Kermode is likeable because he's a film enthusiast instead of a self-important critic. He makes a lot of good points, but never takes anything (including himself) too seriously.
I just watched 28 Weeks for the first time today, have to say that I did like it, but I did think it wasn’t quite as deep as the first film, the first film had that “people in this post apocalyptic situation are just as bad as the Infected, and self preservation oriented, so the themes there are much more impactful than just “The Americans are evil because everything they do to occupy stuff goes horribly wrong”. As a result, even though I was riveted by the movie, it did feel more surface level in its approach to a zombie-esque movie. Visually though, it was outstanding, and the pace was relentless. Brutally intense. Be interesting to see what they do with a third movie, now Alex Garland and Danny Boyle are in talks, and said they’ve apparently got a good idea.
I agree. I don't where people get the idea that a zombie has to be dead. As you mentioned there are all kinds of zombies, mind slaves, reanimated dead, and with 28 days/weeks later... rage zombies.
The plot of 28 weeks only works because of a few people acting stupidly. *spoilers* I.e. no security guarding the room that Robert Carlyles wife is inside. Without her infecting Robert Carlyle then there wouldn't be an outbreak. Because the film only works because of stupid people I ended up hating it.
I'm confused as to why people think 28 Days was a better film. It had it's moments like the scene when London is deserted, but it simply kept dragging on. I didn't feel the powerfull moments like that of 28 Weeks. I think the English just want to stand by their film as the better one, which I understand. It was good, but it needed to be refined more. But, it's all just a difference of opinion in the end.
Really interesting. I didn't like 28 Weeks when I saw it (and it actually got boos from the audience) I got the Iraq references, but I didn't interpret it as Anarcho-syndicalist propaganda. My main problem was that the first 5 minutes of the film are amazing, and if they had followed through with some of the ideas that they established there, I think this could easily have been better than 28 Days.
One thing I just didn't get about 28 Weeks Later was how the American Soldiers completely ridiculously became the bad guys. Sure there was the order "Shoot everyone" but at so many points the friendly American Soldier could have yelled "Hey, we're not infected" and that makes sense since infection turns you instantly crazy. It turned them into the bad guys in such an arbitrary way that seemed indicative of the director's own prejudice towards the American Military. It was still cool as hell.
Well ok, but the 2nd one did have decent character development for what time frame they had to fit. I thought each character was well played, which surprised me. Well, let's hope the next one is good too.
@TxGearhead Yes, they are zombies. They act just like zombies, so as far as it doesn't matter plot-wise whether they're infected or dead, they can be called zombies.
Usually this guys reviews are pretty spot on but 28 weeks later was just average. The whole parallels with the iraq war stuff is all well and good but did it make it anymore entertaining. No. 28 weeks later is on the same level as resident evil.
kermode must really like the crazies, he references it a lot. i think the definition of a zombie movie goes past the reanimation question, because romero's movies are typified by patronising social commentary, a lot like days/weeks. not all disaster movies involve humanity devolving and betraying itself, but all successful zombie movies do.
Wow, he actually liked the movie. I haven't seen 28 Weeks Later myself, but I think it looks good, but I thought Mark would've ripped it a new asshole, according to what people are saying about it.
@moonturkey , too American and sort of displaces how good the first one was. Being chased by one solitary, recurring infected in weeks later isn't as scary as the reoccurring hoards in days later. All this being said they are two different films I guess but even by itself I think weeks later was pretty weak. The "political subtext" don't cut the butter for me:P I'm sure you now think I must be uneducated for just not "getting it":P
I'm not convinced that the film-makers were going for political commentary. The parallel could have been coincidental, since involving an English speaking military just makes good storytelling sense. If commentary was intended, it probably wasn't some generic "down with American imperialism" sort of thing. The soldiers were portrayed as valiant, and weren't occupying England, but standing in for the destroyed British Army.
The film is notably not as good as its predecessor, however the film’s still A scary, well acted, stylish & an enjoyable sequel. (82%) (4/5 stars) (positive)
I thought it was a decent sequel, but the last 30 minutes, specifically after Doyle exits the film, the movie kinda falls apart. I liked the sense of hope the first movie (28 Days Later) left the audience with, while still being ambiguous, whereas this movie ends on a bleak note. I'd be fine with that except that it felt more like shock value, as opposed to being meaningful. The whole reason why the characters sacrificed themselves (inadvertently or not) was to get the kids out, as one of them had a potential cure within them. The ending makes all the effort up to that point seem meaningless, and that didn't sit right with me. If anything the ending seems more like a excuse to have another sequel, as opposed to satisfyingly concluding the film.
But, that's the beauty of the second one. It did have the larger hordes and big action scenes, which are needed in a movie like this, but still had the powerfull scenes. Part 1 just kept dragging on and on. The last 45 minutes when they get to that house wasn't done right in my opinion.
Couldn't disagree more. I'm not one of you lot with your sophisticated comments where I'm sure you have some sort of qualification in literature or media but I thought that the camera work was AWFUL. It ruined a lot of the film. There's only so much shaking and flashing that's acceptable. I thought that in the case of the helicopter scene it could have been replaced with something edgier like in days later where the idea of desperation is more prominent. Weeks later is, in my opinon...
Oh come on, It's not like in the first movie where the British soldiers became the bad guys, that was slowly broken into and it made sense but if didn't make sense how here was "the one good one". They spent the first half of the film humanising them and fleshing them out then they all turned into "Illogical, Must-Kill machines". Like the flame-thrower scene, they would never have torched one of their own, NEVER. It makes no sense. BTW: I would expect such an attitude from an uppity Canadian.
It was never as good as the original. 28 Days Later gave me such a nightmare that I have not watched it in years for fear of have that same nightmare. This was OK, but nowhere near as atmospheric or tense as the first, more a typical brash sequal big guns sequal.
I find it scary that people like you think it is evil for soldiers to try to prevent an incredibly lethal infection spreading in the only way they can. After that queue, the soldiers just become stupid (or the director is stupid) as they even knowing the infected cant shoot guns or drive cars but try to kill them anyway. They become faceless stormtroopers as the director knows he can't explain their actions. Your Communards example was one of revenge, not to save lives but satisfy a bloodlust.
I don't have to suffer your religious prejudices. Just because a certain sect of a religion forbids something, doesn't mean that thing is equivalent to a much more serious crime. Islam forbids consumption of alcohol, that doesn't mean alcohol is equivalent to taking heroin. It's incredibly naive to say that soldiers are only justified to kill to defend themselves. Enemy is a danger if they are not captured/killed due to their declared intent. It's so tiring arguing with religious extremists.
couldn't hold a candle to 28 days but still above and beyond most modern horror movies. but the lead kids performance is rubbish and actually hurts the film imo.
Straw men? You brought those "straw men" out that were little more than snide accusation that could not go uncontested. Why don't you randomly pick another logical fallacy to accuse me of to desperately try to discredit me. Clearly you have some deep seated and illogical prejudices that you probably have in common with the director.
What kind of review is this, he talks about everything except the main theme of the movie : the issue of the unheroic husband deserting wife during a crisis ..
1:47 I shot my Wifi
the first 10 mins of this movie is one of the greatest of all time , shame about the other 100 mins.
That sums it up perfectly.
Kermode is likeable because he's a film enthusiast instead of a self-important critic. He makes a lot of good points, but never takes anything (including himself) too seriously.
Lmao them explaining a “vodcast” is 2007 as fuck.
28 weeks is so underrated. It's one of the best horror sequels ever made IMO.
It’s because 28 days is such a classic, being a follow up would not be easy. But 28 weeks does provide a good follow up
Who else is watching (2)8 years later?
I just watched 28 Weeks for the first time today, have to say that I did like it, but I did think it wasn’t quite as deep as the first film, the first film had that “people in this post apocalyptic situation are just as bad as the Infected, and self preservation oriented, so the themes there are much more impactful than just “The Americans are evil because everything they do to occupy stuff goes horribly wrong”. As a result, even though I was riveted by the movie, it did feel more surface level in its approach to a zombie-esque movie.
Visually though, it was outstanding, and the pace was relentless. Brutally intense.
Be interesting to see what they do with a third movie, now Alex Garland and Danny Boyle are in talks, and said they’ve apparently got a good idea.
Damn it, Kermode. I have to go to sleep but I keep clicking on another review.
(2)8 years later still here…..
I remember going to see this movie feeling all vulnerable as I was coming down off the previous night's E. Jesus, totally mashed my head in it did.
Anthony Hopkins in "I shot my wifi" there.
Oh wow! Where it all began!
thanks for uploading. keep up the good work.
28 Weeks Later was great.
Good review. I love Kermode.
A fair review, it surprised me when I saw it because it was better than I expected.
28 Days creators give credit to Day of the Triffids for the everybody-is-missing opener ---- and Walking Dead creators (afaik) do not ...
Lol at the clipping on the video turning the tagline for Fracture into "I Shot My Wifi". That sounds like a much better film.
Loved the rating of Next. “Next!”
The first film was brilliant, but I gotta admit I enjoy 28 weeks later a hell of a lot more
"contains violence to the welsh accent" haha
Seeing the helicopter ski in-frame towards the beginning, during a sweeping 'running' shot, really spoiled the whole thing for me.
I thought it was fine, although the leads couldn't act and I kept thinking of 28 Days Later, which is obviously a masterpiece.
Then there are the prequels: 28 Hours Later, 28 Minutes Later and 28 Seconds Later lol
Have you seen the Quibi short "28 Milliseconds Later"?
"'Involves cruelty to your bum'."
"...what?"
I agree. I don't where people get the idea that a zombie has to be dead. As you mentioned there are all kinds of zombies, mind slaves, reanimated dead, and with 28 days/weeks later... rage zombies.
The plot of 28 weeks only works because of a few people acting stupidly.
*spoilers*
I.e. no security guarding the room that Robert Carlyles wife is inside.
Without her infecting Robert Carlyle then there wouldn't be an outbreak.
Because the film only works because of stupid people I ended up hating it.
hes become my hero over the last 3 months i have his book and its great if you can get it and sit back with a cup of tea and enjoy!
Can't wait for "28 decades later", "28 centuries later" and then "28 millenia later". Should be great films.
I'm confused as to why people think 28 Days was a better film. It had it's moments like the scene when London is deserted, but it simply kept dragging on. I didn't feel the powerfull moments like that of 28 Weeks. I think the English just want to stand by their film as the better one, which I understand. It was good, but it needed to be refined more. But, it's all just a difference of opinion in the end.
Really interesting. I didn't like 28 Weeks when I saw it (and it actually got boos from the audience)
I got the Iraq references, but I didn't interpret it as Anarcho-syndicalist propaganda.
My main problem was that the first 5 minutes of the film are amazing, and if they had followed through with some of the ideas that they established there, I think this could easily have been better than 28 Days.
When is 28 Months Later coming out? Assuming there is, indeed, such a film?
2:13 I laughed so fucking hard,
One thing I just didn't get about 28 Weeks Later was how the American Soldiers completely ridiculously became the bad guys.
Sure there was the order "Shoot everyone" but at so many points the friendly American Soldier could have yelled "Hey, we're not infected" and that makes sense since infection turns you instantly crazy.
It turned them into the bad guys in such an arbitrary way that seemed indicative of the director's own prejudice towards the American Military.
It was still cool as hell.
Holy shit, I fucking love Kermode, Brilliant trollmaster
exactly what I thought! Doesn't come close to 28 days later.
Well ok, but the 2nd one did have decent character development for what time frame they had to fit. I thought each character was well played, which surprised me. Well, let's hope the next one is good too.
Intacto is great !
I love 28 weeks. I infact prefer it to days. There !
@TxGearhead Yes, they are zombies. They act just like zombies, so as far as it doesn't matter plot-wise whether they're infected or dead, they can be called zombies.
the Day of The Triffids thing is spot on. Great film though
@derpenstein Wait.... I could barely see anything in that scene....
Usually this guys reviews are pretty spot on but 28 weeks later was just average. The whole parallels with the iraq war stuff is all well and good but did it make it anymore entertaining. No. 28 weeks later is on the same level as resident evil.
Wtf is the dad so intelligent?!!!
I love you sunshine! PSA JK Cowan's New ART is READY and tell as many people as you can!
I wish I could see what mackintosh looks like now aka Andy lol
haha theyre so naive at the beginning.
kermode must really like the crazies, he references it a lot. i think the definition of a zombie movie goes past the reanimation question, because romero's movies are typified by patronising social commentary, a lot like days/weeks. not all disaster movies involve humanity devolving and betraying itself, but all successful zombie movies do.
Wow, he actually liked the movie. I haven't seen 28 Weeks Later myself, but I think it looks good, but I thought Mark would've ripped it a new asshole, according to what people are saying about it.
@moonturkey , too American and sort of displaces how good the first one was. Being chased by one solitary, recurring infected in weeks later isn't as scary as the reoccurring hoards in days later. All this being said they are two different films I guess but even by itself I think weeks later was pretty weak. The "political subtext" don't cut the butter for me:P I'm sure you now think I must be uneducated for just not "getting it":P
whats wrong with the rest of it? is it not art house enough for you?
It was Scary as f,,, I also liked the ongoing occupation of an army in another country side to the story
do they ever age
@derpenstein NO SPOILERS PLEASE!!!!
Blimey, 14 years ago... that's horrifying...
Good movie, good sequal, the first one was better.
Could you review ALIEN?
Im with Kermode on this- a lot of people, critics and otherwise, gave this movie a lot of crap. i enjoyed it- not as good as 28 days, but still good
I'm not convinced that the film-makers were going for political commentary. The parallel could have been coincidental, since involving an English speaking military just makes good storytelling sense.
If commentary was intended, it probably wasn't some generic "down with American imperialism" sort of thing. The soldiers were portrayed as valiant, and weren't occupying England, but standing in for the destroyed British Army.
The film is notably not as good as its predecessor, however the film’s still A scary, well acted, stylish & an enjoyable sequel. (82%) (4/5 stars) (positive)
I thought it was a decent sequel, but the last 30 minutes, specifically after Doyle exits the film, the movie kinda falls apart. I liked the sense of hope the first movie (28 Days Later) left the audience with, while still being ambiguous, whereas this movie ends on a bleak note. I'd be fine with that except that it felt more like shock value, as opposed to being meaningful. The whole reason why the characters sacrificed themselves (inadvertently or not) was to get the kids out, as one of them had a potential cure within them. The ending makes all the effort up to that point seem meaningless, and that didn't sit right with me. If anything the ending seems more like a excuse to have another sequel, as opposed to satisfyingly concluding the film.
But, that's the beauty of the second one. It did have the larger hordes and big action scenes, which are needed in a movie like this, but still had the powerfull scenes. Part 1 just kept dragging on and on. The last 45 minutes when they get to that house wasn't done right in my opinion.
great review.
I love this film.....in fact some parts are actually better than 28 Days Later, which I also love
:)
Couldn't disagree more. I'm not one of you lot with your sophisticated comments where I'm sure you have some sort of qualification in literature or media but I thought that the camera work was AWFUL. It ruined a lot of the film. There's only so much shaking and flashing that's acceptable. I thought that in the case of the helicopter scene it could have been replaced with something edgier like in days later where the idea of desperation is more prominent. Weeks later is, in my opinon...
Oh come on, It's not like in the first movie where the British soldiers became the bad guys, that was slowly broken into and it made sense but if didn't make sense how here was "the one good one".
They spent the first half of the film humanising them and fleshing them out then they all turned into "Illogical, Must-Kill machines". Like the flame-thrower scene, they would never have torched one of their own, NEVER. It makes no sense.
BTW: I would expect such an attitude from an uppity Canadian.
It was never as good as the original. 28 Days Later gave me such a nightmare that I have not watched it in years for fear of have that same nightmare. This was OK, but nowhere near as atmospheric or tense as the first, more a typical brash sequal big guns sequal.
I find it scary that people like you think it is evil for soldiers to try to prevent an incredibly lethal infection spreading in the only way they can.
After that queue, the soldiers just become stupid (or the director is stupid) as they even knowing the infected cant shoot guns or drive cars but try to kill them anyway. They become faceless stormtroopers as the director knows he can't explain their actions.
Your Communards example was one of revenge, not to save lives but satisfy a bloodlust.
television isn't it? it's for charidee mate
I don't have to suffer your religious prejudices. Just because a certain sect of a religion forbids something, doesn't mean that thing is equivalent to a much more serious crime.
Islam forbids consumption of alcohol, that doesn't mean alcohol is equivalent to taking heroin.
It's incredibly naive to say that soldiers are only justified to kill to defend themselves. Enemy is a danger if they are not captured/killed due to their declared intent.
It's so tiring arguing with religious extremists.
couldn't hold a candle to 28 days but still above and beyond most modern horror movies. but the lead kids performance is rubbish and actually hurts the film imo.
Straw men? You brought those "straw men" out that were little more than snide accusation that could not go uncontested.
Why don't you randomly pick another logical fallacy to accuse me of to desperately try to discredit me.
Clearly you have some deep seated and illogical prejudices that you probably have in common with the director.
What kind of review is this, he talks about everything except the main theme of the movie : the issue of the unheroic husband deserting wife during a crisis ..
try doing better then
goes on worst movies he has recommended list.
28 weeks later was just shit.
28 days later and dawn of the dead (remake) are the best.
Really didn't like 28 weeks later. It's got nothing on the original.
I despised the movie. Danny Boyle's move from director to producer is far too noticable.
no mayo, pls.