Dawn Of The Dead

[express98]

sorry if this has been posted before ,but the trailer looks the bollocks just thought i would share what i found :D http://www.dawnofthedeadmovie.net/trailer.html

[{I}{K}{E}]

looks good!

[Rock Tonic Juice Magic]

looks pretty good

but 28 days later will still be the best survival horror movie :01:

[FuNkY CaPrIcOrN]

;) Hollywood doing another remake.Thats like the cool thing to do now. :rolleyes:

The Real Dawn of the Dead (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0077402/)

[xxxSHARExxx]

Originally posted by Rock Tonic Juice Magic@22 January 2004 - 23:19
looks pretty good

but 28 days later will still be the best survival horror movie :01:
i hate 28 days later

[Wizard_Mon1]

its just an american version of 28 days later <_< i&#39;ll stick with the british one thanks

[Pitbul]

Originally posted by Wizard_Mon1@23 January 2004 - 11:22
its just an american version of 28 days later <_< i&#39;ll stick with the british one thanks
WTF are you talking about? Dawn Of The Dead was originally out back 1978, if anything 28 days later was a cheap rip off of RE and Dawn Of The Dead, i hate morons, i hope you get beatin

[100%]

Originally posted by FuNkY CaPrIcOrN@23 January 2004 - 05:02

The Real Dawn of the Dead (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0077402/)
id always wondered what the name of that movie was i watched one dark freaky night

QUOTE (Rock Tonic Juice Magic @ 22 January 2004 - 23:19)


but 28 days later will still be the best survival horror movie
Are you influenced by Reality TV in any way? :blink:

[express98]

[QUOTE]
WTF are you talking about? Dawn Of The Dead was originally out back 1978, if anything 28 days later was a cheap rip off of RE and Dawn Of The Dead, i hate morons, i hope you get beatin
:lol: sorry how old r u ? hav u watched dawn ov the dead ...1978 , i think not cos 28 days later is total different ,as is res evil ,rip off wtf u talkin a bout pit bull ......................hope u get a beatin ?????????? hope u spend time watchin movies GOOD ENGLISH MOVIES like 28 days later .........if u like horror ....whats the diff between 28 days and res evil .......i will give u a clue ZOMBIES ......think bout it or watch the movies ..............sorry yes im a brit :01: :ghostface:

[Abe]

.............sorry man but 28 days later.........I thought sucked, no offence.


It would be nice is they made a new series of survival horror with all this new technology.


Anybody ever see a movie that was based on mars when it was earth like?

Like how there was a population there once and something happend ( whatever the writer thinks up) that forces them to leave mars and repopulate at earth?.....................................................................................................................seems like an ok movie plot sence all this mars stuff is going arounds :01:

[cpt_azad]

Originally posted by Abe@23 January 2004 - 22:57
.............sorry man but 28 days later.........I thought sucked, no offence.


It would be nice is they made a new series of survival horror with all this new technology.


Anybody ever see a movie that was based on mars when it was earth like?

Like how there was a population there once and something happend ( whatever the writer thinks up) that forces them to leave mars and repopulate at earth?.....................................................................................................................seems like an ok movie plot sence all this mars stuff is going arounds :01:
Mission To Mars? that was a good movie, oh btw, 28 days later was pretty damn.........................boring. it could have used some good writing, but still, it didn&#39;t suck as much as ppl say. but i&#39;d pick real dawn of the red or RE over 28 days later.

[Samurai]

Originally posted by FuNkY CaPrIcOrN@23 January 2004 - 03:02
;) Hollywood doing another remake.Thats like the cool thing to do now. :rolleyes:

The Real Dawn of the Dead (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0077402/)
Agreed.

I have the George A Romero&#39;s trilogy on DVD and I have to say these were abosolute masterpieces. I just hope that the newer remake&#39;s don&#39;t try and lead people to believe that it is an original idea... when in fact the original came out many years ahead of its time.



Edit: Thought you might like some trivia for the original movie...

"The MPAA had threatened to impose the "X" rating if George Romero didn&#39;t make cuts. Romero did not want to cut the film, and he was adamant against an "X" rating, due to its stigma of hard-core pornography. In the end, Romero was able to persuade his distributors to release the film with no rating, although on all advertising and trailers, there was a disclaimer that in effect read that while there was no explicit sex in the film, the movie was of such a violent nature that no one under 17 would be admitted."

[Gripper]

I remember going to the pictures and seeing the trilogy in one sitting,I felt like a fucking zombie when I came out of there,you can&#39;t beat originals&#33;&#33;&#33; :P
Is it night of the living dead where the zombies wander round saying "brains...brainsss"? :blink:

[Samurai]

No. That is another film.

But...&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33; You&#39;ve hit the nail on the head with that question. I was 6 years old at the time and my older sister was babysitting me. We watched 2 horror films, and I&#39;ve since figured out the first one was &#39;The Blob (1988)&#39; (enjoyed the original of that too :)).

The second however has the "...brains&#33; BRAINS&#33;" quotes and I&#39;ve never been able to remember what it is or find it out.

Any ideas anyone?

[Gripper]

:D Who says watching kids watching horror films is a bad thing,you&#39;re sister letting you watch horror flicks at 6 years old,talk about lucky,there was me scared of Dr who when I was six :lol:
Videos have a lot to answer for :ghostface: :helpsmile:

[Samurai]

Hehe yea they were good times... I&#39;m 21 now and still think about what it was like back in the day lol. I was good friends with the local film rental&#39;s and he was always sorting me out with free videos and that (even 18&#39;s) because I remember borrowing Creepshow 2. Man those were the days&#33;

Didn&#39;t see much of him for a while... til my older brother told me he went to prison for drug dealing :lol: No wonder he let me borrow free films, he was making his money elsewhere LMAO

Anyway, still waiting the &#39;Brains.... BRAINS" quote from a horror film. I also remember people driving a truck and throwing what looked like brains out to the zombies and they ate them :frusty:

[D!mensio_x]

Anyway, still waiting the &#39;Brains.... BRAINS" quote from a horror film. I also remember people driving a truck and throwing what looked like brains out to the zombies and they ate them&nbsp;

I know which movie this quote comes from: Return of the Living Dead (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0089907/)

It was quite a good movie. It had some really funny parts in it. However the sequals were not as good as the first one.

Greetz, D&#33;mensio_x.

[3RA1N1AC]

Originally posted by D&#33;mensio_x@25 January 2004 - 13:56

Anyway, still waiting the &#39;Brains.... BRAINS" quote from a horror film. I also remember people driving a truck and throwing what looked like brains out to the zombies and they ate them

I know which movie this quote comes from: Return of the Living Dead (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0089907/)

It was quite a good movie. It had some really funny parts in it. However the sequals were not as good as the first one.
the part where they&#39;re throwing brains out of a truck... that&#39;s Return Of The Living Dead Part 2. the first one was funnier & had a better script, but there was nothing especially wrong with part 2... just that it was more of the same, including some of the same actors from part 1 just playing different characters. :lol:

as for 28 days later................... that movie was crap. a flaming sack of regurgitated poo. "ooh, let&#39;s get that trainspotting dude to rip off The Omega Man & Day Of The Dead, and film it on cheap DV like an alt-rock music video. we won&#39;t even have to spend any money on monster effects, &#39;cause he can just shake the camera around a lot so you barely see them... people will think it&#39;s innovative and intelligent&#33;" um, no. sack of poo. :frusty:

[Busyman]

Originally posted by Samurai@25 January 2004 - 00:55
No. That is another film.

But...&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33; You&#39;ve hit the nail on the head with that question. I was 6 years old at the time and my older sister was babysitting me. We watched 2 horror films, and I&#39;ve since figured out the first one was &#39;The Blob (1988)&#39; (enjoyed the original of that too :)).

The second however has the "...brains&#33; BRAINS&#33;" quotes and I&#39;ve never been able to remember what it is or find it out.

Any ideas anyone?
The BRAINS&#33;&#33;BRAINS&#33;&#33; quote is from Return Of The Living Dead.

Man this shit is funny how young some of you are&#33;&#33;&#33; :lol: :lol:

28 Days Later is a "severe" rip-off. I&#39;m not saying it was TOTALLY horrible but it doesn&#39;t compare to the older zombie movies.

Some things of note:

1. The old trilogy of George Romero movies:
Night Of The Living Dead
Dawn Of Dead
Day Of The Dead

2. Night Of Living Dead was remade already. The original was in B&W and has a slightly different ending.

3. Dawn Of Dead is NOT a sequel of Night Of Living Dead but Day Of The Dead is a sequel of Dawn Of The Dead.

4. The soldiers having a zombie in captivity while trying to learn from it in 28 Days Later was already done in Day Of Dead.

5. If I&#39;m not mistaken there is a scene where in this new Dawn Of The Dead, the folks are trapped in the mall. While on the roof they notice a gun shop across the sea of zombies. There is a person on the roof with a sign asking for FOOD. The folks in mall need guns n&#39; ammo. In the movie it is revealed that the zombies won&#39;t go after animals. Some type of way the mall folks lower a dog into the sea of zombies with food tied around it. The dog goes across the way and delivers the food then comes back bringing ammo.

[FuNkY CaPrIcOrN]

:D Return of the Living Dead (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0089907/).In the Movie at the end they bomb Louisville.....where I am from.That had everybody in the Theater up and cheering.It was pretty cool.I was only like 10.

The Soundtrack is awesome also if you like 80s Punk.When it came out on DVD the Party was here in town with one of the Producers. :D

:01: BRAINS&#33; :01:

[3RA1N1AC]

Originally posted by Busyman@26 January 2004 - 01:00
3. Dawn Of Dead is NOT a sequel of Night Of Living Dead but Day Of The Dead is a sequel of Dawn Of The Dead.
uh... actually, if you watch all three in a row, Dawn Of The Dead is a sequel to Night Of The Living Dead. it&#39;s just that they were made so far apart and they&#39;re both set in "modern" times (respectively) so the timeline is messed up. i.e. Dawn is supposed to happen shortly after Night, but it&#39;s set in the 70s which is just confusing.

it&#39;s more of a logical sequel than a direct sequel, since the timeline is kinda screwed up and the characters are completely different... but it is a sequel. it&#39;s not just a coincidence that Night & Dawn are both set in Pennsylvania.

[Busyman]

Originally posted by 3RA1N1AC+26 January 2004 - 11:02--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (3RA1N1AC @ 26 January 2004 - 11:02)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Busyman@26 January 2004 - 01:00
3. Dawn Of Dead is NOT a sequel of Night Of Living Dead but Day Of The Dead is a sequel of Dawn Of The Dead.
uh... actually, if you watch all three in a row, Dawn Of The Dead is a sequel to Night Of The Living Dead. it&#39;s just that they were made so far apart and they&#39;re both set in "modern" times (respectively) so the timeline is messed up. i.e. Dawn is supposed to happen shortly after Night, but it&#39;s set in the 70s which is just confusing.

it&#39;s more of a logical sequel than a direct sequel, since the timeline is kinda screwed up and the characters are completely different... but it is a sequel. it&#39;s not just a coincidence that Night & Dawn are both set in Pennsylvania. [/b][/quote]
uh....they are not sequels.

People called them sequels but:

1. The timeline is messed up screwing up the "the sequel part".

2. In Dawn Of The Dead there is no reference to what happened in NOTLD.

3. In Dawn Of The Dead when the dead start to walk it&#39;s understood that it&#39;s the first time it happened.

4. In Day Of The Dead it is clearly set sometime after Dawn Of The Dead and makes reference to the timeline.

5. The only similarities are zombies, Pennsylvania, and George Romero.
Logical.....if relating to the above; yeah ok but it&#39;s not even like the Jack Ryan films...uh. ;)

[3RA1N1AC]

Originally posted by Busyman@26 January 2004 - 04:44
2. In Dawn Of The Dead there is no reference to what happened in NOTLD.

3. In Dawn Of The Dead when the dead start to walk it&#39;s understood that it&#39;s the first time it happened.

4. In Day Of The Dead it is clearly set sometime after Dawn Of The Dead and makes reference to the timeline.

5. The only similarities are zombies, Pennsylvania, and George Romero.
Logical.....if relating to the above; yeah ok but it&#39;s not even like the Jack Ryan films...uh. ;)
2. they don&#39;t have to reference it. what are the Dawn characters going to do, talk about the farmhouse? unless i&#39;m mistaken, there are no shopping mall references in Day Of The Dead.

3. that&#39;s correct. it&#39;s the first time it&#39;s happened-- starting in Night Of The Living Dead. there&#39;s no way Romero would&#39;ve been able to afford to set Dawn in the 60s to make it clearly follow Night, because making sure all the cars, clothes, decor, etc match would&#39;ve cost &#036;&#036;&#036; that he just didn&#39;t have (and prolly still doesn&#39;t have, in 2004). Day Of The Dead is set in the 80s, but it obviously follows shortly after Dawn-- there are still newspapers blowing around in the streets, announcing that the dead have risen. the weather would have destroyed the newspapers already, if any significant time had passed. the 3 movies were made in 3 different decades, but the actual time passed between each one is meant to be a matter of only very few days.

there&#39;s a very straight progression of the story through the 3 movies. the humans are pushed further into corners, the zombies&#39; victories get bigger in scale, and the sense of optimism is in a downward spiral from the start.

*in Night, the zombies first appear, and the people think that maybe they can drive to safety, or just lock themselves up in the house and wait for help to come. in the climax, the zombies overrun the farmhouse. at the end, the zombie-hunters seem pretty optimistic that the zombies can be rounded up & destroyed, but they are underestimating the problem pretty severely. zombies - 1, humans - 0.
*in Dawn, the situation has grown worse, and the city slickers realize that any place with a dense population is going just turn into a zombie mill, so they decide to get outta Dodge. the zombies may be winning, but at least the people can wait for the end of the world pretty comfortably in their secluded palace, taking a cue from Poe&#39;s Masque Of Red Death. the zombies eventually take over the shopping mall. zombies - 2, humans - 0.
*in Day, the zombies have already won, the planet no longer belongs to the humans. from the very first frame, the humans are sitting ducks. if you&#39;re living in a hole-in-the-ground & issuing orders to 3 or 4 guys you&#39;re not even sure you can trust, you&#39;ve lost-- see Saddam Hussein, for "hole = lose" scenario. the zombies taking over the hole-in-the-ground is pretty much a post-game dance in the endzone. zombies - 3, humans - 0.

from the beginning of "Night" till the end of "Day," i&#39;d say that the amount of time passed in the story is definitely less than 2 years, though i&#39;d lean more toward 6 to 12 months.

[lotep]

um, dawn is a direct sequel to night,george always talks about his trilogy night, dawn and day.Plus all the dead are allready alive in dawn.As for 28 days latter, while it is a good movie it does rather blatenly rip off day of the dead. First theres the "zombie" the military guys are experimenting with. Second half the movie takes place in the middle of aplatton of soldiers that are falling apart at the seams. And lastly they want to rape the last remaining women.All this adds up to a nice "tribute" to day. Now i actually think 28 days latter is the better film but it weres its influenses on its sleve. The origonal dawn however is the greatist zombie movie ever, bar none.

[Busyman]

Damn I gotta watch Dawn again (I have it on video).
It&#39;s kinda weird I guess with Night set in the sixties with rampant racism and made in B&W and then Dawn is made in color.
Since they are remaking Dawn and Night has already been remade then we should have Day if Dawn does well.

We&#39;ll probably get folks saying Day ripped off 28 Days Later. :lol:

With the Night remake already made, the Dawn Of The Dead remake should look more like a direct sequel. I noticed in the Dawn remake the zombies can run and jump.

I remember when (in the original Dawn) a zombie stood up too tall on some boxes and peeled his own cap on twirling helicopter blades. :lol: :lol:

EDIT:@3RA1N1AC - I see the news on Dawn in the beginning IS talking about the dead rising ALREADY&#33;&#33;&#33; :o

[3RA1N1AC]

Originally posted by Busyman@26 January 2004 - 15:51
Damn I gotta watch Dawn again (I have it on video).
It&#39;s kinda weird I guess with Night set in the sixties with rampant racism and made in B&W and then Dawn is made in color.
this is a good point. i&#39;m not sure if i agree that NOTLD is about racism very much, since the black guy&#39;s skin color does not seem to be an issue for the other characters at all. but you do have a good point, that NOTLD reflects some of the issues of the time when it was made.

the 60s were a time of revolution in politics & society, the tide was beginning to turn, the old institutions and values were beginning to fall away, people were beginning to realize that racism is not okay, old-fashioned america was losing its grip and it could no longer ignore the "other" (be it hippies, minorities, communists, etc), and NOTLD can be seen as a reflection of that.

the 70s were a time of complacency and consumerism. people just didn&#39;t care that much about the big issues, and the most important thing in a lot of people&#39;s lives was to buy & own new stuff. it was a time of lazy satisfaction-- buy a big new car, go to the disco, go to the mall, swap wives with your neighbor, spend spend spend, buy buy buy, try to live the fantasy life that you see in magazine ads. faithful consumers = zombies. Dawn Of The Dead is sort of about that.

the 80s were a time when "looking out for #1" became a popular view. the tone of that decade was a lot more aggressive, much of the world had turned against us politically, we were turning hostile against immigrants/refugees (the starving masses outside the fence, so to speak), militarism was making a comeback in popular culture (see Rambo, etc), and sexism was replacing racism as the hot topic of the day. Day Of The Dead can be viewed as a comment on that.

the social/political commentary of each movie is not a perfect justification for the massively screwed up timeline, but it&#39;s at least a halfway decent excuse for the settings/props jumping several years ahead in a story that really only runs for about a year.