![]() ![]() Six months after the outbreak of the Rage virus which converts people into flesh-eating zombies. ![]() Darkness and suspense prevail in 28 Weeks Later, the terrifying 2007 sequel to Danny Boyle ’s 2002 hit 28 Days Later. Beautiful, interesting, incredible cinema. 28 Weeks Later movie review: Clever zombie flick offers disorienting violence mixed with unsettling social commentary. I recommend this to anyone who liked the flick itself. Following 28 Days Later, this horror sequel picks up six months following the devastation the Rage virus. There is some disturbing content and bloody, gory violence in this making-of production, if no real spoilers. We again get irritating overstylization, if only a tad this time. They talk about working with Fresnadillo and Boyle(who did a little second unit), about making the picture itself very much like a documentary and, oh, right, the action, too(why do these have such vague focus?). They have interesting things to say, especially when they go over stuff about the movie itself, instead of engaging in the obligatory love-fest(at one point, Byrne practically hiccups trying to make sure that we know that as tough as it was, it was fun, you know, "please don't not hire me"). But when 28 Weeks Later arrived in 2007 there was no Jim, no Selena on screen, and perhaps more startling, no Danny Boyle behind the camera. The best of it is when it actually stays on the same person for several seconds, instead of jumping around like a Rage-infected monkey suffering from ADD. Can this be good with no Danny Boy, Danny Boy, Danny Boyle Fans had to wait five years for a sequel to 28 Days Later. It consists of behind-the-scenes footage, interviews and clips of the film(and the first one). This is the second-to-shortest(or longest) of the three featurettes on the DVD of 28 Weeks Later, coming in at just over 7 minutes total. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |