28 Months Later

Started by Ratchetcomand, Nov 21, 2007, 01:56:05 AM

Author
28 Months Later (Read 4,262 times)

Nightmare Asylum

Nightmare Asylum

#45
Quote from: galaxys ultimate hunter on Oct 13, 2010, 01:31:01 AM
Goofy Idea:
28 Seconds Later (prequel)
28 Minutes Later (prequel)
28 Hours Later (Prequel)
28 Days Later (original)
28 Weeks Later (sequel)
28 Months Later (sequel)
28 Years Later (The Finale)

Then 28 Centuries Later, where we will see zombies vs robots and stuff! :P

OmegaZilla

OmegaZilla

#46
28 Millenniums later. Now that is something i'd watch straight off.

MudButt

MudButt

#47
Quote from: brennan4 on Oct 13, 2010, 02:19:28 AM
To be honest, I didn't hate it, but some things bothered me. The characters seemed so stupid that theyconstantly got into situations  where you knew zombies would attack them, taking away the surprise. I would mention other things, but they're kind of minor. Mostly I just don't like zombie movies.

Well Yeah, obviously they need to be getting into situations that's what gives the action and horror, you can't make a zombie movie with the characters not running into zombies.

JaaayDee

JaaayDee

#48
I love 28 Days Later and I'd give it an 8/10. 

But I have no idea why the sequel gets so much hate.  In my opinion they're both solid films.  I loved the ambient music used in both films and the second one did a good job in recreating the frenetic style of the infected.  Weeks gets a 7.5/10 in my book.


Ghost Rider.

Ghost Rider.

#49
I actually saw 28 Weeks Later first (at the cinema!). I thought it was really good, I would've said about 7.5 as well. I loved the music, the cast (Robert Carlyle, Rose Byrne, Jeremy Renner and Idris Elba are all amazing!), I thought some of the scenes were really great and it had a good atmosphere, some scenes were very unnerving, the RAGE zombies were scary.

Two years later I watched '28 Days Later', and it was NOTHING like I expected. For me, it was nothing like the sequel. All I recognised was the music and the fact that the zombies were the same. I thought the movie was going to be about Robert Carlyle's family before the events of the sequel, but it wasn't, and for a few moments I was disappointed, but then I grew to like these characters more, and I found the original to be more enjoyable, and the ending was much more powerful.

Then about another year later '28 Weeks Later' was on television and I watched it. Wasn't really impressed. Not as good on the small screen (but what film is?), a lot of the night sequences had obvious green screen and CGI effects, it looked fake. The atmosphere of the first film just wasn't there. The stuff with Carlyle's wife was good, but it lost me after that. I'd probably give it a 6/10 now.



SpaceMarines

SpaceMarines

#50
Never saw the sequel, but I really liked the original film. It oozed atmosphere.

Alienseseses

Alienseseses

#51
I feel weird about this.
I love 28 Days Later.
I love 28 Weeks Later.
I'm aware that 28 Days Later is leaps and bounds better than 28 Weeks Later, but at the same time, I'm not disappointed with Weeks at all. And I don't love them as two different things, I feel they go very well together and really are on the same level even though I know they aren't. Why is that?

Marr

Marr

#52
I really like both films. Similar to Romeros "Dead" films -  its different characters with a different storyline.

They were taliking a while ago about a potential 3rd film...but I believe it has been put on hold/cancelled due to "legal issues"

Razz

Razz

#53
28 days is of course the superior film but Weeks has its moments, the first 10 minutes of it are tense as hell.

I heard the original story for 28 Weeks (although it wasn't going to be called that title) was going to centre around the events during infection where a special forces unit is called in to evac the priminister and certain goverment members and get them out of London which would obviously place the film some time before the events of the first movie, that i would love to have seen. I'll try and find a source to back this up later.

Alienseseses

Alienseseses

#54
I heard the 3rd movie, should it be made, would be about the infection reaching Russia.

x2SMONEY

x2SMONEY

#55
I thought it'd be about the infection in Paris because of the end of Weeks.
In all honesty, I prefer Weeks to Days. Weeks has more action, which is what I primarily look for in a zombie movie

Alienseseses

Alienseseses

#56
I find that watching zombies eating people and getting shot is fun for about 5 minutes. That's why I can't stand Resident Evil movies.
But Weeks had enough character development, so we did care what happened to the people under attack.

x2SMONEY

x2SMONEY

#57
Well Resident Evil just blows. It gets to the point where its barely a zombie movie...

Alienseseses

Alienseseses

#58
Quote from: x2SMONEY on Aug 26, 2011, 04:40:26 PM
Well Resident Evil just blows. It gets to the point where its barely a zombie movie...
But exempting that, every zombie movie that's just action, I can't finish. I get too bored/annoyed. There needs to be a POINT.

ace3g

ace3g

#59
Danny Boyle, Alex Garland Teaming for Sequel to Their Zombie Hit '28 Days Later'

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/28-years-later-in-the-works-1235783306/

AvPGalaxy: About | Contact | Cookie Policy | Manage Cookie Settings | Privacy Policy | Legal Info
Facebook Twitter Instagram YouTube Patreon RSS Feed
Contact: General Queries | Submit News