Based on my viewing of 28 Weeks Later this past weekend, here's my list of what not to do when creating a sequel to a good movie:
1. DO NOT give the camera to a seizure-prone elderly woman whenever you want a handheld shot. Despite what many directors seem to think, "nauseatingly shaky" doesn't equal "gritty."
2. DO NOT dumb down the sequel. If the first film was fairly believable (which, despite the whole zombie thing, 28 Days Later was), don't ruin it by making a sequel in which ridiculous and unbelievable things happen all the time. ("Oh crap! We never suspected the zombies would find the back door!", etc.) Also, DO NOT break the rules of your world. In the first film, the Infected came to have certain predictable behavior. We expect to see that in the sequel, and in at least one incredibly distracting instance (I won't spoil it for you, in case you still want to see the movie), the established rules are completely broken. Don't get me wrong--a sequel should do something new, but this isn't it.
3. DO NOT write a story that isn't anchored to any of your characters. We didn't really know whose story this was until the story was over. The whole experience felt like the first 30 minutes of a movie, stretched out to fill 90 minutes.
4. DO NOT waver between "decent movie" and "complete crap movie." Be bad enough that I can laugh out loud at you, or good enough that I don't feel like I wasted my money. This in-between business doesn't work for me.
I gave this a 6/10 (IMDb average: 7.9/10).
13 years ago
1 comment:
Go see Hot Fuzz. Sounds like it was much better than 28 Weeks Later. (I loved 28 Days Later. I think I'll hold off on the Weeks.)
Hot Fuzz wasn't what I expected, but it was still really good. I'd give it a 8 out of 10.
Post a Comment