Give It A Miss: 28 Weeks Later
28 Days Later: nobody in their right mind will argue with you if you include 28 Days Later in your all-time top-ten. The reason it deserves to be in the top-ten is because not only is it a classic modern-day horror film, it’s a damn good film in general. Compare it to any other film, regardless of the genre, and it’ll come out at least equal or maybe even on top. And so when the sequel came out I was there at the ticket-office first thing. Then I was subjected to what I can only describe as one of the most horrendous movie-going experiences of my entire adult life.
Where 28 Days Later achieved new levels of horror quality, Weeks stooped to a level untouched by such horror flops as Nicholas Cage’s Wicker Man abomination and even, dare I say, the hilariously terrible The Hitcher. The strangest thing about Weeks, though, is that mostly it has all the good qualities of a sequel. Unfortunately though, all of these potentially good qualities are marred by the editing: sloppy, incoherent and generally incomprehensible at all times. And it all starts with the zombies.
By zombie standards, Days pushed the boat out enormously. It dared to make zombies faster, stronger and more vicious than perhaps any other film. You could believe this, though, because the story was so captivating. Had Weeks taken that approach it may have at least saved itself from awful-status, but sadly it didn’t. The zombies in Weeks are even faster and more bloodthirsty than in the original film. As a result the entire premise is ludicrous, hard to watch and action-packed to such a degree that watching it too closely could induce an epileptic fit. Need a comparison? Let’s just say that Weeks makes The Bourne Ultimatum look like a film shot in slow-motion.
More good news, I have just gotten paid for the image work that I did on those pop up display stands last month. Turns out that Stephen was right, and the purple was much more attractive.