28 Days Later or Underworld?

[HiTek21]

My brother bought these 2 dvds today, I haven't seen either one of them. Which one is better? I get mixed reviews on both from people I know who saw them.

 

[EvilYoda]

28 Days Later by FAR...not even a close race.

 

[sillymofo]

underworld.... 28 days later is a penis that shouldn't be shown.

 

[slydecix]

Originally posted by: EvilYoda
28 Days Later by FAR...not even a close race.

But... but... Kate Beckinsale!!!



28 Days Later is definitely the better film though

 

[hdeck]

depends what you like. i enjoyed both films

 

[Rufio]

Originally posted by: cr4zymofo
underworld.... 28 days later is a penis that shouldn't be shown.

just like yours!

 

[imported_Tomato]

28 days later

 

[TekDemon]

Underworld if you want fluff that you don't really have to think about or really care about. 28 days later if you want off kilter postapocalyptic zombie thriller type of movie that's ultra low budget and kinda on drugs.

Heck, watch both man... I think 28 days later is kinda overrated, but nonetheless a decent effort and good for the budget.

 

[GagHalfrunt]

It depends. If you're a 13 year old goth-wannabe or just generally braindead, go with Underworld. It's nice to look at as long as you're stupid enough that it doesn't bore you to tears. If you have a brain and want to see an interesting movie that requires you to pay attention, 28 Days Later is FAR FAR better.

 

[sillymofo]

Originally posted by: Rufio

Originally posted by: cr4zymofo underworld.... 28 days later is a penis that shouldn't be shown.

just like yours!

It was an accident, I didn't mean to leave the bedroom door ajar, go back to bed son.

 

[jcwagers]

While neither one was what I could call "awesome", I personally would go with Underworld. I didn't care much for 28 Days Later.

jc

 

[BurnItDwn]

Havent seen underworld yet, but 28 days later is most awesome.

 

[0roo0roo]

underworld is better, 28 days goes from potential to rambo.

 

[Mingon]

Originally posted by: hdeck
depends what you like. i enjoyed both films

 

[Swag1138]

28 days later had such great potential, but failed to pay off.
(If you want to see a GOOD version of this movie, watch The Omega Man)

Underworld was excellent dumb fun.

 

[hjo3]

Why are most ATOTers incapable of making a poll when they ask simple questions with a boolean answer?

28 Days Later > Underworld.

 

[0roo0roo]

and oh, 28 days was filmed on low resolution dv. it looks like cr@p on film. well... it might look ok on the dvd for obvious reasons. i saw it in the theater. the fact that film makers save money by being cheap doesn't make me happy when the savings aren't passed down to me. i paid full price. goddamned bastids.
underworld>28 days big time. their budget was small too, but they did pretty damn good with every dime going on screen.

 

[DaWhim]

saw both, 28 days later!

 

[MikeO]

Originally posted by: hdeck
depends what you like. i enjoyed both films

Same here. Underworld has a weak story but decent action and is damn good to look at. 28 days later has a good story, decent action but the low budget shows.. it's not so good to look at. It really depends on what you like. You should watch both, but... 28 days later first

 

[Corporate Thug]

Originally posted by: EvilYoda
28 Days Later by FAR...not even a close race.

 

[fumbduck]

POLL!

Underworld is a PIECE OF SH!T FILM. It is FILLED TO THE F|_|CKING BRIM with plot holes.

28 Days Later is made by Danny Boyle and he kicks ass, as does the movie. (see trainspotting)

 

[fumbduck]

Originally posted by: cr4zymofo
underworld.... 28 days later is a penis that shouldn't be shown.

Hey buddy, how about you grow the fvck up?

 

[y2kc]

close your eyes and choose one. both are enjoyable crap..we're not talking "The Godfather" vs "LA Confidential" here, so either way you get the same thing.

 

[AUMM]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
underworld is better, 28 days goes from potential to rambo.