kamera.co.uk

film review   

   | FILM NEWS | FILM REVIEWS | BOOK REVIEWS | FEATURES | INTERVIEWS | FORUM | DIRECTORY | BOOKSHOP | BLOG | WHO WE ARE |

      home : reviews : film reviews : 28 Days Later

28 Days Later





Director: Danny Boyle
Starring: Cillian Murphy, Naomie Harris, Brendan Gleeson, Megan Burns



Related Links

28 Days Later
IMDB

Release Dates
IMDB

The Beach - kamera.co.uk film review

Trainspotting - kamera.co.uk film review

Danny Boyle interviewed - kamera interview



related products

Films directed by Danny Boyle (PAL Video, Region 2 DVD)



Related Books





Desolate and empty London streets. An upturned bus. A solitary man's echoing 'Hello?' sends pigeons fleeing. Simple imagery, but stunningly effective.

A cross between Wyndam's Day of the Triffids and Romero's Night of the Living Dead (1968), 28 Days Later is a brilliantly realised, but fundamentally clichéd vision of apocalypse. Writer Alex Garland (The Beach) not only fails to bring anything new to the genre, he even struggles with dialogue and plot, but the film is redeemed by Boyle's electric interpretation.

On paper, the plot is the most basic of post-apocalyptic survival stories. Jim, a bicycle courier (Cillian Murphy), wakes up from a coma one day to find himself in a deserted London hospital. Wandering the streets semi-clothed and hung over, he fails to find any explanation for the apparent exodus until he stumbles upon a full-scale Zombie attack: half-dead beings with burning eyes and brandished teeth, ready to unleash 'The Rage' (a devastating viral infection responsible for the desolation and yes, it's really called that). But Jim is saved by a straggle of other survivors and on behest of a recorded radio alert this makeshift family unit sets off to find salvation at an ad hoc army barracks somewhere near Manchester. The route is pitted with danger but once they get there salvation turns out to be anything but.

If you can overlook the uneven acting (Murphy is excellent; other members of the cast less so), some dreadful dialogue, a corny and completely out-of-place romantic subplot and a disappointing ending, 28 Days Later will reward you with some memorable images and a sense of extreme nihilism and claustrophobia. How far has The Rage spread? We know as much or rather, as little as the characters themselves know which, in a world stripped of all communication, is next to nothing. Visually, Boyle utilizes DV to the max, allowing for a grainy hyper-reality and using it to create some stunning footage. During the opening scenes, he uses long shots and angled shots from behind bars to emphasize both emptiness and entrapment while the lack of sound on screen eerily replicates the silence Jim has woken up to.

But if the filmmakers wanted this film to be something more than gratuitous schlock - and it's hard to imagine the most talented and ambitious filmmakers working in Britain today (which Boyle and producer Andrew Macdonald undoubtedly are) wanting anything less - they have failed. The climax of the film verges on the incoherent and with nothing new on offer conceptually, 28 Days Later remains firmly embedded in its B-movie roots. It's extremely slick, but slick schlock nonetheless.

Reviewed by Monika Maurer


Reader comments about 28 Days Later

Henry Duke (t_aire@hotmail.com) writes:

I saw the film last night and although nobody picks up a gun until at least 2 thirds of the way through, I think it is the best film to come out of Britain for a very long time, I can't remember the last time I enjoyed an English film so much (and I am English)! It might not have the flash and all out "Kill The Zombies" attitude of Resident Evil but the atmosphere it creates is fantastic.


Emyr (feeder_2@lycos.com) writes:

Yeah really good film! well made i thought, i didnt think the shocks were that bad, and the gore mostly was alright hehe The film managed successfully to create a scary and creepy atmosphere in a Britian turned upside down. Although it does kind of hint that the virus didnt really go any further than New York and Paris. Also a French air force plane flying overhead gives that away. Good film though!


Carly (amazingbabeuk02@hotmail.com) writes:

I was extremely disappointed with this much over rated film. Expecting a fast moving, thrilling and tense American horror, i was faced with a slow, simple typical English horror, that was only bearable because of the 'infected' who pounced on the unsuspected.


stephen wynne (Email address withheld) writes:

I went to see 28 days last nignt(08/11/02).It's one of the best films of its type I've seen from British cinema;tense thrilling and catches our imagination.worth a second visit.


Jambo (Jambo1000@hotmail.com) writes:

Not a bad film at all really. Great atmosphere and plenty of edge of the seat moments. True, some of the dialogue and acting are second rate and the love interest is comical. But its very cool, very good fun.


Maurice Mcleod (Email address withheld) writes:

Can anyone explain why it is supposed to take the survivors in this film three days to get to Manchester from London?

Even with a little traffic you can do it in a few hours and they were driving on desserted roads.


Sian Dickens (Email address withheld) writes:

Fantastic film - really enjoyed it, lots of silent scenes which really set the mood. Cillian Murphy is absolutely gorgeous and a fantastic actor. Naomi Harris is also very good. Danny Boyle has done it again!


bob carroll (recarroll@postmaster.co.uk) writes:

maybe the shortages brought on by a complete lack of modern society (no petrol as people have already scavenged it, no roadside services) slowed them down. Maybe they were a bit cautious about driving straight to another city when the countryside offered such needed respite from the urban nightmare and constant attacks. Maybe because it only took them an afternoon, a night's stopover and a morning to get to Manchester, instead of your overestimated 3 days.


Jello (Wallbreaker14@Hotmail.com) writes:

I went to see it on 10/11/02. I can tell you I was bricking it the whole way through. I didn't hate it because it was bad, I hated it because it was scary. It's a bloody good film (Bloody being the operative word) and I watched 80% of it with my hands over my eyes, but I will never watch it again. Kudos to the makers though.


Slutley (pme106@york.ac.uk) writes:

It was fun, funny even at times. The elements of conventional social awkwardness amusing out of place, the bizarre 'family day out' in the taxi. Nice visual touches too - the pots on the tower block roof, impressionistic flower fields, 'hell' becoming 'hello'. Quite who had the wherewithal to clear away all the bodies from london and cars from the M6 escapes me. Reminded me of that doctor who episode when theres zombies attacking soldiers in a big house (did I make that up?). Liked the way they eventually didn't have to be infected to be infected but Lord of the Flies did it more subtle. Good fun though.


Remi (ti_remi@hotmail.com) writes:

Loving British movies, i was looking forward for the November 1 to see the new Danny Boyle's movie (he's one of my favorite creator). But his movie doesn't seem to be for Quebecers. No news about 28 Days Later here. We have the British queen's face on our quarters but we don't have British movies. Just too bad, but i'll keep smiling!

Long life to British cinema!


Jennifer (Email address withheld) writes:

I study emerging viral diseases. That being said, "rage" is complete silliness biologically but a fantastic guess at the human condition... I was very, very afraid throughout this movie and thought it fantastic. The only truly pitiful acting was from the little girl and the visuals were stunning-- the 'genocide' shots both in London and in the forest were just subtle enough to rescue 28 Days Later from all the horror-movie cliches it seemed to want to invoke ('don't go in the room! Look behind you!'). Two thumbs up, up up.


Lorraine (lorraine7@totalise.co.uk) writes:

OH MY GOD!! How scary is this! Maybe I'm a complete wuss but this film scared the pants off me. The imagery and silences were fantastic and added to the atmosphere of the film. Blood pressure at an all time high and stayed that way for about 3hrs afterwards. Some parts are a little bit unbelievable though. For example the trip up to Manchester could not have taken all that time and why the hell did they use a taxi going the speed of your average "green goddess." And if it were me in that supermarket...hehe. Also, why didnt anyone come to rescue survivors? I know the UK is a little island but it's not like we're in the middle of nowhere and people don't know we exist. A lot less scary now that i've had time to think about it but definately worth a second look. Go see this film!! x


JAMES LEIGHTON (Email address withheld) writes:

At first impressions when this film was in its prelude stage, i thought that it was going to be another contempory style, fly on the wall,urban culture narrative piece.As the film evolved, I found myself increasingly gripped by the realistic grasp that the actors vividly potrayed of a scenario, that we can only entertain with our up most fears; in the break down of civilisation as we know it.A good story obviously based on John Wyndams day of the triffids;Rather let down by the juvenile hammer horror blood and teeth, compounded by the make believe 'rage' virus.


Vicky (Email address withheld) writes:

Find me a taxi that can get you halfway up to Manchester from London for only £15.50!! It'll be way cheaper than getting the train next time!

Fantastic film, but I didn't enjoy it -was way too scared!! Definitely go see it, but have a stiff drink afterwards!


Terry (Email address withheld) writes:

Whats the matter with you lot - this was the worst film I have ever seen - it had no redeeming features - the filming was poor, the acting atrocious and the story complete nonsense. Have we really sunk so low that this type of rubbish is held up as the best of British cinema.

The only thing moving during the film was people walking out !!!


Chris (Email address withheld) writes:

I saw this film on saturday and i can honestly say it is a load of crap! Crap acting, messed up visuals, i reckon this will be on channel 5 by the summer!

Avoid it and save your money coz you will be gutted you waisted the time!


David (Email address withheld) writes:

I think that all of you who are complaining have no knowledge of film making and are a diehard mainstream cinema fan. This films challenges all aspects of film making. Why complain about the damn visuals, when they were meant to be like that. Thats the problem, you are so used to this churned out American nonsense that when a decent film comes along you cry... Look at Ring and Vannila Sky.

Anybody with a film degree and who is in the industry will probably appreciate this film. Nobody has even been constructively critical with there points... They have just read a review and typed it on here...


Bisonkid (Email address withheld) writes:

Yes, it is a cliche (Day of the Triffids, Living Dead etc). Yes the plot is thin. Yes the ending is annoying. But - this is one scary film.

I felt like I had been in a car crash after watching. Bleak & traumatising stuff...


nick (reesnp@aol.com) writes:

In desolate, evacuated, infected London did anyone see (in the distance way behind our main man) someone walking to work & in another scene a van being unloaded ?? No ? Maybe I imagined it.

OK then why was everyone so relaxed in the supermarket ? Would you not have been pooping yourself & on edge & alert having left your Taxi unattended outside instead of having a well earned break from the infected, having a laugh on shoping trolleys, choosing the best whiskey in the place? Also where were all the desserted cars & corpses & blood staines on the roads if it is the outbreak claimed surely Mercedes Benz cars arent that expensive that only one infected person in the whole of London left theirs behind ? & did the whole of Londons infected fall asleep in a big fuckin church or what ? There was only another two more infected that chased them up a tower block wasnt there ? I`ve been chased in tower blocks by screaming idiots with bloodshot eyes in the past & it aint funny but its hardly film material (although I do beleive these twats wanted my wallet not my blood!) & how difficult is it to wake these infected folk ?

I dont mean to bitch but have been looking forward to the film for so long & was pretty dissapointed ! (although I did find myself looking over my shoulder a few times when I left the cinema!!)


lucy (Email address withheld) writes:

well i have to say i think boyle is back to his best with 28 days later.A life less ordinary was a flop and The beach wasn't as good as i'd hoped. I'd also like to correct Mr Nick. It's actually a desolate Manchester that we see not London...however i do agree with you on the people you could see...that was a bit of an ooops. I think this was a really good film and i think is very close to what we, as people, would be like in such a thing as an apocalyptic event.


Lucy (lucygreen16@hotmail.com) writes:

OMG. I can honestly say this is one of the best and most original films I've seen in a very long time. Stunning camera work, pretty much top-notch acting and terrifyingly realistic! The only quibble I do have is with the soundtrack: everyone else seems to think it was great but for me it sometimes detracted from the realism of the film. Liked the use of "Abide With ME" though...very moving! And I agree with David, people who go to the cinema and expect an easy time with a twee little film and a happy ending shouldn't bother with this one! Anyone who didnt like 28 Days Later probably just didnt understand it!


infestchris (Email address withheld) writes:

Given that i watched this film with an open mind, and had avoided the (minimal)media hype surrounding it, i found myself being immersed in the whole adventure-horror of survival.

i havn't been this scared and 'agog' since i first played resident evil on the play station!

10 out of 10

Having a fairly distopian view of modern society and a cinical perspective on many things, i found many of the details quite plausable;

I loved the flat-dwelling Londoner's laughable estimate of travelling time to Manchester...

Of course you'd choose a London Taxi to travel in an apocalypse - they're reknown for being reliable and economical :)

"Cambridge Primate Research Laboratory" aka "Huntingdon Life Sciences" - a very clever reference and reassuringly cheaky!

- who are huntingdon life sciences?

http://www.huntingdon.com/

- the horrific truth

http://www.shac.net/HLS/index.html

http://www.luckydayinhell.com/huntingdon.html


Ann Hawkins (Email address withheld) writes:

I go to the cinema on a very regular basis and have seen some real dross in my time but until this film I had only ever walked out of one (Pret a Porter). After an hour of incredulity that Danny Boyle had been involved with this film, my friend and I finally gave up. It was obvious that Day of the Triffids and Lord of the Flies had been raided. We went home, giggling all the way, wishing we had saved our £6.50!


fergal daly (fergal.daly@cmg.nl) writes:

I saw this film recently. I cannot remember the last time I saw a film that I actually left the cinema and reacted too as good as this. 28 days later breaks into new ground it is everyones fear/dream/nightmare all in one. What is really good about this show is that money can't get you out of every fix you get into especially in London, a money riddled place, when you seem the guy picking up all the money you start thinking pick up more but why we find out later it is no good.


Kj (Email address withheld) writes:

one of the best british film's i have seen year. absolutly amazing! well done to the cast, espesally Cillian Murphy (gorgeous as well as talented). i'd definately go and see it again.


lane, author (Email address withheld) writes:

MOVIE OF THE YEAR 2002

Return to his videogame roots for Garland, return to slick editing and inspired crunchy soundtrack for Boyle & co. And not dogged by the hype that killed Garland's 2nd novel Tesseract or the movie of The Beach. Worth seeing on the big screen, though thanks to the snobbery of critics most may have to catch on the telly or DVD.


Jonathan (Email address withheld) writes:

Irish guy, black woman and young girl unite to save selves from terrible virus, along way they meet sympathetic Scots sergeant and innocent black soldier alongside half a dozen pyschotic English soldiers.... hmmm.... a great first half of a film followed by what can only be described as a ludicrous anti-English second half that makes sure that every English person (other than the girl) turns out to be a psychotic even worse than the zombies and are hastily dispatched. Surely we've had enough of this anti-English rubbish from Hollywood without a British movie having to continue it?


ldog (Email address withheld) writes:

Crap movie with no decent storyline there was nothing scary in the film just usless gore. The movie is not what i expected. I can't believe this is the best uk movie.


Charlene (charlenea1@hotmail.com) writes:

I went to see the film on Saturday, and I thought it was quite good, no, not brilliant, but I felt it was as good as horrors get these days, I mean, jeepers creepers was crap and thats american! Its no good saying 'english crap this and that' if a film is good its good if its crap its crap, why bring countries into it!?!? hmmmm, anyhoo I've been s***** myself since and wouldn't recommend it to anyone with a weak heart!


ashley (Email address withheld) writes:

im sorry for the people that hated this film , obviously you went to the cinema expecting independence day 2, with its high budget effects and hollywood supper stars, but surely you can feel refreshed after seeing a unique look at horror. i hear you complaining about bad filming and camera use, were you also complaining when you watched the blair witch project? i bet you were.

get a life and wake the hell up to new cinema.


adam (adm2@blueyonder.co.uk) writes:

i went to see this film & crapped myself till the end, at last i had finally seen a horror that delivered the goods, well done to cast & crew. p.s the girl i took to see it wasnt too impressed, i think she's still in therapy!


Adam (aedge@ukstamp.co.uk) writes:

A really good film, with perhaps some poor acting performances letting it down. Proving that high budgets and glitzy effect don't guarante a good film.

Bloody scary film as well!!!!


ZombieDance (www.zombiedance.org) writes:

Saw this at Sundance - amazing movie - the scariest movie I've seen in ages. Unlike 99% of the zombie flicks out there - include Romero's - this movie is done with maximum focus on realism - and for once, the zombies are actually 'scary' rather than laughably slow and clumsy.

Symbolism is also key to this film - provided you have sufficient time to read between the lines as you view this movie from between the fingers of the hands covering your face. Heavy thematic sub-text concerning familiar institutions such as church, state and the military are present througout - and issues such as rape, suicide, euthanasia, drug-abuse, animal rights, man vs. animal, technology vs. man, man vs. man are interwoven skillfully within this deceptively simple film's narrative.

The so-called 'romantic sub-plot' barely exists, and is hardly of consequence - unless you consider sporadic, desperate and highly dysfunctional clawing at each other by the movie's principles to be on par with your typical Hugh Grant picture. This is hardly the type of date-movie 'schlock' which the review above seems to indicate (did they even see the same movie the rest of us did???)

Cillian Murphy's transformation from incredulous victim of circumstance to brutal survivor is both harrowing and convincing - this is a brilliant film that redefines the genre of zombie films and raises the bar far, far above it's previous b-movie roots.

The dialogue is minimal, the story simple and direct (yet never predictable) - this is by far the BEST zombie film to date, if for nothing else than it's stunning cinematography and visual intensity.


Susie (Email address withheld) writes:

I love Sci-Fi. I’m also partial to a good horror flick. So I hope when I say that "28 Days Later" makes my Hall of Shame Top 10 insultingly bad films ever, you’ll realise it’s not the genre I object to.

Look at the biology for instance (although Alex Garland certainly didn’t). Just exactly how is it possible for a virus or any disease especially transmitted by bodily fluids to manifest symptoms within 20 seconds? OK, disbelief suspended. But then, with such a virulent disease and extreme symptoms, how do the infected remain alive for so long presumably without eating or drinking during that time? Again, hard to swallow but let it pass. But if they don’t remain alive for that long, and presumably can’t drive in that condition, how has the disease been transmitted all around the country so quickly? It’s a very discriminating virus that makes the victims only attack the uninfected and not each other, shame as it would effectively restrict spread. Hmmm. I’m OK with suspending disbelief, but draw the line at burying it and reading it it’s funeral rites.

So what if we ignore all aspects of plausible disease epidemiology, and assume that blood contact makes zombies. The film becomes slightly more credible at this point (shame they made such a fuss about the disease aspect then), although ridden with more discrepancies and incongruities than I’d care to mention. Which only leaves the incredibly wooden acting (watch the little girl!), 1 dimensional characterization, and flagrant plagiarism of vastly superior works. The beginning was lifted directly from John Wyndham’s “Day of the Triffids”; the middle a botched attempt to re-do such classics as “Invasion of the Body Snatchers”, “Night of the Living Dead”, and the less applauded but highly enjoyable “Outbreak” (but then, at least Michael Crighton really is a medical man); and the saccharin-coated ending was straight out of any Hollywood disaster B-movie since the industry began. The film had nothing new to contribute, although I do admit it made previous works look even better. The only (semi-) redeeming features were some interesting visuals and camera work in places – and that Cillian Murphy (without the beard) is quite sexy.

If this is really what British film-making has come too, then I fear for it immensely. A film not to be missed indeed – please shoot carefully and destroy everything, to make sure no other poor unfortunates have the bad luck to see it.


Georges Philippe (Email address withheld) writes:

jaysis christ on a jumped-up, chariot driven crutch, was that not a hell of a movie! wasn't the tunnel scene freaky? went and saw it yesterday (26/02) night (01:15) with a friend and had her sleep over to my place! it was great, not too gory (which was good) and VERY scary, spooky, eerie, uncanny, etc etc. and i personally love cillian murphy-he rocks in this movie. oh, and am really tired of reading supposedly-i-know-everything views about eff-u-cee-kay-i-en-gee sublots and hidden meanings and why was the camera at that angle, does that mean something and crap. in this kind of things you don't go and try to draw the heaviest philosophical conclusion about humanity's fucked-up fate or try and read btw the lines - it's sheer entertainment, gawd dammit, simple as that. if you don't like thrillers or you just look for some meta-paraphysical, metacosmical, metalinguistic crap, just don't go. otherwise, strongly recommended. (not if you plan to undergo a bypass oper. or have a frail heart, :D) who gives a damn about dialogues when your heart's running for the gold medal at the olympic finals 50 m and adrenaline pumps like hell? awesome music, too. (still, a couple of bitchy comments : 3 days london-manchester??? did anyone noice the figure walking at the far end of the scene while Cillian Murphy 'Jim' was wandering around deserted london? was he another survivor? nah, don't think so. and you wouldn't want to spend time looking for the best whiskey in m&s or whatever was that supermarket while infected could be everywhere!)


Per Munck (snyde02@yahoo.com) writes:

I thought getting into my 30's would keep me from jumping in the seat. Haven't seen such a scary movie The 6th Sense.


Antti Autio (Email address withheld) writes:

The 'French airforces' Feeder2 mentioned above were actually Finnish Hawk jet trainers. (at least the pilots spoke finnish..)


Juha Karttunen (Email address withheld) writes:

Antti, I heard it too... i think it was strange... Did anyone else hear this?

(The pilot said "Send helicopter" in finnish)


Ismo Karvinen (Email address withheld) writes:

Well, actually the jets in the end were old British (RN?) Hawker Hunters from the 1950s.

But what was it with the Finnish, an inside joke or what? I have to say it didn't sound right to me, far too chatty for a military pilot.


Niklas Peterson (Email address withheld) writes:

The plane in the ending was a typical British VTOL-Harrier. It even had the characteristic green-grey paint scheme, and the pointy nose.

I knew it was meant to be a Harrier in the sweeping POV-clip over the hills, the way it doesn't fly as much as "hovers" forward.

Loved the movie, though, as Jello said, I "hated" the scary scenes. :-)

The church was almost the worst, with those "awakening" people.

Jennifer Viral Student?

Don't you think some sort of warped stimulant or poison to the amygdala or "temper"-centers could drastically skewer a person's levels of paranoia, survival instinct and aggresiveness?

It wasn't rage as much as panic and psychosis, like they felt killing was very important and necessary.

(Doesn't explain the eyes, of course, but they were instrumental...)

The howling was almost lamenting at times. Like, "I can't stand this, what has happened to me?", and they blame everyone else.


Tobias Rieper (theshym@hotmail.com) writes:

First of all: loved the film, that's it.

Second: everyone has his own opinion, so don't break off ppl that love or hate the movie.

Third: the plane is a Hawker Hunter, and especially the one mentionned here: www.hawkerhunter.co.uk


Rich (Email address withheld) writes:

I have seen snipets of it and I have to say that anything horror nevers scare but HOLY CRAP man!!! This one takes the cake I can't wait to see how they edit this for America no dubbing with crappy American voices please or alternate soundtracks for that matter also. I just hope that my stupid friends will get off the hyp of House of a 1000 corpses because this will definitely knock them off their rockers.


Phil Mcmullen (red_phil@hotmail.com) writes:

I went to go see this film last November, it is now April, and I didn't really fancy seing it. but what a cracking film! my sister dragged me along to see it and i was wondering 2what is this nonsense" as them animal protesters broke into that santuary. but i was soon enthrawelled. the camera angles, the way it is shot, the cast, the plot, storyline, and the fear factor make this film top notch. the ending could have been better, they could do a directors cut, but until they do, this will be the movies flaw. apart from that 9/10! keep it up Boyle, your a truely top class british director.


Martin Polson (reggaedominator@hotmail.com) writes:

The film is disappointing in the sense that the story is absolutly boring, there are no interesting themes, it's just about plain survival but what does it say about anything.The visuals are terrific but if you want to see horror movies with something to say, go check Cronenberg's Shivers, Rabid or The Brood, that's filmmaking!


Jack Hendon (Email address withheld) writes:

No interesting themes... hmmm Amongst the obvious questions raised about human nature, life and death, and society in general, it also struck me that there is a bit of a coincidence in the cycle of the virus, the amount of days mentioned in the title, and the quantity of blood in the movie...


sarsh bingham (Email address withheld) writes:

Always loved zombie films,but as you all know there hasn,t been a good one for years.But then came 28 days later!omg how excellant is that film!Zombies on speed.I just hope it never ever really happens


Mark Scott (cyberbero3000@yahoo.co.uk) writes:

First of all, I'd like to ask how come many people complain that 28 Days Later is "unrealistic". Look at the crap we get fed about aliens and such ilk from Hollywood! Zombies or no zombies, the film creates a believable atmosphere right from the opening scenes.

As for the music - it is tremendous. I went straight out and bought the soundtrack.

This is the best British film I have seen in a long time. No film has ever affected me like it. Those who miss the subtle undertones contained in this film will shun it as a low budget, unrealistic zombie film.

If you like a good film, for god's sake ignore any bad reviews and watch it.


shannon (adingley@ukf.net) writes:

I saw 28 days later at the cinema last year and have been counting the days for it to be released on dvd and finally it has and it is mine.When I fist saw it I couldn't take my eyes off the screen (mainly because of Gillian Murphy wow!)but also because I just felt mesmerised I can really belive something like that happening the way we are going.I can't fault this film at all the special FX were fantastic the whole cast and crew did an amazing job. I will watch this film again and again and again untill I find my inner rage and cause absoulute DEVASTATION.


Haz (harry.lyon@ntlworld.com) writes:

I thought it was a brilliant film and I dont know why some of you people think it was crap! the film deserves to be no 1 the storyline was great the acting was great all of it was great 10 out of 10!


Simbanssi (-) writes:

Quote: "The plane in the ending was a typical British VTOL-Harrier. It even had the characteristic green-grey paint scheme, and the pointy nose."

LOL http://utenti.lycos.it/Dauntless/hare.html

A news flash!!! Many aeroplaes has a green camo and almost every modern jet has a pointy nose (its for the aerodynamics, see!) And the plane had oversized Finnish marks in its tail and wings. A British Harrier??? Gimme a break will ya'! Cannot you people use your eyes, or were you just too scared in the end?

The plane shown in 28 days later was a

GA11 Hawkerhunter

http://www.rotorleasing.com/images/GA11HawkerHunter.JPG

And i have checked and doublechecked this... Check it yourself if you dont believe me!!!


Permafrost (Permafrost@Triad.ath.cx) writes:

I'm not a big zombie film fan, but I don't see this as strictly a zombie "redefining" film. It was very good, very well portrayed one of my favorite aspects of a genre of "horror" film. (Being one of the last few humans left alive in the entire world, and faced with something evil to surivive.) The ending was wanting, but I would definetly see the film again. And where can I get more pictures of Cillian Murphy??


Thomas (Email address withheld) writes:

brilliant. i saw this yesterday on its opening day here in new york and i honestly cant rememb er the last time i was so scared silly in a theater. in fact i have trouble even stopping thinking about it. am i seeing it again? you betcha. and the scenes i cant get out my head are the first infection in the beginning and the infections among the soldiers ... i walked around in a daze after seeing it all, kinda feeling undead myself. if you're a fan of horror, and not schlock, see this movie.


Nakisha (Email address withheld) writes:

I saw the movie tonight & I found the movie to be very disturbing yet very powerful & unique! With all the research & experimentation that goes on in society, one wonders what WOULD happen if something like this were to really take form? This movie goes to the very depths of human emotion and sanity. In such a situation, what would you do; live, commit suicide, or keep the hope of salvation? This was indeed an unsettling movie that gave me chills from beginning to end. The actors did a great job & I liked that the movie was filmed using DV. It gave the bizarre tone of the movie an even greater emphasis. Without a doubt I enjoyed this movie for its uniqueness, its ability to get under my skin, and its gruesome intrusion of the mind. I would definetly add this movie to my collection & recommend it to all who aren't afraid to see life in a different way!


Tom (Email address withheld) writes:

Great movie, but what about that scene before the end before Jim wakes up. It appears to be an upside-down frame with the word "HELL" on it. Really creepy. Fantasticly scary tho


spencer (Email address withheld) writes:

i just saw the movie the other day. don't get me wrong, i thought it was an incredibly good movie, but did anyone else not find it that scary? i think they advertised it improperly. it was not "scary as hell." i say the movie was really good. the visuals were awesome and people aren't mentioning the music enough. the music was friggin great and fit perfectly. am i alone though in thinking it wasn't that scary?


cillian (Email address withheld) writes:

can someone please explain to me the significance of the major and 28 days. Also......why couldnt anyone outside of England help? why did it take 28 days?


Johnnyd (Email address withheld) writes:

Why don't the infected turn on each other? Any ideas? Strictly Director's perogative?


Alberto (Email address withheld) writes:

I saw the trailer for this movie when

I went to go see Matrix, and it sort of

sparked my interest, for I thought it

might be a modern Dawn of the Dead or

Living Dead ( I know corny zombie movies). The story had alot of loose

ends and at times seemed a little slow,

BUT this movie blows away Matrix and

Xmen which are the last movies I saw. This movie was heart pounding and I would recomend it to anyone. If they

polished up this movie it might have been better but, would lose its edge.

Why did we have to see the guy naked twice? I would have liked to have seen Selena showering instead. I would not have minded living in a cottage with Naomi Harris she's a beauty.

Another possible ending would have been

for the jet to make another pass and blow them up or machine gun them down for their is no way anyone would risk rescuing them if the U.k. was quaranted.


jah öberst (jahshow82@aol.com) writes:

they were originally talking about walking to manchester. that's why it would've taken three days...


Libby Adams (Email address withheld) writes:

I thought this movie sucked. I can appreciate the depth of the issues, too bad they were just skimmed and they all seemed random and ill-placed at times. The movie did keep my stomach in a knot. and i do think it's scary in it's own way. I liked the filming and the music (most of the time). but overall the acting was rather lame, the plot (rage as a virus what??) silly and not explained. i loved the beach, but 28 days after left something to be desired. the ending sucked the most of everything.


samuel (Email address withheld) writes:

I love this film, it had a clean and unique Romero feel to it (and thats a great thing) this was not only visually stunning but created an environment with its story only this director can create. Overall a great film one of the best keep them coming.


PhillyGuy (Email address withheld) writes:

WOW!!! I loved this film. It was such an interesting idea. Just think about what it would be like if a virus like RAGE spread throughout the world. I thought the movie got slow at the end but was so relieved to see that jet at the end. A few ideas about the film.

1. They said something about that the virus had spread to Paris and New York. How the hell would that happen if the virus can only spread through peoples' blood and makes them go crazy immediately. US and France are over seas. May be the infected went under the English Channel? Or hijacked a boat, yet they didn't seem too bright! No commercial jet or major ship would leave if someone got RAGE before departing.

2. I'm very curious about the end. Some of you say that the jet at the end was from Finland. From what I saw the insignia on the plane was British. It would be interesting to find out who in the world is still alive and if things will eventually go back to normal.

GREAT MOVIE 10 OUT OF 10


ItaliAngel (Email address withheld) writes:

fabulous film... everyone is entitled to their own opinion but it is a damn shame critics need to shoot down what they don't understand

as a major in both psychology and philosophy i found the demonstration of self-survival vs. living for others extremely facinating. am i on crack? did any one else catch onto Salena's personality transformation? the good guys lived for eachother and survived whereas the military men focused on self survival and ended up infected...

the soundtrack could not have possibly been better...

while the movie itself was thrilling, it left me feeling as i myself am on valium.... peaceful with a sense of hope in mankind


SomeBody (Email address withheld) writes:

I love the film's story line although it can be a bit too gorey at times.

Like , for instance, when Mark got bit and Selena had to kill him.

Other than that , Great Film!

A total thumbs up!


colinstack (Email address withheld) writes:

I just watched the movie and definitely had an effect on me. My mood was irritable and edgy as I left the theater. If a film does that to me its doing a hell of lot more than most of the crap churned out by Hollywood that I just forget 2 seconds after I walk away. I thought the camera work and editing were amazing. The acting was great from the leads and Brendan Gleason was solid as always. Definitely the stuff of nightmares. Best zombie movie I've seen!


Shakka (Email address withheld) writes:

This is the best film I have seen for a good while.

I thought the most enjoyable aspect was the fact that they (the writers/directors) didn't go into too much detail about obviously important issues such as :

1) "The Rage"

2) The impact on the rest of the world

3) How many survivors there were

I could go on. Needless to say, I was discussing this film with a few people after I saw it and everyone had different opinions. it makes a refreshing change from typical Hollywood films where every detail is mapped out and is usually a complete no-brainer.

After I finished watching this film I had loads of questions and wanted to know more.

As I final note, I don't watch horror films as they give me nightmares (at 33 years of age!) and lo and behold, my wife wanted to kill me half way through the night as I was shouting my head off.

See it !


Tapio Rajala (tapio_rajala@hotmail.com) writes:

What the pilot said in the end was something like: "Delta Charlie tässä Echo Lima vedän toisen kierroksen westin country districtin yli ja sitten suoraan lounaaseen... Toistan: Wiski nolla nolla kolme astetta nolla yhdeksän desimaali nolla. Delta Charlie mä luulisin että täällä saattais olla jotain. - - Lähetätkö helikopterin."

Translated: "DC this is EL. I'm taking another round over West Country district and then head straight to south-west.. I Repeat: W 003 degrees 09.0. DC I think we got something here - - Send a helicopter."


Jerry (Email address withheld) writes:

28 days has too much hype and it did not deilver the goods sorry.. It didn't..

Past zombie movie blow this away.. Its a shame that the writer could not be more creative with this film..And i dont want to hear any blair witch stuff i loved the blair witch it was great..this movie is just flat.. a 5 at best..oh god when will we return to real horror movies that scare you..


redbenn (Email address withheld) writes:

I saw this movie tonight and left the theater thinking that I had missed something. I heard talk among other movie goers saying how it was awesome and what not. I tried to think my entire way home from the theater, what was so GREAT about this movie?

I found myself thinking what would I do in the situation if I was faced being the last perosn around, would I do what Jim did or just give up. The one trouble I had was that Selena said that the radio said it spread to NYC and Paris. Then at the end they said it didnt spread. Two conflicting stories.

I got home and had about an hour conversation with my friend who I saw it with (it was his 2nd time seeing it). I told him i had know idea what the hell happened, and he sort of explained it to me:

The virus couldnt spread... the guy when they were chained to the radiators explained it... it couldnt fly over the ocean, or climb over mountains. It also shows thoug, the zombies didnt even have to be there. The zombies were killing people just like the soldiers. The soldiers were more evil than the zombies themselves, creating a gruesome reality of the world we live in. They were just looking out for themselves even though they full knew that England was just 'quarantined' off and they were just killing and raping. When the one soldier figured it out, they killed him too.

This sparked a long debate between us, I beeing stuborn and trying not to budge on my opinion of the movie. I guess with all of the debate it sparked, it did a good job.. the underlying theme in this movie is "what would you do?"

If you go into this movie thinking you are going to see a horror zombie movie, I personally do not think it will impress you. Sure my heart was pounding through it, but any scene with darkness and the suspense of something jjumping out scares me all the time. If you are looking at it in that kind of way then yes, it is a 'b-movie'.

But if you think about it on a deeper scale it says a lot, and should be given a second chance (if you didnt enjoy it the first time). I myself disliked this movie when I left the theater, but find myselff wanting to go back to see what I missed an know what I know now about it.

... and who cares what kind of damn plane it was


Paul Burke (chalky37@hotmail.com) writes:

Throughout watching this film I was on edge. I have permanent gouge mark in the shirt I wore. And yeah, I know, "Rage" is an excessively ambiguous and corny handle for a communicable disease (artificially engineered?) but since this movie was shoot in the pre-SARS era - creepy! In the tradition of zombie movies, which technically this isn't, since the ghouls are infected and not un-dead, it does straddle two genres. Like I mentioned, the Zombie flick but also it works more as a gritty realistic sci-fi/"what if?" scenario. For instance: the "Andromeda Strain" or to a lesser extent "Outbreak"; what a shit film.

The paranoia of mankind's most pervasive enemies is a captivating theme, always has been and always will be. For this reason, I think, this is why this film is so effective. It's not "Freddy vs. Jason". It's a meditation into the deepest human fear. The holistic elimination of the species. A prospect we are teetering closer and closer to accomplishing.

Also, the ambiguities of the film also lend beautiful exposition for the audience to chew on. Is it only the Britain that has been quarantined? Or is the rest of the world infected too? Who knows but it adds another element of tension that works in favor of the film.

All I can say is go see the film.

Paul Burke

Montreal, Canada


Lee N. (minzunuami@hotmail.com) writes:

I saw this on Saturday night at 10... I don't know if it was because the theatre was crappy, but I wasn't feeling the whole "desolation, loneliness" scene at the beginning. I don't care, it was a INCREDIBLY good movie and for a few reasons: the visuals are amazing (my favorite scene being the "eyes meet forceful thumbs" part, the fact that you keep on getting to see Cillian Murphy's naked ass :), and this movie made me laugh SO hard (I keep thinking of the eye scene). I'm telling you, I had more fun at this movie than at any comedy I've ever seen. Despite it's dissapointing ending where everyone doesn't die, I recommend you to see this, really.


Dave G (nomrquackers@hotmail.com) writes:

I thought this movie was really well done, but it could of been a whole lot better. It really took on an air of Lord of the Flies with zombies. The whole point of the movie, it seemed, was that people don't need to become infected to resort to horrid violence, they have it residing in their souls. When the main character punctures a zombie's eyes with his thumbs in the climax of the film and celine almost kills him, it really shows that theme clearly. The movie would of been much better if she had just killed him there.

The camrawork and editing were amazing, giving the film an eery, almost real life tone.


cheryl (Email address withheld) writes:

um i just saw this movie about a week ago. june of 2003. since it just came out over here. and yeah, i don't think i've ever left a movie theater that satisfied before. that movie was perfect. i freakin love cillian murphy! woo he's hot. and i got to see him naked. also, the music that is played in ll the scenes sets the mood soooooo well. especially in the house towards the end. one thing i HATE about ceratin movies is when they have the most trite and overly used types of songs playing. 28 days later had its own disturbing sounds. hehe. *****


Caitlin (Email address withheld) writes:

I just want to say that I thought that 28 Days Later was a brilliant movie. I have always been a huge fun of Danny Boyle and I think this is definately a triumph! The acting was terrific. This movie surpassed my expectations especially since I didn't know any of the actors. All over a great accomplishment! 10 out of 10


julie (julesbk1@earthlink.net) writes:

What a great story about survival.

So much more than just a horror flick.

Truly exceptional. It reminded me again what a creative director Danny Boyle is.

He didn't let a small budget deter him. In fact, he made it work in his favor.

And let's talk about Cillian Murphy. This man is a passionate actor. If you've ever seen Disco Pigs, you will agree. In 28 days later, he inhabits the character with great conviction. And he's rather easy on the eyes.

I loved the mad climactic scene in the mansion towards the end of the film. And how good was it when the little girl ran to look at the photo of her family? I thought that was very truthful.

I thought the movie was not only entertaining, but also offered some intriguing commentary on human nature.

And for those who thought the love story subplot was unneccessary, I greatly disagree. I thought it fit well in the desperate circumstances the two found themselves in.


siskel'N'ebert (Email address withheld) writes:

i agree with Carly. i think it was slow at alot of parts. Also wats with the ending. They crash into a fence then... do they live or die cmon!!


queixada (nummymuffin101@hotmail.com) writes:

horribly antiseptic acting. a rediculous romantic undertone between jim and selena. a banal "lord of the flies-esque" quality. rediculously far-fetched. choppy. completely drawn out. i left 2 hours into the movie and i bet you it went on for another 2. i never left a theater in the middle of a movie until this one. very overrated. i could have used the 9 dollars i spent to see this steaming pile of filth to wipe my a$$! I hope this "film" rotts in B-movie hell.


hansilla (Email address withheld) writes:

I think people who nitpick about things like "I saw a guy walking to work way off in the distance there" and "There was no blood and cars and dead people all over the streets etc." REALLY missed the point. I can't immagine it was easy to get the streets and express way emptied long enough to shoot a scene that comes accross as eerie and devestating let alone spread blood and cars and extras posing as corpses etc.

It's a MOVIE you know? What do you expect? They can't ACTUALLY have london evacuated and I'm sure Manchester wasn't REALLY on fire you know...NONE of that stuff was real...the point is that it was FREAKY AS HELL! The THOUGHT alone is messed up and to actually get a glimps of it was AWESOME! Yes there are flaws when filming a scene that requires an entire city to be empty, but I think they pulled it off superbly!


hansilla (Email address withheld) writes:

"why couldnt anyone outside of England help? why did it take 28 days?"

With such a virulent disease I think it would be like suicide to try and contain a country full of raging murderers. I assume it is just the risk factor that kept people away.

28 days seemed to be the marker for the infected to start starving to death.


Stephen (Email address withheld) writes:

Great film! Granted, it was a little choppy (name a film that isn't) but the overall effect was just what I look for: It left me with plenty of thoughts and asking plenty questions like "how would I act in that situation? How would it feel to wake up to that reality? What would I be prepared to do to survive?"

It net effect was more traumatizing than fear inducing. Remember the scene where Mark (the survivor who celine kills after he is infected) recalls the panic in the train station (Paddington?) as the disease traveled through the terrified crowd? Scary stuff – I didn’t need Hollywood special effects for that scene to work. It was the moments like that, and the church scene, that really made an impact.


Nevdon (nevdonj@netscape.net) writes:

Fantastic.

Although I would say it is more of a Day of the dead/ Triffids/ Omega Man/ 12 Monkeys amalgamation more than anything else. So what? Most films borrow- and this one does it without seeming like a rip-off. Best sci-fi in ten years. I especially liked that it is basically an art film aimed at the gut of the summer block buster crowd. In the audience that I saw the film with there where teenaage hoods, high brows and fan boys.


georgina (Email address withheld) writes:

I loved the movie 'cause is the most terrorific movie I've seen in years!american horror movies are borign because always have the same structure and this english movie enjoy me because is really diferent. the atmosphere it creates is excelent and I think this film will impress you. cillian murphy is brilliant too.


Beth (b_rycroft@yahoo.co.uk) writes:

What an absolutely horrifying film . I felt terminally sick with suspense from begining to end

The shots of London were outstanding and the digital recording technology completely succeeding in giving the film an eerie and futuristic feel.

As I am presently working in America the idea of a UK Armagedon occuring whilst I was away from home was as seductive as it was ludicrous. However, the worst part is that the film's ending was changed for the American audience so I implore anyone who is reading this to email me the European version of events.


Fallon (kittaaa785@msn.com) writes:

I saw '28 Days Later'almost 3 weeks ago, and let me tell you, I still have nightmares to this day! It is the most terrifing movie I have seen in years. It is not a typical 'teen horror'. This movie can scare any age group because it is about something we are all secretly freaked-out by: waking up alone and having to survive from rage-infested creatures. I give this movie a perfect '10'!


Butch (aric1990@yahoo.com) writes:

IT was one of the best movies I have seen but what qustoions me is 28 days later supposed to be the second Resident evil or what because I sat down to play Resident evil zero and saw that the monkeys where the same from the game and 28 days later and I also played Resident evil 1 for gamecube and the zombies were running just like in 28 days later well thats all Loved the movie but the ending was not good could have done better.


Teena (Email address withheld) writes:

Resident evild was a bad movie, pure hollywood c*ap. it's nothing compared to 28 days. Even if i wasn't scared to death and didn't suffer from nightmares for a week like after i saw the Ring, i still liked 28 days better. it has that certain quality to it, one can almost believe that it happened/ will happen. this little movie has something that 95% on modern music, films and other products of the media lack - soul.

big thumbs up. cillain murphy was also magnificent. i'm eager to see his future works.


Nicole (AZNraverSqueakie@netscape.net) writes:

I thought this was a well shot movie, really dark and the shots were so tight you could never tell what was coming up next, I was always ready to scream. I thought as far as horror movies go it was well acted and I felt a lot of sympathy for Jim. I think it is one of the best gore-films ever. I should also add that I think cillian murphy ended up being quite sexy!


Bobette (Email address withheld) writes:

It was a good movie although it wasn't near as scary as it was said to be. I was extremely disappointed with the alternate ending. It was horrible. The characters had already been through so much that having Jim die wasn't necessary. I did like Cillian Murphy, he did a wonderful job playing Jim.


Robert J. duPreez (duPreez@aol.com) writes:

Just saw this film yesterday 03/08/03 and with only one item about this film did it bother me. Besides maybe the fact another critic pointed out the time it took to get to Manchester. Maybe a lot of edit work that will be added to the DVD (I hope). But the connection that the sex drive at the base is overbaked and should have been downplayed as just a few rapists and not a general flaw (is there a pun here?). Cillian Murphy is one actor to be watched. Besides being handsome; brought every ouce of talent needed to push past some of the weaker parts of the film. A side from any film of this genre, this one will be a rental classic for many years to come.


Kevin Cathy (kpcsid@sbcglobal.net) writes:

Awesome movie! Yes I know some things don't make sense in this movie like the ending or why the zombies just don't eat each other, but nonetheless it was one scary movie. Every zombie movie I have seen was just made to gross you out and none of them have tried to be scary - but 28 Days Later tries really hard and man do they do it! It's one of the scariest movies I have ever seen. Imagine that - a zombie movie that actually scares you! I really liked how the movie made you feel like you were actually there and the camera they used and the motions they used (either it was extremely fast or really slow) - it seemed like an artistic movie - like a moving painting. The directing is very well done - the plot does not seem cheesy or corny at any time. And it makes you scared of two things - the zombies and the army. Overall, it was a great movie - very realistic, artistic, and very well done. The people who don't like this movie don't know what a good movie is. (Those are the people that only like a movie because the main actor or actress looks good - or if the special effects are "really cool".) So see this movie if you are a serious movie goer!


toots (Email address withheld) writes:

thanks for clearing up the confusion over what the pilot said at the end. that was driving me nuts.


Brad (Email address withheld) writes:

Everyone else did so much heavy-duty thinking I thought I'd contribute my share! One remaining question was, does the Finnish Air Force fly Hawk aircraft? Yep. According to Jane's Sentinel Security Assessment for Central Europe, the Finns own thirty Hawk 51/51a's, based at Rovaniemi, Tampere-Pirkkala, and Kuipo-Rissala. Adds a degree of "realness", doesn't it? (Although why the Finns? Was theirs the only operational air force?)


Kenneth (Email address withheld) writes:

Why not the Finns? It makes sense that Finland, which for example never got a SARS case unlike other Nordic countries, might have survived the plague. So yes, the pilot was speaking Finnish, and after watching the dvd with the audio commentary by Boyle and Garland, they confirmed that it is supposed to be the Finnish air force. Though they said the plane used is actually British and they unfortunately couldn't change the marking. The pilots voice is Boyle's Finnish friend Jukka, who also plays one of the activists in the opening scene.


Kimmo (Email address withheld) writes:

I saw the movie and as a Finnish person, I immediately recognized the Finnish voice of the pilot in the end. The other parts was kind of incoherent radio chatter but the "send the helicopter" part was clear. I could also confirm that it must be Finnish person speaking the line.

What comes to the fighter jet markings; I would say that the markings in the wings are Finnish airforce markings.


Jorma ja Yrjö (Email address withheld) writes:

Yup!

The pilots do speak Finnish.

1st line "Suunta nollanolla" tr.

"Bearing zerozero"

2nd line "Helikopteri noutaa" tr.

"Helicopter will fetch"


wesker (Email address withheld) writes:

I watched this movie today 10-21. As a long time zombie and horror fan i must say this movie was GREAT. Not really scary, but just the whole feel of the movie was great. Anyone who likes GOOD movies would like it


iain (Email address withheld) writes:

absolutely brilliant, 8/10, and they only just missed those final 2 points because i felt they almost slipped into doctor who territory with the soldiers. But on the whole fantastic. Cillian murphy is an actor to look out for, and the film was Boyles best since trainspotting, probably as good.

two thumbs up.


Ashlie (boob_ash@hotmail.com) writes:

I thought it was a good show overall. It was a little bloody and kind of believable in the fact that there are many infections and diseases that can be spread quickly. It didn't have monsters or something stupid and unbelievable like that. I thought that Cilliam Murphy did a good job as the main character and was incredibly handsome that is just my opinion. It wasn't scarey much, the blood and gore is sure to make anyone queasy. I didn't really care for the ending much, I wanted to know if they found a cure or if there was others out there to help them fight them off. Otherwise it was a kickass movie!


Katrina (Email address withheld) writes:

Watch this movie stoned and you won't sleep at night. I loved it so much that I'm actually looking for info on the web! Can't say that about all the stupid horror films out there.

To those who critize-- it's a movie, enjoy it for what its worth, and then take another hit...


Andrei (geko95gek@yahoo.co.uk) writes:

i watched this movie stoned and now i cant remember much of it, but is far as i do remember it was scary as hell and the silences was a genious idea, and they bring you up to what happens next but believe me, its a surprise every time.

Bloody, scary, spine shivering, brilliant production.


Maty (Shelleysatanic@hotmail.com) writes:

Tengo que hacer un comentario sobre la pelicula y me gustaria tener todo tipo de opiniones. Puedes ayudarme?

I have to do an essay about that film and i need lots of kind of comments, would you like to help me?


Roxie (poohbear_0069@hotmail.com) writes:

It was scary as hell! Overall, a very good movie. I watched it too many times to count. Cillian is Hot and a very good actor, the others did a good job as well. Not like the usual scary movie which I liked about it.

Lots of gore to top it all off!


Emile Foyster (Email address withheld) writes:

A good British film which refuses to 'spoon feed' the viewer with narrative present only to explain the story. The lack of knowledge we share with the protagonists makes for an intriguing plot, allowing the viewer to experience with the charcters some sense of 'what now? what next? why?'. Who is to say how infected humans 'should' behave? The film opens a door to a whole mansion of possibilities and it is up to the viewer to go in and explore for themselves what may be inside. Scary and stimulating.


Christine (Email address withheld) writes:

A moving and very thought provoking film. Some excellent movie making and a great and rather surprising yet possible twist at the end. After watching the alternative ending on the dvd, I have to say I'm glad they didn't use it.

Those who didn't like it have the right to their own opinion but I think you should all take a look at your perception of the world and realise how simple the storyline is and how possible it could be.

A great combination of thrills, scares and a happy ending, without all the hollywood drama and cheese.


Daniel (signten@earthlink.net) writes:

Thanks Shakka for helping me regain the edge the movie gave me. After reading some of the ‘serious’ critiques I am glad that I’m not aware of the ‘technical’ facets of movies. It reminds me of when I took a classical music appreciation class, which has nearly ruined listening to classical music for me.

I knew nothing about this film when I rented it. I didn’t even read the film description on the rental box. It was just something different from the same old, same old on my 200 plus channel satellite subscription. Different it was and thought provoking, got “under my skin” as well, deep enough that I dreamt a similar dream that the character Jim had, and being single, and alone after seeing the moving, I felt isolated in a secluded way, not isolated like one might expect.

I too didn’t think the movie was truly scary, yet it did keep me glued to the film to the point that I forgot I was in control with just a push of the pause button, to give me a much needed brief break. I guess I didn’t want the break; I wanted to see what was going to happen next. I appreciate it, when I don’t know what’s around the corner, or behind that closed door, in a film.

I’ve enjoyed reading the varied responses from the others, intellectually stimulating, much like the screen play. It’s made me wish there was some one in my life to discuss the plethora of perspectives presented.

I highly recommend the movie to any one who enjoys the way a good book is refreshing to have much to think about, from the uncertainties to the subtle reprieve.

Daniel


ducky (dizzy37st@yahoo.com) writes:

I've devoted far too much of my life to thinking about this movie, but I'm wondering which movie ending those in the UK got. I have the DVD, which gives three endings, but I thought perhaps none of the three were used, and that the movie was just cropped at the point where any of the endings were tacked on.

at any rate, quite smart comments (in general) by those on both sides of the debate. I enjoyed reading them a bit.

crap script, brilliant danny boyle, (and cillian murphy). no complaints here.


aria (Email address withheld) writes:

Saw the movie once wasnt that scary, pretty girl but confusing romance. Very gorey though and plenty of action to keep you entertained. I'd give this movie an A for being surprising and exactly what i wanted and exspected from a zombie movie.


Kevin (thymehoar@yahoo.com) writes:

Great movie... love the part where he submerges his thumbs into the soldier's eyes... But my only question is, if the infected are so ravenous, what stops them from getting pissed at each other? They only seem to get pissed at normal people, why starve to death if you can just eat the other psychos? Just a thought...


Stephanie Stevens (hancson@starpower.net) writes:

I am a black American I thought the movie 28 days was intense... Compared to all the American scrap horror movies it was a breath of fresh air. Cilliam Murphy who is absolutely gorgeous is an amazing actor, Noamie too. So I give this move 2 thumbs up.


Falcon (Email address withheld) writes:

Super realism with a gritty finnish, left me wanting more. A good cast of actors and

weird enough story line to keep maintains interest. Always happy to see Manchester up on the big screen. Monkey fever, Nuff said.


zero g (Email address withheld) writes:

This movie was great. All through this movie i was comparing 28 days later to that piece of shit movie resident evil, and i have to say that 28 days later was way better. But i would'nt call the infected humans zombies because zombies are usually slow and dumb and sometimes laughable. I have to admit that these infected humans were scary, fast and sometimes unpredictable. So what that you seen slight flaws about the movie, fuck all of that it was still good. Normally with a movie like this i usually like to see most of the survivors die at the end, but i was not disapointed with this ending at all because i kind of rooted for Jim all through the movie. But i ask...does it have to end there? What happens to the zombies? Where do Jim, Hannah and Selina go from here after beeing rescued? How far does the rage virus really go and could somebody overseas had contracted the virus? I loved this movie, but even though it may be unlikely...i would love to see a sequel. P.S. Why did Hannah's father Frank had to die? He was......cool.


Renee (munkyman@mindless.com) writes:

Monika Maurers comments are incredibly harsh. I am wondering why no one seems to be talking about the comments these film makers are making about humanity. It's a virus called Rage for a reason. Not because they couldn't think of a "better" name but because people are unkind, brutal, selfish, we rampage the earth like we own it and thus all our negative emotions are eccapsulated in this virus called rage which is our ultimate destruction.

The title is awesome and brings much analysis to the film. "28 days later" happens to be the number of days in a womans menstrual cycle, because of this connotation we must think about human kinds reproduction, which leads us then to the desperate army guys claiming to want to start life again but really they are just angry horny men. The two woman in this film are fantastic, smart, emotional, victims and heroes. The women are forced to wear red dresses and at the end of the alternate ending when Jim dies the only characters left are are females. The film draws to an end as the girls walk through a set of doors that leave a slit in the middle of the screen, sumwhat like a vagina.

Therefore I think this movie is a lot more than a horror/sci fi. It is commenting on humans imense overpopulation, our unnecessary anger and greed.

The zombies erge to reproduce is an excellent metaphor for humans reproductivity. Why do we reproduce at the rate that we do? it is not necessary for our survival, we are a virus or a plague on the earth slowly destroying it. The fashion the zombies reproduce in is quite ironic because it is vicious, deadly, it leads them to no satisfaction, once they kill their victum and create another zombie they simply fall down and asume sleep and wait. It shows us the ferocity of our actions only intensified and on a scale which we can respond to.

Danny Boyle and Alex Garland have brought to life a very real scenario and if one wants to look further into it they can find the most profound thoughts on humanity, not simply an entertaining film. It is a realisation of what is truly happening to the earth.


Hair Flick (Email address withheld) writes:

"Rage" is a good name for the virus because that is precisely the emotion that the virus induces. The ensuing breakdown of humanity is as a result of the virus moving from monkey to human (y'know like the old Aids myth). Note, only Britain is infected and quarantined the rest of the world remains safe, aint that the truth!


Moon (Moon@yahoo.com) writes:

After seeing night of the living dead as a child (the 80s version, I have had nightmares of zombies ever since. So you know 2 see this I had to blaze some purple sticky, yicky, yicky, to better analyze the movie. I thought the movie was excellent. The spooky atmosphere, chilling zombies and underlining themes of love, and survival kept me at the edge of my seat. Any one that could not appreciate the film for at least the cinematography or soundtrack is lame, and a groupie of regurgitated cinema.

P.S At the end of my dreams I always escape. Be Easy


Christabell (fadeaway@hotmail.com) writes:

The film reminded me of the chilling BBC1 drama documentary Threads:

<http://www.emptyworld.info/film_threads.html>

Also, John Wyndham's book - The Day of the Triffids, which the BBC also took to cult status.

<http://www.bbc.co.uk/cult/ilove/tv/triffids/>

28 Days Later is a very haunting film, its subtlety was lost on me at first but I have grown to love it's simple complexity and bold creative approach.


Bill (bill__reilly@hotmail.com) writes:

After watching this movie several times, I have tried to analyze the symbolism behind the "Hello" & "Ejet" if someone could be kind enough to send me an email explaining what I had missed I would really appreciate it.


Radu (gorilla_horse<at>yahoo<dot>com) writes:

Whatever its shortcomings, this was a brilliant and well-crafted movie, and it really dealt with multiple important social and psychological issues -- too long to discuss here. I'm only writing now to respond to one or more people who don't think this is technically "a real zombie movie" because the infected are not technically undead. So what? Nearly all zombie movies before Night of the Living Dead, to my knowledge, involved the living who had been turned into semi-conscious automatons. The concept of a viral (or biochemical, etc.) infection causing zombie behavior showed up in undead-style zombie movies; 28 Days Later took this concept, reworked it to give it pressing modern-day relevance, and reapplied it to the earlier concept of living-but-mindless zombies.

My only suggestion as to why the infected didn't turn on each other was that the Rage was an engineered organism complete with the instinctive urge to reproduce and spread. It caused its host unconsciously to recognize other infected, and feel the urge only to attack uninfected potential hosts -- for the sake of spreading efficiently. (Normally one would expect this to be an evolutionary development that would need some time to develop... but maybe it all came about in the lab.)

- Radu

Oakland, CA


zero g (Email address withheld) writes:

Just saw the other ending...the one where Jim dies, that was fine but i like the one where he lives. Like i said before i was rooting for him. And for the record, Night of the living dead is still king of all zombie flicks in my view and anything else that came before that was crap!!! A lot of things after that was crap too. 28 days later...still awsome.


Jim (Email address withheld) writes:

It was very good but not the best film i,ve seen.At the beggining the scientist says to the animal rights activists (In order to cure you must first understand.)Whitch means that there was a cure to RAGE.On the news paper the Jim picks up at the start it says

EVACUATION

-----------

Mass exodus of British people causes global chaos.

Blair declares a state of emergency.

Military ordered shoot to kill.

Government check-points over run.

U.N. to build giant refugee camps.

Chaos at all U.K. air ports.

Government call,s for calm.

Military patrols water around Britain.

All roads to London in grid lock.

If all the roads to London were in grid-lock how did the get out of the city without running into any abondoned cars.

But if there was refugee camps built everyone would go there so that might explain where the cars were and if there was an exodus its likely most people got out of the country before they were killed so mabey thats why there wasn,t that many infected in London.It was never explained what caused the huge inferno in Manchester.


the rage master (Email address withheld) writes:

28 days later was a good film but it was,nt scary just a liitle jumpy like when the infected burst through the windows in jims parents house.Some one at the top of the page seem,s to think that Jim wakes up and wanders around Manchester.Well thats funny ,cause i always thought that Big Ben, West minster bridge and buckingham palace were in London not Manchester.

In 28 days later the whole of Manchester was burning out of control.

Jim woke up in an empty London hospital.


Kalle (Email address withheld) writes:

I'd like to verify that the plane is Hawker Hunter, it does have RAF markings and the pilot does speak Finnish. This was mentioned on the audio commentary and the markings are clearly visible if you take high quality screen captures.


Scott (Email address withheld) writes:

This was one of the best films ive seen, its pretty unnerving being in a completely empty city never mind having murderous maniacs chasing you.

i'd also like to know these things.

if anywhere but britain was majorly infected.

was it 28 days or 56 before the 'infected' became weak? because it said '28 days later...' before the cottage scene

why was manchester a burning inferno? maybe that was the army?

how the 'infected' found the house the army were in.

why were there not that many infected on the streets? did most people escape beforehand? maybe that explains why there were hardly any cars or dead bodies?

thanks for any answers.


Add your comments about 28 Days Later [About]




UTILITIES


Search kamera.co.uk

Product finder



Browse our network:




| WHO WE ARE | BLOG | BOOKSHOP | DIRECTORY | FORUM | INTERVIEWS | FEATURES | BOOK REVIEWS | FILM REVIEWS | FILM NEWS |   


kamera.co.uk

© 1999/2004 kamera.co.uk