Talk:Dawn of the Dead (2004 film)/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Untitled

"The makeup effects were well done, and the soundtrack songs were well selected to fit the film's mood," Sounds like a review of the film, which it shouldn't be. Steve-O 13:16, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Please... there is such a thing as unsuited music, and bad makeup. Deltro 13:37, 12 December 2005 (CST)

There is. But it's not up to us to say that. Reference your sources if, say, a critic or film historian has said it Steve-O 14:23, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm going to pull the NPOV mark in a couple of days unless I missed something. Let me know! Richfife 19:10, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Music VS Muzak

A user changed muzak to music, I'm reverting this, I think the background music in the mall can be called Muzak in this context. (clem 18:04, 22 December 2005 (UTC))

• Muzak is a fucking made up internet word and the name of a specific LLC holding company-- both of which have nothing to do with Dawn of the Dead. Stop trying to interject your Internet 1337 speak into wikipedia articles. 71.81.135.217 (talk) 07:30, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

• • Errr... The term "Muzak" predates the existence of the internet by several decades. - Richfife (talk) 19:38, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Original vs. Remake

An anon user changed this section indicate that in the original (as in the remake), only infected persons return as zombies. If you check out the speech at mark 17 of the original film's screenplay here: http://www.script-o-rama.com/movie_scripts/d/dawn-of-the-dead-script-screenplay.html you'll see that's not the case. Thanks! -- Richfife 06:44, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough if anyone comes back in dawn- I thought that was just living. But are you sure that in the remake only ones killed by zombies come back? --Josquius 22:20, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, the movie makes that point explicitly when they're standing over the two characters that die in a shootout with each other. The survivors discuss whether they should shoot them in the head and decide it's not necessary -- Richfife 22:23, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Virus

I don't recall a reference in the film to a virus creating the zombies - there seemed to be no reason given for what was happening. -- Anon poster 81.174.255.70

From the article: "No mention of a cause for the living dead is actually mentioned in the film. However, the DVD box confirms that it is indeed a virus." -- Richfife 20:39, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

In the beginning of the film, (possibly from the CDC?) there is an actor portraiting a representative official answering press questions. Reference is made that "We do not know" when asked by the press if it is a virus. 5by5 00:36, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Spreads like a virus, but only seems to be directly borne by skin-to-skin contact (the first time I ever saw the movie, I was certain that Ving having an open wound in the fountain filled with zombie blood would turn him by the end of the film). After the virus gets the victim, it's all supernatural from there on.Thanos777 04:18, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

It's been a long time since my Biology lessons in school, but I was inder the impression that Viruses cannot survive in dead tissue, as opposed to Bacteria, don't Viruses need living blood cells to replicate, and it's made clear that the victim's "Primary life functions are terminated" that your reperatory and circulatory systems. Furthermore, from the creation throughout the movie of Stage1-3 zombies in ever increasing stages of decay, it proves the majority of their flesh is dead rotting tissue (Same probably can't be said about their brain matter though as they need it to function) bacteria is the primary cause of decaying flesh. This leads me to assume it's a bacteril rather than a viral contagion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.104.78.69 (talk) 18:58, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

What do you think is more believable to your everyday movie-goer? That a radioactive space probe returning to earth is making all of the recently deceased across the world come back to life, or that a new strain of virus has sprouted up that turns it's victims into violent, cannibalistic, undead killers? The virus is much easier to swallow, because it's close enough to reality in that there actually are viruses out there that can turn a person's mind into Swiss cheese and make them very violent. Obviously some suspension of disbelief is needed as far as the whole "reanimating the dead" schtick, but c'mon, it's a Zombie movie. No one is expecting 100% scientific accuracy out of it. --TwilightDuality (talk) 08:18, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Time before victims come back?

People keep editing in that it can take up to hour for victims to return in the movie. I don't remember that ever happening, but... the edits keep happening. I only remember immediate returns. Am I forgetting something? -- Richfife 03:31, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

I think what it is is that the movie makes reference to someone turning an hour or two after being bitten, and someone gets confused about that. Every time we see someone 'turn' during the movie, it's within moments of dying.--MythicFox 11:35, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

MythicFox is right. There is some time before someone turns if they are bitten or exposed to the virus (if that's what it truly is). But once they die, then they turn in a matter of seconds or minutes. 5by5 00:38, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Page Vandalism as a source

I wonder if I should add links to vandalisms to this page as a source for the "fans resented the remake" section? Nah. -- Richfife 18:11, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Time to take a chainsaw to the trivia section?

It seems like it's getting pretty bloated. Any thoughts? - Richfife 18:07, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Pruning the article

I've removed the following to cut back on the size of the article. My criteria was pretty arbitrary, so if you disagree, feel free to move stuff back in (just make sure to take something out when you do):

(Notes)

• One possible reference from Dawn of the Dead (2004), features Sarah Polley, playing the character of Ana, running her car into a tree in the beginning. Similar to George A. Romero's "Night of the Living Dead" the character of Barbra also runs her car into a tree in the beginning of the movie.
• A reference to 1968's "Night of the Living Dead" can be found near the beginning when a truck crashes into a gas station, an event mentioned by the character Ben in the 1968 film.

(Trivia)

• The epilogue was filmed at Universal Studios in Hollywood, with the final scenes at the dock filmed at one of the locations on the Universal Studios Tour. Another scene was shot off the coast of Los Angeles, which creates a geographical continuity error (noted on the DVD commentary) as there are no mountainous islands in Lake Michigan.
• Included in the DVD release of the movie is a segment -- which utilizes the false document technique -- entitled "We interrupt this program," styled to look like an authentic TV news broadcast reporting on the zombie outbreak. It features the last onscreen performance of Richard Biggs (who plays the news anchor). Biggs' Babylon 5 costar, Bruce Boxleitner, is heard as the voice of the President of the United States. Neither character appears in the film, although the President is mentioned. Some of the news footage, however, can be seen in the film (particularly the segment with Tom Savini as the sheriff).
• Also produced for the DVD was a series of video diary recordings made by the character of Andy the gun shop owner, giving viewers an insight into what was happening to him during the scenes at the mall. Andy's transmissions over the walkie-talkie at the end are identical to those heard in the film.
• The Subaru commercial playing on the television while Ana and Lewis are in the shower was directed by Zack Snyder.
• An early draft of the script had the film ending with everyone dying (the scene played during the closing credits leaves this ambiguous). Another draft ended with only Ana, Nicole, and Terry surviving after being rescued by an army convoy.
• The song playing in the mall when the survivors first arrive is a muzak version of Bobby McFerrin's Don't Worry Be Happy.
• Ving Rhames' arm prosthetic was accidentally stitched to his arm for the scene where Ana sutures Kenneth's wound. An actual nurse was performing the procedure, and in her nervousness, stitched the prosthetic to his arm. Mr. Rhames did not mention this until after the shot was complete.
• Both the original and remake feature a pregnant woman.
• Denise Cronenberg, sister of director David Cronenberg, was the costume designer for this film, while Heather Langenkamp, star of A Nightmare On Elm Street, is credited as being part of the production crew.
• In the commentary, the director comments about a naked woman appearing early in the film "See there, that's a naked chick. I don't know why she's naked." Also during the credits he comments "See there? That's two girls kissing. Just for you."

(Sequel)

• There were reports that Universal Pictures is very interested in making a sequel and has approached Zack Snyder to make it.
• Dawn remake writer James Gunn has said in an interview that he will not return but director Zack Snyder will.
• There were reports on moviehole.net that Universal is trying to get the Four survivors that were at the end of the movie to return.
• At horrorchannel.co.uk/news.php there is a post about the sequel that it has been announced and there a possible plot that details are sketchy and the plot details that it is possibly about a closely guarded secret.

- Richfife 15:52, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't understand why most of this should be removed. Article length certainly doesn't sound like a legitimate reason. Particularly from the Trivia section -- if it's trivia related to the film, it should remain. 69.194.35.109 02:47, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

In theory, there's an almost infinite amount of trivia about any film. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. On a movie like this, the reader should be able go to an article, read through it in a couple of minutes and find out all the basic information that they need to know about the subject. Page after page of random just makes the articles bloated and intimidating. Wikipedia isn't supposed to be comprehensive. If they want every little detail, they can use Google. Note that another editor agrees and has marked the main article as such. I'm going to prune again now - Richfife 04:22, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

I've removed the following:

(Trivia)

• Starbucks Coffee, along with many other corporations, did not wish to be featured in the film, so the fictional "Hallowed Grounds" shop was created, along with all the other names of stores in the mall.
• Director Zack Snyder appears in the opening credit sequence as one of the National Guardsmen who opens fire in front of the United States Capitol.
• A bonus mini-film, We Interrupt This Program, is included on the DVD release as a realistic-looking TV news program reporting on the carnage. The reporter is played by Richard Biggs, who played Dr. Stephen Franklin on the TV series Babylon 5. Biggs' B5 costar, Bruce Boxleitner, is heard as the voice of the President of the United States.
• In the pre-credit hospital scene it is heard in the background that a man has arrived with a bite wound from a bar fight and it is just after 6:00. The next morning Ana wakes up just after 6:30 and is attacked by the little girl, implying that the infection might have originated from the bar fight.
• The character Kenneth is an obvious reference to Ken Foree, an actor who played a similar role in the original Dawn of the Dead.

"In the pre-credit hospital scene it is heard in the background that a man has arrived with a bite wound from a bar fight and it is just after 6:00. The next morning Ana wakes up just after 6:30 and is attacked by the little girl, implying that the infection might have originated from the bar fight." -- Is this correct? According to the maps in the DVD cuts, the outbreak seemed to start from about three different coastlines that are on the opposite sides of the US. o-[O_o]-o --<Knigel> 02:54, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

I realize Wikipedia's not intended to be an all-inclusive source, so I have to wonder why there's a trivia section at all. Surely Wikipedia could point users to superior secondary sources that contain that sort of thing, or leave them to make the connections themselves. 69.194.35.109 21:41, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

I pulled the line "* Quite possibly the best movie ever." from trivia. User:BenWoodruff 03:54, 18 September 2006

• I pulled "*The ending credits montage feature 2 girls kissing." from trivia. Too random. - Richfife 18:58, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Original not a 'Plague'

In the 'Premise Changes from the Original' section, it says: "In the original, the plague spread slowly over a period of weeks and months."

But in the original, it wasn't a 'plague', or any sort of virus, the dead [of any cause, as is stated in the article] come back to life; so there is no plague to spread in the original film.

I can see what the contrast is in "In the original, the plague spread slowly over a period of weeks and months. In the remake, it springs up worldwide overnight.", showing the speed of the epidemic, but it should be worded differently, as this is just incorrect.

I kind of see your point, but the word "plague" doesn't necessarily mean a disease. It can just mean a large number of undesirable events. A plague of car crashes, for instance. "A plague of locusts" is a common term. - Richfife 15:54, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Length of Plot Synopsis

Anyone have any strong opinion about how detailed the plot synopsis should be? I think what we've got now is overkill, but since someone put in all the effort to write it, I'd like to hear what everyone thinks before changing it back. And does Wikipedia have any official guidelines about this sort of thing? --Geoduck 18:53, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Is it Encyclopedic? No. Is it Wikipedic? I personally think so, but I'll abide by the will of the majority - Richfife 18:17, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

The consensus over at the WikiFilms project is that 500 to a 1000 words is a good target, so I've pruned the synopsis way back. (Still about 2000 words.)--Geoduck 06:34, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

I made a lot of changes to the plot, I cut it down a little bit and fixed a lot of the grammar and spelling problems. I can do some more edits if necessary. Greg Birdsall 19:25, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Just for clarification, it stands at 1,031 words now. Greg Birdsall 19:26, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

I rewrote it and pruned it down to ~850. I'm sure it'll start creeping up again, but I enjoy editing stuff like this, so what the heck...--Geoduck 19:37, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps we can start a game of plot synopsis bingo. Every time someone re-adds a particular thing, you cover a square until you get a complete line across your card. - Richfife 02:00, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

OK, I just saw this flick, finally, and am going to add a few words to the plot synopsis (I will prune some too, if I can) to cover some major dramatic elements that are currently not mentioned: the uneasy but, in the end, more-or-less complete shift in "Mall leadership" from CJ to Michael, and Michael and Ana's bit of romance. Praghmatic (talk) 17:33, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Zombies able to tell between living and dead?

I always wonder how the zombies are able to tell the living and the (un)dead apart? They are supposeably mindless. And why don't they attack each other? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Choir geek (talk • contribs)

Neither movie discusses this outright (except in the commentary track of the latter), but if you pay close attention, you'll notice that in both the "Dawn of the Dead" remake and "28 Days Later", the zombies do not attack until their target has spoken. Notice the scene where Ana's husband reanimates. He just kind of stands there metaphorically going "Duh?" until Ana says his name, then he attacks. It depends on the writer, also. In the book "World War Z", it is explicitly mentioned that the zombies just know, much to misfortune of the "quisling" characters that go nuts and start acting like zombies even though they're alive. Why do they not attack eachother? Well, as The Tick would say, because of "Drama Power". If the zombies all ate eachother, the survivors in the mall would only have to deal with one grotesquely overweight bad guy waddling across the parking lot trying to catch its breath instead of thousands of lean meaning chomping machines. - Richfife 20:05, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

The homage/parody zombie flick Shaun of the Dead includes a scene were the surviving characters pretend to be zombies to sneak through a mob of the undead, which actually works until one of the group's cell-phone rings.--Geoduck 02:57, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, when some of the mall survivors went to save Nicole in Andy's store, none of them spoke. The only sound that was made was the manhole cover shutting. So whats up with that? When a victim spoke obviously that would get the attention of a zombie, but still.

On the news, it was said the zombies have a need to feed on warm flesh. Perhaps they have a way of recognizing this, and are drawn to it like some starving person seeing a cheeseburger... That way, they'd tell the living and the undead apart, as I'm assuming the undead's flesh is cold (like, when Ana was talking about the obese woman's skin, she said it was abnormally cold).

C'mon folks, they're re-animated dead, right?? What more explanation do you need except that they're supernatural in nature and would supernatrally see the humans?? You simply can't explain undead zombies with Real World physics...not even in "Resident Evil."

(Note: It isn't heat vision, either. They never saw or even acknowledged the dog. Nor is it noise; the one-armed Asian Zombie turned and saw them without them saying a word. Neither did Hero-Guy make a noise when Max Headroom/Frank returned from the dead; Max simply saw him and tried to attack.)Thanos777 04:06, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

IMHO the Zombies could smell whether a human is infected or not and had a greed for uninfected flesh (of course, it´s difficult to smell uninfected flesh with (or without!) a rotten nose.

That brings me to another question: How long did the zombies munch on their victims? Since they´ll get also infected by getting eaten, there must be a turning point when the victims flesh is infected and isn´t any more tasty to the attacking zombie. Thinking about it I recognize, that most of the zombies weren´t severed that much. So is it possible, that they just bite and chew once or twice and then leave the victim in search for other victims?

And this brings me to the final question: Is it possible that zombies do not bite to satisfy their hunger but for just following an instinct, forced by the genetic code of the virus?84.138.28.117 23:41, 12 August 2007 (UTC)(Kleinalrik)

I always figured that the virus either eliminated or created a "vibe" or "scent" of sorts, meaning that the disease either overpowers the natural "vibes" and "scents" a living human makes with that of a infected zombie. It's possible that the zombies are just no aware of each other, as if the virus blinds them to infected personnel. They don't seem to be attracted to things based entirely on movement, because they don't attack the dog.Southern guy 19:42, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Zombies can run! Freakin' Scary!!!

I love the fact that in this movie the zombies can run! I seriously find this scary! It makes the movie more entertaining and frightening! Just the thought of a flesh eating zombie "running" towards you just freaks one out!

Agreed. I don't care how much of a cinematic genius they keep trying to convince me that George Romero is: shambling zombies that move at 2 M.P.H. simply are the epitome of suck, and ANYONE in a Romero Film who isn't trapped in a dead end and gets eaten by one of his zombies, DESERVES it..

Hooray running zombies!! Thanos777 04:09, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

DVD Special features music

Does anyone know the names of the music that appears during the DVD feature entitled "Attack of the Living Dead? I would really like to know, thank you - RVDDP2501 17:43, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Do you know of any other movie w/ a newborn baby zomby | zombie? Who thinks that that qualifies as notable?

There are a variety of stores in the shopping mall {chopping maul}; one restaurant is named "Hallowed Ground". I wonder whether that qualifies as notable trivia.

Thank You.

[[ hopiakuta | [[ [[%c2%a1]] [[%c2%bf]] [[ %7e%7e%7e%7e ]] -]] 03:44, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

• Dead Alive has a baby zombie. In that case, the baby was conceived and carried to term entirely post-mortem. - Richfife 05:31, 24 December 2006 (UTC)