Started By
Message
locked post

28 Days Later vs 28 Weeks Later

Posted on 3/5/09 at 2:23 am
Posted by Acreboy
Member since Nov 2005
38568 posts
Posted on 3/5/09 at 2:23 am
Which movie do you like better?
Posted by DeathBus
Baton Rouge
Member since Jul 2008
333 posts
Posted on 3/5/09 at 2:34 am to
I like both. But 28 weeks later gets my vote and that is probably only because I haven't seen 28 days in a while
Posted by Froman
Baton Rouge
Member since Jun 2007
37478 posts
Posted on 3/5/09 at 2:42 am to
Days was a better movie, though both are good.
Posted by Acreboy
Member since Nov 2005
38568 posts
Posted on 3/5/09 at 2:50 am to
Days was exactly how I envision the zombie apocalypse, but weeks had a better story imo.
Posted by DeathBus
Baton Rouge
Member since Jul 2008
333 posts
Posted on 3/5/09 at 2:54 am to
Weeks also has one of the most gut wrenching scenes in horror. The part with the eyeballs.
Posted by Volvagia
Fort Worth
Member since Mar 2006
52328 posts
Posted on 3/5/09 at 6:35 am to
days....really didn't like weeks.

SPOILERS




The whole military killing everyone no matter what for most of the movie and the fact that they locked all the folks up with weak arse protection is too absurd for my taste. I can understand the shooting gallery when they are all running out and there is total chaos and they can't afford the hesitation of determining who is infected and who isn't....but when shite settled down that should have stopped.
This post was edited on 3/5/09 at 7:44 am
Posted by SlowFlowPro
Simple Solutions to Complex Probs
Member since Jan 2004
449995 posts
Posted on 3/5/09 at 7:20 am to
quote:

but weeks had a better story imo.

you would think that
Posted by Baloo
Formerly MDGeaux
Member since Sep 2003
49645 posts
Posted on 3/5/09 at 7:32 am to
Weeks was a massive disappointment. 28 Days LAter followed its own internal logic and had some truly great scenes. Weeks is just a series of action set pieces without any character or story to support it. I enjoyed it, but it was nowhere near as good as Days.
Posted by shutterspeed
MS Gulf Coast
Member since May 2007
67923 posts
Posted on 3/5/09 at 8:09 am to
Days. Easily.
Posted by Bucky
Las Vegas
Member since Nov 2008
2517 posts
Posted on 3/5/09 at 8:10 am to
quote:

days....really didn't like weeks.
Posted by Freauxzen
Washington
Member since Feb 2006
38001 posts
Posted on 3/5/09 at 8:12 am to
Like both, but Days is a much better film.
Posted by TigerNutwhack
Baton Rouge
Member since Jan 2004
4198 posts
Posted on 3/5/09 at 8:43 am to
Days. Weeks started out ok, especially the opening scene, but there were some things that didn't sit right with me. Like, the military shooting at a driving car. Really? Since when did zombies learn how to drive a car? You know those people aren't infected, but you're going to shoot at them anyway?

And I actually kinda cared about the characters in Days. I watched Weeks recently, and I didn't care one bit when the soldier or doctor died.
Posted by tuck
Member since Oct 2007
12653 posts
Posted on 3/5/09 at 9:45 am to
You have to admit, the father killing the wife and constantly attacking his children is pretty f'd up. That part of the story made Weeks good. All in all Days was better, but Weeks is good too.
Posted by Dire Wolf
bawcomville
Member since Sep 2008
38709 posts
Posted on 3/5/09 at 10:08 am to
both good but i love zombie movies.

Days was better, the empty London scene is one of the greatest scene is history
Posted by Volvagia
Fort Worth
Member since Mar 2006
52328 posts
Posted on 3/5/09 at 10:30 am to
quote:

Like, the military shooting at a driving car. Really? Since when did zombies learn how to drive a car? You know those people aren't infected, but you're going to shoot at them anyway?


Exactly my beef with Weeks.
Posted by Meursault
Nashville
Member since Sep 2003
25188 posts
Posted on 3/5/09 at 10:32 am to
I loved them both. Days was by far the best, though. But that first scene in weeks...
Posted by SaintLSUnAtl
THE REAL MJ
Member since Jan 2007
22140 posts
Posted on 3/5/09 at 12:48 pm to
It was pretty much the same movie.

Virus infects people, people start killing people, virus is contained, end of movie.

I liked it though b/c I'm in to that sort of movie.
Posted by booga
used to be maui
Member since Feb 2008
1469 posts
Posted on 3/5/09 at 1:38 pm to
The absence of Danny Boyle in 28 weeks later was apparent. 28 days later was suspenseful and scary while 28 weeks later was just another action movie to be placed with all the rest. 28 days later seemed new and refreshing, but 28 weeks later was just the same old stuff.
Posted by CocomoLSU
Inside your dome.
Member since Feb 2004
153597 posts
Posted on 3/5/09 at 1:40 pm to
Days.

And it's not even close.
Posted by Volvagia
Fort Worth
Member since Mar 2006
52328 posts
Posted on 3/5/09 at 2:05 pm to
quote:

Virus infects people, people start killing people, virus is contained, end of movie.


You do realize the exact opposite of that occurs in the end of 28 Weeks Later...right?

BTW, apparently they are working on making 28 Months Later
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 2Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram