Dawn of the Dead (2004 film): Difference between revisions - Wikipedia

Line 160:

| rev7score = {{rating|3|4}}<ref name="james"/>

}}

Upon its theatrical release, ''Dawn of the Dead'' was praised by film critics as a worthy remake of the original, and was hailed as a breakthrough in zombie films. It was called "superior in many ways" to the original ([[James Berardinelli|''ReelViews'']]),<ref name="james">{{cite web |last1=Berardinelli |first1=James |title=Dawn of the Dead (2004) |url=https://www.reelviews.net/reelviews/dawn-of-the-dead |website=Reelviews |access-date=April 30, 2021}}</ref> "a promising silhouette on the horizon of a faltering genre" (''[[IGN]]''),<ref name="todd">{{cite web |last1=Gilchrist |first1=Todd |title=Review of Dawn of the Dead |url=https://www.ign.com/articles/2004/03/18/review-of-dawn-of-the-dead |website=[[IGN]] |date=March 18, 2004 |access-date=April 30, 2021}}</ref> and "the best proof in ages that cannibalizing old material sometimes works fiendishly well" (''[[Los Angeles Times]]'').<ref name="lat">{{cite web |last1=Dargis |first1=Manohla |title='Dawn of the Dead' rises to the occasion |url=https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2004-mar-19-et-dawn19-story.html |website=Los Angeles Times |date=March 19, 2004 |access-date=April 30, 2021}}</ref> [[Lisa Schwarzbaum]] (''[[Entertainment Weekly]]'') called the film director [[Zack Snyder]]'s "killer feature debut",<ref name="ew">{{cite web |last1=Schwarzbaum |first1=Lisa |title=Dawn of the Dead |url=https://ew.com/article/2004/03/18/dawn-dead-4/ |website=[[Entertainment Weekly]] |access-date=April 30, 2021}}</ref> while [[Roger Ebert]] (''[[Chicago Sun-Times]]'') said it "works and it delivers just about what you expect when you buy your ticket" even though "its plot flatlines compared to the 1979 version".<ref name="ebert">{{cite web |last1=Ebert |first1=Roger |title=Dawn of the Dead |url=https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/dawn-of-the-dead-2004 |website=[[RogerEbert.com]] |date=March 19, 2004 |access-date=April 30, 2021}}</ref> The film's opening sequence was singled out for further praise,<ref name="william">{{cite web |last1=Thomas |first1=William |title=Dawn Of The Dead Review |url=https://www.empireonline.com/movies/reviews/dawn-dead-review/ |website=Empire |access-date=May 25, 2021}}</ref><ref name="wapo">{{cite web |last1=Thomson |first1=Desson |title='Dawn of the Dead' Resurrects a Classic |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2004/03/19/AR2005033116948.html |work=[[Washington Post]] |date=March 19, 2004 |access-date=May 25, 2021}}</ref> which some detractors of the film liked better.<ref name="thr">{{cite web |url=https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr/reviews/review_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000467316 |last=Rechtshaffen |first=Michael |website=The Hollywood Reporter |title=Dawn of the Dead |date=March 19, 2004 |access-date=April 6, 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060110130358/https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr/reviews/review_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000467316 |archive-date=January 10, 2006 |url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last1=Mitchell |first1=Elvis |title=FILM REVIEW; A Cautionary Tale for Those Dying to Shop |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/19/movies/film-review-a-cautionary-tale-for-those-dying-to-shop.html |work=[[The New York Times]] |date=March 19, 2004 |access-date=May 25, 2021}}</ref> While some said the remake had better acting, production values, and scares than its predecessor,<ref name="james"/><ref name="ebert"/><ref name="ew"/> others argued thatstated it "[failed] to trigger as much fear and mirth as the original" (''[[The Guardian]]'')<ref name="derek">{{cite web |last1=Malcolm |first1=Derek |title=Dawn of the Dead |url=https://www.theguardian.com/film/2004/mar/26/dvdreviews.shopping7 |website=The Guardian |date=March 26, 2004 |access-date=May 2, 2021}}</ref> and "[worked] only on the level of a visceral horror exercise and, even then, only intermittently" (''[[Variety (magazine)|Variety]]'').<ref name="scott">{{cite web |last1=Foundas |first1=Scott |title=Dawn of the Dead |url=https://variety.com/2004/film/markets-festivals/dawn-of-the-dead-2-1200534414/ |website=Variety |date=March 18, 2004 |access-date=May 1, 2021}}</ref>

Despite the praise, the film was criticized for downplaying key elements of its predecessor. Some critics argued that whereas [[George A. Romero]] had exploited the shopping mall location to [[Satire|satirize]] [[Consumerism|consumer]] culture and a wide range of sociopolitical issues, Snyder had used it merely as a convenient [[Setting (narrative)|setting]] for his characters.<ref name="scott"/><ref name="ebert"/> Others complained that, unlike the original, the remakefilm was content to indulge in bloody zombie violencekillings at the expense of wittyits satirepredecessor's andsly nuanced[[social storytellingcommentary]], leavingthe effects of which they said left the viewers rather numbed and "less mercifully handled, even at the [[Closing credits|end-credits]]".<ref name="thr"/><ref name="tribune">{{cite web |last1=Wilmington |first1=Michael |title='Dawn's' zombies, filmmakers both could use some brains |url=https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-2004-03-19-0403190378-story.html |website=Chicago Tribune |date=March 19, 2004 |access-date=May 1, 2021}}</ref> TheConversely, the ''Los Angeles Times'' critic [[Manohla Dargis]] counterarguedcommented that Romero's central metaphor has lost its significance in the years following the original's release, "with the politics of consumption now an established academic field and shopping now considered a statement of identity"; of the abundant gore, she said "what makes the film pop aren't the buckets of blood, but the filmmakers' commitment to [[Film genre|genre]] fundamentals."<ref name="lat"/> ''IGN'' reviewer Todd Gilchrist praised the film's tonal shift, calling it "a calculated risk that paid off".<ref name="todd"/> Despite complaints that the film lacked the humor of the original,<ref name="ebert"/><ref name="tribune"/> some said it had some funny scenes of its own, including one in which a couple of male characters shoot zombified celebrity look-alikes with a sniper rifle,<ref name="william"/><ref name="ew"/><ref name="wapo"/> which an otherwise negative review from ''[[The Hollywood Reporter]]'' cited as some of its "moments of inspired audacity".<ref name="thr"/>

While [[James Gunn]]'s script was complimented as "sharp" and propulsive,<ref name="ew"/><ref name="lat"/> albeit "big on snappy repartee at the expense of any kind of intriguing plot development",<ref name="thr"/> its characters were lambasted by critic Michael Wilmington in a pan review for the ''[[Chicago Tribune]]'', who said their actions were about as idiotic as their zombie counterparts; personality-wise, he described some of them as "heroic" and a few others as "craven or villainous".<ref name="tribune"/> The lack of [[Characterization|character development]] was also criticized by some reviewers due to the ensemble being large.<ref name="scott"/><ref name="ebert"/> ''ReelViews'' owner and critic [[James Berardinelli]] was lenient in his assessment, arguingcommenting that although there were moments in which the characters did show a lack of [[common sense]], "it's inevitable that most of them end up as one-dimensional throw-aways whose sole purpose is to increase the [[body count]]; he further wrote that "not many people go to a horror film looking for character development and drama."<ref name="james"/> Ebert and Berardinelli praised the "touching" subplots of the [[Mekhi Phifer]] and [[Ving Rhames]] characters, which the latter critic said were "handled with a deft hand";<ref name="james"/><ref name="ebert"/> Wilmington also considered the Phifer subplot "tragic".<ref name="tribune"/> Out of the cast, which was praised as "superlative" and "respectable",<ref name="todd"/><ref name="thr"/> [[Sarah Polley]] garnered the most attention from critics, who complimented the actress as "a perfect against-[[Typecasting (acting)|type]] heroine" with "a nice anxious stare".<ref name="tribune"/><ref name="ew"/>

===Retrospective===