<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.2" -->
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
    <channel>
        <atom:link href="http://moviejunkie.yolasite.com/resident-evil-extinction/resident-evil-extinction.rss" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
        <title>resident-evil-extinction</title>
        <description>resident-evil-extinction</description>
        <link>http://moviejunkie.yolasite.com/resident-evil-extinction/resident-evil-extinction.php</link>
        <lastBuildDate>Sat, 06 Jun 2026 00:56:26 +0100</lastBuildDate>
        <generator>FeedCreator 1.7.2</generator>
        <item>
            <title>Resident Evil: Extinction</title>
            <link>http://moviejunkie.yolasite.com/resident-evil-extinction/resident-evil-extinction/resident-evil-extinction</link>
            <description>&lt;span class=&quot;yui-tag-span yui-tag&quot; style=&quot;FONT-SIZE: 18px&quot; tag=&quot;span&quot;&gt;A decent sequel.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;font style=&quot;FONT-SIZE: 14px; FONT-FAMILY: &quot;&gt;&lt;font style=&quot;font-size: 16px; &quot;&gt;The first &quot;Resident Evil&quot; was a smart and innovative zombie movie that I found good enough to consider a near classic.The sequel, &quot;Resident Evil: Apocalypse&quot;, was dumber than the first, but it was a lot of fun.Is it the lack of fun that makes the 3rd entry in the popular franchise the worst? Or is it the serious tone of the 1st? I'm aware that some fans were pleased with this movie, and some weren't.Did I enjoy the movie? Yes, but there's some problems.The pacing of the movie felt slow and kinda dragged.It should've moved at a fast pace like the 1st one and it would've been a real challenge to match the pacing of the 2nd.The movie is also low on interesting performances.It's not bone dry, but it's somewhat empty.Milla Jovovich is still entertaining as butt-kicking survivor Alice.Mike Epps is entertaining, but he was funner to watch in &quot;Apocalypse&quot;.Then there's the zombies.It's not the zombies in general, it's the amount.The movie could've been a little more fun if we had more zombie killing scenes like the ones in the previous installments.There definitely should've been a little more action and some of the CGI is a little cheesy.The scene where the birds that fed on infected flesh attacked the fellow survivors had some obvious special effects.The film is no more than a simple survivor story that follows survivor Alice as she battles through lots of flesh eating zombies in search of other survivors.Is the fact that the movie is more of a survival story than a zombie movie the reason why &quot;Extinction&quot; wasn't as good as it could've been.Maybe.I'm not saying that I didn't enjoy this movie.I liked it, and I'm recommending it, but my recommendation is extremely mild so it would probably be best to rent the movie.I'm stuck between a B and a B-.I guess I'll give it a weak B due to the fact that I wasn't exactly bored by it.I sure hope &quot;Resident Evil: Afterlife&quot; is going to be better.The director of the very first film is returning so it may have a chance.I just hope it has more action and more involving characters.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;yui-tag-span yui-tag&quot; style=&quot;FONT-SIZE: 20px&quot; tag=&quot;span&quot;&gt;Grade: B-&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br&gt;</description>
            <pubDate>Sat, 19 Mar 2011 15:19:37 +0100</pubDate>
        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>
