Disc Specs

  • Region:
    1
  • Released:
    Out now
  • Country:
    United States of America
  • Running Time:
    109 minutes
  • Screen Format:
    2.39:1 Anamorphic NTSC
  • Discs / Sides / Layers:
    1 / 1 / Dual
  • Soundtracks:
    English Dolby Digital 5.1
    Spanish Dolby Digital 5.1
    French Dolby Digital 5.1
  • Subtitles:
    English
    Spanish
    French

    All extras except commentary fully subtitled.
  • Special Features:
    Director's introduction
    The Lost Tape
    Special Report
    Undead Scenes
    Raising the Dead
    Attack of the Living Dead
    Splitting Headaches
    Commentary
  • Distributor:
    Universal

Film Specs

  • Certificate:
    Unrated
  • Released:
    2004
  • Country:
    United States of America
  • Director:
    Zack Snyder
  • Starring:
    Sarah Polley
    Ving Rhames
    Jake Weber
    Mekhi Phifer
    Ty Burrell
    Michael Kelly
    Keven Zegers
    Michael Barry
    Lindy Booth
    Jayne Eastwood
    Boyd Banks
    Inna Korobkina
  • Genre(s):
    Action
    Blockbuster
    Film
    Horror
    Live Action

Dawn of the Dead (2004): Unrated Director's Cut

30-10-2004 16:00 | 17108 views  |  Michael Mackenzie  |  Show Backlinks  |  Other "Dawn of the Dead (2004)" Content


I must confess that George A. Romero's Dawn of the Dead (1978) doesn't really do much for me. I appreciate its importance as a seminal piece of horror cinema, and indeed its biting and quite excellently realized commentary on contemporary society, but I have never been as wild about it as its more ardent fans. As such, rest assured that my criticisms of this remake stem not from the automatic "defence mechanism" that I suspect was triggered in a number of the original film's most dedicated fans, but rather from issues that I have with this film in its own right. (Don't worry, I'm saving my venom for when Dimension Films desecrates my beloved Suspiria!) In any event, the fact that the remake is sufficiently different from the original for the only concrete connections to be the title, the undead and the fact that the main characters hole up in a shopping mall, suggests that it should be accepted on its own merits as a movie that is only loosely inspired by Romero's film.

Milwaukee A&E nurse Ana (Sarah Polley) awakens to find the world in the grip an unknown epidemic that turns the dead into crazed, blood-hungry zombies. After narrowly escaping from the jaws of her husband, who has fallen victim to the virus, Ana runs into fellow survivors Michael (Jake Weber), tough cop Kenneth (Ving Rhames) and a young couple, hot-headed Andre (Mekhi Phifer) and his pregnant girlfriend Luda (Inna Korobkina). Together they make their way to the relative safety of a nearby shopping mall - a mall guarded by an arrogant security guard, CJ (Michael Kelly), and his two deputies, who seem to be just as eager to put bullets in the skulls of the living as they do the undead. As the world is overrun by the epidemic and the zombies close in, the small band must fight for their survival.


What immediately becomes apparent is that this rendition of the story has none of the scathing critique of consumer society that was present in the original. Indeed, Romero could have written his version with this remake in mind, since in this "re-imagining", explosions are cool and the slaughter of human beings is presented solely as a form of entertainment. The audience cheers and rushes to buy more overpriced popcorn. Initially, it seemed to me that director Zack Snyder had disposed of Dawn of the Dead's subtext entirely and at the same time played right into what Romero had been trying to say about society in the original. However, after watching it again, it strikes me that the social commentary is still present, but it is of a different nature and takes a back seat to the popcorn action. In Romero's film, the survivors were portrayed as being the human equivalent of a horde of insects: moving into an area and colonizing it, then moving on when its natural supplies were exhausted. Snyder's version shows its protagonists to be a lot more individual and indeed more selfish, each going in their own direction within the mall, with communication breaking down as they gloat over their own personal possessions and "territories". At the end of the day, it probably comes down to personal opinion as to which interpretation is more reflective of human nature.

It quickly becomes clear that the remake's screenwriter, James Gunn (who happens to be the same man responsible for that monstrosity known as Scooby Doo), is going through the motions rather than looking to innovate. Lacking Romero's subversive sense of humour, the jokes are a lot more brazen and in your face. Some of the dialogue and reactions are actually very amusing, but by and large it seems like easy humour - canned laughter of the sitcom variety. Gunn comes from the Troma stable, and this is very much Troma comedy - in other words, not so much laugh out loud funny as "Oooh, black comedy in unpleasant situations!" funny. The problems extend beyond the comedic aspects of the script, too, with an inconsistent pace and an overly large cast. Whereas the original film essentially boiled down to four main characters, the remake is cluttered with individuals whose personalities are either extremely stereotypical or so ill-defined that they blend together. Furthermore, there is never any real sense of character development, with everyone seeming to come out of the experience as they went in, barring asshole mall cop CJ (Michael Kelly), who is the only character to undergo any sort of change as the movie progresses. I am also somewhat disappointed that Snyder and Gunn failed to include what was perhaps the original's most important element: a pie fight.

What saves the film is, primarily, the strength of the actors. Ving Rhames, Mekhi Phifer, Michael Kelly and Jake Weber all give strong performance, but the single biggest coup that lifts the whole film out of the pits of mediocrity is Sarah Polley, an actor about whom I have waxed lyrical on more than one occasion. Better known for her independent roles, she here takes on a role that could easily be accused of being beneath her and somehow manages to make it three-dimensional. One of Polley's greatest assets is her expressive face and, even when working with a script that is complete devoid of subtlety, she can distill the required emotions and use her vivid features to get the point across. She is, in my opinion, one of the strongest and most interesting actors in modern cinema, and if I were a complete snob I might say that she's too good for this movie. But I'm not, so I'll simply say that she gives a typically superb performance and that Snyder and co. should thank their lucky stars she agreed to this gig, as it would have been a vastly weaker movie without her.


Another of the remake's strengths is its fast pace. It hits the ground rolling, with a pre-credits prologue that borders on the ridiculous but is fun and involving. The laughs do indeed come thick and fast, mixed in with explosions, squealing zombies and plenty of karo syrup. At times you may not know whether you're laughing at something genuinely amusing just the whole stupidity of it all, but it does actually work. The pace is less consistent once the survivors reach the mall, since the tension lets off and we have to contend with the fact that the dialogue is clumsy, clichéd and overly expositional. At least partially making up for the poor script, however, is the film's look. While Matthew Leonetti's camerawork is fairly uninspired, rarely demonstrating anything more than passable use of the widescreen frame, the post processing that has been applied to the material is very interesting. Whereas the original version was shot in a very matter of fact manner, the colour timing of the remake has been tweaked quite heavily. The world of the undead seems to be a very colourful place, with rich blues, greens and yellows and an extremely high contrast. Snyder also throws in some different shutter speeds during a mad dash to escape the mall during the final act, which gives the footage a very staccato-like motion. This is nothing new - in fact, Ridley Scott does it all the time, most notably in Gladiator's battle sequences - but it is definitely put to good use here. Finally, one more age-old horror movie cliché is put to good use: as the movie progresses, the film stock becomes grainier.

The Dawn of the Dead remake is an entertaining action movie with a better cast than most films of its kind, although it has neither the intelligence nor the delightful cheese of the original. It is, however, significantly different from its predecessor for it to be judged on its own merits, so crank up the volume, sit back and enjoy the carnage, and everyone drink a nice tall glass of shut the fuck up.


The Director's Cut

The unrated director's cut presented on this disc includes some 9 minutes of material that was shorn from the R-rated theatrical cut - a combination of MPAA and studio interference, meaning that some of the gorier material was lost, but also a number of character moments. While the new footage doesn't really change the film in any significant manner - generally amounting to a handful of additional gore shots, a couple of extra dialogue scenes and an additional encounter with the undead when our intrepid band of survivors are making their way to the mall - its inclusion here is certainly appreciated, making the package feel slightly meatier overall.


Left: R1 version; Right: R3 version
(click to open larger image in new window)

By the way, it would appear that the Region 1 version of the director's cut has been censored. That's right, the unrated version that was, I quote, "too scary for theaters", has been cut. The scene in question is one that appears during the pre-credits prologue, and was not included in the theatrical version. It features a nude female zombie staggering about in front of Ana's car. In the Region 3 release of the film, her breasts are fully visible, but on in the R1 version, they have been obscured by some conveniently-placed blood on the car windscreen. Arguably illustrative of the idiotic nature of American censorship as a whole, this is quite possibly the first ever instance of censoring nudity by adding additional gore! For more information, see this thread at HorrorDVDs.com.


DVD Presentation

The film is presented, anamorphically enhanced, in its original aspect ratio of 2.39:1. The first thing that stands out about this transfer is its extremely high contrast and saturation - more so, indeed, than that of its theatrical presentation. As a result, the whites tend to bloom and the dark scenes are very dark, but this does seem to be intentional and does create a certain sense of style. There is also a pleasing amount of grain and negative damage present on the source print, reminding you that you are indeed watching a film and not a digital video. The result is that Dawn of the Dead replicates the experience of the original cinema presentation better than just about any recent DVD I can think of. Less pleasing is the edge enhancement that has been applied to the transfer. Close-ups look very good, demonstrating a high level of detail, but long and medium shots are less impressive, often looking somewhat diffuse with fairly noticeable haloing. Overall this is an impressive transfer, just falling shy of full marks, which could easily have been reached had it not been filtered and edge enhanced to this degree.

The Dolby Digital 5.1 track is solid and very loud. A home theatre system exhibitionist's dream, the mix threatens to overwhelm at times but generally supports the film's overblown nature. The dialogue is, for the most part, crisp and easy to make out, and any lines that are unclear are generally due to the actors mumbling their lines. With a film like this, a DTS mix would have been a very nice addition, but instead the space that could have been used for such a track is taken up by French and Spanish Dolby Digital 5.1 dubs.

Subtitles are provided in English, French and Spanish, and they are the usual Universal kind where the text is positioned on the screen in the general area of the character that is speaking. In an impressive move, Universal have subtitled all of the bonus features, with the exception of the commentaries on the main feature itself and the deleted scenes. While not perfect, this state of affairs is a good deal better than that of most Universal DVDs, and is perhaps a sign that, in the future, they will be able to get their act together and fully subtitle entire packages.


Real American Heroes™.

Extras

The extras begin with a Director's introduction, which you are given a choice to play every time you start the film. It ends up being a fairly redundant feature, with Zack Snyder basically saying that the new cut contains more gore and character moments and is more personal to him overall.

The Lost Tape - This 16-minute video diary features Andy (Bruce Bohne), the gun shop owner from the movie, and essentially shows his story in a more up close and personal manner. It proves to be elatively entertaining without being particularly interesting or revealing.

Special Report - This 21-minute feature is essentially comprised of segments of mocked-up news broadcasts covering the outbreak of the zombie epidemic. While relatively entertaining, it does run for a bit too long and features some genuinely awful acting that I'd be hard-pressed to label as either intentional or accidental.

Undead Scenes - These deleted scenes are provided with optional commentary by Zack Snyder and producer Eric Newman. Generally they are extended or alternative riffs on scenes that remain in the movie, but a couple are completely new and feature some entertaining ad libbed conversations between Sarah Polley and Jake Weber. Snyder, by the way, seems to be a little confused as to Polley's political affiliation - either that or someone needs to explain to him the difference between communism and socialism.

Raising the Dead - This 8-minute featurette goes behind the scenes to look at the process of creating zombie make-up.

Attack of the Living Dead - At slightly over 7 minutes, this featurette focuses on various specific zombies, discussing the creation of their personalities and make-up, and the execution of their stunts.

Splitting Headaches - This 6-minute feature focuses on various gore effects and how they were created.

Commentary - Featuring Snyder and Newman, this commentary track is entertaining but not particularly noteworthy - much like the film itself. All of the main bases are covered, including the actors, the make-up, the locations used and the process of adapting the script from Romero's original. However, a little too much time is spent praising all on sundry, emphasized especially by the end credits, where the duo do little more than read out various names and remark "he/she was great".

Previews are also included for various other Universal horror titles. They play automatically when the disc is inserted, but can be skipped by pressing the MENU button.

There are some disappointments with this line-up of extras. First of all, it's a shame that no overall documentary was provided for the film, as it would have been interesting to get an extended look at its production process. The various featurettes are mostly entertaining, but they only focus on specific aspects of the making of the movie and are therefore not particularly enlightening in the grand scheme of things. I would also have appreciated hearing from the various actors, who are all but absent from this disc. Finally, the theatrical trailer, which I remember being pretty good, is nowhere to be found.


Conclusion

Unsurprisingly, this big budget remake is not a patch on George A. Romero's original film, but it does manage to be an entertaining and well-acted, if unremarkable, piece of work in its own right. With a strong audio-visual presentation, the extras are a little disappointing, but this package is still worth picking up, especially if you enjoyed the movie at the cinema.

DVD Times Ratings

  • Film:
    6
    6 out of 10
  • Video: 
    9
    9 out of 10
  • Audio: 
    9
    9 out of 10
  • Extras: 
    7
    7 out of 10
  • Overall: 
    7
    7 out of 10

Reader Ratings

  • Film 
    7.3
  • Video 
    0
  • Audio 
    0
  • Extras 
    0
  • Overall 
    8

Comments

#1 Posted: 30-10-2004 17:59
R-T-C Films
One of the living undead
Posts: 207

Report this post
There is a 30 minute documentary called Surviving the Dead but is only avaliable on the 'Rated' cuts of the film.

Personally I really enjoyed the 'Special Report' feature. It was nicely put together, loved the Quatermass nod as well.
------
Mondo Esoterica - my cult film and DVD blog.
Quote this post
#2 Posted: 30-10-2004 18:09
pimpy
Member
Posts: 40

Report this post
"What immediately becomes apparent is that this rendition of the story has none of the scathing critique of consumer society that was present in the original"

Jesus. Yet another idiotic individual
reading too much into a film.

"What Romero had been trying to say about society in the original"

Whatever. Its just a zombie film. Accept it and live with it.

"In Romero's film, the survivors were portrayed as being the human equivalent of a horde of insects: moving into an area and colonizing it, then moving on when its natural supplies were exhausted".

Talk about over-reading a damn movie. Christ, its a zombie film, man!

"It has neither the intelligence of the original"

You look for intelligence and reference a zombie movie?

What the?

This is much better than the boring, over-hyped, crap original. It gets going within the first 10 minutes and doesn't drag. Good modern re-make. Enjoyable fun for zombie fans.

:cool:
Quote this post
#3 Posted: 30-10-2004 19:02
Dave 2004
Member
Posts: 49

Report this post
'Pimpy'... just because you're too hyped up on modern action junk to appreciate an older, more intelligent movie, it doesn't mean you have to be rude about Mike's review. And yeah, I agree with this review completely. A great remake, but lacking a lot of what made the original so great. Having only seen the theatrical cut, I'm looking forward to seeing some extra gore!
Quote this post
#4 Posted: 30-10-2004 19:03
Alexei
Squire
Posts: 56

Report this post
"By the way, it would appear that the Region 1 version of the director's cut has been censored. That's right, the unrated version that was, I quote, "too scary for theaters", has been cut. The scene in question is one that appears during the pre-credits prologue, and was not included in the theatrical version. It features a nude female zombie staggering about in front of Ana's car. In the Region 3 release of the film, her breasts are fully visible, but on in the R1 version, they have been obscured by some conveniently-placed blood on the car windscreen."

That's odd. I ordered mine from PlayUSA, and I believe it's the Region 1 Canadian release, and there's no conveniently positioned blood. They're hanging loose for all to see.

I am a fan of the original, and Romero's Dead trilogy as a whole, but I think the remake is a superior conventional horror film. The original has dated very badly, and you'd be hard pressed to find a single moment that you could actually say stands up to scrutiny as 'scary' today.

Incidentally, your point about the comedy being very obvious and in-your-face in the remake strikes me as ironic given your comments about the satire of the original, which is just a shade more subtle than being hit in the face with a shovel.

I'd certainly say it deserves more than a six. It's the best American horror film of this millennium, I'd say.
------
20.
Quote this post
#5 Posted: 30-10-2004 19:07
Mike Sutton
Contributor
Posts: 610

Report this post
How on earth is seeing Romero's film as a 'scathing critique of consumerist society' reading too much into it ? It's not even a subtext for crying out loud - the critique is bludgeoningly obvious from the moment they enter the mall.

Given that your criticial frame of reference doesn't appear to go beyond "it's a zombie movie" and "boring, overhyped and crap", I don't think you're in any position to criticise anyone else's writing.
Quote this post
#6 Posted: 30-10-2004 21:08
Viridist
Member
Posts: 19

Report this post
The R2 doesn't seem to be censored.
I didn't see the theatrical cut, but the director's cut certainly gave me more than the odd fright, and the atmosphere was consistently dark - a good thing missing in a lot of modern american horror. While not as deep as the original, it's nice to have a retake on it, and I think it goes well with the remake of NOTLD.
By the way, the 5.1 soundtrack on the R2 had a half second blast of white noise right at the beginning as the logo fades into the x-rayed skull - but the rest of the film seemed fine. It may just be my copy. The 2.0 track was fine on that point, but badly mixed compared to the 5.1 (listening to both through my two speakers!).
Quote this post
#7 Posted: 30-10-2004 21:21
pimpy
Member
Posts: 40

Report this post
"It's not even a subtext for crying out loud - the critique is bludgeoningly obvious from the moment they enter the mall"

How?

If I was running from a plague of Zombies (who couldn't run and walked like they were paralysed) I would certainly run and hide out in my local Woolworth store. How would that be a critique of society?

I would be safe and sound. Plenty of sweets to keep me fed for a while. Enough time to think and plan ahead.

Honestly. Just watch the original if you must. Love it if you must. But for Gods sake, enough with the the sociology essay already.
Quote this post
#8 Posted: 30-10-2004 21:39
Batou

Posts: 69

Report this post
Ah, Pimpy, you are hitting the nail on the head each time you post.

The freaking mall/shopping centre would be a god damn logical place to go. And you wouldn't think about sociolocical commentary.:p
Quote this post
#9 Posted: 30-10-2004 22:46
Richard Booth
Contributor & Filmmaker
Posts: 980

Report this post
Great review Mike - I think I'll pick this up. What's the difference between the R1 and R2 versions, and how do the extras differ between the theatrical and unrated editions?

BTW, slight typo in the second paragraph after the second screenshot: "The problems extend beyond the comedic aspects of the script, too, with an insonsistent pace" :)
------
We do not tell time, time only tells us.
Quote this post
#10 Posted: 30-10-2004 23:02
Michael Mackenzie
Contributor
Posts: 1647

Report this post
Cheers, Rik - now corrected.

Pimpy, I get the impression that the kind of reviews I (and the other DVD Times reviewers) prefer to write are not really your kind of thing. You would probably be happier with the majestic tomes of Paul Ross. ;)
------

Reviews | DVDs | My Web Site

Quote this post
#11 Posted: 30-10-2004 23:13
Michael Mackenzie
Contributor
Posts: 1647

Report this post
Rik, to answer your question, the R-rated DVD seems to have an extra featurette, "Surviving The Dawn", whereas the unrated cut has "Raising the Dead", "Attack of the Living Dead" and "Splitting Headaches" featurettes not on the R-rated disc. The UK "unrated" disc seems to have the same content as the US unrated disc, although as you probably know I am always a little wary of anything EIV release, given their track record for poor compression.
------

Reviews | DVDs | My Web Site

Quote this post
#12 Posted: 30-10-2004 23:23
nic
Member
Posts: 49

Report this post
I rented out the theatrical version weeks ago and loved it. I will pick up the R2 Directors Cut sometime.

I also think this vesion is much better than the Romero version I saw on TV a few months ago. I held my attention all the way through while I got bored with the original. Having zombies with purple makeup didn't help.
Quote this post
#13 Posted: 31-10-2004 03:07
nwatts
Where it Falls
Posts: 155

Report this post
If you assess this film on its technical strengths accurately, it'll score a lot better than a 6.

Mike, I don't think you understand that this film is a remake.. or as you put it a "re-imagining". Not including various aspects of the original film isn't a bad thing, and in your review you seem to slam it because it's not a 1:1 copy of Romero's work.

Without trying to be too offensive, i'd say this is your worst review (that i've read). This film has taken Romero's concept and reinterpreted it, making it entirely new. You seem to want to pull it down because Synder has tried some innovation.
------
YMDb
Quote this post
#14 Posted: 31-10-2004 09:56
Michael Mackenzie
Contributor
Posts: 1647

Report this post
nwatts:
Don't worry, I'm not offended. I do, however, disagree with your interpretation that I'm slamming the remake for not being a 1:1 copy. I'm GLAD they didn't try to make a carbon copy of Romero's version. If remakes have to be made, I think they should always be as different as possible. What I am criticizing the remake for the fact that it more or less dispenses with the social satire but offers nothing in its place beyond some sitcom-esque one-liners and a bunch of exploding heads that, let's face it, can be found in plenty of other better horror movies. Also, you say that "Snyder has tried some innovation" - in my opinion he did exactly the opposite.

Alexei:
"The original has dated very badly, and you'd be hard pressed to find a single moment that you could actually say stands up to scrutiny as 'scary' today."

I think you'd be hard-pressed to find ANYONE who would call the original "scary", but neither is the remake (IMO). The original is cheesy and has dated a great deal (assuming that being a product of its time is somehow a bad thing, and I'm not convinced that it is), but I found myself laughing much more at the ridiculous moments of the remake than I ever did at the original, cheese and blue make-up and all. The opening sequence of this film is, to me, a craptacular example of bad editing, pacing, clumsy choreography and lame attempts to be scary; and the ending is riddled half-way to hell and back with cheese.
------

Reviews | DVDs | My Web Site

Quote this post
#15 Posted: 31-10-2004 10:23
pimpy
Member
Posts: 40

Report this post
"I get the impression that the kind of reviews I (and the other DVD Times reviewers) prefer to write are not really your kind of thing. You would probably be happier with the majestic tomes of Paul Ross"

Dont flatter yourself, matey.
:D
Quote this post
#16 Posted: 31-10-2004 11:53
Kit_Taylor
Member
Posts: 6

Report this post
Ooh, behave yourselves! *handbag*

Thought this was a well made action-horror myself, worth owning.

"What immediately becomes apparent is that this rendition of the story has none of the scathing critique of consumer society that was present in the original."

A sensible move, as I doubt idea of having everything you want on demand would phase anyone these days. And if one film has already done the anti-consumerist thing right, why do it again?

If it's political at all this version is more straight forwardly pro-America, with self help, community values, toughness and loadsa guns triumphing over adversity. Note that great shot of Ving Rhames standing on the boat with Old Glory flutering in the background.

That said, it does miss an oppurtunity in not going for the obvious modern day twist of satirising anti-consumerism. A wittier, more philosophical script might have found interesting things to say about guilt, hypocrisy and self flagellation over material affluence whilst the world is ending.

But the film is clearly designed as a visceral rather than intellectual experience, and I think suceeds as well as it does at what it does by not putting its fingers in too many pies. Which inevitably means it will have little to offer some viewers.

I think Michael missed the irony in Zack Snyder describing Sarah P as a communist, he was just teasing the right-on gal from the People's Republic of Canada.
Quote this post
#17 Posted: 31-10-2004 12:23
Michael Mackenzie
Contributor
Posts: 1647

Report this post
Quote:
that great shot of Ving Rhames standing on the boat with Old Glory flutering in the background.


One of my favourite shots in the movie, although I suspect for the wrong reason. When I saw the film at the cinema, the moment that shot appeared the whole audience burst out laughing. There's nothing quite like cheese wrapped in the stars and stripes.
------

Reviews | DVDs | My Web Site

Quote this post
#18 Posted: 31-10-2004 15:15
Alexei
Squire
Posts: 56

Report this post
"The opening sequence of this film is, to me, a craptacular example of bad editing, pacing, clumsy choreography and lame attempts to be scary"

Sacrilege... The only recent example of a superior opening to a horror movie I can think of is 28 Days Later. The sense of a sudden impending apocalypse is palpable, which I know some purists object to because we're already in the aftermath of the apocalypse in the original.
------
20.
Quote this post
#19 Posted: 31-10-2004 15:26
Michael Mackenzie
Contributor
Posts: 1647

Report this post
I didn't like 28 DAYS LATER at all. :D The DOTD remake is a vastly superior film in my opinion. :p
------

Reviews | DVDs | My Web Site

Quote this post
#20 Posted: 31-10-2004 15:36
Alexei
Squire
Posts: 56

Report this post
Well, be that as it may, it has one of the most unquestionably brilliant opening scenes in horror film history, besting even Day of the Dead. I defy you to name something better. Suspiria doesn't count; pretentious, garbled rubbish that it is.
------
20.
Quote this post
#21 Posted: 31-10-2004 16:20
Richard Booth
Contributor & Filmmaker
Posts: 980

Report this post
Mike, I've just done a bit of research and the R2 DC also has a DTS soundtrack as well as being uncut. In terms of overall specs, and discounting EIV's appalling reputation, it seems to be the best version to go for.
------
We do not tell time, time only tells us.
Quote this post
#22 Posted: 31-10-2004 16:20
Michael Mackenzie
Contributor
Posts: 1647

Report this post
Alexei:

I'm assuming that you're referring not to the bona fide opening scenes of 28 DAYS LATER -- which if I remember correctly involve some wooden actors accidentally releasing a monkey of some variety infected with "Rage" -- but rather to the sequence in which our intrepid hero awakens in a hospital and wanders out into the deserted streets, shouting "Halloooo!" If so, then I would agree with you that it is a rather effective piece of work. In fact, it's the best part of the entire film and it did suggest that what followed might be good as well. Sadly, it regressed into a sluggish, uninvolving wander through mediocrity with about as much subtlety as a sledgehammer and an almost identical final act to one of Danny Boyle's earlier films, THE BEACH.

I was going to take you up on your challenge to name a horror movie with a better opening sequence, but since you've already cheated by referring to something that is NOT the first scene in the film in question (unless you really WERE talking about the monkey scene, and if so, god help you! :D), I don't really see much point. I would probably have chosen SUSPIRIA in any event, a film with an incredibly powerful opening 15 minutes, whose greatness seems to have sadly eluded you. :)


Rik:

Does the R2 definitely have a DTS track? It's not listed on Rewind, although to be fair they are about as reliable as the London Underground.
------

Reviews | DVDs | My Web Site

Quote this post
#23 Posted: 31-10-2004 17:50
Darth_Fisto
Account Disabled
Posts: 162

Report this post
I enjoyed this film at the cinema, and bought the R3 Unrated version quite cheap (boobies and all :D ). I like the original but it has dated, contains no atmosphere (apart from the beginning with the SWAT members) and just isn't a film I hold in high regard, unlike some people (and yeah, the consumerism stuff couldn't be any more obvious).

But I like the remake because it's fun, much like the original. Some good cardboard cut-out characters and plenty of humour and a half decent script (in respect to the genre).

The R3 DVD is cheaper and uncut and has better cover-art. To spend more on it is just silly ;)
Quote this post
#24 Posted: 31-10-2004 18:10
Richard Booth
Contributor & Filmmaker
Posts: 980

Report this post
Mike - Taken from DVDCompare:

OVERALL: Draw
With R2 German & UK (dir.cut), R3 HK, and R4 releases, since they all have the longer "Director´s Cut", AND audio commentaries & R2 Scandinavian releases, since they include the exclusive DTS ES 6.1 (matrix) soundtrack (they lose the audio commentary on the feature and also on the deleted scenes). Beware of R1 DC, as it is CUT.


EDIT - Ah, wait...looks like you're right and it's the R2 Scandinavian that has DTS-ES 6.1.
------
We do not tell time, time only tells us.
Quote this post
#25 Posted: 31-10-2004 18:52
Alexei
Squire
Posts: 56

Report this post
"I'm assuming that you're referring not to the bona fide opening scenes of 28 DAYS LATER -- which if I remember correctly involve some wooden actors accidentally releasing a monkey of some variety infected with "Rage" -- but rather to the sequence in which our intrepid hero awakens in a hospital and wanders out into the deserted streets, shouting "Halloooo!""

Yeah, that's the one.

"I would probably have chosen SUSPIRIA in any event, a film with an incredibly powerful opening 15 minutes, whose greatness seems to have sadly eluded you."

I hate this attitude. If you criticise something acclaimed, one lazy argument you're guaranteed to hear is that you've somehow 'missed the point'. Suspiria has some of the worst performances of any film I've seen, the plot is utter gibberish and is absolutely incomprehensible for at least forty minutes, by which point I was so bored I didn't care what the hell was happening in the school. Still, it's got style, which seems to be all Argento's audience demands.
------
20.
Quote this post

Page: 1, 2


Do you have a Times Network ID or DVD Times account? Sign in now!



Username:
Password:
Remember:


If not, why not register for one now and experience all the benefits of being a Times Network Member.