deepak Posted May 15, 2007 Report Share Posted May 15, 2007 Has anyone seen this? Good/bad compared to the first movie? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ojnihs Posted May 15, 2007 Report Share Posted May 15, 2007 Was it released? Damn I must be living in a god damn bubble. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deepak Posted May 15, 2007 Author Report Share Posted May 15, 2007 Yeah it came out a few days ago. Reviews are all over the place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ojnihs Posted May 15, 2007 Report Share Posted May 15, 2007 Yeah it came out a few days ago. Reviews are all over the place. Well fuck me. I enjoyed 28 Days Later, so maybe I'll give this one a shot. One of my roommates was a huge fan of 28 Days Later so I'm sure he'll want to go see it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deepak Posted May 15, 2007 Author Report Share Posted May 15, 2007 I really liked the first movie as well. Seems lack of character development (due to pacing) is a problem with 28 Weeks Later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
postjack Posted May 15, 2007 Report Share Posted May 15, 2007 I really liked the first movie as well. Seems lack of character development (due to pacing) is a problem with 28 Weeks Later. i have no problem with lack of character development, so long as their are plenty of scenes with badass infected fucking shit up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ojnihs Posted May 15, 2007 Report Share Posted May 15, 2007 i have no problem with lack of character development, so long as their are plenty of scenes with badass infected fucking shit up. best way to put it ever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thelonious Monk Posted May 15, 2007 Report Share Posted May 15, 2007 i wish the naming of the movies wasn't so corny. 28 days later was fine. 28 weeks later ok. 28 months later? stop it. if there is a 28 years later i will be mad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ojnihs Posted May 15, 2007 Report Share Posted May 15, 2007 i wish the naming of the movies wasn't so corny. 28 days later was fine. 28 weeks later ok. 28 months later? stop it. if there is a 28 years later i will be mad. I guess we'll have to wait and see what happens in this movie to see if they make 28 Months Later. Muahahaha. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thelonious Monk Posted May 15, 2007 Report Share Posted May 15, 2007 28 months later has been announced. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deepak Posted May 15, 2007 Author Report Share Posted May 15, 2007 i wish the naming of the movies wasn't so corny. 28 days later was fine. 28 weeks later ok. 28 months later? stop it. if there is a 28 years later i will be mad. I guess I better register the domain 28 decades later I just spoke to two of my friends, both liked it better than the first. "More action, less whiny bitch drama" according to one of them Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ojnihs Posted May 15, 2007 Report Share Posted May 15, 2007 28 months later has been announced. well there goes that then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dusty Chalk Posted May 15, 2007 Report Share Posted May 15, 2007 I saw it the day it came out. Excellent. A worthy sequel. They deal with the spread of the infection more, and the primary characters in the this one (there's no overlap of characters whatsoever) go through a completely different set of obstacles than the first set. It's still very British and relatively low budget, though I don't know how they did the firebombing scenes that you see in the trailer. That looked pretty good to my non-eyeglassed eyes. You can see this one without seeing the first one -- they rehash the premise of this one (inasmuch as it is covered in the second one) in about the first 30 seconds of the film. I don't think they even spoil the first one.28 months later has been announced. Really? Sources? I looked it up on wikipedia, and the source says he doesn't mention the title. I think the next one could be 32 weeks later. And then the one after that could be 36 weeks later. And then, just to fuck with us, they could call the one after that 39 weeks later. And then 47 1/2 weeks later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dusty Chalk Posted May 16, 2007 Report Share Posted May 16, 2007 Or perhaps they could just call it 28 Days After That. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
postjack Posted May 16, 2007 Report Share Posted May 16, 2007 Or perhaps they could just call it 28 Days After That. 28 Days After Next Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.