The spread of the disease worked - but . . .

Rating: Null/10 (30 March 2004)

Concerning the "spread of the disease" and the speed of infection had to do, it seemed, with where on the body a victim was bitten. Ana's husband was bitten directly in an artery - thus all the blood - causing death quicker and infection to the Central Nervous System to take hold faster. In the case of the obese woman, she was bitten on the upper arm - so it took hours. With the pregnant victim, Luda, she was grazed on the hand - like Frank was. But Frank's bite was very deep - Luda's was not as deep. So, like with snakebite, how long it takes to make the zombie transformation is related to how long it takes the poison/virus/misc. to reach the heart and CNS. I think they were realistic with that part of the movie. But the film just was not as scary or effective as it could have been because the overwhelming feelings of dread, and boredom (which if you're in this situation you're not going to be bored,) were not realistically portrayed. This script could have done with a reading of Alas! Babylon or The Diary of Anne Frank for a little humanization in times of extreme paranoia, catastrophe and dread.
What we're really watching when we watch a movie like "Dawn of The Dead" is a morbid curiosity with Apocalyptic situations. We want to see how we will react. Romero's film cut's deeper than this one does due to the feelings of dread he conjures in his movie. Those weren't addressed here as much - if not at all. It was just as if the characters thought of the zombies as a sort of curious inconvenience, as if to say, "Oh well the world has ended - sucks." That doesn't cut it - and devalues the movie as a whole. We look to horror movies to put us in "worst fear/situation" situations vicariously - and hope we make it out alive or unscathed. But more than half the journey is obtaining empathy - and this film did not accomplish that at all. And it could have - that's the disappointing part.