One of the Americans' key local people turns out to be Don, who reunites with his son and daughter - and lies to them about what really happened to their mother. Army is enforcing a high-tech quarantine, resettling the British capital with refugees who waited out the crisis safely across the English Channel. The infected have all starved to death, and the U.S. After showing husband and father Don ( Robert Carlyle) treacherously abandoning his wife during a zombie attack to save himself in the worst days of the epidemic, the movie revisits the ghostly, abandoned London of the first film. occupiers committing atrocities when they can't tell the civilians from the hostile enemy. In fact, it seems to be at least partially a Gulf War/Vietnam metaphor about overconfident U.S. If you remember how Her Majesty's soldiers reacted to the "rage virus" plague in the first film - they were fascistic survivalist types prone to rape - you won't be surprised that this movie doesn't exactly support the troops either. It just seems that big Hollywood producers came and decided to make a sequel to a great successful independent movie, but they didn't quite understand what made that movie so loveable with the audience.In a major escalation of the first movie's theme, the American military has been brought in to clean up and re-settle Britain, where almost everyone died from a rabies-like contagion that turned people into maniacal (but mortal) zombie psychopaths. was there an idea other then good old zombie action? I'm not sure, but maybe I'm missing something. Almost nothing about the zombies themselves. Main hero goes against other men that threaten him and people about whom he grew to care. And the last part of the movie is exactly that. Expressed by the leader of the military group that main characters meat in the original: the whole situation in which they find themselves is just "Men killing men", just like before the apocalypse, only the details change. In the sequel we get your typical good-guy soldier, your typical doctor lady and (I'm sorry but) a couple of very stupid kids that get 15k people killed and other world exposed (honestly since about the middle of the movie I wasn't even sure as a viewer that I care if these two survive) because they wanted to loot their old house and again because security in the district was extremely inefficient to say the least.ģ)The bigger idea. He is just a guy without a huge backstory that wakes up in the middle of the apocalypse and just wants to get to his family and meets a girl who is ready to do anything to survive and a family of a father and a daughter taking care of each other. Why would he have access to quarantine area of medical facilities? That doesn't make any sense.Ģ)Highly relatable characters. But he is just a caretaker for one building. Then their father that says that he has access to everywhere in the district and goes to his virus transmitting wife. In the sequel it's high security military district that gets exposed because two kids managed to sneak past every outpost, got spot by the sniper on the roof, but didn't get caught until it's too later. Pure, simple yet convincing in the original: originated as something in apes, transmitted to humans, highly contagious, no one was ready for the situation like that. So here's my list of things that the sequel doesn't recognize as necessary elements of the original:ġ)Contamination reasons. And everything I write in this post is a pure personal opinion and nothing more. a solid zombie apocalypse action, the movie is very good. Let me just start by saying that for what it is, i.e. Latest Discussions The Super Mario Bros Movie Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves John Wick: Chapter 4 Renfield Keanu Reeves Tobey Maguire
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |