Dawn of the Dead

I like Snyder’s conception of the zombies. They are no longer the torpid bitches of Romero's classic, but fast predators that are terrifying and you have to be very wary of them. The opening of the film is another pleasant shock, it has no long introductions, no suspense, it gets down to business right after five minutes. The plot immediately shifts into fifth gear (the initial chaos at the family houses and the shot of the city a the massive car pile-up), after a while it drops to fourth gear and it stays there until the closing credits. Fans of the genre will feel that they have just seen something familiar in an exceptional package, a remake and a beautiful tribute to the genre at the same time. It will put a smile on their face that will not not leave them even after leaving the cinema, as if they had just watched a romantic comedy. (08/09/2004)

The story is taken largely from the original, but otherwise I wouldn't go into any comparisons, both directors, after all, are from slightly different backgrounds: Romero is a creator of classic killer and zombie films that focus a lot on suspense, while Snyder is a popcorn and action fan who does things his own way. That said, if I had to choose between the original and the remake, I would go for Snyder and co. Romero's work is a bit looser, less daring and at some moments insanely unbelievable, I remember the zombies crawling around like they had a long pipe stuck in their ass with a curve at the end. This one is a different story, Snyder has applied his talent for combining entertaining action with dark atmosphere and his post-apocalyptic vision is much more effective, more modern and more appealing to modern audiences. Moreover, the plot makes quite a bit of sense, the characters behave believably, and the precisely balanced direction keeps your attention even when the pace slackens and bloodthirsty zombies are not the order of the day. Rhames is cool and the other actors do a good job. Snyder has created a gorgeous homage to the genre that is a bit gory, atmospheric, and most importantly, immensely entertaining. Romero should be proud. (07/02/2013)

A tribute as it should be and on top of that one of a few horror remakes that makes sense, has something to offer and doesn’t just dwell on its famous predecessor. And going to watch it in a multiplex inside a shopping mall was quite apt, I thought. P.S.: Second time round, even the “sprinter" zombies, who could beat the world record for a hundred meters didn’t bother me. (13/05/2022)

When the dead start walking, the fun stops. Or maybe the opposite happens. Who would have thought that a serious zombie movie would be strongest in light-hearted and almost cheerful montages? Thanks to them, it deviates significantly from the genre and can only surprise the viewer like a breath of fresh air. I don't need the category of bloody massacres, so from my side, it is a 70% positive surprise. In the flood of blood, editing, and atmosphere, the glaring illogicalities in the characters' behavior and the light violence of that enthusiastic over-shooting are easier to overlook. (30/07/2007)

Zack Snyder holds the reins of the film firmly in his hands and it is evident literally in every shot. The zombies are no longer lazy stumbling creatures, but deadly monsters. And it is thanks to this change that Snyder managed to achieve such a fast pace and dynamic action scenes that have an incredibly impressive rawness – especially within zombie horror. The fantastic visuals, along with the immensely likeable characters, cool lines, and a healthy dose of cynicism (the director winks at us basically in every other scene), make this possibly the biggest hit of 2004. (25/06/2004)