a new Dawn beckons...

Rating: Null/10 (21 March 2004)

First off, allow me to address all those who feel compelled to lament this new "re-imagining" of the 1978 classic as a weak attempt at a re-make. Notice I said "re-imagining". What would be the point of making a shot-for-shot re-do? What novel and and ambitious qualities could possibly take shape? Well many do, and I am happy to say the new Dawn of the Dead breathes a welcome, albeit supercharged "life" into the zombie genre. True, Zach Snyder's undead don't waddle and plod along with blank stares, which made them much more "corpse-like" in the original. Romero's zombies, despite Tom Savini's (who makes a precious cameo in this one) innovative make-up on closeups, for the most part looked like they needed a tan and a napkin to wipe the ketchup off their chin. The 2004 Dead are vicious, fast, and driven by pure animal instinct. Many comparisons have been made to 28 Days Later, but let's not forget the baddies in that disappointing venture were NOT zombies, but people infected with a cross between rabies and steroids. I havent seen any comparisons to the old 1977 Marilyn Chambers classic (no, not Beyond the Green Door) from David Cronenberg called Rabid, or the 1985 sci-fi Lifeforce. Both featured similar, fast-moving "deadish" villains. And the list goes on.
What makes this new Dawn so mortifying (forgive the pun) is what it DOESN'T tell you: like how the plague started, how universally spread it has become, where the helicopters fly off to (surely there are military safe zones if these yaps can hold up in a mall for so long), and exactly what happens to the bite victims. Yes, it is not airborne, as the film depicts, but slowly sickens the victim to the point of death, but not for long...as soon as the brain "shuts off", like a switch the disease re-animates the flesh--only now the person is on survival auto-pilot: with an incredible rage and craving for food: good ole living human beings. Why not the dog or each other? Your guess is as good as mine. Perhaps it's a primal scent thing, who knows. Again, it's what keeps you guessing that proves so effective, along with that on the edge of your seat, adrenalin-pumping tension that these zombies provide and Romero's antiquated automatons simply do not. To compensate, Romero indulged in "feasting" shots of zombies gnawing on flesh for way too long (which Italian zombie movie directors took to new, um, heights). This Dawn doesn't need to splash the screen with the grotesque, in-your-face-gore that will make you upchuck your popcorn. But it will make you jump and spill it once or twice!
As for the criticism that the movie lacks the social commentary of the original, well, duh, it's not 1978 anymore! The egotistical consumerism of the 70s Romero so aptly lampooned is for our generation passe, and we can turn to I Love the 70's on VH1 for that now. No, today things are even more fast-paced, high tech and bleak. The film captures that brilliantly (a minute in, a doctor wonders if he will make his golf date on Sunday--isnt that a social jab?). Is it The Real World meets Night of the Living Dead? Perhaps, but only at its most basic level. Are there too many characters? Yes, but these days a horror film needs at least two hotties (who will make obligatory spreads in FHM and Maxim, i've no doubt) and enough ingredients of this wonderful melting pot of ours to satisfy our reality tv craving as much as they ultimately feed the dead. Besides, havent we become braindead zombies when it comes to the crap they spew on tv and we eat up without reservation?
I do wish the film were longer to allow us to explore the central characters of Sarah Polley, Ving Rhames, Mekhi Pheifer and Jake Weber more. There is a central and integral bond between the four that goes below the surface of their superficial mall-mates, but we only catch glimpses of it. The original was 40 minutes longer, and it was to character development that it devoted the extra time. The closest we get to that, as others have noted, is the sentimental and doomed relationship between Rhames' stoic cop and a marooned, rooftop owner of a gun shop across the sea of zombies in the parking lot below. I also wanted the film to slow down and take a chill pill once in a while, which would only heighten the thrills once things started to heat up again. Some shots, though, looked like they were taken right out of "Saving Private Ryan" with its bled-gray, choppy footage, and this element I think added to the "warlike" hell of the film. Kudos to commercial director Zach Snyder for not making this a long and saturated MTV video...but a sleek, intense and stylish film. The biting (again, forgive the pun)humor provided by Ty Burrell is a welcome treat, and highlights a clever script that doesnt become weighted down by a multi-layered, deep plot. Save that for a movie without flesh-eating zombies, ok?

So overall, I HIGHLY RECOMMEND seeing this film. The first 10 minutes is the stuff of sheer cinematic horror brilliance (wow did Johnny Cash's Man Comes Around work perfectly), the middle will have your heart pounding out of your chest, and the end offers the action-packed climactic showdown with the mall zombies you've been waiting for...just DONT LEAVE WHEN THE CREDITS START TO ROLL...(HINT HINT) 8 stars out of 10.