Quote:
Originally Posted by clawfoot
_V_: It was definitely fast, it was definitely gritty and I'm glad you enjoyed it
p.s. I've gotta steal your sig pic ... awesome
My mates took me to see 28 days without me knowing the first thing about it, which is probably why I enjoyed it so much. I didn't even know it would be a horror. I tried the same approach with 28 weeks but there would always be that first great film in the back of my mind with which I'd be making comparisons. And I am, of course, hard to please. All I ask for is a bit of originality. Jim (Robert Carlyle) could've killed his wife in an equally gruesome way without resorting to the trademark thumbs in the eyes from the first film.
I've only watched 28 weeks once, so maybe it will grow on me.
But 28 days will always be my number 1 film.
|
Haha...only if I change it. ;)
But I see where you are coming from...usually a mind-boggling original can stay and linger in the thoughts, and often when a sequel comes about, its only but natural to draw comparisons between the two. And usually the sequel pales in comparison to the original.
There were scenes which did make one feel "yeah, sure...like THAT could happen...", but overall, Weeks was almost on par with Days. By the first 25-30 minutes I felt as if I was right into the action, a PART of things going on...that made me enjoy it a bit more than others who keep themselves separated from the essence of the movie.
I think you have to regard both movies as separate entities. You did mention about the fact that both were made by different teams...so just go one step further than that, and watch Weeks separate from Days, as a movie in its own right.
I can gurantee you will enjoy it more than you did the first time around. Happy viewing! :)