Rating:

Yeah, the first part (28 days later) was quite a good horror film. It wasn’t overdone in any way and all the proportions of scary vs moody was perfect. Plus the abandoned empty london streets were a sight in its own.
So knowing that it was a success it was certain that they’ll make a sequel, right? Yeah, and in most cases that ends badly and ruins the legend of the predecessor. In this case it wasn’t really bad news, but it didn’t live up to the original.

28 weeks later survivors are contained in some cities to keep them safe, and the remaining ones try to get to those asylums to survive. That pretty much sums it all up since it’s even more of an action movie than 28 days was. And that’s it’s main flaw. Where they could’ve made a mark and discuss some matters we all like to discuss like human race to self-destruction, they chose having blood and fast action instead. One of the first scenes of a house full of people that try to survive at all costs was perfect, but it got spoiled by the banality and then it all continued towards the end. Too bad because that could’ve been a classic. Instead it’s just a decent action horror.

Rating:

Third parts are usually worse. Usually but not always thankfully. Sometimes when a new director arrives at the set things can get interesting. Same thing happened with already pretty good action/not-so-much-horror series resident evil. First part was set in an underground lab, second in an abandoned city, now we expand the perimeter even more by having the action take place in nevada desert. That’s a pretty big place now isn’t it?

Of course “Alice” is still there, deadly as usual and there are no scenes in this movie or any of the former ones that she’s actually threatened by anyone. Sure something jumps out at her with a loud noise, yeah it might make us jump on our chairs a bit, but we KNOW (seriously, KNOW) she’ll manage. That’s a pro if we’re talking action, but a con if we’re talking horror. Since most of the other characters are pretty boring and un-likeable (oh and not so attractive ) we don’t really care about them. The plot is simple : she helps a group of survivors escape to “safety”.

Of course this is a fun movie to watch, a fast action movie to be precise. Not too much “horror” there. Sure we have zombies but that doesn’t necessarily make it a horror. It’s not scary. But it is entertaining.

Rating:

Dario Argento is an Italian classic horror filmmaker. Actually he had made so many movies it’s impossible for me to name them all. But let’s focus on the quite recent one – Mother of all tears. I think it’s a good movie for a couple of reasons. First it’s really really weird. I mean Weird. Odd. And the evil portrayed here actually seems to be evil.

Sure there are overdrawn scenes and some cheap looking gore, but that kinda added to the general atmosphere. The funny english accents didn’t bother me at all, and the main character – Sarah – is actually the directors daughter. But she does a phenomenal job of being scared, angry, and confused. It has some pokes at religion (since it’s italy and the vatican mostly) and some occult elements. But probably the most important thing is that if you’ve never seen any of the Argento movies you should give it a shot. They look like no other horror. Seriously.