NationStates Jolt Archive

...following on from my disjointed rant on The Chronicles Of Riddick a few weeks back, it was a relief to see one film which didn't just fall into the 'dumb' category, ansd a sequal that disdn't just embarass its predecessor.

Violent, brutal and seriously bleak - what more could a girl want?

Oh yeah, and one quiet, but clever, joke.

I loved 28 Days Later, it's good to hear it didn't blow.

I wanted to see it, but didn't get around to it.

Graaagh?

Wait a minute... this isn't about late term abortion at all!

Graaagh?

Mrh?

Not going to watch it. Smells too much like Hollywood getting its claws into a film to make more money. I mean, the Americans coming over to repopulate the UK? After the end of the last film, which featured a Finnish jet calling in a helicopter?

I will also refuse to watch the up-coming sequel to Dog Soldiers, which, once again, features American soldiers fighting against werewolves. Which, after the first one, seems like bullshit, especially since the first one involved a British special forces unit getting taken apart by said werewolves and a bunch of squaddies also getting ripped to shreds.

Mrh?
Zambaz!

Wait a minute... this isn't about late term abortion at all!
No, it's not. More like post-natal abortion and rebirth. :rolleyes:

Not going to watch it. Smells too much like Hollywood getting its claws into a film to make more money. I mean, the Americans coming over to repopulate the UK? After the end of the last film, which featured a Finnish jet calling in a helicopter?

A British film, made in the UK by a Spanish director, actually, and the portrayal of the Americans is less than flattwering, FWIW.

That movie was good enough for me.

Zambaz!

I wonder if the infected have BARHAH?

Wait a minute... this isn't about late term abortion at all!

lol. nice:p

A British film, made in the UK by a Spanish director, actually, and the portrayal of the Americans is less than flattwering, FWIW.
Ok, well, I may watch it, after my exams.

I wonder if the infected have BARHAH?

Not only Barhah, but also Infectious Bite and Tangling Grasp.





EDIT: lots of werrors in my typing, as thwe lweft sisdwe of my kweyboarsd is still shaggweds, ansd I ain't cxatxching thwem all.

I saw about 20 minutes of it and just left. It doesn't draw you in like the first did , and the lighting was enough to drive me insane.

I saw about 20 minutes of it and just left. It doesn't draw you in like the first did , and the lighting was enough to drive me insane.

Hmmm. The opening sequence reminded me very strongly of the old seventies post-apocalyptic series Survivors - to the extent that I wouldn't be surprisesd if it was an intentional pastiche.

I actually liked this one - one of the very few sequels this year to equal the first. The first one was a nice twist on the genre, and this evolved the story one intelligently, without being ridiculous or needed large leaps of faith on the audiences behalf.

Atmospheric, "didn't see that one coming" moments aplenty, a good social commentary, generally a fun film. The camera work was clever because it allowed your mind to fill in the blanks without showing you every splodge of gore that has become so mundane and mainstream in that genre today.

One thing: that track, score that was played throughout - who/what is it? It's been driving me mad!

I actually liked this one - one of the very few sequels this year to equal the first. The first one was a nice twist on the genre, and this evolved the story one intelligently, without being ridiculous or needed large leaps of faith on the audiences behalf.

Atmospheric, "didn't see that one coming" moments aplenty, a good social commentary, generally a fun film. The camera work was clever because it allowed your mind to fill in the blanks without showing you every splodge of gore that has become so mundane and mainstream in that genre today.

One thing: that track, score that was played throughout - who/what is it? It's been driving me mad!

Wasn't it that God Emperor Save People You and Me Something or Other band?

I still think Christopher Ecclestone was fucking awesome as the insane British Army Major Henry West in the original.

Wasn't it that God Emperor Save People You and Me Something or Other band?

Godspeed You Black Emperor, perhaps?

Godspeed You! Black Emperor, perhaps?

Fixed.

Godspeed You Black Emperor, perhaps?

I think I was closer to their actual name but yes.

Godspeed You! Black Emperor (AKA Godspeed You Black Emperor!).

Fixed.



Fixed.

No, no. It was the instrumental one.

Found it anyway. "In the House - In a Heartbeat" by John Murphy, now just commonly known as the 28 Days Later song as it was featured in the original too.

Thanks though. :)

No, no. It was the instrumental one.

All our tedious internet pedantry for nothing? Surely not.

All our tedious internet pedantry for nothing? Surely not.

I enjoy the pedantry. :)

Its part of why I love this place :D

...following on from my disjointed rant on The Chronicles Of Riddick a few weeks back, it was a relief to see one film which didn't just fall into the 'dumb' category, ansd a sequal that disdn't just embarass its predecessor.

Violent, brutal and seriously bleak - what more could a girl want?

Oh yeah, and one quiet, but clever, joke.

im looking forward to seeing this

...following on from my disjointed rant on The Chronicles Of Riddick a few weeks back, it was a relief to see one film which didn't just fall into the 'dumb' category, ansd a sequal that disdn't just embarass its predecessor.

Violent, brutal and seriously bleak - what more could a girl want?

Oh yeah, and one quiet, but clever, joke.

I am not going to see it because it is a sequel, regardless of whether it is good or not. I refuse to encourage directors to produce what has already been done - they should be trying to inject some life into mainstream films by coming up with original ideas, not rehashing what has already been done better by the first film.

Stick to continental and independent films, everyone - you might not get jazzy special effects but you do get films that care about something other than being a commercial success. They haven't sold artistic authenticity down the river, unlike the Philistines who make the population of Hollywood.

Wait a minute... this isn't about late term abortion at all!

*pulls out the grill* It can be.

They haven't sold artistic authenticity down the river, unlike the Philistines who make the population of Hollywood.

Possibly, but this isn't a Hollywood film... and being made on the continent or being independent is no guarantee of anything. Suckee movies get masde everywhere.*


* or indeed 'ewvwerywhwerwe'.

I am not going to see it because it is a sequel, regardless of whether it is good or not.

On this basis you wouldn't read LOTR because it was the sequal to The Hobbit? - personally I can't stand Tolkein, but the point remains. Or, for that matter Alice Through The Looking Glass.

I still think Christopher Ecclestone was fucking awesome as the insane British Army Major Henry West in the original.
But then, Christopher Ecclestone is fucking awesome in anything he does. A seriously underrated actor.

I'll rent it. *nods*

I am not going to see it because it is a sequel, regardless of whether it is good or not. I refuse to encourage directors to produce what has already been done - they should be trying to inject some life into mainstream films by coming up with original ideas, not rehashing what has already been done better by the first film.


So much for Star Wars V and VI as well then. Sssssh. No one tell him about the whole "I am your father" thing.

Not going to watch it. Smells too much like Hollywood getting its claws into a film to make more money. I mean, the Americans coming over to repopulate the UK? After the end of the last film, which featured a Finnish jet calling in a helicopter?

I will also refuse to watch the up-coming sequel to Dog Soldiers, which, once again, features American soldiers fighting against werewolves. Which, after the first one, seems like bullshit, especially since the first one involved a British special forces unit getting taken apart by said werewolves and a bunch of squaddies also getting ripped to shreds.

i watched it. tagmatium, they actually pulled it off quite well. and no its not as good as the first but still worht watching. but thats just my opinion

..

Violent, brutal and seriously bleak - what more could a girl want?
.

A woman with taste. A rare thing..

A woman with taste. A rare thing..

Some girls would want a woman with taste, but others would only want to 'explore their feelings' with one, usually in their college years...

Some girls would want a woman with taste, but others would only want to 'explore their feelings' with one, usually in their college years...

Some men would too. We'd generally pass on the whole 'explore the feelings' thing though.

I am not going to see it because it is a sequel, regardless of whether it is good or not. I refuse to encourage directors to produce what has already been done - they should be trying to inject some life into mainstream films by coming up with original ideas, not rehashing what has already been done better by the first film.

Stick to continental and independent films, everyone - you might not get jazzy special effects but you do get films that care about something other than being a commercial success. They haven't sold artistic authenticity down the river, unlike the Philistines who make the population of Hollywood.

I think thats increadably arrogent and over simplisitc of you. Sequals do not simply mean doing what already has been done. It can mean that, if done badly, but other times it can be taking the story or events of the film on in a diffrent way and explore new events happening. To dismiss it because of its sequalness is very very arrogent and very simplisitc. Would you dismiss the other 4 HHGG books because they come after the first one, or the two towers because it is the sequal to the fellowship, or would you only watch the first episode of any TV series or ignore SW:TESB or SW:ROTJ because they were sequals to SW:ANH. Seriously, you are being very very simplisitc here. Yes Indie films are often very good, but it doesnt mean that other films are nessecarly bad. There isnt some sort of dichotomy on goodness here.

is it actually any good then? the trailers look rediculously overblown.

Meh, it's alright, but it's poor compared to the original like Malawi is to Sweden.

But then, Christopher Ecclestone is fucking awesome in anything he does. A seriously underrated actor.
Hannah... HANNAH!
*zombie noises*
GRRRAAAAARRRRRGGGH! NOOOO!

On this basis you wouldn't read LOTR because it was the sequal to The Hobbit? - personally I can't stand Tolkein, but the point remains. Or, for that matter Alice Through The Looking Glass.

I wouldn't call Lord of the Rings a sequel to The Hobbit in any meaningful sense: the two books are intended for different audiences and thus try to accomplish very different things.

So much for Star Wars V and VI as well then. Sssssh. No one tell him about the whole "I am your father" thing.

It should be noted that the "no sequels" rule is relatively recent (it was devised about three years ago). I wasn't protesting sequels at the age of ten (when I saw Star Wars) because, let's face it, children have absolutely no taste in anything. Hence Shrek and Harry Potter.

Having recently borrowed the Star Wars trilogy, I do wonder why it was such a success. The dialogue is piss poor, the characters are cardboard cut outs and the entire thing takes itself far too seriously. There are a lot of loud bangs and flashy lights, which I suppose is why it is popular amongst children, but I believe substance should always win over style. Perhaps if audiences had seen the films as the trash they actually were back in the 70s, we wouldn't have been lumbered with the abominations that are the prequels.

I think thats increadably arrogent and over simplisitc of you. Sequals do not simply mean doing what already has been done. It can mean that, if done badly, but other times it can be taking the story or events of the film on in a diffrent way and explore new events happening. To dismiss it because of its sequalness is very very arrogent and very simplisitc. Would you dismiss the other 4 HHGG books because they come after the first one, or the two towers because it is the sequal to the fellowship, or would you only watch the first episode of any TV series or ignore SW:TESB or SW:ROTJ because they were sequals to SW:ANH. Seriously, you are being very very simplisitc here. Yes Indie films are often very good, but it doesnt mean that other films are nessecarly bad. There isnt some sort of dichotomy on goodness here.

It may very well be arrogant and overly simplistic but I am now so fed up of bland (at best) sequels that I no longer care: I would rather not see another sequel.

I think we can exclude the Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy books on the basis that Douglas Adams was a genius and his books are an art form, something that the vast majority of movie makers (especially in Hollywood) are most certainly not.

I think thats increadably arrogent and over simplisitc of you. Sequals do not simply mean doing what already has been done. It can mean that, if done badly, but other times it can be taking the story or events of the film on in a diffrent way and explore new events happening. To dismiss it because of its sequalness is very very arrogent and very simplisitc. Would you dismiss the other 4 HHGG books because they come after the first one, or the two towers because it is the sequal to the fellowship, or would you only watch the first episode of any TV series or ignore SW:TESB or SW:ROTJ because they were sequals to SW:ANH. Seriously, you are being very very simplisitc here. Yes Indie films are often very good, but it doesnt mean that other films are nessecarly bad. There isnt some sort of dichotomy on goodness here.

Let me guess. You think s/he is being simplistic?

EDIT: Oops. I mean, simplisitc. Oh, and arrogent.

Not going to watch it. Smells too much like Hollywood getting its claws into a film to make more money. I mean, the Americans coming over to repopulate the UK? After the end of the last film, which featured a Finnish jet calling in a helicopter?

I will also refuse to watch the up-coming sequel to Dog Soldiers, which, once again, features American soldiers fighting against werewolves. Which, after the first one, seems like bullshit, especially since the first one involved a British special forces unit getting taken apart by said werewolves and a bunch of squaddies also getting ripped to shreds.

woah woah woah there cowboy, spoiler tag that shit.


Anyway. 28 Weeks later is my movie to go see this weekend.

also love the "Maintain the Quarantine, Deadly Force Will Be Used to Protect This Area" poster.

If you're talking about the bit where I mentioned a Finnish jet in 28 Days Later, I sort of assumed that, as this thread is discussing the sequel, the people replying to this thread had already watched the first one. It's also not really a particularly important plot detail.

The Dog Soldiers thing, it's the entire idea about the film. I suppose you'd get the same amount of detail if you watched any trailer.

Meh, it's alright, but it's poor compared to the original like Malawi is to Sweden.

I liked the way it avoided the gothic excesses of the first film - I'm thinking the end sequence in particular.

Strange that there were no Brits apparent in any position of authority, or even as consultants within the NATO forces - given that the infection seemed to have been limited to mainland Great Britain alone, I would have expected that some troops who had been stationed on foreign bases or even in Northern Ireland might be in evidence. Similarly, I would have thought that some ambassador or suchlike might have a token role in the force. Not, of course, that we see much of the whole organizational malarky of the force anyhow.


I still think the original film should have just finished when they rammed the gate in the compound...

I still think the original film should have just finished when they rammed the gate in the compound...
you ever see the alternate ending?
they take Jim back to the hospital after crashing thru the gate but he dies there, leaving just Hannah & Selenna. Movie ends there
personally I prefer the alternate ending.

you ever see the alternate ending?


Let us not forget the chicken ending either.

I still think Christopher Ecclestone was fucking awesome as the insane British Army Major Henry West in the original.

QFT! Why did they replace him as the doctor? the new guy is nothing compared to him...

QFT! Why did they replace him as the doctor?

Because he quit?

QFT! Why did they replace him as the doctor? the new guy is nothing compared to him...
Because Ecclestone is a gurning idiot, and Doctor Who is the most overrated piece of shit that my TV licence has ever suffered with?

I'll show you exactly where to put your bloody sonic screwdriver.

Because Ecclestone is a gurning idiot, and Doctor Who is the most overrated piece of shit that my TV licence has ever suffered with?

I'll show you exactly where to put your bloody sonic screwdriver.
:eek:
Blasphemy!

Tis a heinous crime to slander Doctor Who!

:eek:
Blasphemy!

Tis a heinous crime to slander Doctor Who!

Weelllllllll.......

I have to say I love Doctor Who. But Russel T Davies is going a bit loopy loo with the more recent episodes IMO.

Some of them do seem to be a bit repetitive. The one I watched earlier today, as I had missed it when it was actually on TV, was the one about the spaceship crashing into the sun. It seemed almost exactly like the one from the second series (I think) with the planet about to be sucked into the blackhole. Even had people who were possessed.

:eek:
Blasphemy!

Tis a heinous crime to slander Doctor Who!
Well, slap my thigh and call me Linda.

They’re just so incredibly shit; terrible acting, shockingly unoriginal scripts, plots that go nowhere (Deus Ex Machina, much?), and stuffed to the gills with BBC luvvies.

The show should be called, How Long Till Ricky Gervais Plays An Alien?

And don’t get me started on David Bloody Tennent.