Verity Robins Great movie. Not sure what people expected but I found it highly entertaining.

Ava-Grace Willis Story: It's very simple but honestly that is fine.

Tayyab Torres Strong acting helps the film overcome an uncertain premise and create characters that hold our attention absolutely.

Juana what a terribly boring film. I'm sorry but this is absolutely not deserving of best picture and will be forgotten quickly. Entertaining and engaging cinema? No. Nothing performances with flat faces and mistaking silence for subtlety.

Ivan Lalic Accumulating more money and technological resources, George Romero created the sequel to his zombie horror story with ease and productional lavish. The script picked up where the first flick stopped, making the phenomena of the dead eating the flesh of living more global and massive. Sets are grandious for the genre itself, and there are some really great mass scenes. There are more characters, subplots and the action scenes are more attractive. However, the show is being stolen by the phenomenal script, just overflowing with irony of the modern US society and mass media. Tacky, but hilarious lines will follow the overall fast pace of the movie up until the very end with great success. „The dawn of the dead" is a must see for the zombie horror lovers.

Anssi Vartiainen The zombie apocalypse has started and our story follows a small group of survivors as they flee towards safety, having to fend for themselves in the midst of the walking dead. Their flight leads them to an overrun mall, which they realize would make for a handy fortress if they can empty it from the walkers.This original version is was directed by George A. Romero, who was also behind Night of the Living Dead. Having two of the biggest and most influential zombie movies ever made to your name is nothing to be sneezed at, and Romero certainly has a style of his own and many of the clichés still used to this day have their origins in these movies. Romero's zombies are slow, rotting and only threatening in their sheer numbers and in their relentlessness. They're a force of nature. They can be avoided with human ingenuity, but they're always there, and they will never go away. And even these early movies contain the essential truth of any good zombie movie. That the other survivors are the true threat.Also, comparing this movie to the 2004 remake of the same name, it's interesting to see what was changed. The essential setup is the same, as is the closing climax, to a certain extent. But whereas the remake has heaps and heaps of characters, simply to provide the film with cannon fodder and zombie chow, Romero's cast is only four characters strong. As thus we get to learn a lot more about them throughout the course of the film. They all start with clear, identifiable personalities, but they also grow as the story progresses. We learn more about them and they also change due to the events they have to endure. And between these two films, less is definitely more.This movie is heavily recommended for all fans of the horror. It still holds up as a great story and a true zombie horror masterpiece.

Leofwine_draca George A. Romero's follow-up to his cult classic NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD arrived some ten years later and featured a greatly expanded budget. While DAWN OF THE DEAD is a direct continuation of where the previous one left off (it's a few weeks later, the zombie virus is spreading rapidly, the rescue stations are closing down), the style of the two films couldn't be more different. While NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD was a basically a low-budget movie, filmed on just one set, DAWN OF THE DEAD in comparison feels like an epic; a huge setting, tons of zombies and plenty of special effects. We can only be grateful that Romero finally got the budget to do his zombie movies justice.This time around the film doesn't really concentrate on the conflict between the band of survivors (everybody gets along). Romero injects many of his own political views on feminism, society, etc., and also puts the film on multiple levels. In the first instance it's an action/horror movie, in the second it's a scathing satire on consumerism. Thankfully all this subtext don't detract from the main story, and once again the film succeeds in giving us characters to care about. While some might complain that the film might be a little long, cutting would have resulted in us perhaps losing some sympathy with the characters, losing their little ticks and habits, their expressions, their mentalities.To a mainstream viewer, the cast is completely obscure and unknown. However, Romero picks his actors well and everybody fits their role like a glove. Scott H. Reiniger plays probably the most one-dimensional character of the bunch, a SWAT man who gradually loses his grip with reality and suffers the consequences. David Emge is charismatic as an atypical action man with a conscience, who starts off as a novice and learns how to fend for himself throughout the course of the film. Gaylen Ross is the realist of the group, always in touch with the situation, excluded because of her gender, seeing that the mall they occupy isn't a play area but a prison. However it's Ken Foree who excels as the action man who's also intelligent, quick thinking and kind. The only other notable cast members are Tom Savini, SFX master, cameoing as a biker, and a small role for Joe Pilato, who went on to play Captain Rhodes in the next dead film, DAY OF THE DEAD.The special effects are emphasised as the real star of this film, and much is made of the high gore content. Not five minutes go by without zombies getting shot in the head and blood splattering, although all the real cannibalistic gore is saved until the finale and immediately follows some light relief, Romero cruelly playing with our feelings. Arms are torn off, sockets spraying gore, flesh is ripped from legs and necks. It's all pretty horrible and gruesome, and in some ways depressing too. So many zombies and people get killed in this film that you'll need a strong stomach to watch the prolonged bloodshed. It's most horrible when characters we care about get bitten, and Romero works up a lot of suspense from putting them in danger; the truck driving scene being a prime example, plus the lift bit at the end.The music is by Goblin, and is excellent; simplistic, yes, but catchy and downbeat. There are many comedic moments in the film to counter the horror (Romero obviously believed that comic relief should be included intentionally, so that rather than having viewers laugh at a film, they laugh with it instead), such as a zombie getting the top of his head sliced off by a helicopter rotor blade, or zombies falling off balconies and stumbling on escalators. However these silly bits never get in the way of the violence or true horror of the situation, and some bits are painful to watch, especially one scene where a sympathetic character is due to come back from the dead. The wait is unbearable. It is in these moments that we see the genius of Romero's film, as he explores all possibilities and facets of life in a world full of monsters. It's a huge film, it requires a concentrated effort to get through, but will reward on many levels depending on how you watch it.

Giallo Fanatic Seriously, is it? I mean, it is hard to find another movie like 'Dawn of the Dead'. Whether it is or not I can't tell but it is definitely one of the most influential movies ever made. Many living dead movies have copied George A. Romero's Living Dead Trilogy and among the three I find it hard to decide which is best, 'Night of the Living Dead' or 'Dawn of the Dead'. But anyway I found myself liking this movie more and more as time passes and it keeps getting better and better with each viewing. With 'The Walking Dead' being one of the most popular series in our modern times, I can't help but think 'Dawn of the Dead' was far ahead of its time. Many of the gimmicks in 'The Walking Dead' have surely been inspired by this movie. The relationship between characters, the way tension is built, the way the living dead behaves, people's tendency to murder each other even at the face of extinction. I can mention more similarities but let us concentrate on the movie, genre: horror, themes: society, culture, extinction, survival, year of release: 1978, director/writer: George A. Romero, main characters: Stephen, Peter, Roger and Francine.Plot: Four survivors trying to survive in a shopping mall amidst a living dead apocalypse. Summary: Peter and Roger escapes in a helicopter with pilot Stephen and journalist(?) Francine. After some time of flying around they inhabit a shopping mall which they clear out of the living dead and starts living a life isolated from the rest of the world. Now the strength of the movie is the relationship between the characters. Without it the demise of the characters would have had less impact. What happens to the characters gives me goosebumps and fills me with dread at the end. One of the other things that gives the movie strength is atmosphere. Usually movies in this genre tend to be more driven by gore and violence with little to no atmosphere with characters you do not care about. The atmosphere in this movie is full of dread and full of a sense of imminent doom. But it also has sense of humor, comic book style. Almost like a parody, "What are they doing? Why do they come here? ", "Some kind of instinct. Memory of what they used to do. This was an important place in their lives" was part of the dialogue on top of the mall between Francine and Stephen.At that point the director was comparing shoppers at shopping malls to zombies. Although not originally natural to us it had become so common within society shopping malls became an important part of society's life. It is a social commentary, where shoppers go to shopping malls without wondering why and never seem to question why they go there in the first place. Like mindless zombies, controlled by black magic or what we usually call Voodoo. So although the movie on the surface seems like just another horror movie, it really isn't. It appears to be more like a study and questioning of society's modern culture. Anyway, the movie is magnificently directed by George A. Romero and the cast acts amazingly too. So amazing I find it to get better and better after each viewing. It also has a big influence on modern culture, from the first Resident Evil game to The Walking Dead. I am 25 years old and I find it a little sad people from my generation doesn't recognize the importance of this movie, simply because it is old, because the blood looks fake, because the acting isn't like today and it is not a fast paced movie full of explosions and gunfights with zombies. Like the okay-at-best remake of Dawn of the Dead from 2004. I am tempted to say society's standards have degenerated like the living dead in this movie, but that is just my opinion.P.S. I once watched the German version DVD and it took away all the gory violence, which is sad since the violence is part of the movie's charm. A small plus to the atmosphere and relationship between the characters. Awesome movie.