28 Weeks Later One of Best Horror Film of our time?!
Question: I would put it up in my top 5, where would you place it Horror fans?
Answers: I would put it up in my top 5, where would you place it Horror fans?
It's pretty good. I would place it as #3.
But it's not the best.
It's stylish, but, no, I wouldn't put it anywhere near the top of Best Horror Films. You don't get a vote from me. I think you need to watch a lot more horror films because it's too derivative with not enough innovations.
The cinematography is quite good.
I would place 28 Days Later as one of the best horror films.
28 Weeks Later sucked.
It was not bad. Doesn't belong in the top 10 horror of the '00s either , though.
I loved 28 days later, I tried not to get my hopes up for 'Weeks' but I was still disappointed
28 Days Later was an original take on the Zombie movie. 28 Weeks was just another inferior sequel. When will Hollywood learn that sequels to Horror movies are always crap.
I liked the movie, but it still left a lot to be desired. At first, (movie 1) I did not like the idea of "rage" induced maniacs...I mean, they weren't zombies so why did some of them feed on flesh? If they fed on flesh, why did they starve out? 28 Weeks was a little more brutal, especially when "Felix de Suza (Formula 51)" killed his wife in the isolation room...creepy!!! If all the maniacs died from starvation at the end of 28 Days, where did the infected come from? Also, how did the maniac dad keep up with his kids as all hell broke out around them? How could he see in the dark subway (enough to kill the lady Major) when she had to use night vision? There are a lot of unanswered questions...maybe I think too much into it, but all in all, I liked it... it explained stuff a little better than the first movie...but I am still not 100% sure exactly what the "infected" are. I give it 2.5 stars out of 5; I like it, but it is no "Resident Evil". Good question.