You ever wake up one morning, brew yourself some coffee, then go outside to get the morning paper and you see a goddamn zombie in your front yard eating your […]
You ever wake up one morning, brew yourself some coffee, then go outside to get the morning paper and you see a goddamn zombie in your front yard eating your poodle? That shit really pisses me off! George A. Romero must share my hate for these things cause he make a really kick ass movie about it in 1978 called Dawn of the Dead (Zombi internationally). It was written by Romero in cooperation with film making legend Dario “I’m a super cool bad ass filmaker” Argento!
Dawn of the Dead is basically Night of the Living Dead part 2. Well not really. It goes on to show what happens after the events of Night of the Living Dead. It reveals how mankind has to deal with the zombie apocalypse and it’s effect on society. The reason for the dead returning to life and cannibalizing loved ones is still unknown but the situation is completely out of control. Local law enforcement, government officials, the military, and the media are all stressed to their limits as mass hysteria and growing hordes of the undead begin to tear down the veneer of society and civilization.
The movie soon evolves into a survivalist game where bad ass has to be a badder bad ass just to survive in this “Only the strong survive” scenario. A group of survivors end up holding up in a shopping mall where they try to eek out an existence. Things seem to be going well until a band of road warriors show up and then the shit hits the fan!
The Living Dead franchise would go on to have many sequels and Dawn of the Dead even got a remake in 2004. Though the remake was pretty good, it can not stand up to the originals grittiness and surreal take on the fragility of society. The make up is awesome! The acting is more realistic given the circumstances in the movie.
So shoot the zombie, shoot the poodle, and brew up some more Joe cause “Hell has ran out of room!” as we present to you Dawn of the Dead!!
Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include—
(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors
You must log in to post a comment.