Rating: 
Summary: Chimps and Animals Activists; Scourges of a Placid World
Review: Rage. It affects many a singularity in the whole, passing through the social body with so many a cataclysmic repercussion. Many of the worst times in history are cast in its dye, and many of the things we fear are byproducts of the tongue it universally speaks. So, if rage were to pass through society like a virus, want would the effect be? And what would happen if you were one of the unlucky ones that didn't have the grace to bow out before the world went mad? 28 Days Later is a story about just that, picking up with its main character 28 days after the initial onset of this epidemic hits the world at large. Unlike many movies of its zombie-like type, it is also set in a different realm of interaction, within Britain, and that has some ramifications with regard to the outcome of the movie. For instance, there is no outlet to go to and to procure weaponry of the higher velocity, user friendly, type, with people instead having to opt for blunt weapons, machetes, and iron showings of will. The characters are different that the "norm" as well, with those souls not exactly conforming to rigid horror stereotypes that have plagued the genre in the past. This, in turn, sets the stage for something that erupts well initially and seems to say that it will have many a thing to add to the fold. Fear, blood, violence, and shock come out of the woodworks, and that makes a tale that seems like it will be promising. But then, just when things seem to be going somewhere, the task of telling goes into a tailspin and emerges in a mundane realm that has been so many times done before. The story actually forces itself into completion and it strays, adding in soldiers and some subversive storyline while taking away from the horror and disappointing someone expecting what was touted by the makers - a movie that was, in a word, frightful. This isn't to say that the movie has nothing to offer, because it does give something back. It has some gore, a nice look at a menace that is somewhat like the overused zombie but that is fast and angry instead of slow and brutish, and it picks up in the middle of the problem instead of at the beginning. This gives the viewer a different perspective of the woe manifesting and, in some rights, this would have been fine. The downside to this is that it becomes a human drama in the end, actually leaving out the menace of the rage-infected except for a slow trickling that is, in effect, dull. Sure, excuses have been made that it was trying to make a point, but couldn't that point have appeased the mind with the overuse of horror instead of becoming its skinny, underloved brother? To add to this, the DVD touts three alternate endings that will "blow your socks off," but that advertisement is egregiously deceptive. Two of the ending only have to do with shuffling who lives and dies, and the third, the radical changes, aren't really "shown" to the viewer at all. They are instead ideas that erupted in the middle of making the film and they weren't processed passed the storyboard phase. So, ironically, the best way the movie could have gone, with the bad part of the movie actually removed, is further accented by "the story that could have been" told to you as if you were reading a book.
Rating: 
Summary: Somewhere in the middle....
Review: I've read some reviews here and everyone seems split on this film: either it's the greatest thing since sliced bread or it's a boring waste of time. I found it to be somewhere in between: good for what it was, but would've been great due to what it could've been. First off, I don't consider this to be a zombie film, it barely passes as a horror film. The film deals with a viral infection and has more in common with Romero's THE CRAZIES than his DEAD films. The infected are also fast moving and remind me of the creatures in Argento's DEMONS. The second half, or last third, reminded me of the horror film DOG SOLDIERS. I liked DOG SOLDIERS somewhat, but that's where I felt this movie 'lost it's way'. See, I enjoyed the desolate feel at the beginning, the survival aspect of the film, the sci-fi(rage virus) meets horror(the infected) dimension of the film. But when they hook up with the soldiers at the base about halfway through the film, I felt it took on an action(machine gun toting soldiers) meets drama(what's gonna happen to the two females in a base full of soldiers) plotline that detracted from the original theme. Of course, some people may prefer the second half as it is more action-packed, and it does have that character drama in it(which more astute viewers can read all sorts of meaning and symbolism into). But personally, I enjoyed the more apocolyptic first half than the Rambo meets 'women in distress' second half. That's why I was disappointed with this film and don't rank it as a great sci-fi/horror film or a classic in general. Good for what it was, but could've/should've been better. Interestingly, on the extras portion of the dvd, the filmmakers have a 'radical alternative ending'(actually, it's a long animated storyboard for the second half and doesn't even include the soldiers subplot at all) that I think would've made for a better film as it concentrates more on the three main characters and their search for a cure and survival. There is a commentary track for this ending and they tell you why they scrapped this idea; but I think with some tweaking, this direction for the film(or some other one) would've been better. But that's just me. As is, it's not the highly original masterpiece others make it out to be nor is it total trash either. Certainly worth a rental to make up your own mind about its merits and shortcomings.
Rating:
Summary: Your Days Are Numbered
Review: The plot of the British Science-Fiction/Horror movie 28 DAYS LATER is not totally original: In the wake of an apocalyptic biological disaster, a handful of uninfected survivors struggle to stay alive as they fight against both monstrous plague victims and an unscrupulous and aggressive military enclave. Indeed, it would not be totally inaccurate to describe this movie as THE OMEGA MAN meets NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD. But unlike its venerable predecessors, 28 DAYS LATER projects such stark honesty and austere realism that it plays with an almost documentary-like believability. The ending is a little more upbeat and mawkish than the previous films--at least the original theatrical ending is; the DVD offers multiple alternate endings, not all of which are happy ones--but overall, 28 DAYS LATER is a much more plausible and satisfying movie. Part of the quality of realism in this movie comes straight from the performances. All of the principal actors, while not enormously famous, are first-rate craftsmen, and they create characters that are true reflections of real-world people who just happen to be in a nightmarish situation. In other words, we recognize these characters as either reflections of ourselves or as portraits of our friends and neighbors, and we therefore identify with their feelings, actions, and reactions. Of course, it also helps that the lines these characters speak ring true. The script is very literate and well researched--in one of the extra features on the DVD, the director and screenwriter talk with some of the scientists, politicians, and sociologists that they interviewed as they developed and refined the story's devastating "plague"--and screenwriter/novelist Alex Garland is masterful at converting ideas into real-world dialogue. Arguably the foremost reason that 28 DAYS LATER plays in such an honest and believable manner is the fact that it was shot totally in digital video. The use of digital video has become quite common for shooting television news stories and TV documentaries, and consequently, the quality of digital color saturation and digital's subliminal image pixellation have become associated with real-life events in the public subconscious. Add to that the relative ease with which digital images can be manipulated and the seamless way in which digital FX can be inserted, and you have the perfect tools for making a fictional story FEEL like non-fiction. No doubt ardent fans of both Science Fiction and Horror will want to add this DVD to their collections. But the script, acting, and overall production values of 28 DAYS LATER are top-notch, and since the gore level and technobabble factors are relatively low, members of any filmgoing demographic will find this movie quite satisfying.
Rating: 
Summary: stupid plot-boring story
Review: I'm not sure why this movie did so well in theaters. Perhaps this was more of an indication of a hunger for movies that are not remakes of older movies/comic books/tv shows than of this movie's quality. But this movie has nothing new to offer and is a typical doomsday flick with a little zombie action thrown in for thrills. It is based on the silly premise that the "rage" virus is transmitted through body fluids and within 10-20 seconds turns the infected person into a violent maniac. Of course, the infected are not so violent that they can't act together in chasing down and killing the noninfected. Its funny how they never attack each other-how convenient. Many others have stated that this movie is scary, but it is not. In fact it is quite boring and the cheap scares are entirely predictable and cliched. There is really not enough substance to justify a full-length movie. Really, how long does it take to tell us about a few people driving across England to meet up with other survivors? The story is stretched out and seems like it was written while shooting, which is further confirmed by the 3 different endings presented on the DVD. Much like the Blair Witch Project, this movie is unpolished, and rather dull. The only positive is that the acting was well done. I would not bother seeing this flick.
Rating: 
Summary: 28 minutes later...
Review: ...I found myself "un"involved & thinking about what I did earlier in the day. After a very boring first 20 minutes I thought that I'd give the movie a few more minutes to pick up. Sadly it didn't pick up enough to hold my attention. I thought the film would have been right up my alley because I love zombie/horror, but it just seemed to take itself way to serious for it's own good. And it's not really a horror film at all. A few chase scenes and some bloody vomit doesn't mean you have a horror film. All and all the biggest problem was that it was overwelmingly dull. 1 star for the chic that hacked up that dude who became infected.
Rating: 
Summary: You'll get the loneliest feeling
Review: Most will loathe it, but for those of you looking for something original, 28 days later is above and beyond the term excellent. It isn't frightening and eerie in the same sense that a slasher flick or ghost movies are scary. The fright herein for myself was the overwhelming feeling of loneliness and imminent doom. In addition though, anyone who tells you that the zombies and the sfx looked laughable is an idiot. The zombies alone will make you pee your pants. The real kicker for me though, and perhaps I'm wrong, is the underlying message that I got from the film. Although I've never heard ANY authority actually utter this, I got the sense that 28 days was actually an anti-war parable for the post 9-11 world in disguise, with many metaphors, like the virus name (rage), and the fact that those 'infected' became zombies (much like unquestioning, blood thirsty, staunch 'war on terror' supporters). See if you pick up on it. And for your own sake, don't watch this film with people who can't handle male nudity.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent film... not for the insipid.
Review: This movie is thoroughly thought provoking and disturbing. If copious amounts of blood and guts is the sort of distraction that is 'Scary' to you, rent Cabin Fever or rubbish of that ilk. The sparing use of gore throughout actually adds to the film. In addition, the way it was shot (with a digital camera) adds to the gritty and dark ambiance. As such, this fine movie is as much a psycholical thriller as it is a horror movie. The -Scariest Movie Ever- it was not but then again, what a great marketing draw aimed at getting gen y-ers in the seats. In addition, I am not surprised the term 'boring' was encountered in other reviews of this film. It is a term frequently used these days by those that would rather be playing x-box or going to the next scream sequel. Furthermore, this is not a 'zombie' flick nor does it claim to be. Therefore, there will be no eating of brains or the reciting of ancient curses. The actual premise of the film, to me, is much more believable: a biological weapons or medical experiment gone awry. Highlights include 1) the protagonist finding his parents and 2) the unsettling resolution after a member of the group is believed to have been infected.
Rating:
Summary: 28 Days... to conceive, script, cast and shoot this film?
Review: Okay.. all the folks who panned the original Blair Witch Project now have a new, and in my opinion, far worthier target for their disdain. To its credit (whether you liked it or not) BWP doesn't try to be any more than it is... a low budget film with no real script and pretty much unknown actors. Sadly, 28 Days Later is exactly the same thing, only it was promoted as the scariest movie since Exorcist and, otherwise, a "brilliant and visionary" film.. Visionary? I think not. Here's what I saw:
A plot that, as correctly mentioned in other reviews, has been done before, many times and much better. As a side note, a friend told me that 28 Days Later is "what Resident Evil, the movie, should have been." After seeing both, I can say that I disagree 120% with that analysis. I don't consider Resident Evil to be the pinnacle of horror movies... but it's *much* better done than 28DL... atleast the zombies actually acted like *zombies*... but I'll get to that. Suffice it to say.. 28 Days Later is, in my opinion, nothing more than another "me-too" zombie horror flick with the whole, obligatory "this is what happens when you mess with Mother Nature" moral built in. Scary. Ha! If a bunch of people wearing orange/red contacts, doused with fake blood who are running around screaming and vomiting up mouths full of more fake blood on their victims, who then - only seconds later - turn into exactly the same blood-spitting screaming and raving lunatic is what you consider scary.. then this movie is for you. Suspenseful or Disturbing? The only part that got any kind of an emotional response out of me is when one of the survivors is brutally hacked down by one their own... I chuckled at that. There were a couple other parts that I could *tell* were engineered to yield an emotional reaction.. they just didn't. All in all... this is a very weak piece of movie-making that, for me anyway, failed to live up to any of what it promised.
Rating:
Summary: Yes this is the scariest Horror movie of all time
Review: That is if you are scared of watching Scooby do, then you should definitely avoid this,
Avoid this movie if you suffer from the following:-
Faint Heart
Loss of breath
Hallucinations
Weak Stomach
High Blood Pressure
Low Blood Pressure
Good Taste
Expecting something Good
Suffer from disappointments
Hey get this was in the top 20 from 100 scariest moments. If you want to watch a real good movie then AVOID THIS (YOU'VE BEEN WARNED)
Rating:
Summary: 28 hours later I wanted a fefund
Review: This has to be the most boring un-interesting movie of all time. There is no violence, no blood and where is the gore? All these positive reviews have they even watched this lame junk, the worst thing about it are the characters, they are so dull. Even when the so called zombies attack nothing happens, some quick editing and camera movements, the end result someone laying on the floor a mist all the darkness and only arms or legs visable. Take my advise and dont bother with this because it's not even worth 28 minutes of your time.
|
