Please Read it's about 28 weeks later?!
Question: Ok 28 days later left of with the 3 survivors. right? well what happened i thought 28 weeks later would pick it up and explain what happened if they got rescued and i think they should have capped the story on the cause now i am confused.
Answers: Ok 28 days later left of with the 3 survivors. right? well what happened i thought 28 weeks later would pick it up and explain what happened if they got rescued and i think they should have capped the story on the cause now i am confused.
It was disjointed, because they leave us in 28 days with 3 survivors, then begin 28 weeks with a whole new set of people hiding out and 1 survivor. 28 days lead you to believe the 3 survivors were the only ones that made it in the whole country.
The fact that it did bring in American's as "saviors" really sucked. They said it was a NATO mission, but it was all Americans that were in the mission.
It did turn into just another zombie movie, instead of a futuristic "this could happen" virus outbreak movie that truly was terrifying.
I am still impressed by all the desolate shots of london the director was able to come up with. I really don't know how he did it. The empty streets and bridges impressed me in the first film, and in the second film.
well i guess we will never really know what happen to the first people. but my guess is they did not live. that just my opinion.
But i do agree they should have tried to tell us somehow what happen to them. maybe they could not get the same actors to return.
yes, i think so too and the also spoiled it by having americans in it. it also seemed like a typical zombie, where as the first one was different.
im just as confused as you are...... and nauseous after watching both films. camera movement is way too jerky that i cant understand whats happening, whos biting who!!?? who ran!!?? who got left behind??
its the worst film by danny boyle.....