28 days later...
I haven't seen a topic for this so I figured I'd start one! I went and saw this last night and I wanted to know what other people thought. IMO it was pretty damn good and even though it's not the most original movie out there, it was done well. I don't want to spoil it for anyone, but I'd like to say that I thought the ending was great and not exactly what you'd expect from the genre and past horror/zombie movies. Though the best part was the really hot English people!
Post your opinions.
Post your opinions.
Comments
I keep thinking about the movie and that must mean it's good right? I mean, if it can get the viewer to think about it after they see it...that's gotta be good.
PS - Very nice sig. Giaguara. Another great movie directed by Danny Boyle! It's too bad so many people haven't seen it though...
Link if you dare [countdraculavoice] BWAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHA[/countdraculavoice]
Fellows
Originally posted by groverat
I agree 100% with bauman. Fell apart when they met up with the soldiers, could've done completely without that entire segment of the movie.
so why don't you become a screenwriter then
i like it
(1) London - Just plain creepy. i.e. Silent Hill. WTF?!
(2) Trip to Manchester - Very artistice shots. Enjoyed the parts shot in DV to have that gritty effect. Also very creepy gas station scene.
(3) Soldier Fort - Holy Sh*t. Edge of your seat thriller. It DOES somewhat turn into a "Lord of the Flies" deal. And that was the point. How these people are supposed to be fighting against the zombies yet they can't even control themselves and turn against each other.
I loved it...both times I've seen it. I plan to go see it one more time and then wait for the DVD! Let's hope they do a good job with it. Please no paper case!
Of course, this is made more palatable by building on yet another sexist stereotype: the soldier as depraved animal. The main soldier talking about how before the infection it was nothing but death anyway. What ludicrous garbage; unless he was in Baghdad the UK military hasn't been doing much killing at all lately.
When they left London it turned very south. Moralizing preaching garbage and I'm supposed to reflect on my nature when Jim goes apeshit (gouging a guy's eyes out with his thumbs) and then does a 180 to happy-go-lucky in 10 seconds? Right.
I wanted to see some goddam zombies wrecking shit on grainy film, not some half-baked moral play.
Groverat, is your woman aiming to tackle social-issue cases in her legal career by chance? Or are you just that atuned to all that is sexist (in either "direction")? Honestly...just curious where your sensitivity to those issues comes from.
Why do you think I have 800,000 posts?
I don't like sexist portrayals of men because I'm a man.
I don't like sexist portrayals of women because I know and love many women.
And I also hate it when artists use foolish stereotypes as a crutch. "Boo," I say, "BOO!"
Originally posted by wolfeye155
I actually enjoyed every bit of the movie. I'll break it up into three parts:
(1) London - Just plain creepy. i.e. Silent Hill. WTF?!
(2) Trip to Manchester - Very artistice shots. Enjoyed the parts shot in DV to have that gritty effect. Also very creepy gas station scene.
(3) Soldier Fort - Holy Sh*t. Edge of your seat thriller. It DOES somewhat turn into a "Lord of the Flies" deal. And that was the point. How these people are supposed to be fighting against the zombies yet they can't even control themselves and turn against each other.
I loved it...both times I've seen it. I plan to go see it one more time and then wait for the DVD! Let's hope they do a good job with it. Please no paper case!
Really? You have got to be kidding. I'm in complete agreement with London, but the trip? Yes, let's use a 1920 era car to drive. WHY!?! I suppose it makes it a bit more thrilling, but when you are reduced to using old cars to make things thrilling, something is wrong. It would have been better without the car. The car just made things... too easy.
The first part in London was successful because it seemed REAL. I mean, it made you feel like you were the one disoriented and waking up after 28 days. Once they went on the road trip, they started to lose that connection. Would Jim (read:you) really go into that Gas Station... even after they had all the food they needed? He had been out for long enough that he knew better. Sure, it was scary, but there wasn't a connection. I didn't feel like my life was being threatened anymore, like I did when we were still in London.
Once they got to Manchester, it just all fell apart. Again, it was scary, but it lost the originality of the silent, ghost town approach to zombies. They used old stereotypes (like groverat points out) and cheap thrills to try to keep the movie going.
And then the ending does not do justice to the way they began things. Sure the whole 28 days later was a cute tie in, but I would have rather seen that part of their struggle than the section in the castle. It kinda gives you the feeling like you cheated... you know, that superficial happiness that you did it, but it just wasn't complete? Exactly.
Oh, and groverat, all I have to say is "YAY!" for:
Originally posted by groverat
II don't like sexist portrayals of men because I'm a man.
I don't like sexist portrayals of women because I know and love many women.
And I also hate it when artists use foolish stereotypes as a crutch. "Boo," I say, "BOO!"
Originally posted by groverat
We're to believe that after 28 days men are driven to rape little girls?
No, just the military. It takes less than that to get them going in Japan.
For me, the focus of the movie was a) our fear of death (eg: zombies) and b) our fear of being alone. The london bits were all about being alone.
If you were any less clever you would not be able to use the keyboard.
Originally posted by groverat
If you were any less clever you would not be able to use the keyboard.
Sorry if the truth hurts.
Originally posted by groverat
Of course, this is made more palatable by building on yet another sexist stereotype: the soldier as depraved animal.
I'm sorry groverat, but I don't consider that to be a stereotype at all. Military people are typically closer to the animal kingdom than normal, full-featured people, whether you like it or not. What sane person would get into that territorium-peeing, he-ape testosterone scene and like it?