Ebert's Dawn of the Dead Review

[[AK]Squidly]

http://www.suntimes.com/output/ebert...s-dawn19f.html

The contrast between this new version of "Dawn of the Dead" and the 1979 George Romero original is instructive in the ways that Hollywood has grown more skillful and less daring over the years. From a technical point of view, the new "Dawn" is slicker and more polished, and the acting is better, too. But it lacks the mordant humor of the Romero version, and although both films are mostly set inside a shopping mall, only Romero uses that as an occasion for satirical jabs at a consumer society.

The 1979 film dug deeper in another way, by showing two groups of healthy humans fighting each other; the new version draws a line between the healthy and the zombies and maintains it. Since the zombies cannot be blamed for their behavior, there's no real conflict between good and evil in Zack Snyder's new version; just humans fighting ghouls. The conflict between the two healthy groups in the Romero film does have a pale shadow in the new one; a hard-nosed security guard (Michael Kelly) likes to wave his gun and order people around and is set up as the bad guy, but his character undergoes an inexplicable change just for the convenience of the plot.

All of which is not to say that the new "Dawn of the Dead" doesn't do an efficient job of delivering the goods. The screenplay, credited to James Gunn (based on George Romero's original screenplay), has been co-produced by Richard P. Rubinstein, who produced the original. They use the same premise: An unexplained disease or virus, spread by human bites, kills its victims and then resurrects them as zombies. The creatures then run berserk, attacking healthy humans, infecting them, and so on. The only way to kill them is to shoot them in the head. True to the general speed-up in modern Hollywood, these new-issue zombies run fast, unlike the earlier ones, who lurched along. They also seem smarter, and make decisions faster, unlike the 1979 models, who were likely to lurch up the down escalator.

The story begins with Ana (Sarah Polley) greeting a young girl who lives in the neighborhood. As the girl skates away on her in-lines, the shot is held just a little longer than seems natural, informing us Something Bad Will Happen to Her. And does, as the next morning she attacks Ana's boyfriend, and Ana barely escapes with her life. After zombies roam the streets, newscasters fight hysteria and neighborhoods burn, Ana eventually finds herself part of a small group in the local shopping mall.

Well, not such a small group. Unlike the tight little group of survivors in "28 Days Later," this one expands to the point where we don't much care about some of the characters (the blonde with the red lipstick, for example). But we do care about Kenneth (Ving Rhames), a gravel-voiced cop with hard-edged authority. We care about Michael (Jake Weber), a decent guy who tries to make the right decisions. And we care about Andre (Mekhi Phifer), whose wife Luda (Inna Korobkina) is great with child and will give birth at any moment; the way that plot plays out is touching and horrifying. We even work up some feeling for the guy marooned on the roof of the gun shop across the street, who communicates with Kenneth by holding up signs.

For the rest, the movie consists mostly of dialogue and character scenes, alternating with violent attacks by zombies. The movie wisely doesn't give us too many of those scenes where one guy wanders off by himself when we're mentally screaming, Stick together! And although there is a cute dog, at least it's made useful in the plot. Of course the movie makes full use of the shock shot where a zombie suddenly appears in foreground from out of nowhere.

Of gore and blood there is a sufficiency. When the survivors devise a risky way to escape from the mall (which I will not reveal), a chainsaw plays a key role. The survivors take chances that are probably unwise; maybe they should stay in a safe place, since the zombies will presumably sooner or later run out of gas. But taking chances makes for good action scenes, and exploding propane is always useful.

So, yes, "Dawn of the Dead" works and it delivers just about what you expect when you buy your ticket. My only complaint is that its plot flatlines compared to the 1979 version, which was trickier, wittier and smarter. Romero was not above finding parallels between zombies and mall shoppers; in the new version, the mall is just a useful location, although at least there are still a few jokes about the Muzak.

(3 out of 4 stars)

[[AK]Hylander]

Here's one put up by the Einsteins at CNN:

Review

Just an FYI.

[[AK]Squidly]

Ok Mr "Wet Blanket". I don't expect the efete at CNN to "get" zombie movies.

[[AK]Hylander]

It was actually an Associated Press writer, not CNN.

[[AK]Squidly]

Even worse.

[[AK]Hylander]

And just what is your problem with the Communist News Network anyways?

[[AK]Squidly]

Here's a review by a fan of the genre (tm). Notice any difference in tone?

Constant AICN whipping boy James Gunn wrote the script, a completely untested and brand spanking new director helmed it and it’s a remake of a film that is treated like the Citizen Kane of zombie movies by many hard core film geeks. So this films not only going to suck, it’s going to go down in AICN history as one of the worst films of all time, right?

Nope. Not a bit of it. Dawn of the Dead rocks. Hard.

What? Did I just write those words? Did I just SERIOUSLY write those words? Yes, folks, I did. And I meant them. This movie is seriously one truckload of fun. But to elaborate, I have to go to the original material. You see, I’m not the worlds biggest fan of the original. Oh, I like it quite a bit, but I just don’t love it. I never really took issue with the idea of a remake because in my mind they desecrated that sacred ground over a decade ago with Tom Savini’s remake of Night of the Living Dead. Now, I really dig Savini’s remake, but Night of the Living Dead was always a film that I felt was so perfect it didn’t NEED to be remade. But it was, and once you’ve dug up the body, you might as well go to town. Dawn of the Dead never sat right with me. Like I said, I dug it quite a bit, but as with many well regarded horror films of the 70’s, I felt there were tonal inconsistencies. Dawn was such a great serious film riddled with moments of awkward camp like undead Hare Krishna’s and SWAT Team snipers that can readily perform abortions. It was just odd, and I always felt that without those few moments, the film would be truly great. So in my mind, it was somewhat ripe to be remade. Not that I was ready to accept the writer of Scooby Doo and The Specials as the man to do it.

But, man, did this work. And what made it work is that while this is a remake of a Romero film this ISN’T an attempt to make one. Instead, this is the John Carpenter film we all wish John Carpenter still made. Mixing in elements of The Thing, Assault on Precinct 13 and Escape from New York, this film becomes simply another segment of the Romeroverse, another story told in the ongoing saga of the end of the world. So why not call it something different...? Well, quite simply, this movie borrows it’s premise straight from the original and calling it anything different would still get it tagged as a Dawn of the Dead ripoff. So why the hell not go full tilt and immediately draw the comparison from the get go? But while the premise is exactly the same, and there are a few minor, borrowed elements (albeit all of which are treated differently) like the fun in the mall, a pregnant women, and an escape attempt, the bulk of this movie is very different. For one, while this is survival horror, it is entirely laden with action that doesn’t just involve screaming and running. The action is tense and the zombies are fast (and occasionally creative). This film is less about the angst and woe of the last stand of humanity and more about fear and ass kicking.

And the kills in this range from the wonderfully painful to the downright cringe inducing. Sure, some of them look somewhat digital, but you realize that they have to. There are bits in this movie that you could never have stuntmen do, like a long shot of backing over zombies in a truck, bits that are just both cool and darkly humorous but also provide a genuine feeling of “HOLY F***! THEY’RE EVERYWHERE!” But it also has a soul. You feel for several of these characters. There’s a genuine feeling of loss and a lack of hope that guts those that are still alive.

Sarah Polley is wonderful, bringing the great solid strong leading lady with flaws charm that she has done many times before. Ving Rhames is fantastic, with Director Zack Snyder letting him be all the badass he can be. Here Ving exemplifies the John Carpenter quality I was talking about, proving to embody all the best that John Carpenter poured into his serious heroes. And Mekhi Phifer brings just the right amount of pathos and desperation to round things out.

This movie really caught me off guard. I wanted it to be good, but I just wasn’t convinced going in. Now I am. This movie’s going to clean up. While hardcore Romero fans may find themselves dissatisfied with this, most moviegoers are going to find this a fun, actiony, creepy zombie film that grabs you from the start and never lets go.

[[AK]Bribo]

Currently tracking 80% at Rotten Tomatoes.

Must be pretty good.

[[AK]Squidly]

80% for a gore filled zombie movie at this late date is nothing short of amazing.

[[AK]Squidly]

Stitch, Gunny, and I saw this movie on Saturday... It's hard to explain just how awesome this movie was. If you haven't seen it yet, make a point of getting your rotting carcass to the theater ASAP. You won't be sorry.