I saw this the other night and thought it was good. But apart from the title and the opening sequence it really didnt have too much to do with the original, in my opinion. It was good to see the story progress, but the reason i liked 28 Days Later was because of the proposed reality of the situation, and the grittiness (low budget). The guy (who Seline kills near the beginning) describing Paddington station in 28 Days Later is 100 times more brutal than anything in 28 Weeks Later.
From the opening sequence in the cottage, where they open the door to the boy and it's actually daylight (i was like 'wow') was brilliant. With Robert Carlyle running off just saying '****! ****! ****!' to himself was just brilliant. I was hooked and at that point was happy they'd kept it realistic. But that part of the film was the only part for me that had anything on the original. It did go downhill from there, but to be fair it was entertaining (if cheesy) throughout, and i was never bored.
Two bits stick out for me as being absolutely dire, that was the (infamous?) helicopter sequence, and the absolutely dreadful subway/night vision bit. Yuck, yuck yuck.
From the opening sequence in the cottage, where they open the door to the boy and it's actually daylight (i was like 'wow') was brilliant. With Robert Carlyle running off just saying '****! ****! ****!' to himself was just brilliant. I was hooked and at that point was happy they'd kept it realistic. But that part of the film was the only part for me that had anything on the original. It did go downhill from there, but to be fair it was entertaining (if cheesy) throughout, and i was never bored.
Two bits stick out for me as being absolutely dire, that was the (infamous?) helicopter sequence, and the absolutely dreadful subway/night vision bit. Yuck, yuck yuck.
