28 Days Later (2002)

[slayrrr666]

Here's one more for the "Never-ending Shame" series:

“28 Days Later” is a very overrated zombie movie.

**SPOILERS**

An animal rights group breaks into a research center and accidentally release monkeys infected with a chemical known as rage. Nearly a month later, Jim (Cillian Murphy) finds himself alone in an abandoned hospital and finds all of London abandoned as well. When he finds a group of people who are acting strangely, he gets rescued by Mark (Noah Huntley) and Selena, (Naomie Harris) who are not infected, and inform him of what has happened. All cut up, he and Selena wander the city to find a way to get out. They catch up to a father/daughter pair, Frank (Brendan Gleeson) and Hannah (Megan Burns) and together head over to a military facility that may or may not exist that offers protection for the uninfected. Along the way, they find the countryside ravaged by the infected, and even the military base doesn’t offer much protection from the ravenous attackers.

The Good News: The film does start off with a bang. Less than ten minutes in, we get scenes of a deserted London and the hero wandering through them that are just bone chilling. To know how London generally looks and then to see the opening shots of this film may be a little unsettling to Londoners. Even more unsettling is the make-up used to create the “infected.” There are plenty of them with rotting faces, long scars on their bodies and faces, and this look of dread in their bloodshot eyes that look really creepy. I think they’re eyes are easily the best quality about them, as that look they have is new and different from others before them. There is an almost vampiric look to them that is really refreshing to see. We do get a copious amount of gore as well, which helps to offset the nearly unbearable middle part of the film. Limbs fly everywhere and blood spurts out in great doses. There’s one death in particular, near the beginning, which really should be mentioned: after dealing with one of the infected, the winner notices that they have a bite mark on their arm. The other person looks at this, knows the inevitable, and then goes crazy and hacks up the infected person to pieces. That was pretty creepy, and one of the few good scares in the film. Once the film gets to the military compound, the film steps up and actually becomes scary, delivering a few good scares and plenty of action. We get lots of gunplay, dead bodies, and some clever and surprising results from the battle. Mixed with the rainstorm that occurs at the same time, the results are pretty gruesome and exciting.

The Bad News: Even though we get off to a rousing start, we don’t get anything afterwards for quite a while, leaving a long gap between action. This cuts into the films pace, as we get a great last half with an okay beginning, but that middle part is what really drags. There is way too much exploration of the city and talking amongst the people to really get into the film. We don’t need four discussions about the same event at different times in the city. It got rather boring at times to sit through some of that. It should’ve been cut down by at least ten minutes, as there is way too much redundant talking in the movie that throws the pace off. Even worse, there is that dreaded quick-cut style of editing in the film that renders so much of the film barely able to figure out. This style of filming scenes is completely aggravating and needs to stop immediately. It doesn’t make the scene look good and all it does is make the audience confused as to make is actually happening. All we get is a sense of what is going on, and in a film like this, I assume that we need to know all that is going on, not just guessing because the editing and camera movements are so erratic. There was also a large number of scenes that should’ve been scarier that weren’t. There are plenty of times I felt I should’ve been scared when I wasn’t. Knowing when someone is coming up on a hero should be scary, but instead it doesn’t get a jolt out of them because we know they’re there when the scene called for them to deliver a sneak attack. I did have a few other gripes about the film (they’re not zombies, they’re people infected with a virus) but for space considerations, I can’t repeat them here.

The Final Verdict: I don’t see the big deal with this movie. It’s by no means a classic in my eyes, but the followers behind it are many, so take it at your own risk. It’s not a zombie movie, so those fans might be a little disappointed than others.

Rated R: Graphic Violence, Graphic Language, full male Nudity, depiction of events in animal testing centers, and scenes with a child in danger

[frankenjohn]

I don't understand why so many people hate this movie.

[Pulpmariachi]

I like this movie a lot! But I don't think it's a horror-movie, but more of a thriller.

SPOILER WARNING STILL IN EFFECT

And besides, the ending with Cillian Murphy going apeshit on the military guys was brilliant.

[Termination]

frankenjohn said:

I don't understand why so many people hate this movie.

..because they think its a film about zombies..

[slayrrr666]

Okay, time for me to explain: I felt that there was far too much time just simply talking with nothing going on. I felt bored watching so many scenes I fast-forwarded through most of it and still was not confused at all. I think the film could've been trimmed down to a respectable 1hr and 25mins without loosing anything in the way of plot or character development. I just didn't see the big deal with this movie. It's by no means a classic, and I didn't even mention the fact that they aren't zombies. I simply used the term "infected."

[Quorthon]

I saw it opening day in a packed theater and loved it. I still love it. It is, in a sense, still a zombie movie--just different kinds of zombies than the undead Romeroan zombies we're all used to.

It was one part Dawn of the Dead and one part Outbreak, with a generous sprinkle of Day of the Dead. And say what you will, of all the crappy horror films we've been getting the past decade, zombie films have crept back into the light and, unlike the average Hollywood horror flick, the zombie movies are (for the most part) delivering. After 28 Days Later, we had a decent Dawn remake, Shaun of the Dead, the bizarre (and little known) Undead, and Romero's own Land of the Dead to name a few--and these movies actually hit theaters. What was the last zombie movie to actually have a theatrical release before 28 Days Later? Anyone know? I can only think of Day of the Dead--and that was in 1985.

I thought 28 Days Later was a good movie, a good zombie movie, and one with a unique spin on the zombie theme--namely in the zombies themselves.

We need to remember that zombies have been in movies almost since movies began--it wasn't until Romero came along that they really became damn near their own genre. Which is what I consider them to be. A very versatile horror sub-genre. The Zombie Movie.

Most movies drag a little during the middle--it's just a fact of filmmaking. Anyone can come up with a great opening and an even better climax, but not just anyone can link the two.

[slayrrr666]

Right, but did it have to be so agonizing to sit through, especially for my tastes?

[Quorthon]

I guess I don't really see it. I really had no problem with the middle of the movie. To me, it was pretty average for a zombie flick.

[Bartwald]

Just like Quorth - I like this film a lot, but even I would agree that the beginning is the best part of it; deserted London, atmosphere of mystery, great creepy soundtrack, nude Cillian Murphy... er, scratch the last one, will you? ...they all make for a wonderful jumpstart to the following events.

I will also always treat it as a zombie film - the rules have changed a bit but the spirit remained the same.

[slayrrr666]

To me, it's not just the middle, it's also the hyper-stylized editing of the movie that gets on my nerves. I hate that kind of editing, and this one is no exception.

[Bartwald]

I didn't have problems with hyper-editing here - sure the who's and why's got blurred occasionally but it somehow felt natural in this kind of film.

[Phoenix]

frankenjohn said:

I don't understand why so many people hate this movie.

I dont understand why so many people like this movie. Critics were tripping over themselves exhaulting it because of the hip director when it came out.

Like slayrrr666 I was disappointed and I felt it was way overhyped. It's for a generation that perhaps never saw Romero's zombie films. Really loved the beginning, totally fizzled out for me by the end. I can see how someone could enjoy it but I think it lacks a lot of energy. I can't ever watch it again without falling asleep.

5/10 for me. (gave it an extra point for the cool beginning)

[slayrrr666]

Yes, I also theought it was way overhyped. I clocked it and it could be trimmed down to an hour and a half while still keeping the storylines and action but eliminating way too much of the boredom the middle part has.

[Pulpmariachi]

Just like Quorth - I like this film a lot, but even I would agree that the beginning is the best part of it; deserted London, atmosphere of mystery, great creepy soundtrack, nude Cillian Murphy... er, scratch the last one, will you? ...they all make for a wonderful jumpstart to the following events.

I liked the nude Cillian Murphy.

I didn't like the veeeery beginning, with the monkeys. I was like, "Eh..." and didn't get past the first 10 minutes when I first rented it. Then I decided to give it another chance and got past those 10 minutes and then couldn't stop the movie. The beginning was brilliant, the empty London was brilliant, the empty freeways (GOD I WISH!), the military.... Well, I liked it.

It was shot on DV, did you know that? I think that that contirbutes to some of the hyper-visuals. Like a music video...except a zombie thing...or something. I'm gonna shut up.

[slayrrr666]

Well, I skipped over the middle. The beginning, agreed, is great and the ending is great, but I wish the middle would've had more going on than just occasionally meeting up with them. You all know my beefs with slow paced movies.
Then my other beefs, quick-cut hyper stylized editing, is just so confusing to see that it made most of the viewing experience a giant headache because I couldn't concentrate on what was going on without seeing something blurring and distorted.