't realy care as long as there is a somewhat plausible movement from point A to point B. I guess i'm more of an art lover. I go to the movies for sight and sound. it's like people who pick apart the lyrics of songs. i can barely remember the lyrics to songs. I remember the music. How many movies have great plots anyway? most people come out of a movie talking about performances of various actors. I love a great screenplay, don't get me wrong. it's just that there are about 5 of them a decade.

― scott seward (scott seward), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 20:11 (twenty-two years ago)

No matter how large and convoluted a film's web of suspended disbelief is, to achieve a state of plausibility it has to attach to reality somewhere. Chainsaw makes no effort to do so. It is much more a surrealist art film than a horror film, in the sense that it can only exist as an exercise of the imagination, and only succeeds as a expression of whoever's imagination created it. Such films are only "scary" if you think it's scary that people can think them up. I can make a film in which a family is slaughtered in a Walmart when every other shopper and employee simultaneously join in an orgy of senseless violence, but I can't imagine it making any sense or scaring anybody.

― Stuart (Stuart), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 20:31 (twenty-two years ago)

yeah, i guess i don't always care about scary that much either. although some horror movies scare me in places, i do enjoy them for the painterly effects that the best of them employ. And blood can be beautiful. i'd go see your walmart nightmare movie. Stuart, you have seen Suspiria, right? I think that's what i love about the genre. Like art in other realms, horror movies can go to places both visiually and emotionally that other genres can't. or won't.

― scott seward (scott seward), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 20:35 (twenty-two years ago)

Zombie movies I enjoy not for the horror elements necessarily (which are often quite wonderful, of course) but for the apocalyptic elements that are present in almost every single "living dead" type of film.

― Gear! (Gear!), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 20:41 (twenty-two years ago)

Take a movie like Jean Rollin's Living Dead Girl. It's completely over the top. gruesome. bloody beyond human imagining. nonsensical. and yet, i think it's a beautiful movie. But i suspect that the very over-the-topness that i love in it would be the very stuff that the ordinary cinema-goer would hate about it. which is fine. i dunno, typical art-house fare just doesn't take me anywhere special. and when it trys too it makes such a big deal about it."Look i'm being transgressive!" whereas in horror it's just a matter of course to be transgressive. Where the filmmaker goes AFTER he sets up the parameters of the genre is where things get interesting. And possibly transcendent when done well.

― scott seward (scott seward), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 20:44 (twenty-two years ago)

Yeah, plus i just love zombies and the idea of the end of the world. i forgot about that.

― scott seward (scott seward), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 20:45 (twenty-two years ago)

Gear OTM. This was one of the reasons why 28 Days Later was especially enjoyable for me, the apocalyptic/plague aspect was front and center.

(x-post)

― Jordan (Jordan), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 20:46 (twenty-two years ago)

As with any film, you sort of place yourself in the position of the characters, so the idea that you're dealing with flesh-eating zombies that you have to kill AND the possibility of the end of the world (no responsibilities!) is like some sort of perverse wish-fulfillment.

― Gear! (Gear!), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 20:51 (twenty-two years ago)

you crazy! texas chainsaw massacre is one of the scariest films i've ever seen--the sound design ALONE freaks my shit right out, along with the totally grotesque visual tone (like the shot of the sun at the beginning) and the amazing use of darkness, esp. in that outdoors chase scene.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 20:55 (twenty-two years ago)

in other words it's not just about the plot.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 20:55 (twenty-two years ago)

in other words what scott said.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 20:56 (twenty-two years ago)

except it IS scary.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 20:56 (twenty-two years ago)

If i'm watching some dumb girl act like an idiot while she's running away from psychopathic cannibal, it doesn't matter how dramatic the lighting is if I think she deserves to get caught.

― Stuart (Stuart), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 21:08 (twenty-two years ago)

so you like your horror movies with likeable characters is what you're saying?

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 21:13 (twenty-two years ago)

dismissing lighting as an aspect of filmmaking is like dismissing instruments as an aspect of musicmaking

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 21:18 (twenty-two years ago)

(i'm not being rockist, that includes computers and shit)

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 21:19 (twenty-two years ago)

There never comes a point in Chainsaw where the movie stops asking the audience to accept what's already been established and suspend their disbelief of those parameters for the rest of the story. The whole movie is parameters. Maybe something scary happens after the girl gets away. A Sheriff listening to the girl's story and trying to decide how to handle this family would be in a scary position. If the whole movie started out with the girl sitting in the police department with scratches and blood all over her, shaking and summarizing what happened, and then we had to follow some cops into the house, knowing what they know. That could be scary..

― Stuart (Stuart), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 21:19 (twenty-two years ago)

I didn't dismiss lighting. I said lighting cannot be good enough to make a ridiculous character believable.

― Stuart (Stuart), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 21:19 (twenty-two years ago)

I don't generally get into movie discussions here, but Stuart, I think you're projecting your own dislike of the movie onto some problem with its reality claim -- my ex shows the movie every semester to two of the classes she teaches, one on taboo and one on horror movies, and "it's much more realistic than we're used to" is hands-down the most popular comment from the freshmen.

― Tep (ktepi), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 21:21 (twenty-two years ago)

No, I agree, I like to have some sense of realism/intelligence in my horror movie victims. It makes things much more fun and involving when they are giving escape a good honest shot instead of hanging around like they have a being-eaten fetish.

(x-posts)

― Jordan (Jordan), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 21:23 (twenty-two years ago)

And I don't need to like the characters, I just need to accept that they would possibly do what they do. There's nothing scary about watching a girl scream and stumble around like an idiot, no matter how menacing her pursuer. Gunnar Hansen has to stop and pretend to saw at little branches and shit because he's so much faster than the girl, and she won't GET UP AND RUN.

― Stuart (Stuart), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 21:23 (twenty-two years ago)

i don't get how the cop framing device would improve the plot, sorry

(xp)

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 21:24 (twenty-two years ago)

"there's nothing scary" about running away from a crazy maniac in the middle of a dark scary landscape?!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 21:25 (twenty-two years ago)

with a CHAINSAW?!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 21:25 (twenty-two years ago)

yeah, oh hell yeah, TCM is scary. so is Eaten Alive. And on the Ed Gein tip, so is Deranged.

― scott seward (scott seward), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 21:33 (twenty-two years ago)

The way that girl runs is ridiculous. Like if when the kidnappers called up Mel Gibson in Ransom and told him they have his kid and he said "aw dude that sucks, i want him back and stuff" instead of "GIMME BACK MY SON!" Knowmsayin?

Call it terrible acting, but somebody's letting her get away with it. If you're being chased in the dark by a guy wearing a mask of human skin and weilding a chainsaw, you are running through rose bushes and vaulting creekbeds. You are not whimpering and stumbling and crawling along the ground.

― Stuart (Stuart), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 21:36 (twenty-two years ago)

i think she was in shock.

― scott seward (scott seward), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 21:37 (twenty-two years ago)

uh yeah, what the fuck? what a weird argument, no offense stuart.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 21:40 (twenty-two years ago)

Huh. Interesting begining. This is an unproduced script from 2003, like a film school project or something, I think.

― Stuart (Stuart), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 21:59 (twenty-two years ago)

haha, that's weird!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 25 February 2004 22:16 (twenty-two years ago)

It's gonna blow!

― latebloomer (latebloomer), Thursday, 26 February 2004 03:57 (twenty-two years ago)

Stuart does sorta have a point about the half-hearted attempts to escape by the hot slut. Still, it IS a genre exercise, and I don't think it really has much to do with the film itself. But yeah, I'm with ya, I'd be doing some 50 yard dash shit. But I guess we're supposed to believe she is in so much shock...

― roger adultery (roger adultery), Thursday, 26 February 2004 04:35 (twenty-two years ago)

I'm seeing this tonight! Sneak preview, I can't wait. The little girl in the trailer is fucking scary.

― Jordan (Jordan), Tuesday, 9 March 2004 14:14 (twenty-two years ago)

http://www.oxfordautosales.com/haugens00/hbm1.jpg

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 9 March 2004 14:19 (twenty-two years ago)

Okay, so it's not that great, but it DOES have zombies, as advertised. And it's set in Milwaukee (although if there is a mall that nice in Milwaukee with a gun store two blocks away, someone let me know).

Ving Rhames = classic
Zombie babies = classic
The pre-credits opening = SO CLASSIC
Mekhi Phifer = dud
Sailing away to an island in Lake Michigan = dud
The ending = huge dud

― Jordan (Jordan), Wednesday, 17 March 2004 16:18 (twenty-two years ago)

but youre saying theres still a mall in it?? thats all i need to know..

― bill stevens (bscrubbins), Wednesday, 17 March 2004 21:08 (twenty-two years ago)

Yeah, they spend most of the movie in the mall. There's none of the "mall zombies not so different from when they were alive" or "living actually pretty zombieish once they aren't fighting zombies" symbolism though.

― Jordan (Jordan), Wednesday, 17 March 2004 21:13 (twenty-two years ago)

In the trailers I've seen, many of the zombies bear a frightening resemblance to Michael Jackson. Is that true in the film?

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Wednesday, 17 March 2004 21:51 (twenty-two years ago)

you're thinking of the thriller video

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 17 March 2004 22:06 (twenty-two years ago)

There is a very funny scene where they're passing time on the rooftop sniping zombies who resemble celebrities.

― Jordan (Jordan), Wednesday, 17 March 2004 22:10 (twenty-two years ago)

In the credits:

Percussion specialists

(some other guys)
DAVE LOMBARDO

― Jordan (Jordan), Thursday, 18 March 2004 15:57 (twenty-two years ago)

Gear OTM. This was one of the reasons why 28 Days Later was especially enjoyable for me, the apocalyptic/plague aspect was front and center.

OTM--that's why they're so resonant. I'm not interested in horror film with ghosts/spooks, nasties, etc, but the wonderful visualizatyion of social collapse is what makes these movies grebt. I'm psyched about this remake.

― Strachey, Thursday, 18 March 2004 16:10 (twenty-two years ago)

It's fucking set in Milwaukee?!? Why did I not hear of this before? It wasn't actually filmed in Milwaukee, was it? Now I'm going to have to watch this film at some point just to laugh at it for getting everything wrong, I suppose...

― Chris F. (servoret), Friday, 19 March 2004 02:51 (twenty-two years ago)

Oh, never mind, it's set in some imaginary city in Wisconsin and was filmed in Toronto, apparently. How useless.

― Chris F. (servoret), Friday, 19 March 2004 02:59 (twenty-two years ago)

Oh yeah, and re: The Texas Chain Saw Massacre debate, I think both sides are right on this one. While there's definitely a sense of grotty hyperreality about the film, it's also very cartoony in spots. I think that my first time watching it through, this gave me the feeling of a bad nightmare getting worse, but the second time that I watched it in the theater, I couldn't help but notice the over the top nature of the chase sequence, and Leatherface became buffoonish and not scary to me. Which is a shame, since for the first few killings, I think he's a very effective boogeyman.

― Chris F. (servoret), Friday, 19 March 2004 03:19 (twenty-two years ago)

Yeah, on the trailers it says Everett, WI (whatever), but it actually comes across as being set in Milwaukee. It starts in some fictional suburb and you clearly see zombies tearing people on the Milwaukee Public Transit system, and the radio is talking about Milwaukee and Waukesha and whatever. Probably my favorite part of the movie actually.

― Jordan (Jordan), Friday, 19 March 2004 14:25 (twenty-two years ago)

i'm quite interested in the opening, as it's SO amazing in the original, the panic in the newsroom, it really gave a sense of what might actually happen during a zombie invasion. so i'm very curious about how the remake does it.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Friday, 19 March 2004 15:50 (twenty-two years ago)

just saw it, could not resist. thumbs up, basically. the opening (basically the trailer, expanded) is fantastic, I always wanted to see the zombies hit suburbia, and they did it perfectly.

It's what you'd expect; slicker effects, faster pacing & editing. Fast zombies = tense chase sequences. I imagine most teenaged crowds would find the earlier versions a little slow for them. So it was a fun update & brings the zombies, but it makes 28 days later look deep (which it really wasn't).

Nothing can ever top the incredible, visionary original trilogy, so much more than horror films. The original films play on the horrifying social interactions of the few 'individuals' trying to stay alive, played off the backdrop of all friends & strangers slowly being transformed into a mindless army of uniform, lumbering quietly moaning creatures out to ravenously yet absent-mindedly eat you alive... It's got a lot to say about what it's like to live in the United States.

Warning about the ending: some 18 year old guy had a seizure during the strobing, fast-cut ending credits. Thrashed around, then unconscious, had to be wheeled out... not good

― (Jon L), Sunday, 21 March 2004 09:55 (twenty-two years ago)

The beginning reminded me of Grand Theft Auto 3.

The ending was kind of funny, if only because people who were leaving the theater were frozen in their tracks (in a zombie-like manner) after that first shot of T&A.

The part with the chainsaw accident? Jesus, that was creepy...

― Adam Bruneau, Sunday, 21 March 2004 18:22 (twenty-two years ago)

Oh god, the chainsaw bit, I forgot about that. It was the only part I actually cringed at in the movie. Nice touch though, it's bound to happen when you've got a bunch of stressed-out normal people suddenly armed to the teeth.

― Jordan (Jordan), Sunday, 21 March 2004 19:53 (twenty-two years ago)

much better than expected. Never scary, but almost always teeth clenchingly tense. Ending, well, okay, but how could you end it?

I think people would be more sanguine in a "real" situation like this, fersinstance when the girl goes outside the mall to rescue the dog. I would think in "real life" people would just say, tough, you dead now, bitch.

In the moment, it's quite effective. Ultimately, though, I would like even a horror-movie-world explanation of what happened and why.

― Skottie, Tuesday, 23 March 2004 03:41 (twenty-two years ago)

The chainsaw incident was hinted at in one of the teasers I saw! I almost want to see the movie for that part.

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 23 March 2004 04:35 (twenty-two years ago)

Meanwhile, how very interesting.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 24 March 2004 00:37 (twenty-two years ago)

???

― Jordan (Jordan), Wednesday, 24 March 2004 02:52 (twenty-two years ago)

The original Night of film has fallen out of copyright, see.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 24 March 2004 03:41 (twenty-two years ago)

eleven months pass...

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v488/colonpipe/dawnofthelez.gif

During the end credits, intercut with the closeup clips of zombies, there is a very brief clip similar to the infamous Paris Hilton tape, with its telltale green "nightvison" effect.

― bass braille (....), Sunday, 20 March 2005 04:03 (twenty-one years ago)

third act filled with people on stupid pills. the zombies rarely ever FEED, they just run and bite a lot. still enjoyed it.

― miccio (miccio), Sunday, 20 March 2005 04:24 (twenty-one years ago)

that makes sense since they found the video camera on the sleazy guy's boat. is that a Tatu video?

― Gear! (can Jung shill it, Mu?) (Gear!), Sunday, 20 March 2005 04:28 (twenty-one years ago)

i doubt it. i think the girl on the right is sarah polley

― bass braille (....), Sunday, 20 March 2005 15:30 (twenty-one years ago)

if anyone has a wooden trailer like the one in dan's photo upthread, i would like to buy it.

― jones (actual), Sunday, 20 March 2005 16:17 (twenty-one years ago)

(i don't really remember this movie but zombies generally scare me regardless of the movies they're in)

― jones (actual), Sunday, 20 March 2005 16:19 (twenty-one years ago)

But night vision is standard on most cameras, no? For me it's the visual equivalent of a vocoder: I love both so much.

Oh yeah, it is Sarah Polley. What has she been up to lately? Not much. :-(

― nathalie barefoot in the head (stevie nixed), Sunday, 20 March 2005 16:20 (twenty-one years ago)

a passable remake. certainly better than the texas chainsaw remake which was a complete fucking travesty.

― latebloomer: damn cheapskate satanists (latebloomer), Sunday, 20 March 2005 16:43 (twenty-one years ago)

The Chainsaw remake was excellent, the Dawn one was kinda average. Amityville should be excellent. When they gonna remake Alien?

― Zarr, Sunday, 20 March 2005 18:37 (twenty-one years ago)

hehehe

― latebloomer: damn cheapskate satanists (latebloomer), Sunday, 20 March 2005 20:36 (twenty-one years ago)

http://www.ballyhood.com/shark_bait_rig.jpg

― latebloomer: damn cheapskate satanists (latebloomer), Sunday, 20 March 2005 20:39 (twenty-one years ago)

The Chainsaw remake was excellent, the Dawn one was kinda average. Amityville should be excellent. When they gonna remake Alien?

-- Zarr (zar...), March 20th, 2005.

They're Remaking 'Alien'

― latebloomer: damn cheapskate satanists (latebloomer), Sunday, 20 March 2005 20:40 (twenty-one years ago)

This movie was excellent! The DVD has awesome extras, most especially gun store Andy's home movie!

― nickalicious (nickalicious), Sunday, 20 March 2005 20:43 (twenty-one years ago)

I think having the owner of a gun shop as one of the film's heroes kinda shows why this movie is a slap in the face to anyone who takes the left-leaning Romero trilogy seriously as a comment on the times in which they were made. The new Dawn works okay as an action film, but it isn't fit to lick the boots of the original.

The Chainsaw remake at least stays true to what the original was all about - unrelenting, kickass terror.

― Zarr, Sunday, 20 March 2005 21:42 (twenty-one years ago)

hahaha ;)

― bass braille (....), Sunday, 20 March 2005 21:51 (twenty-one years ago)

Oh that's constructive.

― Zarr, Sunday, 20 March 2005 21:56 (twenty-one years ago)

one year passes...

Warning about the ending: some 18 year old guy had a seizure during the strobing, fast-cut ending credits. Thrashed around, then unconscious, had to be wheeled out... not good

A Twitcher! :)

I finally saw this tonight. Too much 28 Days Later about it but you still can't really go wrong with a zombie movie.

The celebrity killing scene was excellent
"Burt Reynolds, get Burt Reynolds!"
"Good shot!"
"There's Rosie O'Donnell! Tell him to get Rosie!"
"Nah, too easy."

― onimo (onimo), Monday, 29 January 2007 00:31 (nineteen years ago)

but you still can't really go wrong with a zombie movie

Land ?

they're remaking Night OT Living Dead again I see, plus there's always Diary Of The Dead to look forward to - Romeros fourth zombie effort.

― Ste (Fuzzy), Monday, 29 January 2007 01:41 (nineteen years ago)

Fifth, surely? He also made Land of the Dead.

I watched this last night too. I thought it was good, but it didn't give me the creeping, afraid-to-go-to-bed horrors that I normally get from zombie films.

I disagree with what someone said above about Andy's lone gunman being a slap in the face to the left-leaning originals. Andy operates alone, and hey! he gets in some serious trouble.

I really thought the "Burke" figure was overplaying it a bit, but I liked Sarah Polley.

― accentmonkey (accentmonkey), Monday, 29 January 2007 09:33 (nineteen years ago)

oh yeah fifth, and I call myself a zombie buff.

― Ste (Fuzzy), Monday, 29 January 2007 09:58 (nineteen years ago)

enjoyed it. didn't make enough of the mall setting though (having the run of an entire mall = fun) but added enough new bits to make it interesting (zombie baby, er, more things). still can't get my head around fast zombies. they should also have ended it on the boat, left it open for a (non-remake) sequel.

original is miles better though, one of my favourites.

― Koogy Bloogies (koogs), Monday, 29 January 2007 10:29 (nineteen years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.