Rating: 
Summary: * 2* disc DVD set coming later this year
Review: Judging from the sales-rank, many of you (like myself) have pre-ordered the Dawn of the Dead single disc coming this March. From what I've gathered, it represents only the THEATRICAL version with little or no special features. Whether this is a way to spur interest in the re-release or just..uh, well squeeze as much from the market as is possible, is unclear. NONETHELESS, a 2 disc set is due for sometime in 2004 (apparently prior to Halloween). According to a Fangoria report, the multi-disc set will include both theatrical and director's cut editions as well as audio commentary by producer Richard Rubinstein and possibly new tracks with Romero and Tom Savini. There will also be a sizeable still gallery with additional features yet to be announced. I'm more excited about the 2-disc set and curiously peeved at the single-disc version. But it's Dawn of the Dead, what'a'ya gonna do, they've got the good stuff and I need it.
Rating:
Summary: The Best Storyline of them all
Review: This is the one where they hold out in a mall. Good storyline as far as these stories go. Lots of gore & guts. Just what your looking for. I'm first in line to buy this one on DVD.
Rating:
Summary: Great movie..But beware of DVD!
Review: This is deff. a classic horror flick, and finally it comes back to shelves after so many years. But i think everyone should know that this version being released on March 9 is the bad version. The extra you get is a commentary by George A. Romero. A double disc with the director's cut and plenty of extras should be released later on. So be patient and wait for the good version.
Rating: 
Summary: The Actors are really really bad!
Review: Yes I admit I like the Romero trilogy. I am not going to praise Romero because frankly I think the movies are poorly made. I actually prefer "Day Of The Dead" ten fold over this one. What I do not get is why the acting is just so horrible in this film. The zombies are painted blue (for a good zombie make-up job, see "Zombie") and not scary at all. Still I have to admit the premise of being trapped in the mall while the dead tried to break in was entertaining. But still, these actors couldn't act their way out of a high school play. And frankly the direction and photography is not so great either. Despite my criticism I still like the film, and I do own it.
Also, I should point out, romero did not create "zombies". The idea is not his originally. There were zombie movies dating back to the 1930's. Since "Dawn Of The Dead", many ill informed people seem to think every zombie flick is a rip off of this movie. They are so so wrong. Watch "Day Of The Dead" instead, it is much better.
Rating:
Summary: Dawn Of The Dead Is A True Horror Masterpiece!
Review: An intense and overlooked horror classic, George A. Romero's "Dawn Of The Dead", the second and most popular in his Dead trilogy, is probably his most epic tale to date. Regarded by many, including Roger Ebert, as the ultimiate definition in horror films, "Dawn" is truly the thinking man's horror movie. Its horror is far more subtle than that of in-your-face suspense films like "Halloween" or "Exorcist" or for that matter, Romero's first Dead film, "Night". Where most slasher films provide those quick thrills that make us jump but dissapear from our memory almost as quickly as they appeared, "Dawn" creeps into our fears and shows us a view of our downfall as a civilazation. "Dawn" centers around four survivors, two Philadelphia S.W.A.T. members and a couple from a newstation, who are trying to escape a zombie plague that has engulfed the country. The film opens with chaos ensuing as a handful of newscasters attempt unsuccesfully to put together an emergency broadcast. We move forward to a project house where the tenants are protecting the undead because as one of the central characters explains, "They still believe there is honor in being dead". Guns blaze as seemingly more humans are taken down than actual zombies courtesy of a SWAT team bigit who goes buckwild but ends up getting his before the smoke clears. As the violence in the city seems to be piling up, our four characters use the local news chopper to escape to the country side where the situation isn't any less of a problem though a handful of trigger-happy rednecks seem to be having a great time with their beers and shotguns. After a brief touchdown at said location where the group runs into a few problems with both the zombies and each other while gassing up their helicopter, they head back up into the sky and eventually land at a shopping center, the film's cental location. Placing the story at a mall makes for not only a unique and creative backdrop but also allows for Romero to provide an intriguing social commentary on the madness of consumerism that seemed to sweep the late 70's. The zombies who try to break into the center are portrayed as people who loved shopping there so much in life that all they want to do is be there after death. Romero and make-up effects wizard, Tom Savini are at the most sadistic during the concluding act of this film as our heroes do battle with another band of survivors, a motorcycle gang who shows up and tries to take over the mall for themselves. The zombies, who prior to this were pretty much an afterthought regain their power because their human counterparts are far too busy with each other to notice that they are regaining control of the place. Savini's graphic make-up effects really make for a great finale. "Dawn Of The Dead" is very much a different film from "Night Of The Living Dead". "Dawn" takes a far different approach to the "dead taking over the world" concept that George helped create in "Night". The mall setting is far less clostrophobic than the farmhouse in the original but it is the nightmare outside that our characters must deal with. In "Night", it was all about getting past the problem that lie in front of them and it's smooth sailing. In "Dawn", the problem is almost reversed. They are safe inside their location, though their safety is an illusion, and it is the outside world that is coming in. They don't want to get away. The outside world is falling apart and the mall is almost a false symbol of protection. "Dawn" probably will not be an instant overnight favorite. I, myself, was expecting a much different movie than the one I watched. Having caughts bits and pieces of "Day" before I actually sat down to watch it, I was expecting it to have more of the look and feel that I associated with that movie. I honestly didn't know what to make of the weird clothing, the Smurf-blue make-up effects, and the strange Goblins music that popped up through out the film. Within two weeks of watching it, it had become one of my favorite films. All these weird visuals that I found strange actually kept dragging me in over and over again. Though the film is over 25 years old, I can still honestly say that there are very few films of any genre that resemble it.
Rating:
Summary: Best...zombie movie...EVER!!!!!
Review: Trying to put my finger on exactly what it is I like so much about a vision of a ruined world where your only sanction comes from hording the remains of a consumer America that i find so damn appealing is extremely difficult. Is it my general distaste of humans that drives me into a frantic fantasy of being the only one left? Do i long for adventure on such a grand scale that it would end in me fighting off my own friends and family, undead, blue and bloated? Or do I secretly just fear going to the mall unless it involves killing hordes of zombies (the romero type, not the ones at the GAP)? One thing is for damn sure: Romero is the luckiest guy in the world. To sculpt a film that embodies everyone of our deepest darkest fears or fantasies, and he does it in such a way that has kept us from losing touch with this gem since the 70's. Something that has kept us coming back i think is the idea that Romero, like many of you reading this, wasn't really known to the studios with the money. He just knew a lot of people with money not intended for young independent horror movies. Those people took a million and a half dollar risk on Romero, and from what I hear most of the investors were people who'd known Romero since the Night of the living dead days. They didn't know what was brewing in his head, but they knew it would probably work. Seeing this thing get made must have been the happiest accomplishment in his career. So why do we, the avid horror buffs, keep coming back to this campy genre flick with shuffling smurf-like white guys with afros? Well, as a technical accomplishments go, this one succeeds with very little to work from. Getting the kind of shots that Romero wanted on the budget he had must have seemed like quite the joke to the cast and crew, so he had an awful lot of things to consider. For starters, if he was going to succeed in making us believe the whole world came to an end, he was going to have to think of clever ways to accomplish this, unlike a certain remake which just went the full nine and really destroyed a big section of Toronto. Romero garnered together as many people around his beloved Pennsylvania, and he managed to get as many as possible into the movie. The morale of the lesson is make many friends and your movie will get made with their help. So i guess in conclusion, I should tell the uninitiated why they should get up right now and go get a copy of this. For one, the acting is excellent, probably the best of any of Romero's movies. The cast was very green and had a lot to portray given the supposed situation, and they handle it very well. Most of the extras (Zombies) look very nice, but a few will make you wonder what was going on in the seventies that got some people so much screen time (I think it was massive quantites of drugs, personally, but not on Romero's part) like that stupid bald tamborine zombie, some sort of irony in a peace-lover-by-life and a flesheater-by-death kinda thing. Oh, and there is a few white guys with afro's which will make you giggle, and bellbottoms abound, but if you look past that, this is a rather timeless movie. The effects are excellent for there time, and still hold up to todays gore standards quite well. Savini himself admits now that the blood recipe he used was a few shades off, coming off more as red tempre paint than blood, but aside from that, it all looks pretty convincing. I wouldn't recommend buying any of the DVD's floating around at really outragous prices anymore now that a DIVIMAX version by Anchor Bay is out around March or april of 2004, with a super-deluxe version (between 3-5 discs worth, if you can believe that) so don't blow $40 for an oldie here, just wait. I strongly recomend the other films in the Living Dead series, Night of the living dead and Day of the dead. Day is a bit talky, but has great zombies, probably the best, and Night has all the same perks as Dawn but much more gritty. Go check 'em out.
Rating:
Summary: I was wrong
Review: I seem unable to leave this one alone; this will be my third review for "Dawn of the Dead." As people who have read my reviews probably know, I used to despise this film. I rented it on the strength of a Roger Ebert review that pointed it out to be one of the most apocalyptic yet satirically relevant horror films ever made. I expected something more along the lines of Paul Anderson's "Resident Evil," I think. Pure action horror from beginning to end. What I got was something I initially didn't understand as a sophomore in high school. The horror was remarkably subdued, and not really as a result of the zombies themselves, but more from what they symbolize. Of course, I didn't know that at the time. This was best summed up 11 years after completion of "Dawn," when George Romero, director of this film, rewrote his original masterpiece, "Night of the Living Dead." Under the direction of makeup effects artist Tom Savini, Romero added a nice little line of dialogue that reverts back to all his previous work: "They're us. We're them, and they're us." Thus lies the truly psychological horror of "Dawn of the Dead." This film is not terrifying, but what it implies is. Who are the real monsters? The zombies? Grey people ambling about in search of food? They are acting on instinct, all traces of civility erased. In essence, they are blameless. Toward the end of "Dawn of the Dead," we get a glimpse of a band of surviving bikers who loot the shopping mall in a sloppy heist. These people still have minds of their own and act on much more than instinct. As they make sport of killing the zombies in a variety of wholesale ways, all the while stopping to indulge their curiosity with the blood pressure monitor at Penney's, the (other) bloodthirsty humans turn on each other. And for what? To save money on jewelry? I doubt the cashier cares. He's the one behind the bushes in the food court with his throat torn open. No, not him, the other guy with the funny hat. There you go. Now, I suppose here is where I had my initial trouble with the film back in 1998 when I first watched it. As all this chaos ensues on screen (humans versus human, human versus former human), there's a jubilation to the tone. Only when a swarm of zombies encroaches on a biker or an elevator door unleashes a half dozen of the ghouls does the music stop and the tone become one of complete terror. I didn't know what to make of this conflict of emotions then. Five years later, older and wiser, I understand it now. I see the satire in every bit of film and not just the two seconds of frame that show a zombie clobbering down the up escalator. This entire film was meant to be fun. The idea behind George Romero's "Living Dead" series is that human beings are screwy. Throughout his trilogy, we were given all three tones of this: Paranoia ("Night"), dark comedy ("Dawn"), and psychological thriller ("Day"). "Dawn" remains the fan favorite to this day. The other "recluses", as Romero calls us, prefer "Day of the Dead" (don't be fooled; it's his favorite of the three). Anyway, I wrote yet another review for "Dawn" for the reason of personal rebuttal. I claimed in my last review that, although I was beginning to like "Dawn of the Dead," I doubted I would ever include it on a list of my favorite films. Well, I was wrong. "Dawn" is one of my favorite films, and although it does not succeed on the horrific nor technological level that "Day of the Dead" does, it is still a masterpiece in a class of its own, and for the sake of James Gunn (writer of the Zach Snyder-directed remake coming in March 2004... and, oh yeah, "Scooby-Doo") I hope he keeps in mind that you can't recapture greatness, you can only try and re-envision it. This goes for you, too, Michael Bay, and your stupid idea of remaking John Carpenter's "Halloween." Do me a personal favor: Pull your lip over your head and swallow. Regurgitate. Repeat. Thanks.
Rating: 
Summary: heres what I think !!
Review: I first seen this movie as a kid in the early 80's and thought it was good not really one of my favorite horror films but it was good!! okay fast forward to present time I just rented this movie and after seeing it again I felt it looked rather cheesy especially the zombies which was wierd cuz for some reason I don't remember it being like that...anyways this movie is held as classic horror film in which I agree ...I think if your a younger viewer you will get a kick out of this like I said now it (zombies) are cheesy !!
Rating:
Summary: THOSE WERE THE DAYS
Review: The greatest concept and amazingly timeless. My "OWN IT" rating is a gurantee and here is more info for you: Sure you may look at the BLUE make-up on some Zombies and laugh, but just go with it and you'll be fine. The characters are all memorable, the "shopping spree" scenes are great (and this is what I mean when I mention actors that are believable, it's just what you would do in their position). After this movie, you know where zombie movies should have progressed to and never have. This movie is simply great.
Rating: 
Summary: Pretty Good...
Review: If youre a fan of George Romero's work (Night of the Living Dead), then you will be pleased with this. While it doesn't match the classic "Night of the Living Dead" in greatnes, it still captures Romero's mastery of creating paranoia and despair. The image and sound quality is decent for a 70's movie, but not great. A good buy for a horror fan, but you should see Night of the Living Dead first.
| 
