Reviews: 28 Days Later

[JoBlo]

JoBlo's 4/10 review of 28 DAYS LATER can be found here: http://www.joblo.com/28dayslater.htm

And what did you think of the movie? Add your comments below.

GUIDELINES: CONSTRUCTIVE REVIEWS ONLY!

1) If you haven't seen the movie, don't post here, because it will be deleted.
2) If you add two-bit comments like "it rocked" or "it sucked the big one" or just a grade, it will be deleted.
3) If you insult anyone from the board in your post, it will be deleted and you will be banned from the board. You can disagree with others all you want but no putdowns are necessary to make your points. Read our rules here (http://www.joblo.com/rules.htm).

[markus_snoop]

I got to see 28 days later last year over here in Ireland, I liked it but it does tend to miss the mark a little bit alright.
It had it's great moments and I did come out after feeling that it was a good show but something was missing.

The opening was creepy though with all the actors involved doing well. Christopher Eccleson put on a v. good performance but i think the film went slightly downhill when the group joined up with the military. If the movie finished as well as it started I think I would have loved it instead of liked it.

It's just out on DVD over here so i might get

[Sad man]

MY REVIEW OF 28 DAYS LATER
-----------------------------------------------
--------------------------


I just saw this movie. Resident Evil can kiss my ass!
I loved everything from this movie. What I liked the most, was how the movie changed. It started as a horror movie, but It ended with a strong message to humanity. It wasn't really a horror movie.

The performances were SUPERB. I really liked all the characters. They were really nice persons. I personally liked Selina a lot. She was a kick ass girl. I was really surprised with that "TWIST" at the last 20 minutes. It's not really a twist, but It surprised me anyway.

The direction is excellent. Danny Boyle is a great director. All the shots are really well done. That reminds me about the cinematography: It was really cool. The best thing about it was at the beginning, with the man walking arround London alone. The music was also great. I MUST own this movie's soundtrack.

About the zombies(Minor Spoilers): I really liked them, because they weren't those Hollywood looking zombies, like the ones in Resident Evil and The Night of the Living Dead. They just looked like us. And they run very fast. Which made me nervous in several scenes. When the spat blood it was disgusting, but in a good way(End of spoilers).

Some people might get disappointed, because this is not a horror movie per se. It hasn't got lots of action, death scenes and blood. It has very little of those. But it was the plot and the characters that made the movie. I really liked the ending. Some may think it was stupid. What I also really liked here was that I really wanted the main characters to survive, I wont tell you if the do. But I didn't want them to get hurt or anything.

This is the best movie of the year so far, and one of the best horror movies ever. A real surprise. AN AWESOME MOVIE!!!!

Grade: 9/10 or A-

[AgentSmith]

What an extrodinary film this is... I went into it only knowing that Roger Ebert compared to '12 Monkeys'. I thought, since I really enjoyed 12 Monkeys, that I would enjoy this film. Boy, did I ever..

Basic Plot: The film starts out showing the viewer what horrifiying experiments are on done everyday on animals, this time monkeys. Pan forward to 28 Days Later and we see a man named Jim wake up in an empty hospital. Curious as to what is going on and where everyone is, he learns of a virus that caused humans to kill humans.

Within the first 15 minutes of this film, I could immediately see that director Danny Boyle has a huge career ahead of him, regardless whether or not he is successful in the U.S.A. The man has a unique way of bringing a horror story (I will be the FIRST to admit that I do not like many horror films) to the screen that actually makes you think and makes you feel for what is going on and the surrounding characters.

In short, go see this film immediately! One of the best of the year so far. 8.5/10

[Grim H.]

A superb and darkly frightening movie. And DAMN, those zombies are fuckin' fast! This movie can really send shivers down your spine, with its adrenaline-filled scenes, and awkward feeling of impending doom, here's one movie that doesn't dissapoint. I thought it was quite entertaining, and very very creepy. Director Danny Boyle sure does know how to make us feel scared. I nearly jumoped out of my seat, (not really, though. I'm not such a wuss:D )...

28 Days Later...9/10

[The Delfonics]

http://i.imdb.com/Photos/Ss/0289043/09.jpg

28 Days Later - (8/10)
Info: (2003) R, Brendan Gleeson, Alex Palmer
Genre: Horror
Comments: I finally got my hands on this puppy. No, unfortunately I couldnt venture to my local theater. Instead I stayed at home and downloaded a DVD rip. Im such a bitch! I must say that 28 Days Later has so much going for it. Beautifully shot scenes. I love digital video, it gives a movie a grainy and gritty look. I esp. love the raindrops on DV. The shots of London were spectacular. In 28 Days, a group of survivors try to save the human race from infected humans who have the virus called Rage. Blood, action, and some drama ensue. The thing that set itself apart were the odd scenes where Boyle seemed to just get shots of the countryside and play some nice melodic music. It was almost more of an emotional horror flick. This really isnt a zombie flick. For one they arent quite zombie and there really arent many of them. We dont get tons of these creatures at all. The movie mostly focuses around the groups journey. Thats not to say we dont get tons of gore inbetween. The characters really made you feel for them which is always a plus in a horror movie. 28 Days had everything riding for it until the end. The last 2 minutes of this movie are completely awful. One of the worst endings I have ever seen. If they would have chopped the last 3 minutes off of this movie I may have given it a 10 or a 9. Its kinda sad to see a movie get slowed down by its ending. However there are 149 solid minutes and that's what really counts. Yeah a good ending would have iced the cake but its worth the price of admission (or download)

[Silverload]

I have to completely agree with Joblo on this one. This has to be one of the most over rated films I have ever seen. 28 Days later had nothing more then a cool concept going for it. Sure it had a few very awesome scenes, but the majority of the movie is very boring. Not boring because there is no action, but boring because there is no story. If you are not going to give a good story at least give out some fun mindless zombie action. The story in this is about as deep as the story to Resident Evil, but at least RE knew what it was and tried to give a fun ride. But 28 Days Later tries to pretend it is something it is not.

I did enjoyed the first hour, it was a little slow but I was expecting all this to go somewhere. It never did, and where it ended up just ruined everything good this film had going for it.

I do give credit to Danny Boyle for doing a very good job with directing, but all of the problems in this movie come from the very bad script. It is badly written and is completely rehashed from every zombie flick that came before it. Basically this movie is just a bad zombie movie with a good director trying to dress it up as best he could.

I am a huge fan of the zombie sub-genre, and I wanted to like this movie so much. But in the end I left the theater very, very disappointed.
28 Days Later – 5/10

[Helter-Skelter]

Overall 28 Days Later is an interesting, unsettling, although ultimately flawed horror film.

The set-up of the film is excellent - a virus, transmited via blood & saliva, escapes from a research facility in Britian that renders the person infected with it a rage-filled monster that has only one purpose - to kill. Over the course of a few weeks, nearly everyone in Britian is either dead or infected & the movie proceeds to follow a handful of survivors who are trying to stay alive.

The zombies in 28 Days Later are not your typical zombies, they're far more dangerous. Unlike your standard Romero-esque zombies, these zombies displayed no decay, didn't shuffle & stumble about uttering only groans. Instead they jerked & ran while making sounds of incoherent rage. Despite their behavioiur, the only physical features which distinguishs the infected from the uninfected are their red cat-like eyes & their constant vomiting of bood.

I also enjoyed many of the visuals and shot (although I wasn't a fan of the quick cuts of the fight scenes). Boyle keeps the movie draped in shadow and darkness for the most part, & he often chose to make shots which maximize the isolation of the main characters - shots of one of the world's great cities almost totally devoid of life, normal life anyways, greatly added to the film's already oppressive atmosphere.

The 1st half of the movie is far better than the second. The first half is mainly about a group of surviors in London trying to find others who had survived the carnage, while the second half involves the small group of surviors meeting up with a small group of soliders. Let's just say the movie becomes very predictable at this point by reverting to a theme featured countless times in other zombie movies - people fighting people while they should be fighting the zombies. The very ending also is a disappointment and felt far too abrupt.

Despite it's flaws, for the most part the movie succeeds in a few crucial ways - it manages to create an atmosphere of dread and doom, the main characters are for the most part likeable, and the movie succeeds in producing some geniunely frightening moments - although it doesn't even come to close to toppling the king of terrifying movies, The Ring. Unforunately, I can't help but feel that with it's setup & look this movie had the potential to become a classic zombie movie ala Night of the Living Dead & Dawn of the Living Dead, but due to some poor plot choices, it falls somewhere between Dawn of the Living Dead & Resident Evil.


7/10

[Tommy Doyle]

When I first heard Joblo had given this movie a 4, I thought "What the hell? Man, from what I've heard, Jo has gotta be one hard dude to please!!" :p :D Now that I've seen the film... he's dead on with his views. (edit: I decided to write an entirely new review seperate from my one on the Current Movie forum, since as the more I think about the film, the more it pisses me off... so if anyone read my first one, my apologies).


*MAJOR SPOILERS THROUGH-OUT POST*





What a let down. Waited three months for this movie that's been praised up and down the ass, and this is what was delivered. I'm really starting to not like this whole jump on the bandwagon and say a movie is excellent because it's independent and is shot differently than your typical movie.

The movie starts out decent enough. It's got a creepy atmosphere. It's got a few good jolts, a few good edge of your seat moments, good characters, good settings, some amazing shots of London completely empty (I still want to know how they got the permits to do that!). It's quite interesting because the movie starts out as a character driven horror movie, which is SO incredibly rare to come by. A horror movie, that has well developed characters, and still has some good scares. For a few parts, I was genuinely freaked out. The whole tunnel tire change scene had me freaked out... the whole getting gas scene had me freaked out. You kept wondering what was going to jump out from around the corner.

Then the film takes a dive in it's fourth quarter. It turns into a piece on the morality of humanity mixed with an action flick. The only fucking thing it was missing was Steven Segal to complete the entire preachy scene. The remaining survivors manage to find a miliatry hold-out of sorts, with nine living soldiers claiming to have an answer to the cure. We start to get deeper into morality issues. The captain actually says something like "28 days ago, I saw humans killing humans. A week before? Humans killing humans. Two weeks before? Humans killing humans." Uh-oh... I'm holding my breath for the Steven Segal cameo. Then it turns out, the only reason these survivors were led to the hold-out, is so that these 9 soldiers, could fucking rape the women to keep humanity going... Uhm yeah... you want to talk about morality you freakin' scum bag? Fuck you you fucking knob... Don't preach about the nastiness of humanity, only to turn around and perpetrate it. And I'm sorry, but two women and nine men? If you honestly think you're the only people left in the world, you're beyond moronic to think that you're going to be able to continue the human race. You just want to get your peckers wet you losers. Jesus, it's only been 30 days... use your fucking left arm. Close your eyes and picture it's a woman sucking you off...

So, we have the whole movie turned into a topical piece of morality issues. All of the sudden, the zombies seem to be forgotten, as it turns into a clear cut battle of good guys versus bad guys (and very few of the bad guys are zombies). We have an uncannily unkillable hero, really really stupid pathetic bad guys (who up until this point had managed to hold off hordes of zombies but can't manage to take out two now...), guns ablazin', chase scenes, a helpless victim (who at one point kicked more ass than Bruce Willis has ever dreamed of) and army fatigues... What happened to the good, suspensful, horrific, creepy, atmospheric zombie movie?? Beats the shit outta me...

Not to mention the final scene of the movie. I'm sorry, but if you're ballsy enough to make an entire movie dedicated to how hopeless certain situations are, and how hopeless mankind is... have the balls to follow through and complete the movie. Don't give me this sugar coated wrapped in a glitterly bow shit that you stuffed at me... pathetic...

Had such a good thing going for it. Too bad the last 40 minutes wipes out the entire first part of the movie.

Overall rating... 5/10.

Don't buy into the hype. A movie shot with a digital camera, does not a good movie make...

[The1TrueFrog]

28 Days Later - 5/10

http://us.ent4.yimg.com/movies.yahoo.com/images/hv/photo/movie_pix/fox_searchlight/28_days_later/_group_photos/christopher_eccleston3.jpg

I'm not going to say that this movie just totally sucked, because it did at least try, and a few good things going for it. I was getting into it really good during the setup -- it had this eerie resemblance to Dark City, with a nicely done ghost town and a very nightmarish church. Also nice casting, especially considering all the "unknown" actors that do seem to have potential talent.

However, somewhere near the middle, this movie just took a nosedive. Eventually the "scare" factor turns repetitive, cut-off flashy scenes become distracting, and rather than all the suspense that everyone keeps talking about was just boredom. Then as said by "Tommy Doyle" above (beautifully I might add), the writers wanted us to see a moral standpoint about humanity -- which was fed to us by a bunch of horny military perves. Kinda shows a conflict of interest on their behalf...

Anyway, the bottom line is that if this movie were trimmed down about 45 minutes and there was a little more zombie action and a better conclusion (maybe a Planet of the Apes-esque one -- "damn you all to hell!!" hehe), I would have enjoyed myself a lot more. The only real upside of the finale was watching all those bastards get what they deserve!

A 50/50 movie it be...

[KillerKlown]

Boring as hell and VERY over-rated. Started off really well with the vast deserted scenes of London, but this lasted far too long. The film took the biggest dive after the soldiers appeared.

[Writer Col]

I have just returned from the cinema and felt the need to pay respects where they are do. Kudos to Mr. Boyle & Co. for making a film that was not merely terrifying, but extremely thought-provoking as well. I am a screenwriter and avid filmgoer, but as of late - it being summer, after all - there haven't been many films to see that provide much in the way of entertainment that doesn't insult or dull one's senses.

The same may be said for films that get pigeonholed into a "genre," this one being "horror." Is 28 Days Later a horror film? Absolutely not. It is, however, the most frightening experience that I have ever had whilst sitting in a darkened movie theater.

As special effects and such (i.e. morphing, mindless violence, innovative ways in which to kill people) have replaced films that truly dare to get under one's skin by not simply denigrating themselves to cheap gimmicks and gore, it is refreshing that the group here dared to make a film in the vein of such great past classics directed by the likes of Sir Hitchcock and Polanski.

True, films meant to terrify need to get one's adrenaline pumping and flesh perspiring, but what of one's mind? What of thought? Of seeing a bleak and frightening situation in which one thinks, "Dear God, how might I have reacted?"

28 Days Later attempts - and succeeds - to question the nature of violence. Of rage. Of the horror of it, and, also (and this may be the film's most frightening aspect) of its pleasures.

The film opens with documentary images of war, mobs, lynchings, and bodies being torched into raw, eruptive flame. What follows is a meditation on the very nature of those acts. Watch them duplicated throughout the picture with the same straightforward, unwavering, deadpan stare as those which initially greet us. The aim here, I think, is not to make us as an audience goggle at the spectacle (in fact, the manner in which the camera observes events strips it clean of any garishly false entertainment value), but to think about what it is we are actually seeing (and, perhaps, wonder why it is that we, as a society, often crave such images, whilst governments continue to declare war and conduct experiments as to how we may better annihilate ourselves).

In most "'horror" films of late, the characters exist only to be killed. They're a stock collection of caricatures who have become so familiar to us that when they finally do meet their demise, it is of little shock or consequence.

The characters in 28 Days Later behave as "human beings." This is, surely, the reason that the picture succeeds as well as it does. When was the last time one clearly "cared" about what happened to the characters in a "horror" film, instead of waiting for the next big bonanza of blood rife with bludgeonings and slicing weapons? There is nothing to fear, really, because we care only for those characters for whom we have been manipulated to care, and know that by the time the end credits roll, those characters will have prevailed.

The characters in Mr. Boyle's picture think and say the things we might very well think and say ourselves, if caught in such a situation. The loss of loved ones; the selfish suffocation of compassion and courtesy; the numbing of emotions that are crushed for fear of creating hindrances in the quest for survival.

Whilst the horror is there (Jim's visit home; a journey through an underground tunnel; a walk through a diner piled with bodies), it is the reactions of the characters - the bleak deducements of their thoughts; the overall hopelessness of humanity when still we dare to hope - with which the picture is truly interested.

In Mr. Boyle's picture, simply because you are a good person, or because you have people who love you, does not mean that you are safely exempt from the danger which plagues you.

At one point in the picture, such a thing happens, and I felt myself dreading it rather than thinking about dazzling set pieces or blood and carnage. It sickened me to my bones, as well it should have. How wonderful for a picture to reassure one of one's own humanity; of one's own ability to feel, even in the constraints of fiction. (A note on this last: Like any work of fiction worth its salt, this picture derives its elements from a place of truths; there is nothing in it where one might think: "This is impossible. Nothing like this could ever happen." If you doubt that, just pick up a newspaper or watch the evening news.)

Now, mind you, I love to be entertained, and I was. However, when a picture such as this one manages to also engage your mind and emotions, whilst also ripping your nerves raw, it is quite an accomplishment indeed.

Perhaps the people who didn't like this picture were too uncomfortable with its blunt depictions of a world that has embraced its animalistic impulses (recall the initial images on the screen which greet you; turn on that news or grab that paper), or of the manner in which it examined the rage of not only the "bad" guys, but the "good" guys as well (though, in this film, the lines are, as in life, erased). Or, perhaps they simply do not like to think whilst they are being entertained - surely one of the most frightening things in life, indeed.

[coldfryz]

This film was a lot different than i expected it would be from the previews and hype. I thought this was going to be a killer new twist on the zombie movie and I thought it was gonna be scary. But sadly where this concept should have been made into a great movie, it was only made into a mediocre one. Don't get me wrong I definitely think this movie is worth seeing, it just didn't live up to it's hype. the acting and direction couldn't have been better and the writing was sensible. If you're are a fan of the zombie movie, make sure you see this. but if you're not a fan and are just looking for a great zombie movie, stick with the Evil Dead series and Army of Darkness.

[bugdog]

What was scary in this movie?
I went in expecting to be terrified -- all those critics' quotes in the ads and an 85 percent approval rating on rottentomatoes.com -- and I just waited and waited for this movie to get going. OK,
MINOR SPOILER:





The scene with the flat tire was a bit tense.
But that was it -- unless you consider projectile blood vomiting to be scary.
I, too, enjoyed the mood created at the opening. But the more we saw them, the more I despised those shake-the-camera sequences that passed for attack scenes.
And then when the soldiers enter the story, well, it's not even a zombie movie anymore. The movie just turns Rambo-esque and rather predictable.
Certainly one of the most overrated films of this or any other year.

[kerrykat1977]

I saw this flick a couple weeks ago and loved it. It was fun, somewhat believable with all of the hostlilty in the world today... and of course suspenseful! I have to agree with Joe that this movie seemed a bit like an updated version of Night of the Comet (tee-hee) but who cares? How many movies do we see that haven't borrowed some element or idea from another flick? The acting was good, the score was awsome, the infected zombie people were scarry and there was alot of blood and guts! Yahoo!

[Puck Bond]

28 Days Later...is a smart, thoughtful and absolutely thrilling zombie/horror film from writer/director Danny Boyle(Trainspotting(1996)-9/10). I wouldn't say I'm a hardcore fan of these type of movies, but based on early buzz and the previews I was really looking forward to this film. It's certainly one of the best of the year so far and the best film of its kind since the Evil Dead films and even the 1968 George Romero zombie classic Night of the Living Dead(1968)-9/10. The story starts off in an experimental lab where we see rabid monkeys infected with some sort of virus...they call it "rage". Three activists try to free the monkeys not knowing of their condition and one of them gets bitten and the monkeys are set loose. We then flash forward 28 days later and see a single man called Jim(Cillian Murphy) waking up on a hospital bed...he wakes to find the hospital completely deserted...he goes outside and finds the entire city of London a ghost town. This is just an awesome site...a solitary man in orderly clothes walking around the empty streets of London...its accompanied by great music...and the entire score of this film is just great too. As scary visions and settings go this is one of the best....waking up to an empty city, not knowing the cause is truly frightening...just brilliant. Jim eventually finds people...a couple of survivors one named Selena(the very good Naomie Harris) and a guy called Mark. They help Jim escape a rabid band of people who have been infected...and they bring him up to speed on the situation. Most of the entire population has been wiped out by this virus...people are killing people...and it has apparently covered the whole of the U.K. beyond that we don't quite know...The media is wiped out, there is no electricty or water etc. food and water are scarce. Later on they meet up with a father and his young daughter. Frank played by the always good Brendan Gleeson and his daughter Hannah played by Megan Burns. The small band get wind of a radio broadcast from up north by Manchester...it seems a small group of military soldiers grounded at a mansion have found a cure and this gives Jim and company hope. The first half of this film is absolutely brilliant...I was mesmerized from the beginning and it had me on the edge of my seat. The second half of the film is a bit of a letdown...it kind of deteriorates into the usal type of zombie flick...and the end well seems a bit too easy. It still doesn't take away from the fact that this is a very good film...it's not just a zombie gorefest which I very much appreciated...there are interesting issues explored here, like international quarantines and survival of the species and what people are willing to do to survive. Overall, 28 Days Later is a remarkable little film about a small band of people trying to survive a horrific virus that has wiped out a nation. The direction is great, obscure, gritty, off-putting...creating an eerie atmosphere of suspense and impending doom. The cast of unknown actors are universally good. The first half is absolutely brilliant...the second half seems to go astray, but that doesn't discount the fact that this is an excellent film and one of the best of the year so far. Go see it...this film is INFECTIOUS.

[dxhc99]

I saw this yesterday and it didnt scare the hell outta me. That doesn't mean this is a bad horror film on the contrary its ver very good but it showed it didnt need to scare me to make nme enjoy it. It's a horror flick for critics and people who dont care for horror flicks. go see it for yourself.

Final Destination: 8/10
Final Destination 2: 8.5/10
Wrong Turn: 4/10
Resident Evil: 8/10
28 Days Later: 8.9/10

[Writer Col]

What, some of you have asked, is "scary" in this movie?

Well, let's start with:

1) The very real threat of biochemical weapons; namely, smallpox, anthrax, and Ebola.

There are supposed to be only two places in which the smallpox virus is supposed to exist: the CDC in Atlanta; and a facility in Russia. Of the latter country, it has been learned that the poxvirus has been the subject of experiments, some of which used primates. (Sound familiar?)

Add to this the greed of some individuals who, for monetary gain, have sold the poxvirus to other countries. How could this be known? Well, investigators were aware of the amounts of poxvirus which existed; however, when they returned, those amounts had decreased, with the residual poxvirus nowhere in sight. (What is "scary," you might ask?)

Here's another interesting fact: During the previous Gulf War, soldiers were innoculated for -- can you guess -- the smallpox virus. (Getting "scary" enough for you?)

2) In Texas in 1996, there was an outbreak of Ebola Reston at a primate facility. Now, while said strain of Ebola affects only primates, the terrifying thing learned about the strain was that it infected them whilst being airborne. With previous strains, the virus was passed strictly "through the blood." (Sound familiar?) Therefore, it has been learned that viruses do whatever they can to "adapt" to their surroundings. (Getting "scarier"?)

3) A few symptoms of one who has been "infected" with Ebola: vomiting of blood and leakage of same through bodily orifices; irritation and mania; a lethargic, zombie-like state; and the final stage of "crashing and bleeding out. (Need I ask again the "sounding familiar" question?)

4) The further society delves into the rain forests of Africa, the greater the danger of discovering new strains of viruses. Add to that the paving of roads and easier, more expedient ways of travel, and it seems like only a matter of time before...

5) Our world's growing fascination with hatred, rage, and other such nefarious bents of the human condition. Entertainment now consists of watching people put on islands to hurt and damage others so that they can attain a cash prize; single people putting others through various modes of degradation and humiliation on network TV; talk shows that choose to exploit people in pain for the purposes of making their viewing audiences laugh -- this is to name but a few. However, let's look at the news: We watch wars as they are happening (no doubt complete with "stinger" music and "garish" graphics). How much more repulsive, one might ask, could things get?

Now, understand, I am not suggesting that our world could descend into a maelstrom exactly as it was depicted in this picture. But, frankly, the picture unquestionably provides food for thought as to what our world may sadly, one day, become.

In closing, the more knowledge one gains about the world, the more frightening this picture proves to be.

Frankly, it is profoundly disturbing, scary, frightening...

[phatfreddy]

28 Days Later... basically looks like it begins right where Resident Evil left off. It's like a sequel.

Plot: A man wakes up from his hospital bed 28 days later, and he realizes that the entire city of London is deserted, except for a few survivors, and oh yeah and zombies too which outnumber them 5 000 000 times to 1. It seems that a deadly virus was released accidentally into the population and it infected the majority of them, while the survivors had evacuated the entire city, leaving buddy with plastic bag all alone. BOO HOO!

I had high hopes for this movie, since I absolutely loved the Beach and Trainspotting. The first half of this movie is snore city, I thought. No dialogue or action for at least 10 minutes. it's just the main character walking around London holding a plastic bag full of soda. Wow! How fascinating.

The camera work in this film really fit the story. It was dark, and gritty and the sounds the zombies made were pretty creepy.

The acting was pretty solid, since there were no big name actors in this film. And they all did a pretty good job.

I liked the character Selina the most. She had the 'don't fuck with me attitude or else I'll kill you without even thinking about it twice.' She was also attractive too.

There's a pretty good plot twist to this movie as well, which I thought proved a very good point. That no matter how fucked up the world gets where people need to rely on each other, humanity will always do evil things to each other even at the most desperate times. And even though humanity has evolved we still have primal rage inside us all. It's a pretty disturbing plot twist, but it did prove its point.

The only real beef I had with this movie was that it dragged on a lot in numerous scenes. I don't need to see buddy walking around all of London for 10 minutes. We all get the point, everyone's gone, you don't need to show us for that long. 2 minutes would have sufficed.

And I just found out recently that they re-released the movie with another ending which is supposed to be better than the one I saw. That pisses me off since I saw it opening day and paid full price for it. don't know why they didn't just release the very first day. Just me ranting is all.

28 Days Later was a decent flick except that it didn't grab my attention as much as I thought it would. Some of the camera work was very creative and original, but at some points in the movie it was very hard to see what was going on. It's not a movie I would watch over and over again. Wait I think I have to since there's a new ending. FUCK!!!

6/10

[Nate6]

POSSIBLE SPOILERS THROUGHOUT

When I think of 28 Days Later I think, what could have been? A movie that is a near-masterpiece in its first half goes a little off the rails in its second half. Blame it on the infected.

I make it a habit not to do synopses in my reviews because it takes too much time and I know someone else has already written one. So, here's what I think. The performances are largely very good. Cillian Murphy is excellent in the film's principal role of Jim. He makes his character realistic and human, one who isn't always certain and is sometimes a little scared, sometimes very scared. Good stuff. I did not, however, need to see his federal endowment. Naomie Harris was powerfully good as Selena. Her character reminded me of so many people I know. Brendan Gleeson, who has never not been great, and Megan Burns are wonderful as a father and daughter whose only way to survive is by leaning on each other. Christopher Eccleston, a usually-excellent actor, was not quite so good. I saw very little life and expression in his performance, it was stunningly boring and wooden for such a superb actor. Ah well.

The direction was good in most parts. The camerawork and cinematography were mostly superb. I like how the image was distorted when the people were confused, etc. However, the camerawork went absolutely ape-shit (pun intended) during any fighting/attack scenes. I had no fucking idea what the hell was going on, who was being killed, who was screaming. But other than that, good.

The writing wasn't bad. The first half, maybe even two-thirds, of this film was brilliant. Alex Garland expertly explored characters and situations with realism and intelligence. He made the characters do what normal human beings would do, most of the time (except the taking Valium outside in the nighttime thing; who the hell would be crazy enough to do that?). They were scared, frustated and tense, but also able to elicit some happiness and joy from each other, a reminder that humans thrive on their dependence on other people. Plus, the thing got fuckin' scary and exciting at times, and tugged at the heartstrings a little. Then, they got to the military hideout, and after a while there, it all turned to shit. A promising character study turned into a confusing jumble of awkward action sequences and hypocritically-written, poorly-acted characters. I liked the exploration of what happens to people isolated together in one area but after a while it got a little too crazy for my liking.

As for the endings, well, THIS IS WHERE THE SPOILERS COME IN. The original ending was a little too pat for my opinion. I thought it was nice to see them OK and get rescued, but for the kind of film it was, it was maybe too happy. The alternate ending is reams better. It's completely open and even a little sad. It was too bad to see Jim die, but it was cool that Selena and Hannah walked off, not knowing what was going to happen. It was a much better fit, and very cool. ENDING SPOILERS ENDED.

Overall, a film that is brilliant during the first half/two-thirds and a letdown later. I loved the first part of it just enough to give it a...

7/10

[EYE_of_the_SPY]

whats all this talk about zombies? maybe I need to watch this flick again cuz I dont remember any of the characters saying that the "infected" were also corpses coming back to life. Unless I missed sumthing while muching on popcorn, taking a piss break or you reviewers are just not getting it. Zombies are the living dead. They come back only after they die. While in 28 days later victims dont even have a chance to die before they've gone crazed. They are "the infected" not zombies. Its a plauge movie not a zombie movie.

[movieguy1021]

28 Days Later: 7/10

http://www.geocities.com/samsmoviereviews/28dayslater.art

Not since the classic Night of the Living Dead have we seen a good, creepy zombie movie. And it looks like it will be awhile more. Danny Boyle’s 28 Days Later is barely scary, but if you take it for what it really is, a creative drama, it’s pretty good. However, instead of the position of Venus, animal rights activists release contaminated apes to the world, which are infected with rage. 28 days later, Jim (Cillian Murphy) awakes from a coma and finds London completely deserted. He sees some attacking zombies, but Mark (Noah Huntley) and Selena (Naomie Harris) ward them off. Soon he goes along with them to try to find other survivors, but to also try and find a cure.

Although there have been attempts, the last good horror film was Identity. 28 Days Later tries to be a horror film by putting in a few quick and semi-suspenseful scenes. All before the final, concluding sequence (which is the film’s greatest sequence), are quick, five-second shots of zombies trying to attack people. Boyle has the camera moving so quickly during those sequences it’s impossible to tell what’s happening. Of course, we could see all of the blood, because there’s plenty of it, but at times it looked real, but many times it was false.

28 Days Later, which I originally thought was a sequel to the Sandra Bullock romantic comedy 28 Days, really makes itself a good movie by putting in a scenario we’ve all thought about but never really see in movies. The end of the world is always an interesting subject: when will it happen, how will it occur, etc. This explores one way: an infectious virus. It probably would have played better if we didn’t know how London was empty, but the way writer Alex Garland made it work, also.

In between those scarce horror sequences, some good drama plays out. We learn more about the virus, but I thought that the relationship between Jim and Selena was very well done. Movies like this have a limited amount of characters, making us like the ones that are there. I wouldn’t call it a character-driven piece, nor a character study, but it certainly has interesting characters.

If you’re looking for a typical zombie-horror movie, look somewhere else. If you want a drama with intense scenes (and an AWESOME score), check out 28 Days Later.

[Requiem-for-a-Dream]

28 Days Later- 10+ ***Top 5 of 2003***

Genre: Horror/Sci-fi

Year: 2003

Rating: US R/ Can 18A for Extreme Gore, Nudity and Unrelenting Terror.

Director: Danny Boyle

Cast:

Cillian Murphy

Plot:

A group of animal activists free a bunch of monkeys infected with the "Rage" virus. 28 Days Later, the world is infected and everyone who has the virus is violent and ravenous.

My Thoughts:

Thus far, this is the most brilliant film of the year (and I doubt that any other will match the intelligence of this script). I walked out of the film praising it loudly to my girlfriend (co-owner of this site). I couldn't get the film's haunting imagery out of my head.

I've read many great reviews for this film and a few poor ones. The poor ones seemed to focus on the pace of the film, which I felt was perfect. The film opens with a monkey watching horrible acts of human behaviour on a television. We then see that the monkey is strapped down to a table. A group of animal rights activists break in and try to set the animals free when a scientist walks in on them and screams that the animals are infected. "Infected? With what?" one activist asks, "Rage" the scientist replies. What a simple way to describe something so complex.

What 28 Days Later.. does so well is make the viewer think about humans as a species. The movie works as a moral tale about violent acts being the foundation of our society. After 28 days, our lead wakes up in a hospital bed completely nude wondering where the hell everyone is. He soon finds out and the answer isn't what he expected.

Advertised as a Resident Evil-esque zombie flick, this is nothing of the sort. It's a biological warfare story where the victims of the virus act viciously, attacking humans. I think many of the bad reviews have to do with expectations. I knew what kind of movie this was going to be going into it so I wasn't let down in any department. Gore hounds will also get a kick out of this flick. Blood is splashed around like it has a purpose.

This is the most powerful film I've seen this year, although there are a few that have come close (The Hunted, dealing with a similar subject matter of human evil in a more conventional way and Identity that explores the human mind). House of 1000 Corpses remains at the top but 28 Days Later... is a much more unconventional horror film where as House is more of a throwback to the 70's.

Add to all the goodness an incredible soundtrack/score, this movie will not be forgotten.

You have to check this film out if you have a fondness for scares and intelligent films.

Acting- 9/10

The lead actor here is amazing, all others do great jobs but I found the military men were a little cliche.

Directing- 10/10

A tie with Rob Zombie for best Director. Holy shit this movie has a beauty and an ugliness to it that I can't describe. You have to see it for yourself. I actually got a tear in my eyes at a few of the more beautiful shots, shhhh, don't tell anyone.

Gore- 10/10

Many of the infected vomit up extreme amounts of blood all over other people, bloody gunshot wounds, an exploding body, eyes punctured, a bird tearing open a gory wound, extremely gory machete attacks throughout the film, arm slit open and pouring blood, zombies feeding and a tidle wave of bloody/gory corpses all over the place.

Nudity- 3/10

We see some rage boobs and the ladies get the full monty.

AxeHorror©=Copyright

Matt

[Baller92287]

I saw 28 Days later last week, and coming out of the theater I felt a little disturbed, somewhat bored, however the music was fantastic. I felt the addition of an unknown band like Grandaddy was a good choice, and its corkiness fits the style of the movie. In general the movie was straightforeward and easy to understand, however there were a few parts with the military that left me saying, what the hell? As graphic as it was, it was another movie in which, you follow characters around doing stupid things. Such as walking into an abandoned hamburgar stand, when the rest of Britain is inhabited by enraged humans, it is highly obvious that some guy is gonna jump out and spook the audience. There were some jump scenes, and excellent acting, however, it was seriously not necessary for us to see the main actor's penis in the second scene. The music is terrific and it appears much of the scoring is on the soundtrack. This movie is however worth watching and i decided i liked it more in days after seeing it. (Then again, maybe that opinion was enforced by the fact that the chick I saw it with and like, thought it was good). 6/10

[Ellie]

The movie is quite an interesting example of people killing people. It remembered me of "Das Experiment" for some reason.
"28 days later" started off pretty well - Tim finding himself alone in the world. I totally loved these scenes because I really like the idea of waking up one morning and realizing that I'm completely alone in the whole world. Anyways, the story evolved as Tim bumped into a few others with whom he managed to finally reach to the "army" they had heard of from the radio transmittor.
And then the tragic really started. If before they had had to fight for their lives against infected beings, who weren't controlling their actions, then now Hannah, Selena and Tim had to start fighting against other men, who were basically in the same situation as they. That was the sadest part of the movie - to realize that even at the moment, where people are facing extinction, they continue destroying each other. Films like "28 days later" or "Das Experiment" are scary because they show the true pale of human nature, the grotesque twists of mind in the border-situation. But sometimes it feels as if "do I really have to know?"

[Deckard]

Like the hand held love child of David Cronenburgh’s RABID & THE LAST MAN ON EARTH with Vincent Price (Based on the novel “I Am Legend” later remade as THE OMEGA MAN with Chuck Heston), 28 DAYS LATER is anything but original.

With that said its still solid entertainment for the first 2 acts. Unfortunately the finale is a real let down, the alternate ending after the credits at least sticks to the films predominant theme of mans self-destructive history and violent nature. It appears author Alex Garland (The Beach) can write a hell of a novel but still has a hard time with cinematic narrative structure.

The true star of this film is the cinematography that is responsible for 90% of the tension and creates a real sense of urgency. Director Danny Boyle (Shallow Grave, Trainspotting) for the most part helms with a deft hand and gets maximum impact out of the desolate sets and frenzied violence. There is a real aura of emptiness in the abandoned streets and highways that help suspend audience disbelief.

All the cast stay in character and deliver solid performances, even if they are mostly stereotypes. The edge comes from most of the actors being virtual unknowns adding a sense of mystery to how they will play out.

When compared to other modern horror entries this one is above average and certainly worthy of viewing. For the more discerning horror nuts it’s a nice treat that may well gain cult status, but if you’ve caught the hype wave you may well be disappointed.

[dillhead005]

28 Days Later dosnt set itself apart from a Romero film, Dead-Alive, or any other zombie flick to hit the silver screen (I actually love Romero's films cuz they were the first of their kind). But for Joblo to neer completly shun this movie is unfair. Sure it isnt going to change the course of zombie flick history, but we got some top-notch acting, decent enough gore, old-school gritty filmmaking (i actually kinda liked the digital filming, made it seen more real), and although the ending is a little to happy and sappy for my taste, i can deal with it. Its definatly worth seeing if you havnt and i hear on DVD their will be an alternate ending that alot of audiences liked WAY better. Oh and did i forget to mention the bad-ass director of this film Danny Boyle's (Trainspotting) presence is definatly sensed here.

[JofaGuht]

8.5/10

This is probably the best film of the year that I've seen next to Matrix Reloaded. And, probably the best zombie flick I've seen. This is interesting, original, exicting, and involving. Though it wasn't the "scare-fest" everyone made it out to be, that doesn't take away from it being a great film. And some parts were a little unnerving or disturbing, but sometimes those scenes didn't even involve the zombies.

The zombies are probably the kind of zombie I'd least want to meet, despite that. They were pretty horrifying. And one excellent thing about this horror is that it didn't pull any punches. There's no jump sequences, no meaningless gore, and nothing that you would find as a cliche in a horror film.

Mind you, there is a lot beneath the surface of this horror film, a lot to discuss. It's got some very interesting ideas and what it might be representing under the flesh.

Now for my very few problems, one of which was the ending. The post-climax. Was it just me, or was it really badly edited? I thought the ending jumped too quickly and wasn't put together very well. Also, a little bit too obvious product placement with Pepsi. Stuff like that in movies really bothers me.

But, to wrap up, it is one of the better films of this year and is highly, highly, recommended by me. Yet, don't see this film expecting a horror fest, see this film expecting a good film.

[catanmax]

28 days later is a classic end of the world movie. These type of movies are my favourite kind of thriller. If you have seen Resident Evil the movie I am sure you would agree that this movie could almost be a continuation of what would happen with a sequel to it. The scariest thing for me about the movie was the speed of the infected. They are much like zombies, once the virus enters the bloodstream the victim becomes infected within 10-20 seconds, not much time to say your goodbyes. However these 'zombies' move fast, gone are the days of movies like 'Day Of The Dead', where if you had to you could just run past your attacker! Once these critters are on your tail they are hard to shake off.

[Boba Joe]

I've heard so many good things about this movie, I decided to check it out on DVD. I think I was expecting a lot more than what I got, but I still enjoyed the film. I wasn't scared at all in the "first 5 minutes" like I've heard before, although it was an unsettling scene. I found myself more depressed than scared throughout the movie. Granted, there were some scenes that had me freaked, but I thought it did a great job in the whole "end of the world" cliche. The infected were fuckin' A scary!! Oh my God, they're like zombies on crack. Takes between 10-20 seconds to turn and then they're suddenly Olympic sprinters!! Fuck me. I prefer the ending where Jim actually died, but the "radical" ending made no sense whatsoever. I didn't like it as much as I thought I would, but I was still entertained. And Naomie Harris is fuckin' H-O-T.

...cancels summer trip to England...

7 our of 10

[NotKeyserSoze]

Spoilers etc. But then, you've probably seen the movie anyway...

Hollywood has lost the knack for zombie movies. Not that it ever really had it - the really good ones, like Day of the Dead or Evil Dead, were always cult or B-Movies - but one look at the dull-as-dishwater exercise in trendy techo-dancing that is Resident Evil is enough to convince you that you'll never see a fresh, scary take on zombies. 28 Days Later is not really a zombie movie, but it's still a better zombie movie than Resident Evil.

In fact, if you spliced the two together, fiddled the plot a little bit and changed the protagonist, this could be seen as a superior sequel. R.E ends with the heroine waking up in an apocalyptic Britain... so this one opens. Difference is, R.E's only striking scary image - poor Milla Jovonich wandering alone through a ruined city - was its last. 28 Days Later has a host of eerie images, and that's just the first.

Leaning closer to The Omega Man early on than any monster flick, 28 Days Later focuses on far more than flesh eating monsters. It's even a little lazy on the plot (the details of "rage" are never fleshed out, and obviously we never see the horrific nationwide apocalypse, merely hear about it... which is far worse), with exposition coming in short, sharp bursts. But what 28 Days Later doesn't say and doesn't show is infinitely scarier than any CGI monster. The protracted silences, empty streets and horrifying sense of just being utterly alone is a numbing way to open the film - it's fantastic.

The zombies (and they basically are, though they're known as "the infected") are not like anything you've seen. Squealing and in a constant bad mood, they're horrifyingly fast and driven, with only one thing on their minds: find someone who isn't infected and either gnaw them to bits or infect them. When the film pelts into life during these attacks, the sheer visceral shock of it is used over excess gore. Sure, there are machete hackings and eye gaugings - but these are done by the uninfected people. Indeed, a final point about there not being a whole lot of difference does come across in the final reel. These infected are not the big thing of the movie, though: surviving in the long term, and beating humanity's surprisingly dirty nature is the big deal. And it's scarier.

The limited cast are incredibly effective. We're never sure who's next, too, after a main character is hacked to bits in the first twenty minutes. It's great that we know so little about these characters, as we're never sure what they're capable of. Brendan Gleeson's fatherly Frank is a warm, loving man, but when push comes to shove he's a malicious killing machine. The reverse goes for Selena - almost mechanically driven to survival, until meeting Frank's daughter drives her to humanity. Hero Cillian Murphy/Jim is wonderfully open about all of it, too, sharing the audience's sheer disbelief about it all. He's almost an antihero in the climax, causing more death in five minutes than we've seen so far in the film. You're still cheering for him, though.

Almost all of it's shot on DV camera, too, lending the whole thing a security-camera realism. This doesn't often feel out of this world (only the clunky opening scene with the chimps, which is mercifully brief, feels greatly scripted), and the very horrible idea that such an apocalpyse would take well under a month stays with you.

Overall, it's not quite as viscerally horrific as it could have been. Far nastier things are suggested than shown - always the scarier route to take in filmmaking, and something Resident Evil style gurus have yet to learn - and Danny Boyle's direction and selection of slow, building music is stonkingly effective. Interspersed in the doom are little moments of warmth and hope, that add even more humanity to what's going on. It's a big, horrible tragedy, that feels closer to earth than any cheesy zombie picture. Tragically underrated, this is a deeply impacting film. 8/10

[willem84]

I absolutely loved this film. I don't really see why so many people hated it. I can see why because it drug and there wasn't much action and it was more of a thinking movie rather than a cliche horror film where people died one by one from attacking zombies but what many don't realize is that these 'creatures' in the movies are not zombies. they are infected humans.

*MINOR SPOILERS*

What I liked most about the movie is that it conveyed several messages and meanings within the reality of death facing them (the characters). In the scene in the car, when 'Ave Maria' is playing, the two girls are playing cards and they are all smiling and it seems they are having the time of their lives. As if, anything they can possibly get their hands on is just....beautiful bc they are so appreciative of everything they have....apples...anything. just to be alive is good enough.....and any form of life they can get their hands on makes it all the better. this just goes to show that we, as humans, that live in a materialistic world, do not appreciate not only what we are given, or already have, but just the fact that we're alive in itself.

The score is amazing, as well as the acting. The only part that got a little tedious was the army guys. They took away from the beauty of the movie. I know it was supposed to be rough and intense, but them fighting over the girls...i just...didn't really like that part...or the way it was done...or something.....I've always wanted to see a movie taken on with a futuristic/black plague sort-of twist and here i have one, set in the UK.

One thing I'd like to add...or ask..is why so many movies choose 28 days...for their title or...for their reference ....
I.E. ...that damn sandra bullock movie
there is a play written by Naomi Wallace, titled "One Flea Spare" about the black plague that coincidentally takes place .....for a number of 28 days!
then in "Donnie Darko"....after the rabbit meets Donnie he tells him it will be 28 days before the portal opens....

was just wondering if anyone else noticed these things?......

If you guys liked this movie, I'd suggest "The Omega Man"....
this movie reminded me a lot of that....and I liked it a lot when I was a kid. Also, "Solvent Green" was good, although it has nothing to do with infected people or a plague or such, it's good lol.

My rating for "28 Days Later"

9/10

[krazy drako]

Great movie.

This is the best movie in this genre for a long time. The best movie to deal with zombies since Army of Darkness (9.5/10 in my opinion).

The acting was awesome, the concept the movie based it self on was great. (Spoiler) I always knew Green peace would fuck us over so how, and in this movie they did!

Anyways, do yourself a favor and rent this movie on dvd.


My Rating 8/10:D

[X-Nightcrawler]

"28 Days Later" (2003)

Plot:
One confused naked man wakes up in a hospital in post-apocaliptic London. He meets a series of charatcers and they explain the nature of the disaster, a deadly beeyatch of a virus that spreads like bad celebrity gossip.

What I Thought:
One of the bigger disappointments of the year taught me one thing: never, EVER enter the movie theater with a 10/10 expectative because of potential letdown. This doesn't mean I hated the movie, but it DID dissapoint me, in a big way. I want to start mentioning that I had all the reason in the world to expect a lot from this movie, I love post-apocaliptic scenario movies and I adore Danny Boyle's directing, he has talent.

This movie almost plays down in three totally different parts, and that's not a good thing if not executed correctly, for instance, the three parts in the movie (I: City. II: Roadtrip. and III: Military base.) are way too contrasting and feel totally independent, let me expand. The first fifteen minutes of the movie psyched me, like really thrilled me (how they shot an empty London I have no idea but good job), I felt sad for Jim, poor man and the scene in the church like place is terrifying! The pace started to slow a little after the characters Selena and Mark machete their way into the story. It slows a little the pace but worry not, It will pick up eventually.

After the quick disposing of someone, I was like "Character a little useless but ok...", since it felt like an excuse to quench bloodthirst, but that's always forgiveable. Then, we meet more characters (Daddy and daughter) in another thrilling zombie chase 'n kill, a little scarier than last. The pace once again slows down. The following becomes another different movie with less thrilling zombie encounters for a long time (like until the end of the movie is nigh) since the following zombie appereances are the same thing as the last (the tunnel one was also very 'egh' especially when you think how little it brought to the story).

So you might have concluded that what made this movie a letdown was essencially the script after one hour I was starting to think that this plot was taking me nowhere and some things also needed axing (Jim's dream sequence) and the final ending (I hear there's like 4 alternative endings) was a little vague for my taste. The third bit in the military base was the worst for me, it felt a little out of place. Not that's not good (the scariest moment [zombie in window] happens here and it freezed my blood) but I'm sure Boyle could have pulled it off without using such a big setting and tone change.

The characters (the important ones and with exceptions of most soldiers) are very well done and written, I liked almost everyone but was it me or did they seem a little too tranquil to the situation (the scene in the grocery shop) and also pull some dumb moves (you do not put your daughter to drive like that) but I mostly cared for them, that's points in favor. But the props must be given to the actors, not one single player here did wrong. Well done.

Danny Boyle does what he does best and I won't put a single 'but'. He knows how to work visual feasts and that's a fact. Every frame was filled with subtle touches of lens and lightning tricks that make it look appropiate, also, the cameras move like the birds and the shots from above are amazing. The other tricks like slow, frame freeze, etc, work marvels for the story.

Gore:
Some violent machetings (if that's a word), blood vomiting, nasty cuts, nasty zombies. Enough.

Overall Rating:
5/10, the script was the main problem but the acting, directing and score kept me up and running the entire time.

[Cronos]

i regret missing this at the cinema, after hearing about it i wanted to see it, Boyle is a very talented directer and ive enjoyed all of his films

the acting is excellent in 28 Days Later, something rare for a British film and the story is damn kool as well

ive read that people dont consider this a zombie film but i do, IMO a zombie is a mindless creature fueled only by their desire to eat, something the protagonists are in this film

there was also more gore than i expected with some very violent scenes

the story got better and better as the minutes ticked by and the characters developed and they were likable

how can i fault 28 Days Later when it is a British film, horror at that that didnt disappoint

10/10

[Bullet Tooth Tony]

28 Days Later (Fox Searchlight 2002)
Director: Danny Boyle
Starring: Cillian Murphy, Naomie Harris, Brendan Gleeson, Megan Burns and Christopher Eccleston

No this isn't a sequel to the Sandra Bullock vehicle '28 days' I hear you jest. This is Danny Boyle's homage to the greatness that is the zombie movie. We haven't had a decent zombie flick since the 1985 classic 'Day Of The Dead' and '28 Days Later' signals a fine return to form for one of my personal favourite director's Danny Boyle. A virus is created by British scientists called Rage, within seconds the infected are reduced to mindless zombies intent on destruction and violence, much like how I feel after another Tottenham defeat! It only takes you one scratch, bite or just a drop of blood in the eye to become infected into a permanent state of anger. The virus is unleashed when a group of animal rights activists attack the lab where Rage is being tested and doesn't take long before the whole of Britain is decimated into an apocalyptic landscape.

28 Days Later...courier Jim played by relative newcomer Cillian Murphy wakes up from a coma, the first ten minutes or so we follow Jim around as he try's to come to terms with what is going on. This sequence is worth the price of admission alone. The silence as Jim wonders around deserted London is truly awe inspiring as you see the famous landmarks of the great city completely deserted. Danny Boyle gives us long shots of London that really magnify the emptiness. Danny Boyle has always been a visionary director and he fills the screen here with symbolism up the ying yang. After Jim has encountered his first infected, he meets up with Selena played by the very impressive Naomie Harris and Mark.

After an excellent sequence at Jim's home they set off somewhere, anywhere with no real direction until they meet a father and daughter Frank (Brendan Gleeson) and Hannah (Megan Burns). Frank becomes a father figure to Jim and after hearing a radio broadcast they decide to leave London and find salvation away from the madness and a promised cure in Manchester. This is the sequence that really bothered me, Manchester is roughly 4 hours or so from London but it still takes them a couple of days to get there. I know the M6 can be a nightmare most of the time but the roads are empty! The first 50 minutes or so of '28 Days Later' makes for truly amazing cinema but once we get to Manchester things tail off a tad. The second half of the film doesn't compare to the first. However it is the last half where we discover what is happening and the message Danny Boyle is trying to convey.

In the second half the group meet up with a small cross-section of soldiers. Lead by Major Henry West, the always brilliant Chris Eccleston we learn what the radio message really is for. Its here that Jim meets another father figure in Major West. This relationship is really interesting, West is telling Jim all these things and Jim listens trying to take in what is happening. Selena is another interesting character, when we first meet her she is a emotionless and cold but towards the end changes dramatically and her relationship with Jim is very fascinating. Naomie Harris and Cillian Murphy are both awesome together, can't wait to see more of these two. Brendan Gleeson as Frank shines as the likeable cab driver but Megan Burns as Hannah isn't really convincing and at time sounds wooden. She isn't terrible but showed that she is a newcomer, she is only young and can only improve The soldiers, played by a rabble of ex-soap stars also disappoint in what is truly stereotypical writing by Alex Garland. Garland provides a brilliant script, his first. You may remember he wrote 'The Beach' which Danny Boyle himself made with differing results...not Danny's finest hour.

Danny Boyle truly is a gem when he has a small budget to work with, you can add this to his other classics 'Trainspotting' and 'Shallow Grave'. I like the message implied, which I don't really want to spoil if you haven't already watched the movie. '28 Days Later' has gone down a storm in the US and deservedly so. This movie makes you think, is cool and has some great set pieces. The soundtrack by John Murphy is truly awesome, especially 'In The House - In A Heartbeat' which is superb. A truly visionary film, which I'm worried will be spoilt by the greed of Fox who own the rights to any sequels.

Highly recommended.

[mattjk_17]

28 Days Later

Upon first seeing the trailers and TV spots for this movie, I was pumped for it. It looked like it would be a thrilling ride and another great movie from Danny Boyle.

However, word got to me that this movie was pretty poor, it had a few good scenes but nothing really memorable or stand-out about it, minus the scenes of an empty London. I avoided seeing it at the cinema due to word of mouth. Eventually I got the chance to watch it on DVD, so I thought to myself "Might as well, wouldn't hurt, could be a great way to kill some time."

Really interesting movie, not Boyle's best but very entertaining. Gory when needed, but with a good story to back it up. The first hour or so was top stuff, but I felt that after the 60 minute mark the movie went downhill. Good acting involved and, apart from the disappointing final few moments, it was a fun ride.

7/10

[Lou Sytsma]

Good first half. Boring second half.

Really enjoyed the movie up until they went to the army base. From there the rest of the story was so predictable and killed any further interest on my part.

The speeded up zombies were interesting. Scenes in the city were set up and shot in an interesting manner.

Slow zombies are still scarier though.

5/10

[drdash]

just saw this last weekend and it was awesome. very psychologically intense. definitely a thinkiing person's horror film. not a true zombie ilm, but more like another romero film "the crazies" I thought it was intense and the characters were fleshed out well enough for you to care about them and i especially liked how jim went all rambo at the end. i think this will be seen as a classic in later years.

ciao
drdash

[socalled]

So Jo gives an exploitation flick like Cabin Fever a good review and slams a great movie like 28 Days. We may need to have a serious talk :D

I was luckily enough to get a view of Undead and 28 Days in a private screening. Was l blown away, bet your arse. Two new zombie flicks with new interpretations of the sub genre.

28 Days rocks along in classic Brit horror style. From the greens releasing the virus at the start (and that had a certain maniac charm to it ... people trying to save the planet destroy the planet), to the solider boys gradually descending into chaos toward the end, this is a well paced thought provoking film.

Brit horror is alive and well. For anyone who enjoyed this one, grab a seat at a screening of Dog Soliders as well.

9/10 ...

[Heavenley]

I was quite impressed with this film, I think it was more than your standard ''zombie movie''.


Firstly the way it was shot (in a grainy and gritty way) makes it seem a lot more real. The zombies whom they called (the infected in the film) were more real and frightening than in some other films I've seen. They actually looked infected with a disease that caused them severe rage and madness. Their eyes were frightening. The performances from the actors were good, and overall a creepy and atmospheric film.



The downside............... the last quarter was not too great, and the ending way too predictable, thought the first half to three quarters was excellent in my opinion.


Overall an impressive film that sucked me in from the moment I started watching.


8/10

[REAL_XYZ]

This movie has a pretty cool concept. It would be very easy for a virus to wipe our existence off the planet. Then, when you only have a few uninfected people left, you better start making some babies.

I thought this was a decent flick. I liked the digital video style. I liked the jerky motion during the attacks. I also cared about most of the main characters.

I don't understand why we didn't see more bodies lying around though. I also didn't care for the projectile vomiting scenes. Plus, I wasn’t sure if only the U.K. was infected, or the entire world was infected (because the movie seems to contradict itself).

I don't think we can classify the infected people as zombies. Also, I don't think we can count this as a "scary" movie. Disturbing, yes. Thought provoking, yes. Not scary, and certainly not Exorcist scary. Oh well, those things didn't spoil my fun. This movie turned out much better than I expected.

I say...8.5/10.

[gspawn]

28 Days... Later- 5/10
^A movie pun.
*mild, non-plot-critical spoilers*

This is one of those times when I just kept thinking that this exact film, shot with any different director or cinematographer, could have been much better. There was a good movie here, we just didn't get it.

The Good:
-It's British. Packing a nice British film into your evening is a random urge that some moviegoers (like me) enjoy doing once in a while. When you need your Brit-injection, this is a good spot.
-British actors. They're... British... expect... British-ness. Which is always refreshing to see coming to an American cinema.
-I'd say this film has a lot of realism, but that's really part of the definition of British style for me. Gritty realism, actors chosen for looking the part and not just for payroll, etc etc.
-Big shots of London, empty. Which was cool. Except...

The Bad:
-It was TOO empty. Millions had died in a massacre before this film begins, and there wasn't a single skull or rib or spot of blood to be found.
-Grainy filmmaking was a gimmick for me. This film would have been the exact same either way, except:
-Artsy camerawork. Every single frame of this movie, it's too obvious that a certain director or cinematographer or (insert person here) had JUST arrived from film school and just HAD to wok the camera until they got the exact image they wanted to frame for every single shot. Sometimes it was hard to tell if the cameraman was filming a zombie flick or an ad for some new perfume. This movie had so much scenery and so much in the way of characters, that all of the imagery told its own story. All this work on the part of the filmmakers ruined every bit of beauty each shot would have given on its own. Again, there's a great movie in there- it just wasn't captured on film. Same goes for the way scenes were cut, the way action was pasted together, etc.
-And yes, the ending is just a massive plot hole that had to be tacked on at the very last moment.

Overall:
-This is a cool, fresh, new not-quite-zombie film with some amazing set pieces and some cool character work...
-...but it's also a film that got ruined by the camerawork and editing. I can't help but think that the plot holes were probably all added on the editing room floor.
-If you want an interesting, British zombie flick to zone out with, you've got it.

5/10
Could have easily pushed 7-9/10 with different people at the helm...

[Romero's Dead]

It was a change of pace in the zombie genre, and I respect them for that. The film got a little dragged out towards the end, though.

7/10

[Brando @$$ Fat]

YAAAAAAWWWWN. This movie was sooo boring. Good thing I had a large Mountain Dew while I was in the theater or else I would've fallen asleep. This movie is kind of like George Romero's DAWN OF THE DEAD (8/10), only really really bad.

28 DAYS LATER- (3.5/10)