Rating: 
Summary: say you love indie filmmaking
Review: Boyle is a true filmmaker. On par with other new generation directors as Kassovitz, Refn and Besson he reinvented the European filmaking scene with his creative and imaginative aesthetics. He took a wrong turn and got lost for a moment in
the Hollywood burocratic persona exploitation but then decided to go back to his roots. He proved he is indie at heart and still is a talented visionary. Like all true film geeks he was probably raised on genre films such as cannibal, extreme and zombie movies. And to shoot a zombie movie was indeed his kept away secret for a long time. With digital revolutionizing the industry and the filmmaking mediun as a whole, he made this for the new generation of inspiring filmmakers so to realize how little it really takes to make your child dreams in filmmaking reality...
Rating: 
Summary: Empty England
Review: "28 Days Later" enchants with a marvelous score (John Murphy) and dazzling photography. The scenes of a deserted and absolutely still London are unforgettable.A group of animal rights activists invade a laboratory to free the animals and save them from experimentation. The animals are infected with a virus that causes rage and follows with a horrible death. The animals show their appreciation by viciously attacking their liberators and running amok. 28 days later, Jim (Cillian Murphy) awakens from a coma, naked in a London hospital. Disentangling himself from support devices, he sees a scene of disarray and not a soul in sight. He calls out to absolute silence. He wanders the empty streets becoming increasingly disoriented and terrified. When he is attacked by a group of infected people, two hard-bitten non-infected survivors save him. They get a recorded radio message supposedly from the Royal Army telling them to get to Manchester where a vaccine is available. They have a harrowing journey (any reader of Stephen King's "The Stand" could have told them to Stay Out Of That Tunnel!) and finally arrive to find a quasi-military group led by a half-mad Major with strong overtones of Colonel Kurtz in "Heart of Darkness." They are quartered in a beautiful English country home that is properly spooky. The group finally overcomes the "army" in some highly unlikely encounters and the movie ends on an optimistic note. Cillian Murphy as Jim gives a highly nuanced performance. He is by no means an action hero. Jim is a nice, not overly bright born follower who reluctantly has bravery forced upon him. He firmly keeps the audience on edge, proving to us over and over again he is no Terminator or Robo Cop coming to the rescue. The major problem with the movie is it loses emphasis when it leaves London behind and descends to a more mundane level. Minor flaws are the opening scenes at the laboratory. There should have been Level 4 precautions dealing with such a lethal virus and airtight security. The activists entered with the ease of visiting a pet store. Another worrisome thing to me was exactly how long did the infected people live after coming down with the virus? They weren't "zombies" because they weren't dead, but they certainly did a lot of running around! In spite of a few problems, I recommend the movie, though not to the faint of heart.
-sweetmolly- Amazon Reviewer
Rating:
Summary: Whoa...
Review: Wow. Mix Resident Evil and Dawn Of The Dead together with some freaky ... zombies, and you get this movie. The plot wasn't really too horrifying, nor the sequence, but it was the zombies. I saw it in the movie theather, sitting in the front row. The makeup was excellent, and the Raimi-ish camera (when the zombies chased them) was pretty awesome. Worth the money to go see it.
Rating: 
Summary: Strong Start, Hard Fall
Review: This movie has a very interesting premise: Humans become infected with a virus, "Rage", which causes them to hunt down and bite other humans so as to transmit the disease. On second thought, that's not a good premise at all. The movie opens in post-apocolyptic London, with empty streets and eerie flyers pinned to walls of distressed families looking for each other. The first half an hour or so follows the main character, Jim, around London looking for answers to the ostensible question: "Where is everyone?" Well, for those are going to see the movie, I don't want to spoil it. The footage is fascinating initially, and the viewer is forced to stop and think about how completely empty the reality of that circumstance would be. However, it doesn't get much better than that, and soon becomes a senseless zombie thriller. The "uninfected" turn against each other, the zombies rise, etc. etc. I had high expectations for this movie as I am somewhat familiar with the writer Alex Garland (who wrote the story this movie is based on, and "The Beach" which I believe was done by the same director as well). Both "The Beach" and "28 Days Later" reveal Garland's social anxiety, as both show how humans essentially cannot cooperate and always end up ruining things for each other. "The Beach" does a much better job at this, for the characters are placed in a situation which is opportune for cooperation, but soon becomes the stuff of Sartre's "No Exit." The hardest aspect of this movie to deal with is that it looked to be the salvation of the theater for this summer, but in my opinion, turned out to be a total dudd.
Definitely not a film I would recommend.
Rating:
Summary: Real Good Science Fiction/Morality Tale
Review: We went to this movie with another couple: they disliked it, we thought it was great. I think a lot has to do with expectations. This is not a horror movie, even though there are some genuinely horrific moments. I would classify it as a moody science fiction, and found it very satisfying in that I still think about it. There are touches of Omega Man, Day of the Triffids, Lord of the Flies and other classics. This does not make it a rip-off, but a thought-provoking reference. Who is wrong: the simplistic animal rights activists, or the researchers dabbling in risky experiemnts? There are references to experimentation later in the film as well. As far as the sex-crazed military are concerned, I think the realization that life as we knew it might be over can affect a man's thinking perhaps even more than the number of days he may have gone w/o sex. Rather than an anti-military statement, I think it is a statement of the human psyche. This whole film dealt wonderfully with the questions of our humanity and civilization and how little it takes to tear away our fragile structures. I would recommend it to people who enjoyed the afore-mentioned sci-fi classics-it should appeal the most to them.
Rating: 
Summary: Humanity's heart of darkness
Review: "28 Days Later" is a rare breed of film in that it attempts to be both art house flick and horror movie rolled into one. Perhaps a bit surprisingly, the film for the most part succeeds in this undertaking. It is a horror film that is driven more by suspense and psychological terror than gore, which is refreshing for someone like me, who has never been interested in the typical slasher horror film genre. "28 Days Later" also sets itself apart from the standard horror movie by actually taking the time to develop its characters, giving them background and motivation for their actions as well as developing a sense of sympathy in the viewer for them. The film is not without its flaws though, and sometimes suffers from a fairly obvious lack of originality in plot and subject matter. However, all in all the film does work when seen as a new take on subject matter that has been presented many times before.
The director effectively uses low lighting throughout the film to enhance the sense of claustrophobia and impending terror. His use of quick camera movements and close-ups also convey a sense of the frantic and chaotic while at the same time bringing the viewer into very close contact with the events on the screen. The crowning achievement of directorial prowess in the film is without a doubt the breathtakingly eerie shots of an absolutely deserted London.
"28 Days Later" explores many facets of the dark side of the human psyche, from the obvious use of the "infected", who are driven by mindless rage, to some of the seedier characters we meet later in the film, who are driven by more complicated and selfish motivations. We are faced with the question of what is more evil, the mindless rage of animal instinct, or the well thought out forced control of people for personal gain? Also, is it greed that pushes these characters to attempt control, or simply the overwhelming drive to satisfy human needs? When we see certain characters driven by such selfish motivations even in the face of such a crisis situation, we must face the question of whether or not human nature itself is inherently good or evil.
"28 Days Later" finds its strength in its ability to present such intriguing subplots while still providing a satisfying dose of suspense and terror.
Rating:
Summary: not near as good as they hype it up to be
Review: After seeing the previews i was really wanting to see this. I was disappointed. I dont think it is scary in the least. This entire plot has been done before. It totally ripped of an old 80's horror moive (think it was called year of the comet) where most the world is killed looking at a comet, a few people are left, they pick up a radio transmission, and follow it to its source to find out it wanst what the expected, sound familiar? Anyways, very slow movie, boring in alot of spots, not enough creatures in the film, and they arnt even the focus of the movie. Deffinitly not enough gore. This is as good as a twighlight zone flick, but not movie material.
Rating:
Summary: it was better then the scary movies i seen
Review: 28 DAYS LATER was scary but not like my heart was pumbing so fast.dont get me wrong it was scary, but its better if u watch it at home on dvd with alot of friends, thats wat makes the movie scarier. If u watch it with 1 friend its not scary its boring trust me i watched so many scary movies with my best friend and the movie [stunk].when i watched the ring one time with alot of my friends i was scared cuz ur friends try to scare you during the movie.If u like movies where the charcters have to have survive then watch 28 days later.
but if i where u i would get on dvd and bring alot of friends over watch it in the dark ur gonna get scared.
Rating:
Summary: Exciting, intense, gut-wrenching... and a complete mess
Review: (spoilers) The problem with trying to make a realistic (believable) horror film is that, when you push the boundaries of feasability, you end up with big holes in the very foundation of the movie. The beginning of 28 Days later does not involve any supernatural forces, undead, or infractions of the laws of physical science. Instead, 28 Days Later is based on the all too believable premise that a secret (government-created?) virus has been released accidentally by some well-intentioned but misguided animal rights activists. All too believable, except that it seems unlikely that such a ferocious virus would be contained in a room with less security than Nieman-Marcus. When our hero, Jim, awakens from a month-long coma, he finds himself naked and completely alone. He leaves the hospital, probably assuming he's in a dream, and tries to find someone.. anyone. What he finds are people infected with the virus, which turns them into zombie-type creatures, and he begins to run. Luckily, he runs into two of the only unifected people in the city, who just so happen to be perfectly happy to save his life. Then there are a series of bloody encounters with infected people. All of these scenes are edited in a disoriented fasion, presumably to make the experience more unsettling for the viewer. The group then drives out to Manchester, where they are hoping to find a rumoured vaccine for the infection. However, what they find is a bizarre military installation. At this point the movie takes an entirely new tack, and new dangers are presented. An unlikely series of events leads to Jim rescuing his two partners from the snares of a fascist-leaning army, in the process of which he releases an infected man into the house where the two women are held captive. Only a film script could find a way to protect these two unarmed women while the rest of the residents of the home perish. The first half of this movie I found incredibly depressing. If it had been some b-movie popcorn flick, it wouldn't have affected me the same, but the dark tone of this film gets under your skin immediately. The second half is rather silly and at times senseless. All in all, this is a inspired but disjointed film -- recommended to fatalists and fans of british accents.
Rating: 
Summary: NOT SCARY!!
Review: This movie was very boring and not even close to scary. The only thing scary about this movie was how bad it was. I wanted to be scared but this movie could not deliver! Please do not see it unless you feel like wasting money and time to see a really stupid movie. I could have made a better movie in 22 days!!
| 
