28 Days Later: Not getting enough Credit

[Lendri]

I dont know if any of you have seen 28 Days Later, but its a horror type movie from Britain.

I'm gonna whine about the reviews it has recieved. America is F*CKED up man, just because it doesn't show massive explosions and Vin Diesel, they're ripping on it.

A quote from TIME magazine: "...bland special effects..."

Okay, the movie has perfect special effects. They didnt have to spend millions of dollars on CG effects that look fucking fake. God, all the American Film Industry values is computer graphics that look like they belong in a PSX game.

A statistic from a newspaper: "28 Days Later: 2 and a half stars... Legally Blonde 2: 4 stars"

Give me a fucking break. That movie deserves nothing short of death. Ergh...

The best thing about the movie is the fact that they used a low quality camera, and that every shot has composition. It seems like this means nothing, it doesn't have flashy cars or constantly naked women, so it must be horrible! Damn those brits, so would say our fellow critics.

Quote from a newspaper, "...blunted by poor camera techniques and quality..."

If you have yet to see this movie, let me tell you, the "poor camera quality" is fucking intentional. It adds to the ambience of the movie, and if these American critics cant get their shit straight, some blood is gonna be spilled.

That's all I have to say.

Go about your business.

[Captain_Dude]

I agree completely. I enjoyed that movie a great deal. The special effects worked great. The infected looked great! The makeup was wonderful, the acting was superb, and the camera techniques were very fitting.
I felt the plot was a wee bit predictable, but other than that it was a very enjoyable movie!

I think the people that didn't like it are the same kind of people to like the Matrix Reloaded. Bland, dull, confusing stories with horrid acting and excessive fight scenes are perfectly fine, as long as people fight, things explode (I still say that movie was only fun because of the pointless explosions, like the part where the thing exploded, and the other thing exploded, and the explosions collided and then they exploded that aswell). Many americans will easily go see a piece of trash movie like Matrix 2 and love it if everything blows up and people fight, and there's all kinds of pointless special effects.

That's just the way we Americans are, we like our cars fast, our explosions big, and our fight scene long (with some meaningless, bland sex scenes thrown in). Story means nothing to most of us. Hell, I might aswell fire up maya, make a 3 hour movie of this blowing up, and make millions off of it!

[Reenee]

My brother grabbed one of those "for screenings only" copies.

He said it was awful. So darn awful, he got to sleep. It's just not worth watching.

And before he said that, I was optimistic about seeing it myself, but now that my brother saw it (and I trust him; he's a computer animator and works heavily in the movie industry), I'll go blow my money on McDonald's.

[Gwanko_Vera]

This movie is a good movie. it may not have had a hole lot of explosive speacial effects, but it was, in my oppinion the best scary movie that has come out this year. i wanted to see it because it was,by first impression going to be about zombies, and in a way it is. one of my relitive saw it and because it was an english import "AKA" a foirgn movies (pardon my spelling kindo f tired) they thought it was crap. for what i was expecting and what the movie was i have to admit there was a big diffrence though for me at the diffrence was that it was better than i expected, oh and on the day i was going to see it,i looked in People magazine and they said that it was a good movie

[Wewt]

That.

Movie.

Sucked.

Hard.

[Ness]

I was never into horror movies.

[Davion]

On 2003-07-03 11:18, Ness wrote:
I was never into horror movies.

I'm with Ness. I don't know how my sister talked me into seeing The Ring. I spend FAR too much time looking at TVs. (if you've seen the movie you know what I mean)

About 28 days later. You don't need to go so crazy at the entire American movie industry because you didn't like the reviews, Lendri. Legally Blonde 2 is a COMPLETLY different kind of movie. I doubt it will be getting any academy awards for best special effects or best cinematography. You shouldn't even put it in the same sentence as 28 Days Later, and your statment about how bad L.B.2. is is very opinon based. I have sisters who love that movie.

Now, let me ask this. How many movies like 28 Days Later have there been? It's so old that anyone watching a zombie movie already brings baggage with him or her. Also, you need to figure out the differance between special effects and special effects. A movie with bland special effects and bad camera is much different than super explosions or other pyrotechnics.

[Ness]

On 2003-07-03 12:04, Davion wrote:

On 2003-07-03 11:18, Ness wrote:
I was never into horror movies.

I'm with Ness. I don't know how my sister talked me into seeing The Ring. I spend FAR too much time looking at TVs. (if you've seen the movie you know what I mean)

I hard so much about that movie I might as well have seen it.

[Jehosaphaty]

im not a big horror movie fan either. mmm mcdonalds. definatly money better spent.

[Sai-Yuk]

if you want a good movie, watch the adventures of baron munchausen. that movie is utterly insane. but it gels in a way most insane movies don't.

like the point where the baron cuts rope from the top of a place they're climbing from to tie to the bottom or when he lifts himself and his horse out of water by his hair...

not sure on the spelling of the movie, but, i'm sure it has one of the guys from monty python in it, as well as... what's her name... uma thurman? i'm sure she was in a batman movie or something...

still, effects laden movies can't be said to be better than ones that make you think, simply because they are flashy and make you go 'ooohh' and 'aaahh' with all the pretty explosions.