Moral of the story: Don't fucking break quarantine. Ever. I'm still not exactly sure what to think of the movie overall. Not exactly bad but not exactly good either. The biggest gripes would be a big reliance on coincidence and some very questionable tactics in dealing with the virus by the US-led NATO forces (not necessarily in terms of morality but effectiveness). 28WL does have some great SFX going for it, though, and the opening flashback sequence was a nightmare come to life. I don't care what the purists say; fast zombies are just as good as the undead variety.
Had a client / tennant call last night, said he'd just got back from it, liked it OK, but I got the idea that with a different director and all, he liked 28 Days Later better. Still waiting for World War Z myself.
What did you find wrong with it? I just saw it for the first time last night. I thought it was a good flick. I intend to see 28 Weeks Later tonight.
The camera work was dreadful . . . too much shaky hand-held stuff. It was new and different in The Blair Witch Project but by the time 28 Days Later rolled around it was just annoying. Too many horror-movie cliches. Plot holes. No surprises. Predictable. The whole thing felt more like going thru the motions than anything inspired. It was just . . . meh.
I caught the first film on DVD a few years ago. I thought it was flawed but enjoyable movie. I expect I'll pick the sequel up on DVD as well.
Saw this today. A worthy sequel to the fun but umremarkable original. Agree that there was WAAAAAY too much shaky-camera shit. Of course, the kicker is that the whole plot just vanishes without the galactic stupidity of everyone involved, but that's the horror genre in a nutshell, isn't it? Couple of high points: The brit girl- Imogen Poots is the name () was easy on the eyes. Her eyes, in fact, could drown a guy. And I've had a serious schoolboy crush for Rose Byrne since her appearances in Troy and AOTC as one of Padme's handmaiden/ bodyguards. Downside: I really hated to see the US military painted as the buffoonish bad guys, here. The 'American led NATO force' they talked about at the beginning consisted solely of U.S. Army personnel, it would appear, who fucking shoot everyone in sight, firebomb London, AND use chemical weapons. Wonderful portrayal. But I had to smirk at the ending:
I'll wait for World War Z. [-]The book was good, and I anticipate a decent if somewhat contorted movie version[/-]. WHAT AM I SAYING? I can't imagine a successful transition of WWZ without a good chunk of the ambiance lost.
I don't mind them being the "bad" guys - it adds an interesting element having to avoid the infected and the military, and if you suddenly have the possibility of carriers that aren't exhibiting symptoms that makes a lot of sense - but being so horribly inept when dealing with an outbreak is pretty bad. I can't imagine a worse plan than rounding up the civies and putting them in a dark, tight, insecure location. And not leaving anyone guarding a virus carrier is stupid beyond belief. But given that the British military devolved into a bunch of crazed homosexuals and rapists after four weeks in the 28 Days Later I think the US military got off rather easy.
