![]() ![]() While 28 Days Later subverted expectations to become a groundbreaking horror movie, 28 Weeks Later leaned towards mainstream action and spectacle. For all of its flashier, big-budget additions, it told a less intimate story and lacked identifiable characters. RELATED: ‘The Matrix’ Dance Adaptation Being Directed for the Stage by Danny BoyleĢ8 Weeks Later also fell behind its predecessor in critical success. ![]() It earned a fair $64 million at the box office, but given that the far thriftier 28 Days Later earned over $82 million worldwide, Weeks looked like a fiscal disappointment by comparison. Despite this budget increase, though, 28 Weeks Later failed to live up to financial expectations. Thus, the follow-up warranted greater investment, and was made for a loftier $15 million, put to use for larger set pieces, grander special effects, and an overall vaster narrative. While Danny Boyle directed 28 Days Later on a modest $8 million budget, its runaway success poised 28 Weeks Later to be a blockbuster sequel. Londoners, beware.The history of 28 Month's Later's troubled development begins back in 2007, when 28 Weeks Later first hit theaters. By the way, I think that watching 28 Weeks Later will be an especially scary experience for Londoners, as most of it is set in London. There are better movies with a similar feel (such as Children of Men), but as a sequel to a decent horror movie, 28 Weeks Later certainly stands out. really not enough few safety precautions on the part of the military for such a dangerous epidemic potential), but the movie runs smoothly throughout, and even the child actors deliver. There are some loopholes in the plot, of course (e.g. And, like I said, it is different - with its crisp visuals (unlike the music-video lushness of a lot of Hollywood film scare), haunting and memorable music and unaffected performances. 28 Weeks Later focuses a little more on some action elements than, say, on the question of how long people can uphold their morality and respect for their fellow woman in such peril, but still, this movie stands proudly as a horror flick. We get to see normal, everyday people and faces struggling to survive, when practically everyone around them can quickly become the embodiment of evil and destruction. Perhaps due to the fact that this is an European movie, we get something markedly different from the Resident Evil franchise - here, in placed of Resident Evil's focus on showcasing pretty actresses and made-up high-tech, we are treated to a foreboding feeling of isolation and powerlessness in face of helplessness and doom. The zombies here are extremely hyped-up, not doped, and instead of being bent on eating the flesh of the living, they behave like rage-driven human beings stripped completely of their superego and ego, and left with the instinct to fight (and yes, as it's the result of a scientific experiment gone bad, the movie can be considered sci-fi). ![]() The main gimmick here, like in the original, is a mix of the zombie theme and the killer virus theme. Most importantly, however, the sequel is as good as the original, which is the greatest surprise of all in the horror genre. Although the movie does juggle many clichés, it does so kind of skillfully, so that you can really expect to be surprised. I must say this is one of the best horror movies I have seen (and I have seen hundreds), for a number of reasons. Like its predecessor, 28 Days Later, 28 Weeks Later is nothing like that. European horror movies used to be theatrical, low-budget and suffering from it, and badly edited. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |