Universal Pictures | Release Date: March 19, 2004
8.7
USER SCORE
Universal acclaim based on 472 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
426
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)
10
juliankennedy23Jul 17, 2014
Dawn of the Dead (2004): 10 out of 10: I sympathize with the fan boys that feel any remake of Dawn of the Dead is religious sacrilegious. You get an emotional attachment to films that scared you in your youth. (One on mine is Assault onDawn of the Dead (2004): 10 out of 10: I sympathize with the fan boys that feel any remake of Dawn of the Dead is religious sacrilegious. You get an emotional attachment to films that scared you in your youth. (One on mine is Assault on Precinct 13 that was remade recently and I just know I will be disappointed with the remake. I am still scared of ice cream trucks as a result of seeing that film when I was 9)

Remakes themselves have a well deserved bad reputation. (Easiest movie trivia question: What is the best film remake? The Maltese Falcon of course. That Humphrey Bogart perennial was a remake of a 1931 film of the same name. I'm sure back in 1941 that there were a couple of people complaining that Bogart was no Ricardo Cortez and the ruined the story by taking out the affair and homosexual subplots. The first film after all was a pre-code affair.)

Dawn of the Dead is in reality a different movie than the original. This is no shot for shot Psycho remake nor is it the same movie with a glossier CGI coat of paint. It is a faster more intense zombie film. It is one of the best action horror films of the last ten years. The opening twenty minutes in simply one of the scariest action packed sequences I have ever seen. By the time our band of protagonists gets to the mall they are not the only one's catching their breath.

It becomes a pretty good sized group at the mall and you end up slogging through some slow bits as the zombies eat it down to a more manageable size.The acting is across the board good and the effects are suitably gory and plentiful. Director Zack Snyder wisely dumps much of Romero's sociological subplots and replaces them with a more timely commentary. (Instead of zombies as consumer motif we have shooting undead celebrities. And instead of an outwardly hostile motorcycle gang, we have a more subtle power struggle between the otherwise powerless.)

The updates honestly work, as a more literal remake would have simply fallen flat. Is Dawn of the Dead better than the original? I won't say. Is it one of the best films of 2004? Yes. Is it better than Romero's own sequel Day of the Dead? Good Lord yes.
Expand
8 of 8 users found this helpful80
All this user's reviews
9
TheQuietGamerMar 6, 2011
This may seem like a b rated movie but it's not it's surprisingly well made movie, truly enjoyable if your into the zombie movie genre like I am, if you are this is a must see.
6 of 6 users found this helpful60
All this user's reviews
10
lukechristianscMar 11, 2014
i love the dawn of the dead remake and the original was even better . these are two movie that were the best remake films i have ever seen in my life
5 of 5 users found this helpful50
All this user's reviews
10
HISHEhebAug 10, 2014
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. best zombies movie ever, don't miss it. i love this movie and i think everyone should watch it. I Promise, you will enjoy it, even if you hate movies with zombies Expand
5 of 5 users found this helpful50
All this user's reviews
8
JayHApr 12, 2009
One of the best horror films of all time. It is genuinely frightening, great special effects. Suspenseful, well directed and acted. The touches of humor make it work that much better. Excellent.
2 of 2 users found this helpful
9
survivorfan989Mar 2, 2013
One of the better zombie films out there and definitely one of the most entertaining with some great character work and solid special effects make-up. It's a remake of Romero's 70's Classic but made fresh for today's audience, and it worksOne of the better zombie films out there and definitely one of the most entertaining with some great character work and solid special effects make-up. It's a remake of Romero's 70's Classic but made fresh for today's audience, and it works perfectly. A nice crop of actors give the characters life plus there's zombies like you've never seen before that really know how to run! It also has the perfect setting in a shopping centre Overall a Horror classic and personal favourite of mine! Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
8
DorianS.Apr 5, 2008
Hell, this movie was great,blood and all that,but the problem is,the zombies are too fast.I was first scared by the movie,but later,it was fun
1 of 1 users found this helpful
8
JH.Feb 26, 2007
Robugly, could you be less vague? Overall, as horror movies go, the characters here were astro physicists compared to your average teen slasher bimbo/jock clique.
1 of 1 users found this helpful
10
Meth-dudeApr 12, 2015
This is a truly terrifying and captivating horror movie.Ving Rhames shines as the cop who don't take **** from anyone and the rest of the actors like Sarah Polley and Kevin Zegers are impressive.Highly entertaining movie.
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
10
TheNewSpielbergMay 1, 2011
As much as I love Romero's 1978 classic, I must agree with fellow movie buffs who say that this particular remake was unfairly prejudiced and slandered upon release. The movie sticks pretty much to the basic plot; a group of people hide outAs much as I love Romero's 1978 classic, I must agree with fellow movie buffs who say that this particular remake was unfairly prejudiced and slandered upon release. The movie sticks pretty much to the basic plot; a group of people hide out in an abandoned shopping center during a zombie apocalypse. That's all there is to it. The acting was good and some of the comedy moments were actually pretty funny (Hollywood Squares, anyone?). Of course, seeing as it was shot in the modern era of the zombie flick, there is just enough blood and huts to satisfy any gorehound. The zombies looked scary and WERE scary simply due to the fact that they could sprint (a cliche started by 28 Days Later). The heavy metal soundtrack really helped the atmosphere of a zombie invasion and went great with zombie-killing. In sum, an underrated horror movie. Expand
6 of 7 users found this helpful61
All this user's reviews
9
RegOzMar 3, 2012
I am not really into gore, but this movie is fantastic in its genre. Beyond the gore, the construction of the characters is good; although, they had some fairly stereotypical ones (that is one of the reasons why I don't give this movie a 10).I am not really into gore, but this movie is fantastic in its genre. Beyond the gore, the construction of the characters is good; although, they had some fairly stereotypical ones (that is one of the reasons why I don't give this movie a 10). From a more analytical perspective, it is not just about horror, but also about how in extreme situations our human condition can either betray us, or strengthen us. Fate plays a role in our lives, but we always have a choice, even if there doesn't seem to be one. I definitely recommend it. Expand
6 of 7 users found this helpful61
All this user's reviews
10
ApocalypseGamerNov 5, 2011
YES! This remake of Romero's original film is WAY much better. A perfect cast, with suspense, more zombies, action, and a very fantastic plot. If you like zombies - Watch this film!
4 of 6 users found this helpful42
All this user's reviews
10
AdamW.Mar 1, 2009
This movie is the pinnacle of epic zombie movies that are also funny.
2 of 3 users found this helpful
1
Edc.Feb 24, 2008
if you have ever seen any zombie horror film before then you needent see this one. all the cliche'd characters, one dimensional personalities and terrible cringeworthy one-liners as per usual. however unlike other fliks, there was none if you have ever seen any zombie horror film before then you needent see this one. all the cliche'd characters, one dimensional personalities and terrible cringeworthy one-liners as per usual. however unlike other fliks, there was none of the suspense and not enough jumpy moments to save the film. aside from some smirk raising black humour, this really was a very very poor film. waste of time Expand
3 of 5 users found this helpful
7
DuckNationMay 25, 2014
One of the best Remakes that has been done and one of the best iv'e ever seen. The opening Ten minutes of the film is great and while it maybe not match the intensity of the original it does it's best to great you right into the action. TheOne of the best Remakes that has been done and one of the best iv'e ever seen. The opening Ten minutes of the film is great and while it maybe not match the intensity of the original it does it's best to great you right into the action. The movie opens up to Sarah Polley(Ana) wakes up to find her husband being attacked by a zombie child. As she makes her way outside she then sees that the carnage is taking over city with huge explosions, buildings on fire, and helicopters everywhere. From then on out its a fight for survival not only by from zombies but from humans as well. Overall it's a good film i had a fun time watching it's in my top 5 zombie movies of the 2000's

7.5
Expand
3 of 5 users found this helpful32
All this user's reviews
10
RD.Mar 3, 2007
Very good remake. I have not seen the original. So I won't compare it with the remake. But this is a good movie and very entertaining and creepy. TH emovie is especially good for a first time director and the ending is very good Very good remake. I have not seen the original. So I won't compare it with the remake. But this is a good movie and very entertaining and creepy. TH emovie is especially good for a first time director and the ending is very good provided you stay till the end of the credits. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful
9
KingJan 14, 2007
About as good as the original.
1 of 2 users found this helpful
0
MarcoP.May 25, 2007
Really terrible. It doesn't hold up a match to the original, and it's even worse watched on its own merits. Avoid at all costs. And don't believe people who say this remake is good. They are Consumer zombies.
1 of 2 users found this helpful
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
10
JohnR.Jan 18, 2008
Outstanding movie, much better than the original Dawn. Great directing, acting, soundtrack and action. As with most of my favorite movies, I enjoyed it more the 2nd, 3rd and 4th viewing. The Directors cut is also much better than the Outstanding movie, much better than the original Dawn. Great directing, acting, soundtrack and action. As with most of my favorite movies, I enjoyed it more the 2nd, 3rd and 4th viewing. The Directors cut is also much better than the original theater version. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful
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
7
rotkuApr 9, 2012
One of the better zombie horror efforts of the last few years. It's not as apocalyptic as Romeros original but the storyline works well and the action scenes are good.
2 of 6 users found this helpful24
All this user's reviews
7
asylumspadezNov 19, 2011
A great remake if you ask me. It was entertaining and interesting through out. Its nice to see a franchise get a much needed reboot and be a sucessful reboot as well. Acting wasnt good though.
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
8
AtTheMoviesJun 29, 2011
In order to judge this movie, you must look at it in two ways. First, since it is billed as a remake of the original, and not a re-imagining, one must look at how it holds up to the original. The original is, by far better then this. TheIn order to judge this movie, you must look at it in two ways. First, since it is billed as a remake of the original, and not a re-imagining, one must look at how it holds up to the original. The original is, by far better then this. The remake lacks the overarching criticism of consumerism that the original had. The remake specials effects are obviously better, but that is a given. The original is scarier in the traditional sense. The remake is almost more of a thriller. Many plot points are not carried over into the remake. Both versions deliver what you want, a great zombie movie with lots of zombies kills and suspense. So, when compared to the original, it scores around a 6.5. However, when looking at the film in it's on right, if you saw this before the original, it is much better. The special effects as mentioned are very good. There is a large cast of characters, so there are lots of main character deaths. We seem to be left with only the characters we pity at the end, which is good. When not compared with the original, the plot is refreshing. There are plenty of suspenseful sequences, and a great introduction to what the world has come to through the eyes of the main character. No zombie movie is complete without a great introduction to the zombie ridden world. The remake triumphs the original in that sense, since we already knew what happened in the original, based on events in Night of the Living Dead. The film also does a good job of making the mall seem real, by creating a lot of fake, yet believable brands. So, in it's own right, without looking at the original, the remake of Dawn of the Dead would get an 8.75. So, when averaged with the score of a 6.5 when compared with the original, the remake of Dawn of the Dead would get a 7.625. That rounds up to an 8, which is my score for the remake. That is of course compared to the 10 that I would give the original. Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
7
FilmVirtueFeb 15, 2014
This remake of the original Dawn of the Dead proves to be a more effective and powerful film than the original. It may not appeal to everyone, but for those who enjoy a good zombie film, this new take will certainly be a good choice.
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
8
hampusforevOct 24, 2010
Sometimes you wonder whether people even watched this movie or just dismissed it as "lesser" than the favorite Romero-classic from 78 without even giving it a chance. I mean "Paranormal Activity", the worst **** atrocity I've ever seen, has aSometimes you wonder whether people even watched this movie or just dismissed it as "lesser" than the favorite Romero-classic from 78 without even giving it a chance. I mean "Paranormal Activity", the worst **** atrocity I've ever seen, has a better metascore. I'm probably one of the most pretentious cinema snobs that you'll ever meet, but I loved this movie. It's miles better than the original, which is revolutionary, sure, but has much flatter characters and lesser development. And don't give me any of the "striking critique of capitalism"-nonsense; that "mall-shoppers are like zombies" is as shallow a symbol as a 14-year-old punk-rocker who just discovered Bill Hicks would come up with. Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
7
j30Nov 27, 2011
Zombies can run. Oh ****. Zach Snyder is behind the camera for this "better than average" remake of the great Dawn of the Dead. What makes this movie better than other horror remakes is that you actually care about the characters.
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
0
JesseR.Feb 2, 2010
I've seen worse zombie flicks but none that took this much money 2 fail so miserably. Nick Cannon is terrible (which is still pretty good for Nick Cannon acting), Mena is unbelieveable (not in a good way) as the heroine, and "Bud" I've seen worse zombie flicks but none that took this much money 2 fail so miserably. Nick Cannon is terrible (which is still pretty good for Nick Cannon acting), Mena is unbelieveable (not in a good way) as the heroine, and "Bud" (still pissed about that one) is the undead proof that this movie is an abomination. Avoid this @ all costs unless it's simply to watch the movie w/ the commentary on and listen how they weakly try to defend the movie ("You think you can do better?"). Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
0
LouisH.Feb 6, 2008
Like all of our contemporary horror movies, this movie was absolutely one of the worst movies ever made. I can't believe they consider it a "drama" movie after all the senselessly stupid actions all the characters make. There is no Like all of our contemporary horror movies, this movie was absolutely one of the worst movies ever made. I can't believe they consider it a "drama" movie after all the senselessly stupid actions all the characters make. There is no reason, no sense, or any point to this movie. Where did the zombies come from? Why did nobody take them seriously (with the mom's stupid gasp in the beggining)? Here is why :THEY'RE ALL IDIOTS!!!!! Expand
0 of 3 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