|
Post by Amanda on Apr 18, 2007 10:48:48 GMT -5
We have that one at work! I took a photograph of it hanging in our lobby, actually, and sent it to Andrew. The one we have is massive, though. It's more of a banner than a one-sheet (which is what a regular-sized poster is called). As soon as it came in I said, "Mine!" It's basically one of the coolest posters I've ever seen.
And by the way, I totally said that the other day when I was looking at it. I said, "Are those Rose Byrne's eyes?" and got a round of, "Who's Rose Byrne?" and I was like, "Oh, you know, she was in Marie Antoinette and Troy and she's in Sunshine..." and they were like, "*blank stare*" and I was like, "...nevermind..."
Anyhow, I've changed my mind about this one since December! It's going to be scary as hell. =x
|
|
|
Post by sunshinedna on Apr 19, 2007 16:36:29 GMT -5
I've not seen it yet, but have heard it is *brilliant* and scary, scary, scary... I'm amazed they finished it actually. As you will see earlier in this thread I was told a couple months ago that it wouldn't be finished (I think there was loads more CGI than they were planning)... but it happened...
I've been seeing a few things around London for this. That symbol spray painted on sidewalks and stuff... I also think there's going to be a 'zombie attack' in various UK cities soon, too... heh...
|
|
|
Post by sunshinedna on Apr 26, 2007 19:21:09 GMT -5
Just saw it. Intense. So intense that my friend was so shaken up afterwards that he didn't even want to come to the party! It's very different to the first one, but it's equally as good. No rubbish sell-out sequel...
|
|
|
Post by kagerou on Apr 29, 2007 16:44:42 GMT -5
When I first heard about this I was skeptical and I thought it'd be a silly sequel... But they've started showing the previews here and it looks crazy awesome! (And I realized that Danny and Alex were actually involved, which I didn't really know until recently. ) Not to mention its got Rose. So I'm excited, only a couple weeks 'til it comes out. ^^ Although I'm worried that it'll freak me out.
|
|
|
Post by chero on Apr 29, 2007 17:42:18 GMT -5
The TV adverts over here look promising!
|
|
|
Post by sunshinedna on Apr 30, 2007 5:47:04 GMT -5
Although I'm worried that it'll freak me out. It's *really* violent in places. Really, really violent. I spent a lot of it hiding behind my hands! But I'm a wimp when it comes to scary movies, so someone of a stronger constitution might do better than me... Saying that it's also a *lot* of fun... and British people, at least, will think it's got a happy ending
|
|
|
Post by kagerou on May 3, 2007 10:47:48 GMT -5
Haha, I don't worry about violence, just sometimes the zombie stuff gets me. It's weird. But I'm excited nonetheless. ;D
|
|
|
Post by sunshinedna on May 4, 2007 6:28:51 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Amanda on May 4, 2007 13:53:21 GMT -5
That's such a cool short! I loved it. On another note, check this out. Someone typed it up from some recent edition of Entertainment Weekly and it made me laugh and laugh: There was no shortage of casualties in 2002's 28 Days Later, Danny Boyle's surprise hit about a plague-stricken Britain where almost the entire population had been transformed into blood-soaked psychopaths — or been chewed to death by them. But producer Andrew Macdonald was the one who found himself a victim when it came time to plan a sequel. Why? Well, Cillian Murphy had become so in demand after his breakthrough performance in the first film that the Batman Begins and Red Eye star refused to take even a small role in 28 Weeks Later. ''I was going to have him play one of the infected,'' says Macdonald. ''I said, 'I'll buy you a trip to Barbados if you appear in the film for 10 minutes.' But I couldn't persuade him.''
Macdonald doesn't sound particularly irked by the snub--maybe because Murphy will star in the producer's forthcoming sci-fi epic Sunshine. Plus, his absence allowed new director Juan Carlos Fresnadillo to take the franchise in a fresh direction. 28 Weeks Later takes place six months after the last of the ''infected'' have died off and stars Robert Carlyle as a survivor who is reunited with his two children in London as the city is repopulated with the help of U.S. troops. ''The approach of the movie is to look at one family and all the problems around it,'' says Fresnadillo. Wait a minute. An intimate family drama with zombies? ''Well, what happens, of course, is the disease comes back,'' says Macdonald. ''And it gets out of control, and the Americans just say, 'Kill everybody.' First of all they shoot the infected, then they shoot everybody, and then they firebomb them with napalm, and then gas them with chemical weapons.'' Ahh. Always nice to see our global image in such good shape. But at least the cast had a blast. ''It was a lot of fun because you're acting with people who are in full-on blood and gore,'' says Harold Perrineau (Lost), who plays a downed U.S. helicopter pilot. ''But in truth, it's a little weird eating lunch with people who are, like, bleeding from the eyes.'' (May 11) I was just particularly amused by how they're like, "Cillian Murphy has a MASSIVE ego and snubbed the entire DNA Films production team, that foul ungrateful bastard!!!!!11!oNE!1" P.S.- There are three uber gory clips at DNA Films' YouTube account.
|
|
|
Post by Amanda on May 11, 2007 1:44:40 GMT -5
So... I've just gotten home (2:33am, yes, yes) from seeing it... We got it in and I made it up today and was so thrilled and just had to watch it as our "preview" film. Aside from being thoroughly terrified (I might have almost cried in sheer horror a couple of times), I'd really just like to say that I thought it was brilliant. It was horrifying watching London (and not being a Londoner, seeing places and thinking, "I've been there! I love it there! Oh-- wait... there it goes...") being destroyed right in front of me, and I'm pretty sure my cursing (both outwardly and in my own head) went off the charts, and I'm glad I sat beside someone who muttered "Oh god, ohgodohgodohgod" the whole time with me. I even mentioned to her-- keeping in mind that you were at the premiere, Gia-- that I was so glad I wasn't someplace where I would have to act "professional" because it was just way too scary for me to keep a handle on things. I spent most of it hiding as well. I kept thinking about what you said about the subway, too, Gia, and I had the *facepalm* action down-pat and I was curled up behind a pillow and muttering "ohgodohgod" as the car was driven down and I said out loud, "Please-- don't go in the subway, oh, please, don't go down there, please, please!" The following people are BAMFs (badass mother f**kers for those of you who don't know): - Juan Carlos Fresnadillo - John Murphy (the soundtrack was incredible...!) - Rose Byrne - Imogen Poots & Mackintosh Muggleton - Enrique Chediak & everyone who worked on special effects and editing (Chris Gill!) I just thought it was generally really well done. Sidenote: Did Danny say he got to shoot a bit of it or did I just make that up?
|
|
hongi
Navigator
Posts: 27
|
Post by hongi on May 11, 2007 4:46:37 GMT -5
Watched it, wasn't as good as 28 Days Later, but it was still very enjoyable. Rose has a... surprising meeting with one of the infected. Hah, I know it's not much of a spoiler. But just you wait... Have a watch and get ready to be scared out of your wits!
|
|
|
Post by Amanda on May 11, 2007 14:33:27 GMT -5
Watched it, wasn't as good as 28 Days Later, but it was still very enjoyable. Rose has a... surprising meeting with one of the infected. Hah, I know it's not much of a spoiler. But just you wait... Have a watch and get ready to be scared out of your wits! That was one of the parts where I almost cried, haha! I hate scary movies because I always think, "Have you ever seen a scary movie in your LIFE?!" And then to think about how something like this film actually seems like it could happen tomorrow... I just want to hide under my bed. I was disappointed in a lot of the people who saw it with me, though. I don't think a lot of them fully grasped the intellectual side of it and they were just like, "COOL! Exploding heads!" And for the record, I do not think that exploding heads are cool, and it was awful and gory, but at least well done for that sort of thing...
|
|
|
Post by littlered on May 11, 2007 21:02:58 GMT -5
I'm so annoyed, it's an "18" certificate, which means I won't get in :-( Unless I get a nice cinema worker-person who gives me the benefit of the doubt. I REALLY want to see it, me and the BF were going on Sunday to watch it to avoid exam revision, but I don't know now. I guess i'll just have to put on too much makeup and sort of hide behind some one, heh.
|
|
hongi
Navigator
Posts: 27
|
Post by hongi on May 12, 2007 22:10:16 GMT -5
Incidently, if Danny Boyle had directed it, it would have been an absolute masterpiece. As it is, it's slightly disappointing. Here's the one critical piece that made my tear my hair out in anger: At the end of the movie, when the pilot faces down the sister and brother, the pilot should have shot them. The pilot has already been shown to be a family man (his photograph) but also a follower of the military. The director should have explored the interaction between his sense of duty (Code Red means killing all civilians, infected or not) and his morals.
If the kids were killed, the emotional impact is that much greater. The sister's promise to her brother (I'm not going anywhere or something on that order) will be a staggering statement in retrospect. After the deaths of their mother and father, the two have to stick together. I can imagine the very last scene as the sister's hands curling around the brothers. The whole movie is very nihilistic and pessimistic, and this final scene would have fit in with the overall style.
But the director went for the sequel shot and money.
I also wish they focused entirely on the family. No General, no military technicians or screens. The movie already went three quarters there. By focusing on the drama, the movie would be compositionally stronger (less loose ends) as well as enhancing the terrifying implications of daughter against father, father against wife. The whole family coming apart would be more scary than any number of heads exploding. 28 Days Later was a drama movie with horror elements. I wish 28 Weeks Later went the same route.
|
|
|
Post by kaliszewski on May 13, 2007 23:53:13 GMT -5
Was neither as scary nor as dumb as it might have been, both to our relief and minor disappointment. Heh...!
Most frightening scene: Rose Byrne, as Scarlett, the Incredibly Underaged Medical Major, examines someone whilst "observing contagion protocols"-- and she doesn't wear goggles! Look, film people: I know she has very purty eyes, does Miss Rose, but even DENTAL HYGIENISTS wear goggles now!
Most irritating plot element: a certain character who keeps turning up like Michael Myers' face on a very bad penny. And said character pulls the dog-in-the-tunnel trick from "Independence Day." Not to ruin anything, but let's just say it's too bad that movie fire can't corner like my Mini.
Most annoying cinematographical boo-boo: Why we don't set scenes in pitch-blackness (unless said royal we happens to be the master of pitch-blackness, David Twohy): Eventually, we have to realize that no one-- not the audience, not the characters-- can see what's going on. Then we have to trickle ambient light in from... somewhere. And then some smartass in the audience (like she who's writing this post) will say, "Hey. Where's that light coming from?"
Most questionable geography: They're to meet in Regents Park-- so they head south and east-- and more southeasterly still-- and cross TO GREENWICH via the Thames Foot Tunnel? Not that it wasn't GREAT seeing the tunnel: I walked it for "research" for a fic. Cool.
Thought it was extremely well-directed and shot. Was very, VERY glad a certain someone didn't write it (though I'm loath to name names: like most creatures of the night I fear flame). Special kudos to Jeremy Renner, who plays the likeable, level-headed, and conscientious Sergeant Doyle.
(Oh, and every time a head exploded, I couldn't help but think of the scene in "Hot Fuzz" where Nick Frost's naive but gung-ho Danny Butterman asks Simon Pegg, as hard-as-nails Nicholas Angel, something along the lines of "Is it true that there's a point in a man's skull that if you shoot it his head explodes?" Sorry, but I had to squelch a chortle every time a skull went *SPLAT* in 28WL. Thank YOU, Edgar Wright...!)
|
|