The 2004 Dawn of the Dead is sort of a poor man's version of the 1978 original by George A. Romero, which isn't to say it doesn't deliver the goods in terms of gore, but it has little going on upstairs. It's the equivalent of choosing Paycheck over Total Recall both films are based on short stories by late sci-fi author Philip K. Dick, but only the latter of the two movies actually amounted to anything memorable and thought-provoking.
Then again, I'm in a minority when it comes to the first Dawn although I liked it enough to purchase the DVD, I didn't love it, and felt a lot of it was silly and not very funny at all. Many critics call it an attack on consumer America (zombies flocking to the mall = us), and while I admire the message and the obvious passion behind Romero's project, I've always admired Night of the Living Dead (1968) the first installment in the original 'Dead Trilogy' the best, and think its allegories about racism are even more subtle than the consumer attack in Dead (which is about as blunt as being hit over the head with a hammer).
The remake of Dead boasts a better cast but a lot of the dialogue is just as stiff as its predecessor. Also, it often stoops down to the level of sheer stupidity for instance, when one of the film's characters, stuck in a mall surrounded by zombies, decides to make a mad dash across a street (flooded with the undead) in order to rescue a trapped dog? This makes those 'Don't go in the basement!' moments in other horror films look like brilliant ideas.
The zombies in this re-imagining of Romero's tale are faster than the slow-walking numbskulls in the original, which begs the question: If they can run as fast as a car, how come they can't manage to outrun humans carrying heavy weapons, and can't manage to figure out how to break into a mall, when all the humans did was throw a toilet seat through a window? And how come, if they're so strong, the scrawny female heroine can manage to fend one off and shoot it on the head? And yet Ving Rhames can't manage to win a fist-fight with one? Please.
IBrains are not required for this film. At all. For that reason it is a solid 'mindless action blockbuster' but don't expect anything substantial. You could have the IQ of a zombie and still enjoy this.
Yes, I was entertained by this movie, and that's why I recommend it as a well-made action flick, but I don't feel the need to see it again anytime soon, whereas the inferiority of this version has just made me appreciate the Romero version even more.
Then again, I'm in a minority when it comes to the first Dawn although I liked it enough to purchase the DVD, I didn't love it, and felt a lot of it was silly and not very funny at all. Many critics call it an attack on consumer America (zombies flocking to the mall = us), and while I admire the message and the obvious passion behind Romero's project, I've always admired Night of the Living Dead (1968) the first installment in the original 'Dead Trilogy' the best, and think its allegories about racism are even more subtle than the consumer attack in Dead (which is about as blunt as being hit over the head with a hammer).
The remake of Dead boasts a better cast but a lot of the dialogue is just as stiff as its predecessor. Also, it often stoops down to the level of sheer stupidity for instance, when one of the film's characters, stuck in a mall surrounded by zombies, decides to make a mad dash across a street (flooded with the undead) in order to rescue a trapped dog? This makes those 'Don't go in the basement!' moments in other horror films look like brilliant ideas.
The zombies in this re-imagining of Romero's tale are faster than the slow-walking numbskulls in the original, which begs the question: If they can run as fast as a car, how come they can't manage to outrun humans carrying heavy weapons, and can't manage to figure out how to break into a mall, when all the humans did was throw a toilet seat through a window? And how come, if they're so strong, the scrawny female heroine can manage to fend one off and shoot it on the head? And yet Ving Rhames can't manage to win a fist-fight with one? Please.
IBrains are not required for this film. At all. For that reason it is a solid 'mindless action blockbuster' but don't expect anything substantial. You could have the IQ of a zombie and still enjoy this.
Yes, I was entertained by this movie, and that's why I recommend it as a well-made action flick, but I don't feel the need to see it again anytime soon, whereas the inferiority of this version has just made me appreciate the Romero version even more.