Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

i've just watched 28 weeks later

it's a zombie-style film without zombies in.

it's like the difference between a chocolate flavoured milkshake and a chocolate flavour milkshake.
 
The Doctor said:
http://www.allthingszombie.com/forums/showthread.php?t=14475

From the other thread. These guy know what they're talking about when it comes to zombies. ;)

Aye, and there are probably a fair few people who'll argue endlessly about whether Dracula would really be affected by a crucifix after all. Love the idea that there's some authentic blueprint for a Zombie that must be followed, as if the voodoo toting folks of Haiti really give a shit about accuracy and their image rights.

It's a fucking Zombie film. Even the director and producer thought so - it's unnecessary to compartmentalise it off again
 
milesy said:
it's a zombie-style film without zombies in.

it's like the difference between a chocolate flavoured milkshake and a chocolate flavour milkshake.

:cool: well put.

charlie brooker eat your heart out.
 
I watched it last night on the back of this thread, I really enjoyed it, didn't think it was flawed at all, much better than the first one.

It is a zombie movie btw.
 
I didn't read the thread. But 28 Days Later was a great disaster movie in the noble British tradition of disaster stories.

28 Weeks later was a relatively boring action film.

Anyone else who has already said this gets my full support.
 
No they're not ghouls.

They're zombies that have found themselves in a legalistic semantic limbo due to running too fast and not being rotten enough.
 
Idaho said:
They aren't zombies - they are rabid-types.
Rabid types who look a bit too clean cut. After a few weeks of running about with no food or barbers open, they should be more Bobby Sands and less Bobby Darin.

General question. Do zombies poo?
 
Back
Top Bottom