|
|
Post by X factor on Jun 7, 2014 22:27:35 GMT -5
I'm watching this movie now...sure it's an older movie, but the theme of the movie is very realistic. A bad virus really could get out and infect people, whole populations, and turn everyone rabid. And maybe it's already occurred...the 'Rage' virus that is, just look at the local news, the violent headlines. There's a lot of parallel to this movie and real life that I'd like to examine in the future as time permits...  |
|
|
|
Post by X factor on Jun 7, 2014 22:48:53 GMT -5
One thing this movie does a good job at demonstrating is that sometimes being noble, and or disobeying orders, gets you killed, or jepordizes the lives of others.
This movie is realistic in that there's not always a happy outcome to noble choices, or bad choices...but rather there's heavy tolls to pay for both in certain situations...
|
|
|
|
Post by X factor on Dec 13, 2014 20:53:15 GMT -5
I'm watching 28 weeks later, again, cause HBO absolutely sucks, and play the worst movies.
Anyways I want to point some things out about this movie.
1. The premise of '28 weeks later' is far more scary and believable than that whole 'Walking Dead' Claymation, cgi bs on AMC.
28 days, and weeks, is still, by far, a superior based or produced Movie.
2. It was the wife, in the beginning, who jepordized all in the wooden house by insisting on answering door, or making her husband do so to let 'mild' in, and by doing so all ended up dying a bloody death by the infected.
It's what happens when emotions get in the way of safety and logic.
3. And later in the movie it's the surviving Fathers hobbits, who break protocol by crossing bridge, that are responsible for setting off infection again and getting 100's of thousands killed.
|
|
|
|
Post by X factor on Dec 14, 2014 2:41:06 GMT -5
 I just can't get over the fact that somehow the destruction caused by the two hobbits in the movie, somehow gets over looked cause they're 'cute', young and British. As if being cute, young and British excuses one from accountability. But not once in the movie do the hobbits 'atone' for their massive blunder which in turn gets 10000's more killed. Instead throughout movie, some military doctor, protects them, sharade's them around, as if they're worth more than others, when they, the bratty disobedient hobbits, is the reason the second out break took place. And that does kind of reflect real life, in that the more adorable society perceives you, it's as if you can do no harm. This is played out in courts, type of sentences handed out for same infractions ect. But to me, these hobbits (just in the movie) are unrepented spoiled devils, who do to them disobeying rules, gets their Father infected, which then leads to destruction of 10000's. And even after that, in movie noble Army guy sacrifices life for them...why...cause they look cute? So if you're young, cute, apart of priviliged class, you can be reckless, re infect the whole Island of Britian and still looked at as 'heroish'? Well to me, a true observer, they're not heros...nor would anyone else be who had done the same. Had the hobbits, the Brother and Sister, been Africans or something, people would look at it with a different light. Ye, I know it's only a movie, but just bugs me that just because they're 'cute' to society, I as a viewer, should over look the path of destruction they leave in movie cause they broke protocol and went exploring when specifically told not to cross 'The bridge'. In next post I'll light up the wife, and how her 'compassion', ended up getting a whole house of people infected...and then expected husband to come back and die with her...but instead he ran. Good for him... |
|
