A good zombie movie ***

Rating: 7/10 (9 January 2005)

I've always been known to trash needless "remakes" of films, and especially the more recent re-do's. I think it's become a celluloid disease that's really infested cinema these days and there aren't a whole lot of fresh ideas remaining, specifically in the Horror genre. Having gotten this out of the way, there are exceptions to every rule and all you die-hard Romero fans might as well get your stones ready for hurling at me right now, because I may actually like the 2004 version more than the 1978 film.
In all honesty, other than spending some of its time in a shopping mall there really isn't all that much direct similarity between this new DAWN and the original; hell, this movie could have been called something else entirely (NIGHT OF THE ZOMBIES, 28 DAYS LATER or anything) and then it wouldn't have mattered to hardcore purists as much, because this film is very much its own animal. We all know that the real business reasoning behind using the title DAWN OF THE DEAD was to lure in the hardcore fan base. So it's best to approach this experience as just another "end of the world"/"zombie takeover" situation on its own terms.
Still, comparisons (thanks to the title) are bound to crop up. I found these ghouls to be a refreshing change from the traditional slow-moving ones; I'd be much more terrified at having a carnivorous flesh-eating cannibal hot on my ass running after me than I would one of those old fashioned crawlers who could easily get knocked to the ground by a good sneeze from my nostrils. This doesn't mean I don't retain my fondness for the more limping, arthritic type of zombie of yesteryear; it just means I thought this change was welcome and posed a greater threat. Since whatever is ailing these creatures is never explained, I also had no problems believing it could make them speedy and even roar like wildcats. Hey, at least it makes them fearsome.
It's been claimed that the characters in this new version are not sympathetic nor well developed, and I take serious issue with that... On the contrary -- it's the characters of the "original" DAWN OF THE DEAD whom I've never felt anything for. But in the 2004 film - and this is especially true regarding the favored Director's Cut - these people are exceptionally well defined and distinct from each other. There are heroes (Ving Rhames) and there are villains in this predicament (the security creep). Sweet guys and jerky guys (the dope with the boat is a perfect example of the latter). Guys you can feel sorry for (like Andy on the roof or that poor soul who has to face a crucial decision late in the fight). And no matter which version you prefer, Sarah Polley runs circles around Gaylen Ross in the Leading Lady Department.
Zack Snyder is no genius (after all, he still allowed inappropriate hard rock music into the soundtrack for one thing), but he's directed a pretty good thriller with an end-of-the-world feel. This is especially felt in the knockout pre-credits sequence. There are plenty of exploding heads and gore to please fans of the original yet not go into overkill mode as happened the first time. It's not perfect and it's not as horrifying as NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD, nor is it as uncomfortably apocalyptic as DAY OF THE DEAD ... but for all intents and purposes that are forever open for debate, it IS more fun for me than that other Romero zombie film that fits between those two.