Dawn of the Dead (Resident Evil 0.5 movie)

[cbwing0]

Zombies by definition do not eat each other. This is stated eloquently in the original Dawn of the Dead, when a scientist is describing the zombies. He says something along the lines of, "These [the zombies] are not cannibals. They feed on the living, but they do not feed on each other." The same is true in Resident Evil, and every other zombie movie of which I am aware.

[supa dupa ninja]

I saw Dawn of the dead last night and one thing is on my mind: IT'S FUNNY AS HECK!!

not to spoil anything but there was a montage scene where they were... oh heck just watch the movie and find out for yourselves....

[Fsiphskilm]

I just watched i

[Stephen]

To each his own...it did pretty well in the box office for a horror flick. Highest grossing horror remake film ever. I plan on picking it up on dvd when it comes out....and if it hits the little theater down the road in a few weeks I might see it again. (there is a small theater down the road that is like 2 months behind)

[cbwing0]

I'm seeing it in a little under two weeks, when I go home for Easter weekend. If I could have seen it sooner, I would.

[Zedian]

I saw it actually on opening weekend.....it wasn't anything near the original version. Somehow the original Dawn of the Dead had some satiric moments and found itself being a little funny. Strange thing is, this newer take somehow just wasn't as funny. I did like how they added more characters -- which at least gave me the greater sense of paranoia as more and more humans are becoming prey to this outbreak. But the ending just about killed me.....I too was expecting something a little more novel and well different.

There sure have been a lot of zombies and with RE Outbreak and RE 4 coming out, we're only going to see more.

Lastly, I never quite understood why 28 Days Later was deemed a zombie movie....they were infected people who would just go balistic.

[DrNic]

Lastly, I never quite understood why 28 Days Later was deemed a zombie movie....they were infected people who would just go balistic.

Probably because they look and act a bit like zombies. It could also be the fact that to be a zombie means to be thoughtless or without free-will (i think thats what the word means).

[Fsiphskilm]

I thought Dawn of

[cbwing0]

Zombies aren't a whole new species of Poeple? They're just dead humans. So in a way Zombies are Cannabals, it's just the dead eating the living. In DOTD the Zombies refused to eat dogs or cats even when they were right in front of them. The zombies went for the humans. I'd call that cannabalism.

In a way you are right, but in other ways you are wrong. Zombies in both DOTD and RE were once human, and feed more or less exclusively upon humans (although in the original Night of the Living Dead, zombies eat insects, rodents, and anything else that is alive ). Since the NOTLD zombies are from the same storyline as those in DOTD, it is safe to assume that they both eat any living thing that crosses their path.

Even if they did only feed upon humans, there is still a strong basis for not calling the zombies "cannibals." As mentioned before, they never feed on each other (which can be explained by the same mechanisms that drive them to eat human flesh in the first place: an instinctive avoidance of rotten, toxic food), which is part of the definition of a true cannibal. Since they are different from living humans in many important ways (the most important of which being that they are dead), it is reasonable to call them a separate species/group.

I agree that DOTD and RE2 aren't really in competition, especially given the fact that they were not released at the same time. RE2 won't be released for several months, and by then DOTD will probably be out on DVD.

In just six days I finally get to see DOTD, so I will post my thoughts on it at that time.

[JediSonic]

Since they are different from living humans in many important ways (the most important of which being that they are dead)

lol, that was almost sig worthy!

[cbwing0]

Yes...and it was completely intentional...

[cbwing0]

Ok...I finally got a chance to see Dawn of the Dead last Friday, so now I will give my thoughts. Let me start by saying that it is an excellent movie, worthy of being counted among it's predecessors as a great horror movie.

Although it is a remake of the classic, Dawn of the Dead '04 is not simply a retelling of the original story with a bigger budget and modern setting. Fans of the original will notice some similarities, but they are all done in a new and unique way. The director even uses your knowledge of the original to build suspense and take the story in a new direction at several points in the story.

Unlike the original, zombies are highly mobile (but still as dumb as rocks). I didn't know how this would work out compared to the original, but it turned out quite well. Perhaps the regular slow zombies just aren't scary anymore, and I can live with that.

The movie does not lack one thing that is important to a good zombie movie: humor. From their interesting rendition of Disturbed's "Down With the Sickness," to the relationship between Andy and Kenneth (Ving Rhames), the movie does not lack comedy, especially if you have a rather dark sense of humor.

Nevertheless, the movie does not let you forget that the mall is surrounded by relentless hordes of the undead. There is also plenty of gore, which is another key to good zombies movies. Despite having an R rating (as opposed to being unrated or NC-17), Dawn of the Dead has a respectable amount of gore.

Some people have complained about the ending; however, it makes perfect sense when you consider the original trilogy as a whole. Through subtle, yet clear references, the plot movies from Night of the Living Dead, to Dawn of the Dead, concluding with Day of the Dead. In this way it is a remake not just of the second film in the trilogy, but of all three. For fans of the original, this adds an additional layer to the already great remake.

Another possible criticism is Dawn of the Dead '04 does not really bring anything unique to the zombie-horror subgenre (even the zombie baby has been done before); but it is the combination of elements that makes the film original and unique. The environment established in the first few minutes of the movie also adds originality in its depiction of the chaos following the first stages of zombie infestation.

As a zombie/horror movie, Dawn of the Dead is a top-tier production. I recommend it to any horror fans, especially those who--like me--enjoy a good zombie movie.

[Fsiphskilm]

I personally

[cbwing0]

Hmmm...tons of fast zombies vs. tons of slow zombies...I think the former is more dangerous.

Both types can be scary if used right (as they are in the original Dead trilogy, which came long before RE ).

[Lightbringer]

I prefure the mostly slow zombies personally because its more realistic, i like the freshly dead to run a bit till rigermortis hits em. , but anyway. Sinec when is a zombie movie realistic. For what it was, It was a good movie and i didn't regret paying to see it.

Lightbringer // Aaron

[Straylight]

Just to throw this topic off a bit, has anyone seen "Shaun of the Dead" yet? It's gotten some really good reviews.

Link:

http://www.empireonline.co.uk/site/incinemas/ReviewInFull.asp?FID=9785

[Lightbringer]

thats an interesting sounding movie, but im not sure if i'll ever see it. It sounds like a writer got board after seeing the movie and thought about what would happen if zombies infested his local area. the name is funny though.

Lightbringer // Aaron

[cbwing0]

the movie does look pretty interesting. Perhaps I will watch it when I have some time and money (i.e., in the summer ).