28 days later review. (1 Viewer)

[coroneos]

This movie is different and I give credit for this. However, I did not like the movie at all. The imagery was crap and the cinematic techniques were apalling. I wanted to leave after 10mins. Unfortunately I didn't want to leave my friends in boredom even more !!

 

[Macccca]

bah

28 days later was such a good movie.

"the cinematic techniques were apalling." V--- the director (boyle) expermienmted with quite a few different techniques and imo it really worked.

each to their own, but i thought that this was definalty one of my favoutite movies

 

[still ill]

the cinematic techniques gave it a charming realism that you don't see in films anymore
the plot was intense and intriguing
it left me thinking about the possibilities the film posited for days after
one of the best films of the year in my opinion

 

[Xayma]

Originally posted by still ill
one of the best films of the year in my opinion

Nope, this is probably the one time I will agree with Coroneous ever, but that movie wasn't good, the concept was pretty awful although the director did try to bring it back to decent the acting just brought it back down again. It seems to be the love/hate movie of the season. Honestly dont waste your money.

 

[deyveed]

A lot of people i know have said the movie was crap.
I'm not going to watch it

 

[BallymcBallTits]

noo
i cant beleive you said the visuals and cinematography were crap?
why?? The video gave the movie a gritty realist edge which, when given the subject matter and storyline, create a wonderful paradox. I found this movie to be very confronting because of its cheap and realistic look. And what about the amazing openeing scene of the movie where jim is wandering around a deserted london. That was such a brilliant scene, and left me scratching my head and wondering "how the fuck did they do that". (incidently, the crew set up very early in the morning when there was no-one around, hard to beleive, but true). And what about the massive shot of manchester(??i cant remember the city) as smouldering ruins?
I cant beleive you said the cinematography was crap. The change to 35mm at the end of the film brought a haunting clarity to the image, making it feel somewhat resolved.
and the editing!! talk about intense. Everything from the opening montage of violence, to the absolutley frenetic editing during the climax of the film, worked so well. The use of music was awesome too, Brian eno and Godspeed you Black emperor bringing very climactic qualities to the film.
This film really opened my eyes to what you can do with video (i have an interest in film making, and have made several short videos), it was brilliantly made and looked fantastic. granted the plot was thin and pretty shakey, but lets face it, no body was expecting the usual suspects II were they.

 

[still ill]

you've been tol'

now go see a decent non hollywood film for once because it's a rarity and spectacular

 

[Macccca]

wow, very well put Bally

 

[coroneos]

But the subtlety of cinematic techniques + different camera uses did not really work to the directors advantage.

Yes, it does look more realistic and down to earth than a whole range of modern day movies. However, why the hell would you want to watch something that depicts reality when we watch movies to escape the confines of reality?

The movie does not succeed on any level, and the imagery of violence does not work with such poor cinematic techniques.

 

[BallymcBallTits]

depicting reality?
what the fuck?
since when have zombies been real.
This film is in no way a realist film. Hopefully you understand the concepts of similacra and representation so i dont have to explain them to you.

This film is escapism, entertainment, cleverly hidden in a way that makes it look like a news article. It imerses you in it because it looks more real. it doesnt mean it IS real. you fucking idiot.

 

[crazyhobo]

Coroneos: you give yourself way too much credit in this threads title.

 

[BallymcBallTits]

yeah, its barely a paragraph, let alone a full, structured, coherent reveiw

 

[unoriginal]

28 days later would have to be one of the worst movies of the year, I laughed the whole way through and i'm pretty sure it wasn't supposed to be a comedy. If you want a laugh see it now, if you don't want to waste 2 hours watching a very ordinary movie give it a miss

 

[crazyhobo]

Originally posted by unoriginal
28 days later would have to be one of the worst movies of the year, I laughed the whole way through and i'm pretty sure it wasn't supposed to be a comedy. If you want a laugh see it now, if you don't want to waste 2 hours watching a very ordinary movie give it a miss

You had better not seen it in a cinema, or you are the scum of the earth.

 

[guy]

i havn't seen the movie and i hate you all
go watch legally blonde two

 

[unoriginal]

crazyhobo I did see it in a cinema but it was almost empty and every person in the cinema was laughing. If the cinema was full I would have left, I have some decency

 

[Macccca]

out of curiosity, if you dont like 28 days later, what kind of movies do you like?

 

[flisb]

oh i've wanted to see this movie for so long!!!!!!! but i missed it and they aren't playing it anywhere near me now *cries hysterically*
.. looks like i'm gonna have to wait till the video comes out...*sigh*

 

[BallymcBallTits]

unoriginal, you're a fucking twat. You can't just go shooting your mouth of about how much this movie sucks without substantiating your claims at all.
how about telling us WHY YOU DIDNT LIKE IT as opposed to how full the cinema was.
its people like you who fuck me off to no end.

 

[jhakka]

I liked the movie because I haven't seen something like that before. The filming was unusual, and it was one of those "it could possibly happen" kind of scary (as opposed to piss yourelf in fear because someone lost his upper body scary). I like something different now and then.

That and the fact that it was so obviously British. I like how they didn't Americanise it.