28 Weeks Later (2007)

[Dave]

No thread for this yet?? I just saw it today.

It is much more violent and more gory than the original. This kind of film doesn't do much for me I'm afraid; it's shocking, but it doesn't frighten me in the way a good old-fashioned horror movie does. We discussed that in another thread; how less is more; how thinking about the idea of something happening is actually more frightening than actually seeing it in all the detail.

I wanted to see it for the continuation of the story. I thought that was somehow lacking, but I'm still glad I saw it.

Six months after the Rage virus was inflicted on the population of the British Isles, the US Army helps to secure the Isle of Dogs in Docklands, London for the survivors to re-populate and start again. But not everything goes to plan. Well would it?

Robert Carlyle takes the lead role from Christopher Ecclestone (though as a completely different character.) Carlyle and his wife hid in a cottage from the Rage, but he ended up leaving his wife behind when he ran for his life from an attack. Their children were safely on a foreign school-trip and have been held in a Spanish refugee camp. Now father and children are to be re-united.

Spoilers...The children escape the security cordon to return to their old home. There they discover their mother, alive but distraught. She is actually a Rage carrier. She has no symptoms, but she was bitten and does have the virus. When she is brought back to Canary Wharf, she bites Carlyle when he makes an unauthorised visit to her, and the whole scenario begins again. It wasn't explained how the mother survived for 7 months in an attic without food.

Living in London, I could nitpick for hours - like how they go down Charing Cross tube station and end up on the Jubilee line - how the aircraft lands at City airport, but the Terminal buildings are at Heathrow - and how the father can follow them when they drive around so far - but I will refrain. The deserted London scenes are even better than 28 Days Later and the fire-bombing of Canary Wharf is very impressive.

The American Army's idea of Quarantine is very poor though and major mistakes are made by the NATO force in control of District 1.

Spoilers...I don't think it can all be blamed on the soldiers being unwilling to fire upon the children. And the mother and the boy being carriers of the disease does make the possibility of a cure likely - something that is now vital given the film's ending. I do think that the French would have had much stronger border controls. By the time that helicopter flies over the Channel about 8 months has passed - plenty of time to set up proper border controls.

Obviously, there will be a third installment.

[UltraCulture]

No Danny Boyle

No Cillian Murphy

No Point

28 days was so unique, that this film was bound to be a dissapointment,as soon as Tinseltown gets it's hands on a decent indie film,it goes to pot.


can you imagine hollywood walking around with Divicams?


where's my Super8

[(-Haunted Willow-)]

Just saw it today(lucky to get in) and was really dissapointed. Can't hold a candle to the original.

[Jason_Taverner]

I'll just wait for the DVD, I am not a massive fan of Danny Boyle but i did enjoy the orginal, mainly the haunting shots of london, I felt this is what give the film a little bit of an edge but the original had a sloppy ending, I was surprised to see there was a squel.

[dustinzgirl]

I just watched this the other day....and the only thing I am thinking is, "I'm pretty sure my kids are smarter than that!" I mean, seriously....these kids just do the dumbest stuff and then they are like "OH NOES ZOMBIES!" afterwords.

The movie does have some cool parts. I do think that they did not spend a whole lotta time on making it believable.

I was rooting for the infected anyways.

[Dave]

Originally Posted by dustinzgirl

...these kids just do the dumbest stuff and then they are like "OH NOES ZOMBIES!" afterwords.

Kids like to break rules, and do "dumb stuff". They also had the excuse of being out of the country during the first outbreak, so the full picture may not have been shown to them.

The army did not have an excuse for doing dumb stuff - quarantines were broken, rules bent or broken, orders disobeyed, a whole catalogue or errors.

Some of the "haunting" shots of London in this were better than the original, but it is in no way a better film.

[andrew.v.spencer]

Well at least houses would be cheap in a depopulated zombie infested Britain.

See there's always a bright side.

[Niolani]

How disapointing that the movie isn't that great. I was hoping it would be good but guess not, oh well.

[Brigitte]

I saw 28 Weeks Later on DVD--honestly, it didn't have the rush the first one did. I liked the fact that they were following different characters, but c'mon, some of the things that happened in that movie were just ludicrous.
1.) Never, in a million years, would the governments of the world reintroduce people into a plague-infested region only a few months after the last remnants were alive. Especially, one with such dangerous consequences.
2.) I can understand how the father, being in charge, could have access to most buildings (residential, commercial). But, there's no way he could have access to what could presumably be a Level 4 biohazard facility. So, he never could have actually gotten to his wife undetected (since, for some reason, they didn't post a guard outside)
3.) Knowing that an outbreak had occurred again on Britain, the militaries of the world (i.e. France) would likely shoot any approaching helicopter out of the sky, especially one at the end. At the very least, those people would be quarentined and the "Rage" would become evident through interactions there.

Sorry about my little rant here. I was really disappointed. I hope they stop the series where they're at.

[roddglenn]

It wasn't as good as the original, but I didn't think it was bad. I thought they largely kept to the same feel as the original - similar shooting techniques, music, etc. The characters were engaging and however outrageous some of the elements they made a decent action horror out of it that did pretty much what it said on the tin. It had its flaws - the ending being the main one, Carlyle gaining access to his wife and the sniper teams being overrun so easily (snipers always have a spotter - they never work alone). But overall I enjoyed it.

[Gav]

I'm a little confused and I find myself wondering if the people commenting here were watching the same movie I was.

In some ways it wasn't as good as the original...

On the other hand the director did in fact take it in a different direction from the first - and seemed to put in a bit of commentary on certain ethical choices It's a bit like the relationship of Alien to Aliens in my opinion: vastly different yet inhabiting the same universe. That the director managed to avoid so many of the pitfalls of The Sequel is to be applauded.

It also has one of the best opening sequences of the year.

[Vincent Tauscher]

True, the opening sequence was one of the best for the year. But, I have to agree with Brigitte, the overall plot and ending were a bit rough-edged and disappointing. For those who have not seen it, I would recommend going and seeing it, even though it wasn't as spectacular in my opinion. I've heard a lot of folk say it was better than the first, so it's just a matter of preference.

[jackokent]

I thought is was a terrible film. I went to a little local cinema and for some reason me and a mate ended up in the wrong screening and almost ended up watching a kid's film. The usherette, who knew us, came and got and and it was really funny at the time. Now I wish she'd left us.

The film was sensationalist rubbish and again a crappy follow up to what was a good 1st film... why oh why don't they learn?

Incidentally one of my mates was "raged up" extra in this.