28 Weeks Later **Spoilers**

Cafe Society
1

Wow, I’m surprised there isn’t a thread yet.

Anyway, I first heard of this sequel just a few weeks ago, and didn’t give it much thought. I didn’t care for 28 Days Later, nor most zombie movies in general. But alas, I got roped into seeing this with some friends…and I’m glad I did. The movie rocked.

I thought it stayed true to 28 Days Later, in the sense that it consistently took itself very, very seriously. But it exceeded it in copious area. It was tighter, faster, and way more action-packed – oh, and best of all, no stupid ‘rape’ plot threads to slow things down.

This is also one of the most violent and grotesque movies I think I’ve ever seen. I even had to turn away at the eye-gouging scene. Then the helicopter scene, though beaten to the punch by Planet Terror (Grindhouse) a few weeks back, can more than hold its own, given that it wasn’t meant to be humorous, and again, was far more grotesque.

I also thought much of the acting was (surprisingly) top notch, given the source material. But I thought the one actress who really stole the show was Imogen Poots, who played the daughter, Tammy. You could see the fear in her eyes in almost every scene, particularly in the night vision sequence. Hell, I became terrified just looking at how terrified she was! Plus she’s just damn pretty to look at (that large nose looks damn good on her!)

This isn’t to say the movie isn’t without its problems. It has the usual round of characters doings stupid things, if only to push the story along, which was slightly disappointing. And while I was incredibly engaged by the daughter’s performance, I was annoyed by the son’s. To be fair, I’m sure the script is equally to blame, but I found it distracting that he was pretty much emotionless throughout the entire movie. Oh, and what the hell was with the father being everywhere in London, without a car, no less? Did he take the train?

So what did you guys think of the film?

2

Yeah I enjoyed it, despite myself. You’re right, the daughter was great (and beautiful, but only 17, alas) and the boy annoyed the crap outta me.

Way too many plot holes to point out (and hey, it’s a zombie film so whats the point…?) but the ‘code Red’ lockdown plan was pretty shabby, all the time they had to prepare a good procedure, and what does it turn out to be?

Herd everyone into a basement, lock the doors and turn off the lights!? Not very friendly, but fine, ok at least they’re safe. Uh…

back door eh?

but screw all that, why the hell were there no guards posted outside the room containing a woman who was confirmed as infected?! That might have saved some time and energy…

And I understand that dad had a security pass 'cos he looks after a building but should it really give him full access to US military buildings?
Bleaaargghhhh I’ll stop now.

3

Apart from this one. :slight_smile:

4

I enjoyed it very much. A half-step down from 28 Days Later, in my opinion, but still action-packed and entertaining.

There were plot holes, sure, but then it’s hard to make a zombie movie (or pseudo zombie movie, for you sticklers) without plot holes. There were plot holes in 28 Days Later, too. (It takes the zombies 28 days to starve? Yeah, well, how long does it take them to die of thirst/dehydration? Particularly when they’re dropping a pint of blood and spittle on everyone they meet?
Zombie: “RRAAOOOHHRRR!!!..RRR…whew…[huff]…I gotta sit down a minute…little dizzy…You guys go ahead…”)

So where will the next installment be set? Can the infected make it into Africa, or will the Suez Canal stop them?

I know they are planning at least one more in the series, but frankly I’m hoping for more (as long as the writing and direction remains tight). There are a lot of scenarios to explore with a worldwide rage epidemic. (And its aftermath, for that matter…28 Years Later, anyone?)

And hey, for our third installment can we leave out the military angle (and filmmaker’s commentary on the military) and just focus on the people? The military plot lines detracted from both movies in my opinion. Let’s just stick to ordinary people trying to survive a nightmarish situation.

5

Thanks for that Spoke! I supposed to be working so I tried to stiffle my laughing, and instead triggered a coughing fit, which I then had to remedy with a sip of water.

It went everywhere :frowning:

6

:smiley:

heh

7

Saw it yesterday.

I liked it but a few things annoyed me.

  • Close up camera work. Pull back and show more action please.

  • The Carlyle character when all “raged up” was a bit too clever. He followed the kids around. All other victims just seemed random.

  • No guard on the mother was silly to the extreme. No way would a caretaker be able to access someone like that so easily IRL.

  • The choices the US soldier made.

Other than that it was pretty enjoyable. Loved the offensive chopper flying and look forward to a third instalment.

8

Yeah, I saw that, but I meant ones discussing the movie after having seen it.

9

First off, the thing that stood out to me most was that the daughter was really, REALLY lovely. Her eyes are just amazing, and I’m sure that finding someone with such expressive eyes was not an accident considering how integral someone’s eyes looked was to the plotline.

Secondly, the handheld shaky camera combined with with the super high-contrast lighting of the scary scenes made it hard to sometime tell what was going on. When Scarlett was being attacked by Zombie-Dad, it was very hard to tell who had the gun. They seemed to go for the deliberate make-the-moviegoers-jump timing, as opposed to just building a sense of dread like I felt in the first one. As a result, I found it much scarier and less creepy than the first one. I wasn’t nearly as invested in the characters, and the story seemed a lot thinner.

I thought that Zombie-Dad being able to be everywhere at once and actually going out of his was to try to track his kids was pretty damn lame. Maybe there’s a reason he’s doing this that I’m missing, but seriously. Also, agreed on the point that the zombies … err, the Infected, would die of dehydration sooner than they would starve to death.

So, I did like it. I did have a very visceral reaction, and I did have the very strong urge to hide behind the person I saw the movie with. I just liked the first one a lot better.

10

I liked the movie, but I have a big problem with the “Zombies” within.

They were infected with a virus, right? Which causes uncontrollable rage, ok?

Then why do they not fight among themselves? Why do they just target uninfected people? Surely if you were infected with pure blind hatred, you’d be lashing out with the nearest person to you.

Also, it seems that the filmakers cannot decide how to KILL these creatures; by headshot alone, ala a “regular” zombie, or are they as killable as you and me?

When the breakout starts, the infected are shot by snipers, with chest shots working just as well as head shots; this makes sense to me. They’re just people, with beating hearts and lungs; shoot them, they die.

And yet, after the helicopter scene, we see some infected with great big fuckin chunks missing, ala romero zombies, still infected, still active, still crazy (after all these years).

These are problems that were carried over from the original film, so I dont level them at 28 weeks later… itself.

or maybe I missed something?

11

My take on the father’s behavior was due to the manner in which he was infected–through the virus carrier mother’s saliva. And that the virus had mutated inside her due to her genetic differences, causing a change in the infecteds’ behavior–maybe allowing them to retain some of their former intelligence? Maybe he recognized his kids but didn’t have the intelligence left to realize they were not supposed to be a tasty snack, just that he was supposed to be with them. He also used his keycard, obviously, since he got himself out of the room with his dead wife and got into the basement room where the civilians were trapped. He also retained enough brains to realize he needed to keep away from the firebombs (at least I think that was him shown in profile hiding in the alley as the fire blasted down the street).

I agree with the camera work being annoying though. Although I did like the frenetic and panicked feeling it gave the movie.

12

You’re definitely missing something on this point. It certainly wasn’t a problem in the first movie. The “zombies” are just people. Stab them, shoot them, smash them in the head with a bat, and they’re dead. Must just be a problem with the sequel.

13

I don’t know, I can kind of see why he might have ducked out when ordered to shoot people at random, but his reasons weren’t communicated very well. He seemed pretty casual about it afterwards.

Was shooting the sniper neccesary? Maybe… they were in hurry. Though since he did that, he might as well have popped the flamethrower guys…

14

I don’t think shooting the flame thrower would have made a difference with all that toxic gas floating around.
Did anyone else love the descent into the subway? I was freaked out the whole way down! Every time that girl looked back at the woman, I got a chill down my spine.

15

So how long would it take the infection to cross Eurasia? Surely mountains and deserts would slow things down. Imagine the panic in, say, India or China upon hearing that mainland Europe is infected. Imagine the boatloads of refugees trying to get away. Lots of fodder for more movies.

16

I suppose. Being flame-throwed can’t be much fun though…

Hey have you seen the film ‘The descent’? The whole thing is like that scene. All creepy and claustrophobic.