eugimon Posted June 21, 2004 Posted June 21, 2004 so they're making a sequel... 28 weeks later. http://www.darkhorizons.com/news04/040621a.php hope it turns out well, 28 days later is one of my favorite horror flicks... Quote
TheFrenchOne Posted June 21, 2004 Posted June 21, 2004 The first one was very good (especially the ost) hope the second one will be at least as good. Many good movies have been ruined by a shitty sequel ( i have just seen battle royal 2 and it is Quote
cube Posted June 21, 2004 Posted June 21, 2004 yea, 28 days later was sweet...I hope they don't try to big-budget it, and bork the whole thing up with special effects, CG, n stuff Quote
Isamu Atreides 86 Posted June 21, 2004 Posted June 21, 2004 i hope at least for this one, the lead character (if its a dude) will be wearing pants the whole time, unlike the first one.... Quote
Agent ONE Posted June 21, 2004 Posted June 21, 2004 I'll see it. I thought the first one was cool, for a newer version of a zombie horor movie. Quote
1st Border Red Devil Posted June 22, 2004 Posted June 22, 2004 Hmmm.... Im ambivalent at the moment to a sequel. I liked 28 Days. I love a good Zombie flick. I play All Flesh Must Be Eaten and Zombies!...its the gamer in me that did it. Quote
Ladic Posted June 22, 2004 Posted June 22, 2004 Boyle is not expected to direct the sequel that's bad. Quote
Mr March Posted June 22, 2004 Posted June 22, 2004 I really enjoyed 28 Days Later, especially as a refreshing disaster flick that didn't involve setting it in the U.S. Though I would love a sequel, it's doubtful Danny Boyle will direct so I think I'll wait until I can get this one as a free rental Quote
Blaine23 Posted June 22, 2004 Posted June 22, 2004 No Danny Boyle is a very bad thing. It was his direction that made the movie more than crap, IMHO. Any sequel without him is just the studio seeing if they can milk a minor hit for a few more schillings. Do they still have schillings any more? Quote
JsARCLIGHT Posted June 22, 2004 Posted June 22, 2004 OK, quick thought here... In the course of the movie you learn A ) why the people are "zombies", B ) What "powers" they have as zombies and C ) the "limitations" to their zombieness. Also in the course of the DVD, the alternate ending for instance, you see that the rest of the world is most likely unneffected other than Britain and that the world is re-establishing itself rather quickly (otherwise how would an RAF recon fighter be flying around?). My question is: how does the sequel work? They established in the movie that the people are not "zombies" per se, but are merely infected humans and they possess no supernatural abilities like zombies do. For instance, shoot a zombie in the head = destroyed but shoot him everywhere else and you just piss him off and impair his ability to move... but you do not destroy him. The infected people in 28 days later are proven, in the course of the movie, to be "human". They die if you shoot them enough, they die if you chop them up, they die if you do anything to them that would kill a normal person and they will also starve to death if they don't eat anything. So with the major infected areas quaranteened, as they appeared to be at the close of the first movie, you are given the impression that the epidemic is "contained" and that it will eventually go away unlike other zombie movies like the recent remake of Dawn of the Dead where anyone that dies adds to the problem. To me, the movie started and ended itself and it's "world" quickly with one short piece... the only resulting way they could make a sequel is to "resident evil" the thing (read = take the cheap and easy way out) and either have another breakout somewhere else just on a bigger scale with more guns and blood or re-write their own "lore" to continue the rampage... like having the infected people not starve to death after all and just keep going like evil energizer rabbits with a bloodlust. What do others think about this? Quote
bsu legato Posted June 22, 2004 Posted June 22, 2004 I wonder what they'll call this one... 28 Days Later 2: Die Later 28 Days Later 2: Dead by Dawn 28 Days Later 2: Judgement Day 28 Days, 28 Later and to run the joke further into the ground... 28 Days Later 2: Electric Boogaloo. Quote
Blaine23 Posted June 22, 2004 Posted June 22, 2004 OK, quick thought here...In the course of the movie you learn A ) why the people are "zombies", B ) What "powers" they have as zombies and C ) the "limitations" to their zombieness. Also in the course of the DVD, the alternate ending for instance, you see that the rest of the world is most likely unneffected other than Britain and that the world is re-establishing itself rather quickly (otherwise how would an RAF recon fighter be flying around?). My question is: how does the sequel work? They established in the movie that the people are not "zombies" per se, but are merely infected humans and they possess no supernatural abilities like zombies do. For instance, shoot a zombie in the head = destroyed but shoot him everywhere else and you just piss him off and impair his ability to move... but you do not destroy him. The infected people in 28 days later are proven, in the course of the movie, to be "human". They die if you shoot them enough, they die if you chop them up, they die if you do anything to them that would kill a normal person and they will also starve to death if they don't eat anything. So with the major infected areas quaranteened, as they appeared to be at the close of the first movie, you are given the impression that the epidemic is "contained" and that it will eventually go away unlike other zombie movies like the recent remake of Dawn of the Dead where anyone that dies adds to the problem. To me, the movie started and ended itself and it's "world" quickly with one short piece... the only resulting way they could make a sequel is to "resident evil" the thing (read = take the cheap and easy way out) and either have another breakout somewhere else just on a bigger scale with more guns and blood or re-write their own "lore" to continue the rampage... like having the infected people not starve to death after all and just keep going like evil energizer rabbits with a bloodlust. What do others think about this? Good points, all. I liked the contained-ness of the original movie - it made it more realistic, in my eyes. I would assume by the title of 28 weeks later... that the only real way to make it a sequel and use that title would be to have mean that the problem wasn't as "contained" as the ending of the first film led you to believe. It wasn't as if we saw everything get neatly wrapped up at the end of the first film - in either ending. Containing a massive outbreak of some weird mutant zombie virus has got to be a bit difficult, y'know? A worse idea would be what you already stated - "Another Outbreak! This time... in Hawaii! NO!" Or the idea that maybe a few weeks after these original zombies die, they continue to mutate and come back. Hell if I know. All I do know is that I might give a rat's ass if the guy who directed Trainspotting, Shallow Grave, The Beach and the original was directing this one. Instead we'll end up with some studio powered B.S. Quote
Greyryder Posted June 23, 2004 Posted June 23, 2004 According to Sci-Fi Wire, even though Boyle isn't directing, he is co-producing. The man will have a hand in the new movie. Quote
Sumdumgai Posted May 13, 2007 Posted May 13, 2007 Saw 28 Weeks Later this morning (boy that sounds strange ). I liked it but had problems with some stuff in it. I liked 28 Days Later more, but I liked some stuff from the new one. In particular the chase that we saw part of in the trailers. There was a lot of stuff that really pissed me off in the movie, but that was the way the characters were written (and I play too much Zombie Infection mod Counterstrike Source, so stupid people piss me off easily with zombie-ish stuff). Quote
Scream Man Posted May 13, 2007 Posted May 13, 2007 wow, this thread started in 2004! thats damned impressive! Should be seeing this next week. Quote
Warmaker Posted May 13, 2007 Posted May 13, 2007 28 Days Later 28 Weeks Later 28 Months Later 28 Years Later Can I go on? Curious to see how this pans out with more MWers viewing it. Quote
Wes Posted May 13, 2007 Posted May 13, 2007 The thing that bothered me about the movie was that they seemed to forget that they originally had the infected very light-sensitive, so you could roam free during the day. Now half the time they're running from them during daylight. Not bad, worth going to the dollar theatre, had some girl behind me that was far too jumpy. Just wish it was more than 91 min. Quote
Guppy Posted May 13, 2007 Posted May 13, 2007 I saw it tonight.. very brutal and bleak but great. Of course there are the usual plot holes but who cares? Robert Carlsyle was great too. I read that Danny Boyle is keen to do a 3rd and final film and wants to direct. Quote
promethuem5 Posted May 13, 2007 Posted May 13, 2007 I did not see 28 Days (I don't like scary movies or zombies...) but my friend made me go see 28 Weeks and I loved it! Very bleak and dreary happenings... I will definitely go out and get 28 Days and see it now. I would also certainly enjoy a 28 Months/Years if they come out. It wasn't a super scary movie, but it had some suspense and my friend who likes scary movies nearly pooped his pants in one scene... I'm debating going to see it again. It was really interesting and alot of fun. Quote
Ladic Posted May 13, 2007 Posted May 13, 2007 I loved this movie, might even be better than the original Quote
Sumdumgai Posted May 14, 2007 Posted May 14, 2007 Spoilers: It sucked that they killed Doyle, he was awesome. Although, I knew from the commercials in seeing him wink, he was destined to die. The family was stupid, it's their fault everyone got screwed. The kids sneaking out into the infected zone, the dad kissing the quarantined mom, the sister taking the infected brother to the mainland and spreading it to the rest of Europe... I don't remember infected being able to see in the dark in the first movie. I thought it was kind of bs the way the dad was all over the place all the time, and being all ninja-like and vanishing. Plus the whole beating the medic to death with her rifle. I don't remember the infected using anything as a basic melee weapon in the first movie. I did like the movie overall. Especially the "oh crap" feeling when the infected start invading the house and the dad ditches his wife. And the military trying to shoot the infected and avoid hitting non-infected, before switching to kill them all. The helicopter killing the infected scene had me going "oh crap! The helicopter is going to go down!" :end spoilers Quote
Retracting Head Ter Ter Posted May 14, 2007 Posted May 14, 2007 (edited) 28 Days Later 28 Weeks Later 28 Months Later 28 Years Later Can I go on? Curious to see how this pans out with more MWers viewing it. The day after 28 Years Later? BTW, was it ever established why the Infected don't eat other Infected (or even fight/chase them)? Edited May 14, 2007 by Retracting Head Ter Ter Quote
Warmaker Posted May 14, 2007 Posted May 14, 2007 I only saw 28 Days Later, but it was never mentioned there either. It may be one of those plot or logic holes that they want us to go, "Forget about that. You're thinking too much." Quote
Guppy Posted May 14, 2007 Posted May 14, 2007 my take on what I read and what I assumed was that for an Infected, even hearing the sound of a un-infected human's voice was like the angriest you've ever been times a million. That seemed to be what seperated the two: Infected simply and purely hate those who are unaffected - the sight and sound of us drives them into a total rage where their sole thought is to stop end that person. Plus they never eat anyone, they just beat the Sh!t out of them. Quote
Sumdumgai Posted May 14, 2007 Posted May 14, 2007 Oh hey, I'm like that when I get really tired and people try to keep me up and not let me sleep. Complete with bloodshot eyes and everything except the vomitting blood. Quote
promethuem5 Posted May 15, 2007 Posted May 15, 2007 I hope the soundtrack gets released soon... Quote
1/1 LowViz Lurker Posted May 15, 2007 Posted May 15, 2007 (edited) Plus they never eat anyone, they just beat the Sh!t out of them. I think it would have been better if they were conscious of the disease inside them and that they should bite intentionally knowing that it will convert the victim to their cause. Nothing scarier than zombies that can think and plan. Seems that zombies are becoming faster and smarter these days! The next step in zombie evolution: zombies that are able to group together as a team to raid towns and create an undead (or in this case living) army to take over the world and form a zombie empire. Edited May 15, 2007 by 1/1 LowViz Lurker Quote
Wes Posted May 15, 2007 Posted May 15, 2007 I think it would have been better if they were conscious of the disease inside them and that they should bite intentionally knowing that it will convert the victim to their cause. Nothing scarier than zombies that can think and plan. Seems that zombies are becoming faster and smarter these days! The next step in zombie evolution: zombies that are able to group together as a team to raid towns and create an undead (or in this case living) army to take over the world and form a zombie empire. You play Resident Evil 4? Quote
bob joe mac Posted February 10, 2008 Posted February 10, 2008 *reviving old topic * I just watched it today and wow amazing zombie movie. When the snipers have to shoot at civilians was nuts. In my opinion this may take the cake for my favorite zombie movie Now I wonder how 28 months later will turn out... http://www.28-months-later.com/ Quote
Wes Posted February 10, 2008 Posted February 10, 2008 *reviving old topic * I just watched it today and wow amazing zombie movie. When the snipers have to shoot at civilians was nuts. In my opinion this may take the cake for my favorite zombie movie Now I wonder how 28 months later will turn out... http://www.28-months-later.com/ And I was about to say...there was already a sequel... I hope it isn't going to take a que from the "* of the Dead" series but buck the name-time trend. While I like the series I was mad at the stuff they changed and I don't want them to make it follow the same evolution in story as those and the RE movies. More like the RE games would be great. When are they going to make that Fatal Frame movie?! Quote
promethuem5 Posted February 10, 2008 Posted February 10, 2008 I'm excited no-matter what the next one is called; 28Months Later is fine. Days is amazing, and Weeks is pretty much my favorite zombie movie ever (top of a short list.) Quote
Vermillion21 Posted February 12, 2008 Posted February 12, 2008 The plot for 28 weeks later started strong, then fell apart ... especially with the hokey family plotline with the dad somehow tracking his kids down, even though he's suppose to be a mindless zombie. I was disappointed. *reviving old topic * I just watched it today and wow amazing zombie movie. When the snipers have to shoot at civilians was nuts. In my opinion this may take the cake for my favorite zombie movie Now I wonder how 28 months later will turn out... http://www.28-months-later.com/ I don't get this link, is this a fan attempt to continue the movie storylines?? Quote
Keith Posted February 12, 2008 Posted February 12, 2008 (edited) Days later was ok, but weeks later just pissed me off with its stupidity. If he needed a key card to get into his wife, then how the hell did he get back out once he was a zombie? Are we to believe the doors just "stayed open" ? Sean of the Dead has my vote for best zombie movie. Edited February 12, 2008 by Keith Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.