28 Weeks Later [Archive] - Horror.com Forums

carnage

06-22-2004, 05:11 AM

According to Variety:

Plans for a sequel to the 2002 cult horror hit 28 Days Later are underway.

Director Danny Boyle is unlikely to return in the same role for the new movie - tentatively called 28 Weeks Later - although he is expected to take up a producer position alongside screenwriter Alex Garland.

In the original, a powerful virus is unleashed on the British public, sending all those infected into a murderous rage. Within 28 days the country is overwhelmed and a handful of survivors begin to salvage a future, unaware that another threat is lurking.

The low-budget movie grossed $45 million (£24.6m) in the US and $25 million (£13.6m) overseas.

Thoughts?

juda666

06-22-2004, 06:53 AM

i loved 28 days later, i think its a good film, it would be interesting to see the sequel, not sure how it would go though,

newb

06-22-2004, 09:15 AM

So.....is this gonna be a Zombie movie? :)

movieman64

06-22-2004, 09:58 AM

Sounds interesting

carnage

06-22-2004, 10:35 AM

Originally posted by newb
So.....is this gonna be a Zombie movie? :)

Someone's looking for a beating.....

just to make sure this thread does not turn that way, 28 Day Later was NOT a zombie movie. :rolleyes:

newb

06-22-2004, 10:38 AM

ShankS

06-22-2004, 10:44 AM

I reckon this could be a good film, IF the filming and directing is as good as 28days later.

alixzander

06-22-2004, 11:03 AM

ill watch it.

kpropain

06-22-2004, 03:49 PM

I liked the first one myself so, I'm anxious to see how the sequel will turn out....

Miss Britt

06-23-2004, 05:38 AM

Originally posted by newb
So.....is this gonna be a Zombie movie? :)
We need more ZOMBIE type movies... Loved 28 days Later...

carnage

06-23-2004, 05:47 AM

Originally posted by Miss Britt
We need more ZOMBIE type movies... Loved 28 days Later...

...agreed!

.....just so long as you understand that 28 Days Later, while a good movie, was NOT a zombie movie

Miss Britt

06-23-2004, 05:51 AM

Originally posted by carnage
...agreed!

.....just so long as you understand that 28 Days Later, while a good movie, was NOT a zombie movie
It was a Rage induced adrenaline Zombie thingy... I just as soon call it a zombie movie over a slasher movie any time...:D

carnage

06-23-2004, 05:56 AM

Originally posted by Miss Britt
It was a Rage induced adrenaline Zombie thingy... I just as soon call it a zombie movie over a slasher movie any time...:D

here we go again....

ok, the definition of ZOMBIE is the LIVING DEAD.....so, that said, one has to be DEAD before one can be a zombie, yes?

The "infected" in 28 days later were just that and nothing more..INFECTED....they were not dead, undead, or otherwise.

It was a great movie, I liked it, good plot and idea behind it.

It just was NOT a zombie movie

Vodstok

06-23-2004, 07:28 AM

You sure? :D

Just fucking with you :)

It may be interesting, but i would definately miss Boyd's touch.

Stingy Jack

06-23-2004, 08:38 AM

Yikes!! NOOOO!!! Okay, this is one of those films that works great by itself and will be destroyed if a sequel is made. I mean, Lucas totally fucked up the Star Wars trilogy when he started with the new shit (IMO). But then again, if the story is intelligent and contributes something to the first film, then it might be okay. I just can't think of anything more that needs to be done with that story and its characters.

KRUGERKID13

06-23-2004, 07:26 PM

oh is this one not gonna suck or what

stonefx

06-24-2004, 09:58 AM

Any buzz on what the story might be about?

Vega Demon Lord

06-26-2004, 03:47 PM

I can't wiat. It seems promsing, but is the sequel going to take place in the U.S.?
Because that would suck to take the series out of Britain.

Vega Demon Lord

06-26-2004, 03:49 PM

I just recently read in a mag that it probably will take place in the U.S. (I HOPE NOT!), since at the end of the first film a plane picks them up. And apparently it's a U.S. one and then it's gonna spread all over the U.S. I think New York

Hate_Breeder

06-26-2004, 11:22 PM

i pretty much agree with everybody on this one. I liked the first one, but dont know about the 2nd one, oh well i would watch it anyways..

juda666

06-27-2004, 01:53 AM

they should definatley keep it in britain...

carnage

06-28-2004, 09:10 AM

Hard to say...I mean they did say in the movie that it spread to the US...so it would be a logical step.....

....but not sure how it would turn out. I would think something along the lines of the Dawn of the Dead remake...

stonefx

06-28-2004, 09:36 AM

what if it was about the rebuilding of the UK? Could they make it less of a zombie film and more of a post-apocalyptic film?

Vega Demon Lord

06-28-2004, 09:58 AM

I have a feeling they're going to add monsters and a new type of "Advanced Infected." I could definately see that happening.
Kind of like with new super human abilities. Like they can jump higher and they are faster or something. It would be interesting to see. Like if they sould talk or something, trying to trick the remaining humans.

I mean it COULD work. Pray that it will.

orangestar

06-28-2004, 05:43 PM

The first one was boring, this one will probably be 7 times as boring.

stonefx

06-29-2004, 08:48 AM

boring???

I thought the first one (heh, well the only one as of now) totally kicked ass.

You had it all, actions, romance, intrege, betrayal, gore, the end of the world...

what more do you want?

KRUGERKID13

06-29-2004, 09:35 PM

i two thought it was boring not to mention crappy

-->oscam5<--

06-30-2004, 07:28 AM

Yeah, It was a pretty bad movie IMO, It had all the ingredients, except actually having some zombie ass-kicking. It was all 'Run away, ahhh!' which is ok for the first half-hour or so but it was all 'run away' or 'lets go shopping!'. Yeah, it really sucked, but if this new one has some zombie-ass kicking [or whatever the fuck they were. But, they looked like zombies, acted like zombies so shit yeah: zombies.] then there is a shred of hope for it.

zwoti

06-30-2004, 07:37 AM

Originally posted by -->oscam5<--
Yeah, It was a pretty bad movie IMO, It had all the ingredients, except actually having some zombie ass-kicking. It was all 'Run away, ahhh!' which is ok for the first half-hour or so but it was all 'run away' or 'lets go shopping!'. Yeah, it really sucked, but if this new one has some zombie-ass kicking [or whatever the fuck they were. But, they looked like zombies, acted like zombies so shit yeah: zombies.] then there is a shred of hope for it.

not zombies...sigh

stonefx

06-30-2004, 10:06 AM

pish-posh

I thought it was cool.

carnage

06-30-2004, 10:41 AM

Vega Demon Lord

06-30-2004, 08:21 PM

zombies rule

carnage

07-01-2004, 05:13 AM

Originally posted by Vega Demon Lord
zombies rule

or drool...whichever.....

misterX

07-03-2004, 06:51 AM

Originally posted by stonefx
what if it was about the rebuilding of the UK? Could they make it less of a zombie film and more of a post-apocalyptic film?
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRR RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINNNNNNNNNNN NNNNNNNNNNGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG.
shit as if the first one wasn't boring enough

Vampenguin

07-03-2004, 08:00 AM

Originally posted by misterX

shit as if the first one wasn't boring enough

Originally posted by KRUGERKID13
i two thought it was boring not to mention crappy

Originally posted by orangestar
The first one was boring, this one will probably be 7 times as boring.

Exactly. Why werent you guyz there a coupla weeks ago, I was on a thread about this, I was the only one who didnt like it.....Ha! Im not anymore!

JokerMONEY3000

07-05-2004, 03:53 AM

I liked 28 days later up until the part when they met up with the soldiers. One of the main reasons I didn;t like it was because theyh were completly safe. It wasn't scary anymore.

carnage

07-06-2004, 11:21 AM

Originally posted by Vampenguin
Exactly. Why werent you guyz there a coupla weeks ago, I was on a thread about this, I was the only one who didnt like it.....Ha! Im not anymore!

shhhhhhh.....you'll wake grandma...

carnage

07-06-2004, 11:24 AM

Originally posted by JokerMONEY3000
I liked 28 days later up until the part when they met up with the soldiers. One of the main reasons I didn;t like it was because theyh were completly safe. It wasn't scary anymore.

Were they? Were they really?

.....try watching it again....and again...and again...

"Come play with us Danny..for ever and ever and ever and ever..."

JokerMONEY3000

07-13-2004, 08:31 AM

lol, I guess they weren't protected, but I still didn't like when they met up with the soldiewrs, it was cool when they were on the road. George Romeros movie were about zombies, but if you notice, in all his movies its always humans who break down an mess shit up for themselves. Exspecially in Day of the Dead, outta all 3 they were most protected in their, underground. Dawn of the Dead was good 2, but in Day of the Dead their was no way the zombies could get in. An then the military general fucked everything up! Even though they were "infected" in 28 days later, it was the people's inability to cooperate with each other that fucks up everything.