Seems familiar??? 28 Days Later - The Rage (2007) Discussion

[–] jezmo_uk 18 years ago

Yeah, because 28 Days later had TONS of Vultures in it didnt it? Twat. Dont comment of what you dont know s**t about....

reply

[–] nemesisdesign 18 years ago

Wasn't the virus in 28 days later called rage? If they wanted to avoid being called copycats, why wouldn't they use a different name for the virus :\

reply

[–] TheCommenteer 16 years ago

im sure you said this while trying to burn 700mb to a floppy, cos hey, they both use the word disk...so...what gives?! shouldnt they be exactly the same?! this is a crazy crazy world we live in when floppys dont hold 700mb...

reply

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] TheCommenteer 16 years ago

i see youre slowly getting the point...and yet missing it at the same time.
1. im aware you werent correcting my spelling "why the hell you would be stupid enough to even consider pointing out inaccuracies in something thats clearly meant to be satirical?" does the word inaccuracies = spelling to you? did i mention that you were correcting my spelling? at all? no?
2. "I was indicating that your whole point, serious or not, is incorrect."...well done? isnt this exactly what ive been saying? "im guessing you hear things like 'the pot calling the kettle black' and point out that pots cant talk. its a given. we all know it, it doesnt need to be said." did this not give you a hint that you point out things that dont need to be said? im not sure what part youre not grasping there.
3. i love this quote "It doesn’t matter what you call them, they are not the same thing" youve finally realised my initial point! now relate this back to the movie...ta da! regardless of what the virus is called...ITS NOT THE SAME! :O wow. amazing.
4. "Just because they sound the same and differ only in one letter, does not make them the same thing, therefore you can’t use that as an example." actually youve made me think its a better example than i gave it credit for. just because they are called the same thing, but give completely different results, does not make them the same thing. therefore you cant claim its a ripoff.
5. "Take a look around the IMDB boards, there are people who freak out over even the slightest similarity, screaming COPYCAT! RIPOFF! and the like, so it is fair to say that they were concerned about people nagging about using the same virus name and basic plot." oh everyone else is doing it, therefore its ok. i think its fair to say that theyre ALL assclowns rather than say because alot of them are doing it, none of them are assclowns. see the point? lets hope so, itll be the first one youve grasped yet.

reply

[–] ajmal-m 16 years ago

its like watching two retards have an arguement

reply

[–] TheCommenteer 16 years ago

in the same way that kicking a ball is like kicking a ball.
because theyre the same thing.
...yes i realise this just paid me out.

reply

[–] Killer_Wolf 18 years ago

Based on a Fango article, a big mutated Tasmanian Devil looks to be the main baddy of this movie. Very un-28-Days-later-ish if you ask me.

reply

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] oshoj 18 years ago

That's cool, Brick. One of our good friends (Eva Lohse) is a make-up artist on the film.

reply

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] moovieluva 18 years ago

Hey oshoj

How do you know Eva?? She's a friend of mine too. Do u live in LA?

reply

[–] denny7777 18 years ago

I am working in this film as a volunteer assistant grip and we were inspired (some what) by 28 days later but this film will be better! Just you wait!

So you get to work with Erin Brown? You lucky son of a bitch!

R.I.P. America
1776-2000

reply

[–] backwoodsterrormovie 18 years ago

This movie has nothing to do with 28 Days Later. You might as well say it's a copy because they are both horror movies. Since they are, it HAS to be a replica, right? Oh, and Home Alone was an exact copy of I Spit On Your Grave, because they both have a scene that takes place in a bathroom.

reply

[–] dragonhead44-1 17 years ago

Well, I've seen this movie on sale here in the UK and it has a new title.

"48 Weeks Later"....

reply

[–] denny7777 18 years ago

This movie looks like a combination of Hostel, Cabin Fever, and 28 Days Later, I cant wait!

R.I.P. America
1776-2000

reply

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] iamjoealmighty 18 years ago

wasn't 28 days later just the same concept of every zombie movie ever made since Night of the Living Dead

DUMB F U C K

reply

[–] legion_quest666 18 years ago

No, 28 days later took the overtones of a zombie movie than removed the zombies, and replaced them with 'rage' infected humans - the main difference being that the people in 28 days were not zombies.

This film sounds very much like it was influenced by the 28 days soley because of the use of the term 'rage virus' in the films description - a 'rage virus' being the same thing that kick started the events of 28 days and its suppossedly coming sequel 28 weeks

reply

[–] erich242 18 years ago

Bruno Mattei's Hell of the living dead anyone? Which was really just a rip off of Romero's Dawn http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082559/
Seems like most horror is a retread these days(both 28days & Rage), but that didn't stop Slither from being cool
-Erich "I ain't nothin' but a Gorehound" Von

reply

[–] sidpharcus 17 years ago

First, 28 Days Later is a zombie flick plain and simple. Its a different spin on 'zombies', much as Underworld was for vampires. The main thing the made 28 Days Later so great was its director Danny Boyle. His direction is masterful.
Second, if 28 Days Later had called its virus anything other than 'rage', this whole discussion wouldn't exist.
There is currently a comic out by Fangoria Comics called "Beneath the Valley of the Rage" it is a 4 part mini-series prequel to this movie. Clearly if you go check it out, you will see it is very much different from 28 Days Later.

reply

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] tobi-lyton 17 years ago

Yeah right, and when Eli Roth says Hostel 2 is a good film, we of course have to believe him... cuz you cannot argue with the director?

Well, I can argue with just about anyone! :D

reply

[–] gabrielrude 16 years ago

hey hostel 2 was a good movie...
however 28 days later is a zombie film...

reply

[–] emo101-1 16 years ago

28 weeks or days WAS not a zombie film. True zombies come from Haitian voodoo.
Ramero just american-ized it. Learn somthing before you spout about it.

reply

[–] styliek-1 16 years ago

And all the movies borrow heavily from I Am Legend,,,the book not the film...its a fact of life when you have so many theme related movies they will share similarities, so get over it and stop making the thread a p1ssing contest

reply

[–] TheCommenteer 16 years ago

hostel 2 sucked. oh hey, im gonna ignore my friend warning me about going off with a guy who i just acknowledged as looking scary in a foreign country with which im not familiar and dont speak the native language...one of the many many many character driven flaws in hostel 2.
and 28 days later is not a zombie film. if you think it was, you werent paying attention.
then again this can be explained simply, youre a hostel 2 fan...ahhh yes.

reply

[–] Nick_Denife 16 years ago

Perhaps you should see it before making judgements about it. By the way, 28 DAYS LATER and HOSTEL 2 both sucked. And I saw them, so I know whereof I speak. I crewed and have seen THE RAGE - it's a drive in movie and pretends to be nothing more. It contains nods to dozens of different films (ones that were influential and were loved by the writer and director), everything from THE BRAIN THAT WOULDN'T DIE to THE RE-ANIMATOR. It's just a fun, crazy, mad movie and it's a blast to watch. And if you're a Mushroomhead fan, enjoy their appearance and the two videos in the extras! Now get your head out of your nether regions, idiot.

reply

[–] alesisqs61 16 years ago

Watching now..... not good by any means and made Andrew Divoff look bad....which must be hard to do because he rocked in Wishmaster and Lost.

Directing/Editing/acting is sub par. 1 filmmaker to another honestly.

The only thing in this movie so far I could not accomplish are the gore FX and I'm 16 min in and not enjoying it.

OMG, I forgot Reggie Bannister is in it.... This is making Phantasm look like an academy award winning movie in comparison.

reply

[–] jezmo_uk 16 years ago

someone else who is desperate to make movies but doesnt have the gumption. Painfully transparent dude....(Yawn)....
The movie is great to anyone that GETS IT. And you dont get it.

reply

[–] dilbertsuperman 16 years ago

I love the morons saying this movie copies 28 days later.
It shows how gloriously ignorant they are since 28 days later is simply a copy of the various living dead movies.
imbeciles.

reply

[–] Synetech 16 years ago

A lot of people seem to be nagging that they are not alike. I have not yet seen this, but the description does indeed make it sound very much like 28 Days Later. Sure they have plenty of differences, but they both boil down to rage virus creates man-eating mutants. That’s why they sound the same.

That said, it doesn’t mean that it is a rip-off. At the end of Shaun of the Dead, the news anchor said that despite rumors, the outbreak was not caused by the Rage virus. Of course Shaun was technically a spoof anyway.

--
Synetech

reply