Universal Pictures | Release Date: March 19, 2004
8.7
USER SCORE
Universal acclaim based on 468 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
422
Mixed:
25
Negative:
21
WATCH NOW
Stream On
Stream On
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
4
beingryanjudeSep 2, 2014
Considered by many to be the precursor to the zombie-obsessed lives we live in today, Dawn of the Dead unfortunately is an average survival flick. This one never seemed to grab for me.
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
5
grandpajoe6191Sep 27, 2011
I never watched the original, but what I would recommend for "Dawn of the Dead" is to make a survival horror game rather than a movie. The ideas are fresh and tense, but its displayed using the wrong techniques.
4 of 11 users found this helpful47
All this user's reviews
5
KivaJun 21, 2013
I've heard in the past that this film is awesome and scary. As a big The Walking Dead fan i can say that this film was not as I expected. Firstly, the characters are lame and boring with no good history. Secondly, The action was notI've heard in the past that this film is awesome and scary. As a big The Walking Dead fan i can say that this film was not as I expected. Firstly, the characters are lame and boring with no good history. Secondly, The action was not impressive as i expected. You will like it if you are into these kind of films.. *The ending was worse than i expected. I expected everyone would die... too much expectations i guess Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
5
ArkonBladeDec 28, 2010
the original dawn of the dead is easily the best zombie movie ever done ... the remake not so much . it does stick to the whole survivors holding out in the mall set up but thats really about it . its not a bad film but doesnt have the magicthe original dawn of the dead is easily the best zombie movie ever done ... the remake not so much . it does stick to the whole survivors holding out in the mall set up but thats really about it . its not a bad film but doesnt have the magic the original has . the zombie baby how ever was a creepy little thing . Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
5
eTurkeyFeb 8, 2012
Unfortunately, the Dawn of the Dead remake (original was made in 1978) didn't live up to the prior expectations I had placed on the film upon hearing how good it is from my friends. Character development was virtually non-existent as theUnfortunately, the Dawn of the Dead remake (original was made in 1978) didn't live up to the prior expectations I had placed on the film upon hearing how good it is from my friends. Character development was virtually non-existent as the director instead opted to introduce more unnecessary empty shells as the movie progressed. The blood and gore was fine yet the zombies seemed more human than any recent flick of the same genre that I've seen recently. There's also a few cheesy moments which could have been left out. Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
4
hollowficationJun 3, 2012
i like it but only problem is it no remero movie it remake of his classic movie but i prefer the original the zombie in this one are fast ones show in this movie decaying look of zombies. but no matter what i like remero ones
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
5
GodotIsW8ing4UJan 14, 2013
Considered on its own merits alone, it's a passable zombie movie with a memorable opening and epilogue and a blandly forgettable everything else. Only one character that the audience knows or cares about fails to pull through, with all theConsidered on its own merits alone, it's a passable zombie movie with a memorable opening and epilogue and a blandly forgettable everything else. Only one character that the audience knows or cares about fails to pull through, with all the other deaths happening to the cardboard cutouts that pass for 80% of the characters as an excuse to have gore for its own sake. Lots of interesting ideas that become mere filler due to superficial half-treatment. The movie is good for a few scares here and there, but it pales terribly when compared to the original. Gone is Romero's social commentary, replaced by admirable yet insufficient earnestness, and there lies the film's true failing: it takes itself more seriously than it lets the audience take it. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
4
JoeBobNov 7, 2009
Overrated. not much character development, pretty cheesy at times, but it did have some good points such as being funny. but is mostly mediocre and flat.
1 of 2 users found this helpful
5
CameronS.Mar 24, 2004
I am a big fan of George A. Romero?s zombie classics Night of the Living Dead and Dawn of the Dead. The latter film is a fun action movie, it contains many great scares, gore galore, and has biting humor in a world where humor is dying with I am a big fan of George A. Romero?s zombie classics Night of the Living Dead and Dawn of the Dead. The latter film is a fun action movie, it contains many great scares, gore galore, and has biting humor in a world where humor is dying with the dead civilization. The characters are also well developed and the film is focused primarily on four stranded refugees in a vast mall, the pinnacle of the 20th Century, while also creating many comic zombie fellows roaming the mall. Absent are the things that made Romero?s film a great horror-comedy achievement. The poorly shot and imprudently edited actions scenes are incomprehensible to a point where it is hard to tell what?s going on. There are far many more characters this time around, whose sole purpose is to get killed violently by the films climax. However, something did survive into this remake, and that?s the comedy. The film is terribly funny, making for something of an entertaining piece. What I especially liked about the much better zombie movie ?Return of the Living Dead? was that the characters lived in a world where zombie movies existed, especially Romero?s films. The characters, as dumb as they were at times knew that they were dealing with zombies. I note this because there is a scene when all the excess characters show up they wheel in a woman who is clearly about to turn into the dead, with her gray skin highlighting and her dying green veins becoming clearly noticeable. I was just thinking how dumb these people would have to be to let someone they knew would be turning into the mall. Note to everybody: when somebody is greyly pale with their veins popping out and the smell of death, don?t let them into your place of refugee. The direction is quite sophomoric and the screenplay is a serviceable homage to the original while coming up with some original tact and wit of its own, though it plays with the usual thoughts and clichés of most modern horror films. That being understood, the acting is quite serviceable for this kind of movie, with Ving Rhames spouting lines so intrepidly panicky they come off exceedingly humorous. The film feels terribly inspired by the far superior 28 Days Later, but not stealing anything that would have made a difference, like the anti-cliché of instant infection. Now we have zombies that are faster but just as dumb who can tip mobile vehicles that weigh several tons but are unable to break through a glass door. I didn?t wholly dislike this film, but I am curious as to why anybody would want to see this picture over Romero?s own classic. But a good comment I would like to say about it, it is far better than Tom Savini?s trite, inane, and ghastly Night of the Living Dead remake or even Romero?s own humdrum, flavorless, spendthrift, feeble Day of the Dead. But then again, that?s not much of an accomplishment either. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful