Very Good, But Not Great...

Rating: Null/10 (21 March 2004)

Given the amount of dreck we horror fans have been forced to endure over the last ten years or so, it is refreshing to see some new life being pumped into the genre. Last year's remake of TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE was an excellent re-imagining of the story (although producer Michael Bay's heavy handed influence was quite prevalent), and now we have the remake of George Romero's classic DAWN OF THE DEAD.
Is the new version good? Yes, it is. I enjoyed it immensely (although I'm kicking myself for not staying through the closing credits as I normally do). Does it surpass the original? Not by a long shot.
The 1979 DAWN was a cleverly written, darkly foreboding, and bitingly satirical look at the human condition. There was a sense of dread that permeated the whole film, and you just found yourself wondering when the proverbial feces would hit the fan. In addition, sub-level social commentary on everything from consumerism to abortion could be found; the original DAWN OF THE DEAD was that most elusive of creatures...the intelligent horror film.
Now the new DAWN is certainly a thrill ride, and I wasn't as put off by the running zombies as I thought I would be. I just thought everybody accepted the end of the world a little too easily, and there were too many characters to flesh out in the film's 1 hr and 40 minute running time. And I'll admit, I'm not much for a lot of humor in these films; if you're gonna be dark, for crying out loud be DARK. If I want comedy, I'll watch ANIMAL HOUSE.
DAWN OF THE DEAD 2004 is certainly a legitimate addition to Romero's Living Dead canon (much like the excellent 1990 remake of NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD), but I have a feeling I'll be sticking to my DVD of the original (gonna go watch it now, as a matter of fact!)
My rating: 7 1/2 out of 10....