Jump to content

  • Current Donation Goals

    • Monthly Donations
      Raised $390 of $700 target

28 Days Later

Plainview1981

By Plainview1981
in The Lounge

 Share

Recommended Posts

Plainview1981 Mentor

Plainview1981

Posted
Posted

I bought this movie off ebay and just gave it a watch and I must say that it's ok, but it didn't come close to living up to the hype. It had some intense moments, but overall it's just a copycat of the other zombie movies with one note characters.

Cillian Murphy goes from the average Joe to Rambo in no time and he does some really idiotic things. Naomi Harris plays as the strongest of the characters, but more than anything she wishes that she was Pat Grier from back in the day.

I loved the low budget look, and the zombies were great, but over all the movie got more dumb as it went along and more towards the end it got so predictable that it started to lose my interest.

I'm not sorry that I bought it, but the new Dawn of the Dead is a better movie. I would however say that it's better than Land of the Dead.

6/10

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Admin
chillzatl Newbie

chillzatl

Posted
  • Admin
Posted

you would be one of the few to think that any of the new "dead" movies is better than 28 days. Without 28 days, those movies never would have been remade, which they didn't need in the first place. Zombies don't run! That entire concept makes those movies so stupid as to be hardly viewable and to any fan of the genre (or horror movies in general) it it's painfully obvious that they were just trying to cash in on the premise of 28 days using an established name.

also, in 28 days, they aren't zombies, they're infected.

also, you say that 28 days was predictable towards the end. I can only assume you mean the last 20 minutes, where they meet the soldiers and it becomes pretty obvious what they want. Before that I know good and well you had no idea where the story was going.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Plainview1981 Mentor

Plainview1981

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Quote:

you would be one of the few to think that any of the new "dead" movies is better than 28 days. Without 28 days, those movies never would have been remade, which they didn't need in the first place. Zombies don't run! That entire concept makes those movies so stupid as to be hardly viewable and to any fan of the genre (or horror movies in general) it it's painfully obvious that they were just trying to cash in on the premise of 28 days using an established name.

also, in 28 days, they aren't zombies, they're infected.

also, you say that 28 days was predictable towards the end. I can only assume you mean the last 20 minutes, where they meet the soldiers and it becomes pretty obvious what they want. Before that I know good and well you had no idea where the story was going.

The Dawn of the Dead remake isn't a great movie. I'd give it a 6.5/10. But it was action packed and filled the entire time and the movie kept going. Truthfully, it's not really a remake. Even though it also takes place in a mall, it sort of feels like it's own movie.

It also had better actors and the characters were abit deeper in my opinion. Mekhi Phifer, Ving Rhames and Sarah Polley gave better performances than Murphy and Naomi Harris gave. Murphy is a guy that has a chance to be a good villain in future movies, but he is totally wooden here. I really felt bad for Mekhi's character in DOTD when I never felt bad for anyone in 28 Days Later.

"Without 28 days, those movies never would have been remade"

Without Day of the Dead(which sucked) then 28 Days might not exist either. Without Black Christmas, Halloween might not exist. So what's your point?

SPOILER:

When Cillian Murphy broke the chained infected guy loose it was so damn stupid. He had no idea who that thing would attack. Basically, the last 20 minutes went down the dumb action movie route by doing things like that. Moreover, the happy ending made me want to vomit. Also, the making out scenes with Murphy and the woman felt really awkward for some reason. Another thing I didn't like was how Naomi's character went from extremely tough to really soft in the blink of an eye.

I don't know how 28 Days Later really reinvented anything. It didn't come up with the running zombies/infected because that was used in Return of the Living Dead... Which is a far better movie than 28 Days Later. 28 Days Later felt like a ripoff with the grocery store scene and when they had the black dude chained up and fed us the line about how they're trying to understand the infected is a clear ripoff of Day of the Dead.

The worst part, is the movie just often stalled. It had some intense moments such as the tunnel scene, but overall this movie just had poor pacing. There was no real "meat" in middle of the movie. Oh, and I don't buy people getting infected in 10 seconds no more than I buy zombies running.

It doesn't really bother me if I'm one of the few that likes the DOTD remake more than 28 Days Later. Lots of people also think Bad Boys 2 is a good movie. It doesn't make me feel bad for not liking it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Plainview1981 Mentor

Plainview1981

Posted
  • Author
Posted

It was better than Land of the Dead also. I would say that for me the original Dawn of the Dead is the best one. I know the makeup looks terrible, but it's still the best zombie movie to me. Night and Return are both close second ones though.

I just wasn't a huge fan of SOTD. It had great intentions, but I didn't find it as funny or entertaining as Hot Fuzz.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...