What are you seeing in '07?

General Discussions, Polls, Lists, Video Clips and Links
Post Reply
AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 7779
Joined: October 25th, 2004
Location: Binghamton, NY

Post by ShyViolet » March 30th, 2007, 10:05 pm

The trailer for 28 Weeks Later, "from the producers" of 28 Days Later.


http://www.apple.com/trailers/fox_atomic/28weekslater/

In an interview, Danny Boyle said he wouldn't direct it, but "serve as executive producer." Uh-oh. :? Sound familiar? :roll:

Different cast. Different director. Lame title.

I don't mean to be a party pooper (I am a RABID fan of the original film--no pun intended. :P) but as Ben would say, this looks pants!! :wink: :roll: :P


:wink:
Last edited by ShyViolet on June 9th, 2007, 10:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"That’s right, folks, it’s gonna be a Meg episode, stick around for the fun.
Here’s the clicker...no one’d blame ya.”

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 5017
Joined: September 1st, 2006
Location: Nevermore

Post by Daniel » March 31st, 2007, 2:08 am

Well, it looks interesting. :?

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 7779
Joined: October 25th, 2004
Location: Binghamton, NY

Post by ShyViolet » March 31st, 2007, 2:42 am

It might have some good stuff, maybe it's not all bad. :wink:

I'm just such a HUGE fan of the first one, Cillian Murphy and Danny Boyle, (neither of whom are in it) that maybe my expectations are bit too high....but I'll try to give it a chance. :)
"That’s right, folks, it’s gonna be a Meg episode, stick around for the fun.
Here’s the clicker...no one’d blame ya.”

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 5017
Joined: September 1st, 2006
Location: Nevermore

Post by Daniel » March 31st, 2007, 4:00 am

Yeah, but I wasn't defending it, Vi. ;)

I've only seen clips of the original, but from just those, this looks like a step down.

That's why its just interesting. :P

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 7779
Joined: October 25th, 2004
Location: Binghamton, NY

Post by ShyViolet » March 31st, 2007, 5:27 am

Oh, O.K. :wink:


You should see the original, Dan--excellent film!! :)
"That’s right, folks, it’s gonna be a Meg episode, stick around for the fun.
Here’s the clicker...no one’d blame ya.”

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 5017
Joined: September 1st, 2006
Location: Nevermore

Post by Daniel » March 31st, 2007, 2:54 pm

Yeah, maybe I should've been more clear, seeing as this is a sequel. ;)

Will do, Vi! :)

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 823
Joined: February 22nd, 2007
Location: Belgium

Post by Jeroen » March 31st, 2007, 5:33 pm

As always, I'm hoping to be pleasantly suprised.
Loved the first one.
I really hope that child isn't gonna turn out annoying

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 7779
Joined: October 25th, 2004
Location: Binghamton, NY

Post by ShyViolet » April 1st, 2007, 9:38 pm

I have a bad feeling about the kid....well, about the whole movie. The "kid in peril" thing is SOOOO tired....I have a feeling they're going to be doing a lot of that.

They did it so well with the girl Hannah in the first one....VERY chilling and upsetting. There's no way this film is going to go into THAT territory.


Here's the trailer from #1: about a googal times better. :P


EDIT: Oops, forgot there's full frontal nudity there!! Sorry. :wink: :oops:


Well, anyway, it basicially looks like this will be what 2010 was to 2001.
:( :(

Darn them! :x
"That’s right, folks, it’s gonna be a Meg episode, stick around for the fun.
Here’s the clicker...no one’d blame ya.”

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 7779
Joined: October 25th, 2004
Location: Binghamton, NY

Post by ShyViolet » April 1st, 2007, 9:43 pm

I did find this awesome pic however: :)

Image


I doubt they will have any scenes in this that measure up to even the first 15 minutes of the original.
"That’s right, folks, it’s gonna be a Meg episode, stick around for the fun.
Here’s the clicker...no one’d blame ya.”

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 823
Joined: February 22nd, 2007
Location: Belgium

Post by Jeroen » April 4th, 2007, 8:13 am

Grindhouse just got 89% on rotten tomatoes!!

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 7779
Joined: October 25th, 2004
Location: Binghamton, NY

Post by ShyViolet » April 5th, 2007, 10:47 pm

Kinda random, just a video of Bob Iger at the Meet the Robinsons premiere, being interviewed by an Indian show about Bollywood:



I wonder: with Disney films being made in India, does Iger mean animated as well? :?:
"That’s right, folks, it’s gonna be a Meg episode, stick around for the fun.
Here’s the clicker...no one’d blame ya.”

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 823
Joined: February 22nd, 2007
Location: Belgium

Post by Jeroen » April 6th, 2007, 4:36 am

Hey Vi, there's a new international trailer for 28 weeks later as well
http://mb.foxinternational.com/develop/ ... /movie.swf
I think it looks better then the first one

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 7779
Joined: October 25th, 2004
Location: Binghamton, NY

Post by ShyViolet » April 6th, 2007, 6:36 am

Thanks Zwollie! :)

I gotta admit that does look SLIGHTLY better, but not much. I'll probably see it anyway though...just cause I loved the first one so much.

My biggest problem with what we've seen so far is not only the indicators of a probable cookie-cutter plot (kids in peril, dad, older brother figure, it's "six months later" and everything's been fixed since the last film oh wait no it hasn't....) but that the plot appears to violate one of the most important rules of the first film: (spoilers if you haven't seen it)
click to reveal content
Once you're infected, THAT'S IT, you're infected, and everyone knows it right away. Ten to twenty seconds later and you're a raveging, bloodthirsty monster. From what I could see from the trailer, it's much more ambiguous now about whether or not someone is infected, maybe they are, maybe they aren't, takes time for the disease to take affect, etc....which is exactly the opposite of the first film's premise....that's what made it so great.

That way the original screenplay couldn't get away with any annoyingly obvious suspense cues, subplots about someone hiding their disease, etc...once someone got bitten or cut, that was pretty much it for them. (Unless there was a cure, and as we could see from the alternate ending they abandoned in the storyboard stage, it was just too complex to get into cure teritory at that point.)
Also, in the new film there are apparently lots of scenes in hospitals, streets, with lots of crowds etc....doesn't seem half as scary or realistic as the death-riddled London or the army camp in part 1. :( Just very familiar, been-there done-that kind of feeling.

But whatever....just from seeing the trailer and how the original cast is all gone (good for them) I'm not expecting much except maybe a few scares...if that. :?

I hope to be proven wrong though.....
"That’s right, folks, it’s gonna be a Meg episode, stick around for the fun.
Here’s the clicker...no one’d blame ya.”

User avatar
Animated Views Admin
Animated Views Admin
Posts: 18518
Joined: October 22nd, 2004
Location: London, UK

Post by Ben » April 6th, 2007, 8:39 am

Yes, Vi, animation in India. Tinker Bell, for a start, is being done there.

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 7779
Joined: October 25th, 2004
Location: Binghamton, NY

Post by ShyViolet » April 6th, 2007, 3:18 pm

Oh, O.K. :wink: I just wasn't sure what Iger was talking about in that clip; he sounded like he meant live-action films as well.....?

Maybe he was just rushed.....:wink:
"That’s right, folks, it’s gonna be a Meg episode, stick around for the fun.
Here’s the clicker...no one’d blame ya.”

Post Reply