28 days later review

Have a picture of 28 Days Later?, please send it to us.
 

Average Ratings

Value for Money	8.4/10
Overall rating	8.2/10

75% Recommended9 out of 12 Reviews

Quick Links

Write your review

expert review of 28 Days Later

• Previous
• Review 12 of 12

By DARREN HORNE. on 17th Dec 2002

DARREN HORNE.'s Ratings

Value for money	5/10
Overall value	4/10
DARREN HORNE.'s recommendation

Good Points

ITS BRITISH.... ER... HMMM. OH, LONDON IS DESERTED.

Bad Points

UNEVEN ACTING, POOR SCRIPT AND DIALOGUE, UNINTELLIGENT AND UNREALISTIC CHARACTERS.

General Comments

28 DAYS LATER..........

Starring Cillian Murphy, Naomie Harris, Megan Burns, Brendan Gleeson, Christopher Ecclestone, Noah Huntley, Luke Mably and Ray Panthaki..........

Director Danny Boyle
Writer Alex Garland
Certificate 18
Released November 2002
Duration 113 minutes..................

Danny Boyle moves into the horror genre with this zombie film with a twist. Combined with the writing talent of Alex (The Beach) Garland, this had the potential to be a fresh and contemporary take on the classic zombie horrors such as those by George Romero. It fails miserably.

Animal activists break into the Cambridge Primate Research Centre and find caged chimps surrounded by a continuous video stream of war, anger and hate. Somehow the scientists have created a virus of pure rage, and these animals are infected with it. The well-meaning activists then free a chimp, which viciously assaults them, spreading the virus.

28 days later a bewildered Jim (Murphy) wakes up from a coma to find the hospital, and the rest of London, silent and empty.
He wanders the deserted streets looking for any sign of life. But the people he comes across have been infected and are now rabid, blood thirsty, rage crazed zombies.
Two other survivors (Huntley and Harris) come to his rescue and explain what has happened. They later join up with a taxi driver, Frank (Gleeson) and his daughter, Hannah (Burns). Together they set off for Manchester, which is the origin of a military radio broadcast offering sanctuary and a cure. There they meet Major West (Eccleston) who has brutal and pessimistic answers to their predicament.

Images of a deserted London, wiped clean of humanity by a virus, are both terrifying and shocking, especially as the threat of biological terror attacks nag at all of our minds. The hellish visuals of Manchester consumed by fire snuff out any sense of hope and give a sense of post apocalyptic loneliness. The despair, that haunts every scene, increases when the characters reach the army "safe haven".
The action scenes are few and far between, but they hit hard and fast, shattering the deathly silence with violent, heart-stopping gore fests. In between there is little suspense or tension, and the slow pacing leaves us craving that next attack.
None of the characters are likeable, due to awful dialogue and poor decision making. This isn't helped by Burns, whose terribly performance destroys any illusion of realism and constantly reminds us that this is just a film.

Its only redeeming feature is its subtext of the fragility of civilised society and how quickly we become savage and cruel when there is no authority to answer to.

An unsettling film that could have been so much more, especially when compared to the superb low budget werewolf film, Dog Soldiers. Top marks for effort though.

6 Comments on Review by DARREN HORNE. for 28 Days Later

1. Ali. on 29th May 2003

   this review isn't accurate at all i watched this movie and thought 'what an original idea' plus its not another cheap american flick its british.
   this was a great movie and i would recommend u watch it for it makes u think. ( also megan burns is fit)

2. Fother Mucker. on 29th May 2003

   This is the worst review of any film that i have ever seen. You are completely biased. Get a grip, this film rules.. go britain.. o i havent actually seen it yet but it looks insane.

3. darren. on 31st May 2003

   hi, this is my review that i wrote quite some time ago now, and it has just recieved a few comments. I re read my review and still stand by it, the film was dull, and some of the acting was terrible. I expected far better from the team that did it, Garland (Beach) and Boyle (trainspotting).
   One of the guys criticising the review says he hasnt even seen the film yet!!!
   See Dog soldiers (also British) which is far better, or even Resident evil, instead.

4. kevin. on 15th Jun 2003

   i think that this movie leaves off where resident evil ends, but in its place there are a bunch of retarded english people that show how civilized they really are when the authorities have been erased. i do like those scenes with all of the empty streets. i dont know that the acting was all that bad, considering these are a bunch of unknowns that are trying to just get a start and land a movie with a good premisis. i did like dog soldiers better, but we all need a zombie movie every now and then because its just so damn cool. so dont bash this movie, even though it did kind of suck. i prolly just liked it because i was drunk and kept drifting out of consienceness and woke up at all of the cool parts. wait, what did i just say?

5. Versilratus. on 4th Jul 2003

   Brilliant film. Great cinematography. Superb acting. I liked how Boyle features the rage of the Infected vs. human. This film reflects on other forms of rage within our own society that the viewers can relate to. And that is what makes the movie a success. It leaves the viewer breathless right down to the end of the film. The way the movie ended was good, it leaves people to think of their own conclusion. Thought provoking indeed. It's not your typical hollywood horror movie and that's what I like about it. It's one horror movie that people with different perspectives can read A LOT into and write real long reviews about, don't you agree? For a person who thought the film was so "dull," you sure have a lot to say about it.

6. moocows on 16th Dec 2003

   I agree with this person, dodgey and rubbish. However, if they spent another year deveolping it, it may have actually been quite good. The mansion bit and the begging action scenes were good, however the rest of the film was flimsy at best. Plus the ending was poo! its good to have a cool ending and stuff but i was watchin the film and like just after the main finale action scene like 10secs later the credits were rollin, like say wha?! 4+1/2 out of 10 bannanas.

• What Is the Alternative Ending in 28 Days Later
• 28 Days Later the Movie
• 28 Days Later Trailer
• 28 Days Later Soundtrack
• 28 Days Later Alternate Ending
• 28 Days Later Music
• Listen to 28 Days Later Soundtrack
• Another 28 Days Later
• Sequel to 28 Days Later
• Urban Exploration UK

• 28 Weeks Later
• Dawn of the Dead
• Urban Exploration
• Dog Soldiers
• Youtube
• Resident Evil
• 28 Weeks Later Review
• Creep
• Shaun of the Dead

Would you like to see a review that's not being listed?

Web Results

28 Days Later... (2002)
28 Days Later... (2002) More at IMDb Pro» ... 28 Days Later successfully takes the zombie genre to a new level, this movie is far more than just a horror flick.
www.imdb.com

UK Urban Exploration Forums
a community for urban explorers and those interested in urban exploration ... If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above.
www. 28dayslater .co.uk

DIY Guide: Your own Supervillain Hideout aka tailrace tunnel of ...
0230 Four and a half hours later we resumed surveillance upon our quarry. Shortly after three am a pack of workers left and It Was Showtime.
www. 28dayslater .co.uk

Fox Atomic

www.foxatomic.com