Dawn of the Dead (1978)
Dir: George Romero
Cast: Ken Foree, Gaylen Ross, Scott Reiniger,
David Emge
Dir: George Romero
Cast: Ken Foree, Gaylen Ross, Scott Reiniger,
David Emge
AKA: Zombie: Dawn of the Dead
Horror fans are fickle. While I tend to love 80s slasher films, I hate
Scream and just about every slasher movie that came after it. If
this were the general consensus it would be easy to dismiss
Scream as a piece of garbage. It’s not that easy though. Well, let
me start by saying that the fact that the film did tremendous box
office means very little. The amount of people that like something
has very little impact on its quality in my eyes. It’s the people that
like it that get me: Very smart people whose opinions I value
highly! Even one slasher aficionado in particular, who I think has
scene every single movie the subgenre has to offer, champions
this movie that I can’t stand. It’s harder to find common ground in
the horror community than you’d think.
Scream and just about every slasher movie that came after it. If
this were the general consensus it would be easy to dismiss
Scream as a piece of garbage. It’s not that easy though. Well, let
me start by saying that the fact that the film did tremendous box
office means very little. The amount of people that like something
has very little impact on its quality in my eyes. It’s the people that
like it that get me: Very smart people whose opinions I value
highly! Even one slasher aficionado in particular, who I think has
scene every single movie the subgenre has to offer, champions
this movie that I can’t stand. It’s harder to find common ground in
the horror community than you’d think.
There’s one movie though, that above nearly all others, unites genre fans under one banner. I speak, of course, of
George A. Romero’s Dawn of the Dead. Even though his debut flesh muncher is one of the seminal horror (or
otherwise) films in the history of American cinema, Dawn of the Dead not only lives up to all expectations created by the
original, but manages to distinguish itself as a landmark masterpiece in its own right.
Most importantly though, Dawn of the Dead is the movie that everyone likes. So many of the established classics fall
victim to superficial complaints that it doesn’t surprise me that they’ve been lined up on the remake chopping block.
Night of the Living Dead and Psycho are black and white (wah!), The Texas Chainsaw Massacre doesn’t have much
blood (you don’t say?), or Halloween doesn’t have…okay, I can’t think of a good reason to remake Halloween… But
getting back to Dawn of the Dead, this is such a kick ass movie that still holds up amazingly well almost 30 years later,
they wouldn’t dare, would they? Of course they would, anything with a cool sounding title is fair game now.
Well, if I’ve learned anything over the last ten years, it’s that bitching about horror remakes isn’t going to make them
stop. I’ve actually found them surprisingly easy to ignore lately, and if there’s sliver lining it’s that occasionally the
original film will get a snazzy new DVD release in the flurry of promotion for the remake. As much as I’m tempted to, I
don’t want to turn this into a rant about those sprinting zombies that invaded theaters in 2004.
George A. Romero’s Dawn of the Dead. Even though his debut flesh muncher is one of the seminal horror (or
otherwise) films in the history of American cinema, Dawn of the Dead not only lives up to all expectations created by the
original, but manages to distinguish itself as a landmark masterpiece in its own right.
Most importantly though, Dawn of the Dead is the movie that everyone likes. So many of the established classics fall
victim to superficial complaints that it doesn’t surprise me that they’ve been lined up on the remake chopping block.
Night of the Living Dead and Psycho are black and white (wah!), The Texas Chainsaw Massacre doesn’t have much
blood (you don’t say?), or Halloween doesn’t have…okay, I can’t think of a good reason to remake Halloween… But
getting back to Dawn of the Dead, this is such a kick ass movie that still holds up amazingly well almost 30 years later,
they wouldn’t dare, would they? Of course they would, anything with a cool sounding title is fair game now.
Well, if I’ve learned anything over the last ten years, it’s that bitching about horror remakes isn’t going to make them
stop. I’ve actually found them surprisingly easy to ignore lately, and if there’s sliver lining it’s that occasionally the
original film will get a snazzy new DVD release in the flurry of promotion for the remake. As much as I’m tempted to, I
don’t want to turn this into a rant about those sprinting zombies that invaded theaters in 2004.
Instead, what I want to do is celebrate Romero’s Dawn of the Dead. It may not always be in the top spot on my list of
favorite movies, but I’ll readily admit that it just doesn’t get any better than this. To begin with, there’s no other movie
that I find myself continually rooting for the main characters with. The four leads seem like a dysfunctional part of my
extended family. From there, you have to love Tom Savini’s effects work. These are exactly the kind of effects that I
love. They’re not so elaborate that they become cumbersome, they move fast like the rest of the film. Each effect
seems like a magic trick, they all go just a little further than seems physically possible. At times they come so fast and
furious that you’re still marveling over one when another one floors you.
While a punchy, fun story with great effects will probably be entertaining, it’s not enough for a movie the caliber of Dawn
of the Dead. First and foremost, what I love about the film is the depths of discussion I can have with people. I consider
Romero one of the great artists of our time, and I love discussing my interpretation of his vision with people.
Since no discussion of Dawn of the Dead would be complete without noting how the zombies in the shopping mall look
just like the patrons we see there every day, let’s get that out of the way first. That’s right. They do. I sometimes read
criticism of the film saying that this analogy lacks subtlety. I don’t think subtlety was the approach Romero was shooting
for here! It’s right there, it’s in your face. All that zombies seem to have left are the most basic of instincts: find
food…and shop! That’s quite a comment on the values of our society. This isn’t something that’s hidden within the
subtext of the film; it’s the driving force behind the movie. It’s also something that Romero elaborates on with his living
characters.
favorite movies, but I’ll readily admit that it just doesn’t get any better than this. To begin with, there’s no other movie
that I find myself continually rooting for the main characters with. The four leads seem like a dysfunctional part of my
extended family. From there, you have to love Tom Savini’s effects work. These are exactly the kind of effects that I
love. They’re not so elaborate that they become cumbersome, they move fast like the rest of the film. Each effect
seems like a magic trick, they all go just a little further than seems physically possible. At times they come so fast and
furious that you’re still marveling over one when another one floors you.
While a punchy, fun story with great effects will probably be entertaining, it’s not enough for a movie the caliber of Dawn
of the Dead. First and foremost, what I love about the film is the depths of discussion I can have with people. I consider
Romero one of the great artists of our time, and I love discussing my interpretation of his vision with people.
Since no discussion of Dawn of the Dead would be complete without noting how the zombies in the shopping mall look
just like the patrons we see there every day, let’s get that out of the way first. That’s right. They do. I sometimes read
criticism of the film saying that this analogy lacks subtlety. I don’t think subtlety was the approach Romero was shooting
for here! It’s right there, it’s in your face. All that zombies seem to have left are the most basic of instincts: find
food…and shop! That’s quite a comment on the values of our society. This isn’t something that’s hidden within the
subtext of the film; it’s the driving force behind the movie. It’s also something that Romero elaborates on with his living
characters.
Let’s look at the quartette’s course of action when they find the mall. First, they find supplies that they need to survive
like food, water, and a shelter to rest safely. Next, they venture out into the mall to get some supplies that might help
them in their plight (even if they’re not immediately necessary for survival). This includes batteries, televisions, radios,
and ammunition. As they start to realize that have a good thing going, they secure their little hideout by blocking the
entrances, exterminate all the zombies already in the mall, and disguise their refuge so that any potential looters won’t
know they’re even there. Now that they’re safe and secure, they can get back to the things that matter is our society:
things! They go hog wild taking money and expensive clothing, cooking gourmet food, and playing arcade games and
sports.
They’ve created a little utopian society amidst the zombie carnage. And what makes it so great? All the great things
they have access to! I won’t pretend to be superior though; I admit that every gigantic superstore I go into is scoped out
as a possible refuge during the next zombie holocaust. Things have only gotten more convenient too. Now you can buy
your groceries, guns, and electronics all at the same store. Not to mention that I’ve seen more than a few people in Wal-
Mart that I suspected were in fact walking corpses.
At this point everything seems on course for our characters to lead a reasonable fulfilling existence inside the
Monroeville Mall. That is, until a group of marauding bikers spies their helicopter parked on the roof. Ex-SWAT team
member Peter advises the group lay low and let the bandits pass through. The helicopter pilot and former television
weatherman can’t abide by this though, saying, “This is ours, we took it.” He initiates a gun fight with the bikers, which
ultimately leads to his death and his leading hordes of zombies to their hideout.
like food, water, and a shelter to rest safely. Next, they venture out into the mall to get some supplies that might help
them in their plight (even if they’re not immediately necessary for survival). This includes batteries, televisions, radios,
and ammunition. As they start to realize that have a good thing going, they secure their little hideout by blocking the
entrances, exterminate all the zombies already in the mall, and disguise their refuge so that any potential looters won’t
know they’re even there. Now that they’re safe and secure, they can get back to the things that matter is our society:
things! They go hog wild taking money and expensive clothing, cooking gourmet food, and playing arcade games and
sports.
They’ve created a little utopian society amidst the zombie carnage. And what makes it so great? All the great things
they have access to! I won’t pretend to be superior though; I admit that every gigantic superstore I go into is scoped out
as a possible refuge during the next zombie holocaust. Things have only gotten more convenient too. Now you can buy
your groceries, guns, and electronics all at the same store. Not to mention that I’ve seen more than a few people in Wal-
Mart that I suspected were in fact walking corpses.
At this point everything seems on course for our characters to lead a reasonable fulfilling existence inside the
Monroeville Mall. That is, until a group of marauding bikers spies their helicopter parked on the roof. Ex-SWAT team
member Peter advises the group lay low and let the bandits pass through. The helicopter pilot and former television
weatherman can’t abide by this though, saying, “This is ours, we took it.” He initiates a gun fight with the bikers, which
ultimately leads to his death and his leading hordes of zombies to their hideout.
I find Flyboy’s reasoning interesting. On one hand, it sucks to see something you worked so hard on and risked your
life for destroyed by a band of reckless ruffians. On the other hand, it makes you realize how frighteningly attached to
material possessions a normal guy like Stephen (Flyboy) is. Yes, they took it first, but really they stole it first. It wasn’t
theirs to begin with, and I wonder what they would have done if they found people in the mall first. If they were hostile,
would they have fought for the property?
Stephen’s rationale is also interesting when compared to something he says earlier in the film, when they take off in the
helicopter. He claims that he has a right to the news stations chopper because he’s the weatherman and uses it
everyday for his job. Peter scoffs at this reasoning a bit since this isn’t a work related flight and tells him that they’re
thieves and bad guys now. This bad guy mentality makes Peter coldly rational as opposed to Stephen’s passionate
nobility. In the end, they both enjoy their material possessions, but it’s Stephen’s emotional attachment that leads to the
war (and to think, they were worried about the zombies).
It’s also interesting to note that Peter’s armor begins to chip away at this point. When the mall is a total loss he helps
the only other survivor, Stephen’s pregnant girlfriend (Fran), escape and contemplates suicide. In fact, the original
shooting script had him shooting himself in the head and Fran decapitating herself with the helicopter blades. We can
only speculate as to exactly why Peter lost the will to fight, but I think that it’s not too far off from the reason Stephen
opened fire on the bikers: They were so attached to their way of life that they had worked so hard to create that they
couldn’t imagine leaving it behind for the uncertainty of the outside world.
life for destroyed by a band of reckless ruffians. On the other hand, it makes you realize how frighteningly attached to
material possessions a normal guy like Stephen (Flyboy) is. Yes, they took it first, but really they stole it first. It wasn’t
theirs to begin with, and I wonder what they would have done if they found people in the mall first. If they were hostile,
would they have fought for the property?
Stephen’s rationale is also interesting when compared to something he says earlier in the film, when they take off in the
helicopter. He claims that he has a right to the news stations chopper because he’s the weatherman and uses it
everyday for his job. Peter scoffs at this reasoning a bit since this isn’t a work related flight and tells him that they’re
thieves and bad guys now. This bad guy mentality makes Peter coldly rational as opposed to Stephen’s passionate
nobility. In the end, they both enjoy their material possessions, but it’s Stephen’s emotional attachment that leads to the
war (and to think, they were worried about the zombies).
It’s also interesting to note that Peter’s armor begins to chip away at this point. When the mall is a total loss he helps
the only other survivor, Stephen’s pregnant girlfriend (Fran), escape and contemplates suicide. In fact, the original
shooting script had him shooting himself in the head and Fran decapitating herself with the helicopter blades. We can
only speculate as to exactly why Peter lost the will to fight, but I think that it’s not too far off from the reason Stephen
opened fire on the bikers: They were so attached to their way of life that they had worked so hard to create that they
couldn’t imagine leaving it behind for the uncertainty of the outside world.
I’ve watched Dawn of the Dead a lot and every time I sit
down with it I find something new to appreciate. Romero is
one of the most interesting storytellers to ever pick up a
camera. Whether is it be with the living dead, a kid that
thinks he’s a vampire, or even a bunch of armored knights
jousting on motorcycles, his films consistently lend
themselves to a literary style analysis. This is a rare feat for
someone who doesn’t make art films; above all his movies
are engaging and exciting. Dawn of the Dead just may be
the most exciting of them all!
down with it I find something new to appreciate. Romero is
one of the most interesting storytellers to ever pick up a
camera. Whether is it be with the living dead, a kid that
thinks he’s a vampire, or even a bunch of armored knights
jousting on motorcycles, his films consistently lend
themselves to a literary style analysis. This is a rare feat for
someone who doesn’t make art films; above all his movies
are engaging and exciting. Dawn of the Dead just may be
the most exciting of them all!
5 Wooleys out of 5!
Dr. Spector 06.02.2007
Dr. Spector 06.02.2007
