'28 Weeks Later' - High-Def Digest review - High-Def Digest Forums
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10-10-2007, 02:26 AM
jed's Avatar
jed jed is offline
HDD Founder
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,621
Default '28 Weeks Later' - High-Def Digest review

Peter's review of '28 Weeks Later' is up. He calls the film itself an average sequel, and although the film's source materials don't exactly scream "demo material," he says the video and audio are solid, and the supplements package should please fans as well.

Full review here:
http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/842/28weekslater.html
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10-10-2007, 02:29 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,002
Default

Spoilers follow.. sort of.

There does seem to be a blue-ish cast to the picture at times, although fleshtones are pleasingly accurate. Depending on the source material, grain and noise can also be fairly common issues -- shots frequently look fuzzy and indistinct.

I disagree. There were some points, when the containment fails, that the pq did look quite terrible, but not that bad. It deserved at least a 4 for pq. The sniper scenes look great, i dont understand the "2d" view that is talked about..

Ive watched it twice, Ive never seen the blueish cast picture. if you could please point out where its at Id appreciate it..

But when the clan's presumably deceased mother returns, seemingly immune to the zombie virus, some unpleasant family dynamics erupt, and soon all hell will once again break loose.

She doesn't return, the family finds her in a house. And she's not "immune" to the virus, she has it, and infects the others with it. They say that SEVERAL times in the movie.. and even point it out many times as well. There is no "family dynamics", the husband left everyone for dead, and she wasn't. How is that a "family dynamic"? He kisses the wife, gets infected, kills her. The virus WAS dead, but the wife had it, she just didn't become a zombie, infected yes, but only infected her husband by him kissing her.

After setting up such a potent vision of the future, and a genuinely intriguing family of three-dimensional characters, the conventions of the genre would seem to demand that intelligence take a back seat to visceral shock.

Did you honest to god, I mean this in the nicest way possible, WATCH THE DAMN MOVIE? Sergeant Doyle sacrificed himself to let the children, who as far as we know, are deemed "the future" due to their immunity to the virus. So he lacks intelligence because he sacrificed himself to save them? Yeah thats lack of intelligence. Who else died because of lack of intelligence Peter? Please share. The female doctor died because she sacrificed herself to once again save the children. Everyone else who died in the movie was insignificant characters.. the snipers took out most of the characters..

So peter, please point where the lack of "intelligence" was? The group sacrificed themselves for the future of the world.. which we know the ending.. somehow the kid infected others..

So peter, if you were in this situation, say one of the humans, wouldn't you realistically panic? How would you have done the movie..? I think it was done great, the humans reacted quite realistically.

It is now 28 weeks beyond the events of 'Days,' and most of the major cities have been quarantined, turned into virtual walled fortresses meant to keep the uninfected people in, and the drooling zombies out.

Ive seen it twice. Im almost 100 percent sure they state that there is barely any infection left, the mother is one of the last known infections, if youll watch the scene where the doctor examines her, she states that she hasnt seen an infected person in months, they also stated that the infected eventually die once they don't eat flesh for a certain period of time.

Im not trying to be a dick or anything.. but seriously.. did you watch the damn movie?

Id love a reply.. either in here or in a pm. Once again.. not trying to start things..

Last edited by Ice2Dragon; 10-10-2007 at 03:12 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 10-10-2007, 02:59 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 5
Default

Picture was a 4+. Lot's of 3d like effects.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 10-10-2007, 03:01 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 545
Default

Thought the PQ was great, a definate 4.

Movie was also well above average.

For some reason HDD's recent BD reviews seem well out of line with others.

Just watched Halloween, it looks stunning but was slated on HDD!
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 10-10-2007, 03:24 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 73
Default

28 days later was much better than this one.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 10-10-2007, 03:27 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,240
Default

This is one the few playstation discs that i'd actually like to get hold off. I had really bad expectations when Danny Boyle was not announced as the director but they did well all the same.

It's also part of a growing trend of post-apocalyptic sci-fi films set in London (see the exceptional Children of Men, released pretty much the same year).

If you get a chance, check out Intacto, an earlier film by Juan Carlos Frenadillo.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 10-10-2007, 04:58 AM
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 587
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ice2Dragon View Post

...
...
...
...
...

Im not trying to be a dick or anything.. but seriously.. did you watch the damn movie?

Id love a reply.. either in here or in a pm. Once again.. not trying to start things..

Sorry to step in, but I think you're misreading Peter's verbage.
1) The movie has a steely gray tone (particuarly during the second and third acts when the city is being overrun) which adds a primary blue hue to the palette (watch the nighttime scenes and the bombing run). He's not trying to compare it to a film like 'Underworld,' he's just pointing out the dominant primary.

2) First, she does "return" whether by choice or discovery -- she returns to their lives. I think Peter's trying to avoid an overly detailed plot synopsis that gives away every angle of the story. Second, Peter states she is "seemingly immune" to the disease, which means other characters initially think she is immune to the disease. Which is completely true. Third, "unpleasant family dynamics erupt" is a tongue-in-cheek, spoiler free way of hinting at her killing her husband. Again, he's dead on.

3) Those elements still exist in the film -- but come on -- the action definitely takes a front seat to character development. He put it more kindly than I would have.

4) Notice the past-tense words he uses. He's merely referring to the reasons the cities were barricaded and walled in the first place. If you read the sentence, it doesn't say the zombies are still trying to get in -- just that the walls were built at one point to keep such people out.
All in all, I understand you were frustrated with the review and disagreed. But please take the time to read the exact wording before getting so upset. In each case, Peter is accurate even though you would have chosen different ways to describe what he was referring to.

Anyway, I'm not trying to be argumentative -- we always appreciate the posts. Just try to be less volatile in your responses... I'm sure you'll catch our attention more with preverbial honey than vinegar.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 10-10-2007, 05:37 AM
Pimboli's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,284
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JAG1977 View Post
Thought the PQ was great, a definate 4.

Movie was also well above average.

For some reason HDD's recent BD reviews seem well out of line with others.

Just watched Halloween, it looks stunning but was slated on HDD!
I agree about Halloween but there was dirt on the print which should have been cleaned up.

I dont agree with the 4 assessment, your putting it on a par with the Surfs Up transfer which was 4 and it IMO is far superior to the 28 Weeks Later's transfer. The movie wasn't shot to look pristine so I think the 3.5 reflects the transfer which isnt a bad thing as thats how it was meant to look.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 10-10-2007, 07:27 AM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 16
Default

are you watching diff movies then we are buying at stores? This movie looked great!
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 10-10-2007, 09:07 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,792
Default

Quite a difference from some of the other reviews:

home theatr spot -
pq 5/5

At an average AVC bitrate of 37mbps, the video must have the lowest compression ratio of any high definition release so far. I didnít clock it with the PS3 this time to confirm, but FF2 appeared to average higher than the listed spec on the PS3. So, factoring in the room for error in clocking bitrates in a player, Iíd expect the advertised specs are probably legit. 37mbps average seems amazing to me and a real surprise considering how content Fox appeared to be with lower bit budgets prior to their high def hiatus. Iím glad to see the change, as bandwidth is one the things that sets BD apart. Itís great to see it utilized more fully.

Multiple types of cameras were used while filming, but detail is an enormous upgrade from Days, unless you factor in the final sequence from the film that wasnít shot on video. But, Weeks stands shoulder to shoulder with some of the best weíve seen on the format, day or night, in resolve. Its sharply contrasted visual design looks fantastic in high def. The film appears to have undergone some digital correction in post. Many shadows have been crushed possibly to alleviate noise, which is densely populated in most of the film, as is typical of dark photography whether digital or film. The film was very grainy when I saw it theatrically as well, despite a much softer, less dynamic fidelity on the bigger screen.

Like I said, gore is so much more effective in HD. And HD reveals the visual effects to be very convincing Ė even the helicopter scene. This one doesnít hide behind camera limitations. It shows it all!


high def preview -
pq 4/5

This release of 28 Weeks Later was very solid. Fox went with a BD50 and another high bitrate AVC encode. The PQ was sharp and vivid throughout. The colors were solid and flesh-tones were spot-on.

i rented this last night and watched it on a 50" 1080p and thought it was pretty amazing - when i saw peter's scores i had to do a double take thinking that it must be about 28 days later
Reply With Quote
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
28 Days Later vs. 28 Weeks Later kamiller42 Blu-ray Software General Discussion 12 11-16-2007 03:51 AM
28 Weeks Later Blu-ray review tekman Blu-ray Software General Discussion 0 10-11-2007 12:29 PM
'28 Weeks Later' -- pre-release buzz PeterB Blu-ray Software General Discussion 73 10-09-2007 07:47 PM
WARNING! 28 weeks later coming on May. nelll Film Forum 8 05-21-2007 04:36 PM
I want 28 Weeks Later on Blu-ray! bone crusher Blu-ray Software General Discussion 5 05-15-2007 11:15 AM


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off