I checked out the definition of "horror" in the dictionary recently, and I noticed that the American Heritage lists 5 definitions. In the case of this movie, I don't believe the first definition ("an intense painful feeling of repugnance and fear") completely applies. Take out "and fear" and that definition applies. Instead, for this film I prefer definition four: "Something unpleasant, ugly, or disagreeable."
Before I continue, I thought that "Night of the Living Dead" was a good film. I admit it's not great, but there's something campy and claustrophobic about it. "Dawn of the Dead" has an overall interesting concept, and neat smaller ideas within. But there are a couple of things that bothered me about this film.
1. It is not scary. The flesh-eating zombies are indeed disgusting, comical, but not scary. Only two things in a film can cause a scare. The first is by way of the jolt or shock, where something unexpected just suddenly happens. The second way is through sustained tension where you absolutely dread what is going to happen as you see it unfold in front of you. I experienced neither of these things in this film. There are bluntly no jolts. The attempted sustained suspense fails because none of the characters are worth sympathizing over. Good horror has terrible things happening to people whom you don't want to see it happen to. Whether it be Romero's overly emphasized social message in this film of the inhumanity that comes within tragic times or what.. for some reason, I am never concerned with what happens to these people.
2. The graphic violence of this (and I'm referring to the Director's Cut version)is absurd, extravagant and unnecessary. It almost seemed like the movie was an experiment for a special-effects artist to try out his latest toys. A scene here and there showing the flesh-eaters at work in all of their gruesomeness could justify some of the content. By the time the movie ends (which I thought it never would), literally all hell has broken loose, and the gore is just completely uncalled for. I thought I'd never see a movie that rivals the 80's version of "The Fly" as the goriest movie ever made, but this definitely does, and maybe even tops it.
The whole movie is not completely atrocious. The aforementioned social message, and the totalitarian society built by 4 people in a mall work really well in this film. For that, I gave it a 4, but I couldn't rate it any higher.
Final thoughts: Another reviewer has already noted that this is more of an extremely black comedy than horror. I would have to agree. This is probably a movie worth taking a look at once.. if you have the stomach for it. But unlike most users of this site, I can not rank it anywhere near my Top 50 for best horror films.
Before I continue, I thought that "Night of the Living Dead" was a good film. I admit it's not great, but there's something campy and claustrophobic about it. "Dawn of the Dead" has an overall interesting concept, and neat smaller ideas within. But there are a couple of things that bothered me about this film.
1. It is not scary. The flesh-eating zombies are indeed disgusting, comical, but not scary. Only two things in a film can cause a scare. The first is by way of the jolt or shock, where something unexpected just suddenly happens. The second way is through sustained tension where you absolutely dread what is going to happen as you see it unfold in front of you. I experienced neither of these things in this film. There are bluntly no jolts. The attempted sustained suspense fails because none of the characters are worth sympathizing over. Good horror has terrible things happening to people whom you don't want to see it happen to. Whether it be Romero's overly emphasized social message in this film of the inhumanity that comes within tragic times or what.. for some reason, I am never concerned with what happens to these people.
2. The graphic violence of this (and I'm referring to the Director's Cut version)is absurd, extravagant and unnecessary. It almost seemed like the movie was an experiment for a special-effects artist to try out his latest toys. A scene here and there showing the flesh-eaters at work in all of their gruesomeness could justify some of the content. By the time the movie ends (which I thought it never would), literally all hell has broken loose, and the gore is just completely uncalled for. I thought I'd never see a movie that rivals the 80's version of "The Fly" as the goriest movie ever made, but this definitely does, and maybe even tops it.
The whole movie is not completely atrocious. The aforementioned social message, and the totalitarian society built by 4 people in a mall work really well in this film. For that, I gave it a 4, but I couldn't rate it any higher.
Final thoughts: Another reviewer has already noted that this is more of an extremely black comedy than horror. I would have to agree. This is probably a movie worth taking a look at once.. if you have the stomach for it. But unlike most users of this site, I can not rank it anywhere near my Top 50 for best horror films.