Dawn of the Dead (1978)

IMDb

A zombie apocalypse has torn through the USA. Two TV station employees and two police officers take a helicopter trip in a desperate attempt to find some kind of sanctuary... they end up hunkering down in an abandoned shopping mall, which might not be nearly as safe as they think...

Genres: action, thriller, horror
Director: George A. Romero
Screenplay: George A. Romero
Cast: David Emge, Ken Foree, Scott H. Reiniger, Gaylen Ross, David Crawford

I watched this for the first time back when I was just a kid—somewhere around '98. If I recall correctly, the title used here in the States was Zombi 2. It’s easily one of the best films in its genre.—definitely.

ruggedfalcon28 said:I watched this for the first time back when I was just a kid—somewhere around '98. If I recall correctly, the title used here in the States was Zombi 2. It’s easily one of the best films in its genre.—definitely.

Are you sure about that? I find it hard to believe anyone would have titled it that way back then, mostly because Lucio Fulci was clearly trying to cash in on Romero's reputation by calling his flick Zombi 2.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zombi_2

Here is my little contribution to this week's film spotlight. Back in 1968—the same year audiences were treated to the genre classic 'Rosemary's Baby'—George A. Romero's horror film 'Night of the Living Dead' arrived on the scene. No one could have predicted the massive impact it would have on cinema history. It introduced audiences to a level of graphic violence that had never been seen on American screens before. Beyond that, though, it was the intense, all-encompassing terror that left a permanent mark on a generation of viewers.

Even though the movie was an unprecedented success for an independent production, the creators didn't see much of the profit. A string of box office disappointments in the following years dampened Romero's influence in Hollywood, making it a real uphill battle to fund his ambitious sequel. That’s when Italian horror maestro Dario Argento stepped in. Fresh off hits like 'Deep Red' and 'Suspiria,' Argento helped secure the financing in exchange for the rights to personally oversee the international edit. The end result was 'Dawn of the Dead,' which stands as one of the most acclaimed and sought-after horror films ever made.

The plot of 'Dawn of the Dead' is so effectively simple—and so well-known now—that it's almost hard to describe. As the world edges toward an inexplicable and relentless zombie apocalypse, four people—two soldiers, a helicopter pilot, and his girlfriend, a TV reporter—barricade themselves inside an abandoned suburban shopping mall. The mall provides more than just fuel for famous film commentary; it offers some truly gripping, if not terrifying, details. With its graphic depictions of human evisceration, exploding heads, and gruesome flesh-eating, 'Dawn of the Dead' might just be the most hardcore American film ever. Still, that didn't stop it from becoming a massive hit both here and abroad. It earned great reviews, most notably from Roger Ebert, who called it one of the best horror films of all time. It immediately became recognized not just as a genre classic, but as one of the sharpest social satires of the decade, offering biting commentary on the growing consumer culture embodied by the mall setting.

Internationally, the film's reach was even greater. It was released overseas as a special 117-minute cut (the US theatrical version ran 120 minutes) edited by Dario Argento. This version featured a more prominent soundtrack by the rock band Goblin and maintained a much faster overall pace. Released in most countries under titles like "Zombi: Dawn of the Dead" or "Zombies," it was such a phenomenon in Italy that the following year, Lucio Fulci—previously known for directing 'giallo' thrillers—helmed a bloody semi-sequel. His 'Zombi 2,' released in the US as 'Zombie,' became one of the biggest hits of the 1970s, fueling the global zombie/cannibal craze of the early 1980s and cementing Lucio Fulci's status as a horror icon.

'Dawn of the Dead' is a stunning example of how the horror genre can produce works that are as socially relevant as they are terrifying—films that break free from conventional tropes to establish themselves as truly timeless. While I might give a slight edge to 'Night of the Living Dead,' 'Dawn of the Dead' remains an extraordinary film and a nearly perfect sequel to one of the scariest movies ever made. It’s the horror film I’ve watched most often; I remember watching it for the first time on VHS with my friends, knowing we only wanted to watch it and record it over and over.

Honestly, Romero just has the two best zombie films. Even though I love modern picks like 'Shaun of the Dead,' and underrated gems like 'Let Sleeping Corpses Lie,' the Spanish 'Tombs of the Blind Dead,' or 80s flicks like 'Dead & Buried' and 'The Return of the Living Dead,' the quality of 'Night' and 'Dawn' puts them ahead of all other zombie movies.

Jessica Morris6 said:Are you sure about that? I find it hard to believe anyone would have titled it that way back then, mostly because Lucio Fulci was clearly trying to cash in on Romero's reputation by calling his flick Zombi 2.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zombi_2

Maybe the titles got mixed up—or maybe I just misremembered. It’s not exactly easy to recall every little detail from over twenty years ago.

Jessica Morris6 said:Are you sure about that? I find it hard to believe anyone would have titled it that way back then, mostly because Lucio Fulci was clearly trying to cash in on Romero's reputation by calling his flick Zombi 2.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zombi_2

Some international titles were "Zombi: Dawn of the Dead" or just "Zombies." Besides that, Fulci and Romero were close friends, much like that entire classic generation of horror directors—Bava, Argento, Fulci, Romero, Carpenter, Craven, Hooper, Yuzna, Gordon, and Landis (if we're even counting him as a horror director). The only one who always seemed to keep his distance and act like he was above the rest was Cronenberg; I love his work too, but he wasn't exactly tight with the others. And then there's that legendary old guard of makeup artists and practical effects experts like Savini, Bottin, and the absolute legend, Baker.🙏

Man, the horror genre is never going to see an era like that again, where you could actually take pride in knowing the directors, the actors, and the makeup artists by name. I absolutely love the history of my favorite genre. Nowadays, everything feels curated and managed, but it just doesn't have that same soul.

It’s honestly kind of surprising to see such a high rating on IMDb. I guess it’s probably just because zombies have become trendy again lately. To be honest, I couldn't even make it to the end. It drags on way too long, and I just didn't really enjoy it. If they had managed to secure a bigger budget, maybe this could have been a top-tier movie, but as it stands, it feels like straight-up B-movie territory. Personally, I'd give it a 4/10. The Return of the Living Dead from 1985 is much better.

There’s actually a director’s cut out there too—it's a bit more gore-heavy and goes into much more detail regarding the characters...

The movie is a total classic
for me, the first part is the absolute best

yeah, it’s a little long—but honestly, that’s just how an apocalypse feels
it creeps up on you, slow and steady
just trudging along, much like the zombies themselves
I actually revisited it recently, watching about 10 minutes of it every day 😁
that scene with the helicopter and the chopper is incredible 🙂 I completely blanked on it entirely

Honestly, this movie was a lot weaker than I expected.

I actually thought the remake held up better in a few spots.

The remake is actually pretty solid, though I’ve never sat down to watch the original and honestly, I probably never will. It just sort of slipped past me back in the day 🤷

Man, I remember the first time I actually checked out The Return of the Living Dead and it was a massive letdown—it had that super cheap, low-budget B-movie trash look to it. Total disaster.

If I had to pick a favorite from all those "classic" zombie flicks and old-school horror movies, it would probably have to be Lifeforce (1985) ☕

Finally got around to watching it on my second attempt last night; I actually drifted off about ten minutes before the credits rolled...
The direction was excellent, and for some reason, I walked away with this strange, almost feel-good sensation while watching. Just like Crow89 mentioned, the subtext really hammers home that critique of American consumerism, which feels incredibly intentional...
I wouldn't call it trash, though the makeup work was pretty rough, and that final sequence where the zombies are trekking through the ice felt a bit much.
Even though there are four main characters, it feels like Romero chose to focus far more on the zombies themselves. The human characters don't get nearly enough development, but honestly, it feels like he did that on purpose...
It’s a shame it isn't connected to the 1968 version; that would have been a fascinating little detail to uncover.

briskhound2 said:There’s actually a director’s cut out there too—it's a bit more gore-heavy and goes into much more detail regarding the characters...

Could you elaborate on that? I watched the extended remastered version that runs about 2 hours and 19 minutes...

Jessica Morris6 said:Finally got around to watching it on my second attempt last night; I actually drifted off about ten minutes before the credits rolled...
The direction was excellent, and for some reason, I walked away with this strange, almost feel-good sensation while watching. Just like Crow89 mentioned, the subtext really hammers home that critique of American consumerism, which feels incredibly intentional...
I wouldn't call it trash, though the makeup work was pretty rough, and that final sequence where the zombies are trekking through the ice felt a bit much.
Even though there are four main characters, it feels like Romero chose to focus far more on the zombies themselves. The human characters don't get nearly enough development, but honestly, it feels like he did that on purpose...
It’s a shame it isn't connected to the 1968 version; that would have been a fascinating little detail to uncover.

Could you elaborate on that? I watched the extended remastered version that runs about 2 hours and 19 minutes...

I guess that’s pretty much it. If it includes that scene where Elise decapitates someone... then yeah, you're definitely watching the extended cut. It also features that conversation during the flight about how one of the brothers died—stuff that just wasn't part of the original theatrical release...

The Black man mentions the brothers and close friends he left behind; I completely blanked on that detail...

Patrick Martin said:The remake is actually pretty solid, though I’ve never sat down to watch the original and honestly, I probably never will. It just sort of slipped past me back in the day 🤷

Man, I remember the first time I actually checked out The Return of the Living Dead and it was a massive letdown—it had that super cheap, low-budget B-movie trash look to it. Total disaster.

If I had to pick a favorite from all those "classic" zombie flicks and old-school horror movies, it would probably have to be Lifeforce (1985) ☕

How is it that you, as a horror fan (correct me if I'm wrong, but that's the impression I got), can't stand trashy horror movies, especially the stuff from the 80s? What's your take on Re-Animator?

Crow89 I can't even begin to process this... like, seriously? It's just one thing after another. You think you've seen everything, then someone drops something like this and you realize you haven't seen squat. It’s honestly exhausting. I'm sitting here trying to make sense of it all, and it feels like I'm chasing my own tail. Just total madness.
Wait, hold up—so you’re telling me that as a horror fanatic (correct me if I'm wrong, but that's the vibe I'm getting from you), you actually have a problem with trashy horror? And we're talking about the 80s era specifically? Seriously? What’s my take on Re-Animator? Man, where do I even start? It’s such a trip. You’ve got Jeffrey Combs just going absolutely ham—the guy is a legend, period. He brings this manic, unhinged energy that totally carries the whole thing. It's one of those movies that just refuses to play by the rules, you know? It's messy, it's gross, and it’s got that perfect grindhouse soul that you just don't see much anymore. Honestly, if you haven't seen it, you're missing out on some seriously wild ride through mad science territory. It’s pure, unfiltered chaos in the best way possible.

That’s right in the same category of absolute letdowns for me. 🤷

When I look back at all that absolute trash horror from the 80s, there's only one thing that really sticks in my brain. Look, I’ve been thinking about *The Toxic Avenger* (1984) again, and honestly? It’s a total trip. You can't just watch this thing and expect some polished, big-budget Hollywood nonsense. It’s raw, it’s messy, and it’s got that specific kind of grit you only find in those cult classics that feel like they were filmed in a basement on a shoestring budget. It’s basically the ultimate underdog story, if that underdog was a mutated freak tearing through the streets. It hits that perfect sweet spot between being absolutely ridiculous and having this weirdly dark, satirical edge that actually says something about society—even if it’s mostly just about people being terrible to each other. It’s gross, sure. It’s loud. But there’s a soul to it. I know some people think it’s just mindless trash, but they’re missing the point. It’s got that DIY energy that makes modern superhero movies feel so fake by comparison. Back then, you could feel the chaos. It wasn't manufactured in a boardroom; it was born out of pure, unadulterated madness. If you haven't sat down with this one yet, you're seriously missing out on a piece of weird history. Just don't expect a clean shirt at the end of the night. I mean, even looking back at it now, the guy’s just totally mindless. Like, honestly? He's stupid as hell, from here to infinity and back.

Look, I’ve always been a massive sucker for those old-school horror classics, you know? That's my bread and butter. But man, even I have to admit... Dark Star is actually pretty solid.

I mean, like... Look, I’ve been sitting here thinking about *House* from 1985, and honestly? My brain is just kind of fried from trying to wrap my head around how much potential this movie actually had. It’s one of those weird ones that sits right on the edge of being a total masterpiece and just being... well, a mess. But that’s the charm, right? Or maybe it’s just the madness. It’s got that classic mid-80s vibe—you know the one. It’s like if you took a standard haunted house flick and decided to crank the absurdity up to eleven. It doesn't want to be a serious, brooding horror movie like something out of a deep psychological thriller; it wants to be loud, it wants to be messy, and it definitely wants to make you feel like you're losing your mind right along with the characters. The practical effects? Man, they go hard. There's a certain grit there that you just don't see in the polished, CGI-heavy garbage they pump out in Hollywood these days. It feels tactile. You can almost smell the dust and the old wood in that house. It’s visceral. And yeah, some parts are definitely "so bad they're good," but I don't think that's the right way to look at it. It’s not failing at being a comedy; it’s succeeding at being its own specific brand of chaotic energy. I catch myself drifting off thinking about other flicks from that era too—like how it compares to the sheer madness of *The Toxic Avenger* or even the more polished stuff from John Carpenter. It lives in that same neighborhood of "genre experimentation where nobody is quite sure what the rules are anymore." It’s a wild ride, and even if it leaves you feeling a little bit dizzy and confused, you can't really deny it has a soul. It’s unapologetic. It’s a trip. He was actually pretty solid back then, honestly. Fright Night (1985) Yeah, and don't even get me started on that...

Look, they exist, and that’s what matters. *The Toxic Avenger* is a classic Troma flick, and those movies are pure, unadulterated trash—you either love them or you hate them. But when it comes to zombie movies, this one is easily Troma's strongest entry: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0462485/

On the other hand, you've got something like *From Beyond*, which features Jeffrey Combs and was directed by Gordon, the same guy behind *Re-Animator*. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/From_Beyond To me, movies like that are absolute treats. Oh, and don't forget *The Stuff* https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0090094/

And then there's *Fright Night*. 🙂

For me, this was one of those absolute classics I’d been dying to check out for maybe 10 or 15 years—it was basically legendary in my head
I finally sat down to watch it back in 2003. Some guy I knew from the expat community living over in Sweden—who was basically just patronizing me about how much I was whining to see it for free—actually sent me a tape with two Romero films on it

I mean, when you spend over a decade wanting to see a movie, it's more than just a flick
It leaves a mark on you
I know I'll be coming back to this one repeatedly

The soundtrack is killer, and the atmosphere is just spot on

briskhound2 said:I guess that’s pretty much it. If it includes that scene where Elise decapitates someone... then yeah, you're definitely watching the extended cut. It also features that conversation during the flight about how one of the brothers died—stuff that just wasn't part of the original theatrical release...

Apparently, Romero's version doesn't feature music by Goblin; the version with Goblin is actually Argento's (if I'm right about the editing). That Romero version was meant for the US, while the Argento one was for Europe because they supposedly hit a wall with distribution logistics.
In Italy, it was released under the title Zombi, which is how it still comes out today (I have the DVD).

I’ve lost count of how many times I’ve watched this movie (most recently this past Friday). My husband is a total Romero fanatic; he even got a photo with him back in 2011 at the Science Fiction Film Festival in Trieste.
At that same festival in 2018, they screened a restored version and had Dario Argento introduce it. What I found fascinating was him saying they were essentially filming it with the spirit of a Western. If you look closely, some scenes definitely have that touch.

Honestly, bikers get on my nerves because of this movie. Just when you think you've organized everything and found some sense of security, that wild gang swarms in. When I watched this as a kid, I felt so bad for them. In the end, you realize the real danger isn't the zombies, but the people and what they turn into.

And please, don't start with the "cheap" makeup comments (okay, fine, the blood is a bit too bright and red), but that was done by Tom Savini (the guy playing the main villainous biker).

Man, people can be such jerks sometimes, honestly.
Who hasn't been driven crazy by stuff like this? He clearly didn't think the movie was any good, and he obviously didn't connect with the characters one bit. 😁

I can only imagine what it would’ve been like sitting in a theater watching this back in the late seventies.

Regardless of what anyone wants to claim, this film is an absolute genre classic.