Dawn of the Dead (1978)

There was a time when movies actually held their own, but nowadays, you can really see how mediocre they've become. Honestly, the only people trying to force these bad films down our throats are the nostalgia seekers—people who just lie to themselves to convince themselves everything is still great. It’s frustrating when you run into someone else's opinion that goes against what you expected. 😁

I think I still have my old DVD somewhere, probably picked it up at a Best Buy back in the early 2000s. It’s one of those cult classics that honestly transcends its genre and the era it was made in. You get a healthy dose of Horror, some dark humor, and a bit of drama and social commentary, all wrapped up in those psychedelic colors of the free-love era. It really lifts the movie above the usual intellectual low bar set by your typical zombie flick.

Anyway, I had a moment recently that totally captured the vibe of the film, so I wanted to share it with you guys. 😁

I walked into my local grocery store during the day, and it was eerily empty for this time of year. I was the only customer in the whole place. Now, I’m not talking about a massive Walmart here, but it wasn't just some tiny corner bodega either. There were just two cashiers standing there, both staring intensely at their phones. They didn't even look up or acknowledge me, even though I walked right past them and the door chime definitely went off. The only sound was the low hum of the refrigerators and the ceiling fan. I cleared my throat and said hello, but nothing. Not a single glance from either of them. As I kept walking deeper into the empty aisles, I couldn't help but think of the movie and how maybe it’s time for a remake—one where the zombies are distracted by their phone screens instead.

northernangler8 said:There was a time when movies actually held their own, but nowadays, you can really see how mediocre they've become. Honestly, the only people trying to force these bad films down our throats are the nostalgia seekers—people who just lie to themselves to convince themselves everything is still great. It’s frustrating when you run into someone else's opinion that goes against what you expected. 😁

Lol, what nonsense. You could say that about any older classic, and there's a good reason why they are classics. There is a legitimate reason this film is among the best Horror movies ever. You have to understand—non-horror fans don't get that we hardcore horror fans are a specific breed; we value different things. In horror, acting isn't even the priority for us; it's all about atmosphere, and if you find some social commentary like in this film, that's fantastic. The acting in this movie isn't even bad; the only weak point is the colored zombies, but that's just a minor detail.

It's the same deal with Italian Horror from Dario Argento, Fulvia, Mario Bava, and the rest. Sure, most of their films have subpar acting, but when it comes to technical direction (especially Dario Argento and Mario Bava), hardly anyone has been able to compete with them over the last half-century. Same goes for the atmosphere, which is the most important element of a horror film.

That’s why I find people like you much funnier—you base your arguments on some academic film school rules, implying a movie is only good if it has: great acting, a great script, great directing... Give me a break, lol.

No, film is way more complex than that. Horror movies often lack top-tier acting or scripts, but what they possess more than any other genre is an infectious enthusiasm and an atmosphere that gives you an inexplicable feeling—it's pure addiction. Of course, if a horror movie happens to have great acting and a great script too, then you get the absolute best, like The Exorcist or Radiation.

Take The Thing, for example; it's a chaotic film, but that chaos is exactly why it's a masterpiece. Dawn of the Dead is a top-tier film because of its atmosphere and social critique, and Night of the Living Dead is a masterpiece and one of the greatest horror films of all time—and that has nothing to do with nostalgia, lol. I don't even know how one could be nostalgic for Dawn of the Dead. It's true I saw it for the first time when I was young, but when I think of nostalgia, I think of The Goonies, Gremlins, and movies like that, not HORROR like Dawn of the Dead. Regarding The Goonies, I'll admit that as an adult, I think it's terribly overrated (on the other hand, Gremlins isn't; if anything, it's a much more fun movie to watch now).

In other words, you're talking nonsense because you didn't like it, so you search for some "logical" explanation that can't actually be logical. The film itself is as complex as the person watching it, and so much depends on the viewer's mood, the atmosphere, and how you approach it. The horror genre is full of unwritten rules, from the slasher subgenre to just the act of watching these films. Anyone who watches horror during the day or in a theater is making a huge mistake, but that's just my opinion based on my own lack of experience back when I was a kid. Still, us hardcore horror fans who hit up conventions and hang out together are a specific, slightly twisted breed, so I don't expect you to get it. Yeah, nostalgia is definitely the strongest argument out there.😵🤦🙄

Gerald Jackson48 said:I think I still have my old DVD somewhere, probably picked it up at a Best Buy back in the early 2000s. It’s one of those cult classics that honestly transcends its genre and the era it was made in. You get a healthy dose of Horror, some dark humor, and a bit of drama and social commentary, all wrapped up in those psychedelic colors of the free-love era. It really lifts the movie above the usual intellectual low bar set by your typical zombie flick.

Anyway, I had a moment recently that totally captured the vibe of the film, so I wanted to share it with you guys. 😁

I walked into my local grocery store during the day, and it was eerily empty for this time of year. I was the only customer in the whole place. Now, I’m not talking about a massive Walmart here, but it wasn't just some tiny corner bodega either. There were just two cashiers standing there, both staring intensely at their phones. They didn't even look up or acknowledge me, even though I walked right past them and the door chime definitely went off. The only sound was the low hum of the refrigerators and the ceiling fan. I cleared my throat and said hello, but nothing. Not a single glance from either of them. As I kept walking deeper into the empty aisles, I couldn't help but think of the movie and how maybe it’s time for a remake—one where the zombies are distracted by their phone screens instead.

Careful now, you must be feeling pretty nostalgic! You can't just call it a great film without being mindful of what you're writing.

Nathan Murphy: Look, when a movie this bad gets praised, it’s usually nothing more than pure nostalgia. Only the old-school fans are going to back it. Try finding someone watching this for the very first time who would actually agree with you that it’s a masterpiece. Honestly, I just think high-quality films will always beat out low-budget productions. There are exceptions, sure, but I don't think this is one of them.
Just so we're clear, I love Horror. I wouldn't call myself a die-hard fanatic, but I enjoy the genre. Maybe those poorly made zombies just didn't do it for me compared to other zombie flicks. I think I might have even seen bits of this when I was a kid. It was advertised on TV quite a bit back then and seemed terrifying. But then again, everything seems terrifying to a child.
I honestly don't see what makes the atmosphere of this movie any different from other horror movies. If anything, I'd say it doesn't really have a unique atmosphere at all.

The truth is, I didn't like this movie, and I don't really get why people are reacting this way to such an mediocre film. But hey, opinions differ. You just have to live with that. It wouldn't be great if we all thought exactly the same way. 🙂 Though, it also isn't great when people are afraid to speak their minds just to please everyone else.

You can't even put 'The Thing' in the same conversation as this movie. 'The Thing' is one of the best horror films ever made. In my opinion, it might even be better than Alien (1979).

I don't want to spend the whole time trashing the movie, though. That scene with the bystanders was actually pretty good. And the core idea behind the film isn't bad either, it just has way too many other flaws.

Personally, I wasn't even alive when the movie came out back in 1978 (intentional choice of words), so I don't really know what kind of nostalgia you're talking about; I saw it much later in life.
The film is a classic and still holds up perfectly today.

I don't mean you actually sat there watching it back in '78. I just mean that the movies you grew up with can easily get rewritten by nostalgia. Since zombies are having a huge moment again, that's probably why people are revisiting it. But if you ask me, it’s definitely one of those overrated films.

A stellar film. Even compared to Night of the Living Dead (1990) in that house. I think I could still sit through it today without getting bored, despite how much faster the world moves now.

As for the newer stuff, the best is Dawn of the Dead (2004).

I finally sat down to watch Romero's version—the third one I've checked out in just a few days—but honestly? I still think Argento's European version is the superior cut. It’s the one we all grew up watching back in the old VHS era. My only real question is why they left out that helicopter scene with Ellie in that specific edit.

Romero's cut includes the helicopter sequence, but you lose Goblin's score, and there's just way too much humor injected into it. In my opinion, Argento was right to trim all that excess away to tighten up the editing.

It’s a fantastic movie. I’ve revisited it countless times, and somehow, it seems to get better with every viewing. The acting is top-tier, and the zombies themselves are genuinely iconic and unforgettable....

And no, I'm not being hyperbolic here—the film is truly incredible... regardless of whether someone else manages to grasp that or not.
If someone thinks the movie is bad, that's their prerogative; at the end of the day, it's just their opinion.

I don't let nostalgia cloud my judgment. Just because I liked a movie years ago doesn't mean it holds up for me today. And if I find that I don't enjoy it anymore, I'll be the first to admit it—I'll say it was good then, but it doesn't pass the test now. I don't have any trouble being honest about that.

Saw this one a while back. I first heard about it in a Dylan Dog comic—probably the first issue—and I was stoked when I finally tracked down a copy back in the old days of burning CDs. 🙂

The first time I watched it, I had the long cut, which felt a bit dragged out for my taste. A few years later, I caught the version titled "Zombie 2." Honestly, I liked that one better; it’s got more energy and a killer soundtrack.

It’s definitely a classic. One of the best zombie flicks out there.

Still, I think the first part of the trilogy is the peak, though the third installment has the best anthology-style zombie makeup. As far as Romero's work goes, I stopped after seeing Land of the Dead in theaters. I actually enjoyed that one, but since everyone said the others weren't great, I just skipped them...

northernangler8 said:I don't mean you actually sat there watching it back in '78. I just mean that the movies you grew up with can easily get rewritten by nostalgia. Since zombies are having a huge moment again, that's probably why people are revisiting it. But if you ask me, it’s definitely one of those overrated films.

I didn't actually see it until I was in my mid-twenties, if I recall correctly, and that was after I'd already sat through some "heavy hitters" like The Exorcist... so for me, it's still the best one simply because the execution is solid. There’s zero nostalgia factor involved here—if we were going by that logic, I should be obsessed with Night... since I saw that as a kid, but in reality, it’s a pretty mediocre flick. Not a bad concept, necessarily, but it just really rubs me the wrong way how banal and, frankly, stupid it is. I actually think the remake is better, mostly because Savini gave the female lead some actual agency instead of treating her like a piece of furniture... I mean, if Dawn of the Dead (1978) is considered "bad," then Diary or that last one, Survival... are basically unwatchable. They aren't even in that special category of being "so bad they're good." And no, people aren't revisiting this version just because zombies are "popular" again—it's more about Snyder's version (which is also a good movie) being modern and hitting that sweet spot for younger horror fans today. Dawn of the Dead (1978) is all about pure atmosphere—those shots of the empty city center, the soundtrack, characters who aren't exactly lovable at first glance... it all works, even now, and that's why it holds its ground.