PoorAndDangerous
Superstar
seeing the reviews for this and then coming into this thread is wild lmao
Even then if someone’s seen a lot of movies in their life they should tell by the end of the film we’re getting another one.Not everyone knew that. I didn’t going into the film.
it's interesting to me this is so divisive. did people forget the ending to the original film? i didn't like it back then. it switched to real cameras after the blurriness and became a completely different film with the army storyline.
i fukked with it, but that last scene felt like nia dacosta directed it. she makes bad movies so she might flop the franchise so bad with the 2nd one that we don't get the third one that's supposed to be directed by danny boyle.
It's a weird ending that felt so out of place compared to the tone of the film, which is why I mentioned that the ending scene should have been moved to post credit.Even then if someone’s seen a lot of movies in their life they should tell by the end of the film we’re getting another one.
This feels like a film that’s getting heat early on by fans that will be received better when the other movies are released.
I saw this movie as a foundation to what’s to come
tone shifts can absolutely ruin a film. I'll have to check it out.It's a weird ending that felt so out of place compared to the tone of the film, which is why I mentioned that the ending scene should have been moved to post credit.
I mean it was just a 3 min introduction to new characters. I get the “tone shift” but that shift might not even be in the second film.It's a weird ending that felt so out of place compared to the tone of the film, which is why I mentioned that the ending scene should have been moved to post credit.
I knew we were getting more films but that was just weird to me.I mean it was just a 3 min introduction to new characters. I get the “tone shift” but that shift might not even be in the second film.
It just seems like the audience doesn’t know how to take it, and like you said a lot of people don’t know we’re getting more films.
I knew going in So my viewing experience is different
Reading is fundamental breh. I never said it was like the original. I said the original also switched it up in the third act. They used real film cameras instead of that early digital video shyt and moreso the tone and story shifted. In fact boyle and garland have this problem in all their movies they've done together(sunshine being the biggest offender).The ending was NOTHING like the original movie
What happened at the end felt like it was from a completely different movie universe ENTIRELY
Reminds me of the BULLshyt they did in The Walking Dead when they started throwing in GOOFY shyt like junkyward people and Amazonians for no damn reason![]()
The movie strait up ignored the final scene in 28 weeks later. It claims the virus never made it to mainland europe, but in 28 weeks later , a horde of them ran by the eiffle tower![]()
It's a weird ending that felt so out of place compared to the tone of the film, which is why I mentioned that the ending scene should have been moved to post credit.
28 weeks isn't completely cannon.The movie strait up ignored the final scene in 28 weeks later. It claims the virus never made it to mainland europe, but in 28 weeks later , a horde of them ran by the eiffle tower![]()
it's interesting to me this is so divisive. did people forget the ending to the original film? i didn't like it back then. it switched to real cameras after the blurriness and became a completely different film with the army storyline.
i fukked with it, but that last scene felt like nia dacosta directed it. she makes bad movies so she might flop the franchise so bad with the 2nd one that we don't get the third one that's supposed to be directed by danny boyle.