Boyle and Garland have, in their dotage, outdone themselves. The first film was good, the second almost entirely forgettable, but this third act, wow, fucking fantastic. “28 Swinging Cocks”, “28 Inch Cock” or “28 Dicks Later”, any could have been apt titles, but that’s too easy. This is the movie in which the anatomy is riotous, the intellect unashamed, the heart unexpectedly exposed.

  • who@feddit.orgEnglish
    51·
    6 days ago

    How would this new one hold up for someone who skips the second one?

    No spoilers, please.

    • InvalidName2@lemmy.zipEnglish
      4·
      6 days ago

      28 Years Later is a self-contained story and it really won’t matter if you’ve seen the prior entries or not. There are some connections and some references to prior films, but nothing noticeable or vital to understanding or enjoying what you’re watching.

    • Deadeyegai@lemmy.worldEnglish
      5·
      6 days ago

      Spoiler free. I skipped the 2nd and didn’t feel left out. Might have missed some easter eggs or some other details but not enough to dislike it for what it is.

    • zero@fek.xyzOP
      5·
      6 days ago

      Tough question. There are parts of the second one which is really good, subjective of course, but everyone I’ve spoken to agree the first 10 minutes is really good (was directed by Boyle).

      To me the story is not connected, but still worth a watch.

    • steeznson@lemmy.worldEnglish
      4·
      6 days ago

      It’s the same writer/director as 28 Days. From what I understand it even partially rectons 28 Weeks.

    • shads@lemy.lolEnglish
      2·
      5 days ago

      I’d just watch the 2nd, I don’t get why its so disliked, not going to say it was a masterpiece but its better than average for the genre. But I think there is more than enough c9ntext to watch any of them in isolation.