Rating: 
Summary: Excellent
Review: I rented this movie with low expectations, considering how many times I'd been disappointed over what could have been a great horror movie. However, within the first 15 minutes, my fears were assuaged. What the film-makers have accomplished with this film is nothing short of extraordinary. They have managed to provide gruesome and grisly entertainment as well as a deeper underlying meaning.
While the "Last Man on Earth" scenario has been played repetitiously for moviegoing audiences for ages, it almost seems new in this film. The characters are wonderfully played by a cast of virtual unknowns, which seems to further the whole isolationist theme. The background and incidental music, while admittedly weird, do not seem out of place in this undeniably weird film.
Of course many nay-sayers complain that the movie ends leaving too many unanswered questions. That, I believe is the whole purpose of the film. Many a viewer will leave this movie with questions racing through their heads, and if they do, the film-makers have succeeded. This movie was made to ask questions.
And in a time when such horrible, pointless films are being made today, better to leave questions unanswered than to have never asked any questions at all.
Rating: 
Summary: great ideas, not fully developed
Review: Getting a storyline for a movie that will actually be terrifying is a tough thing to do today, but this movie does it fairly well. The highlight of this movie is not the in the main characters, who are boring and often annoying, but in the ZOMBIES!! The zombies just look awesome, but the best thing about them is that they are damn FAST. In other zombie flicks, the zombies are slow moving creatures, which makes you wonder how the main characters ever get caught. In this one however, the zombies are FAST and VICIOUS - the people who are still alive after the plague barely have a chance to survive because the zombies are just too quick. Although the end of the movie is a little bit disappointing after all the previous action, I would suggest buying or renting the DVD and watching all the other endings to see just how far the directors and writers came. They went from a ridiculously implausible ending to one that is actually feasible, albeit boring.
Rating:
Summary: Superfly's Review
Review: This movie was average. This was one of the best zombie movies I've seen in a while but the movie had a weak plot. I'm thankful that it wasn't just running around and shooting the undead. What really blew me away were the alternate endings on the disc. I boosted my rating one star for the special features(Yay). To end my review own this DVD.
Rating:
Summary: You just don't get it.
Review: We know you are mad because 28 Days Later isn't really a "horror" movie, but it got the review "SCARY AS HELL" for a reason. The zombies and killing isn't suppose to be the scary part of the movie. It's giving the viewers the illusion of waking up after an accident...and having nothing, and have no idea what is going on, and nothing to live for. The movies scary because it's showing you how a man, a father and his teenage daughter, and a woman are fighting to survive in a world overthrown with a virus they can't fight. Is a movie "good" or "scary" if it's horror genre is slasher, like Freddy? Pointless killing of teenagers to scare teen couples while they hold each other in their parents living rooms? Wouldn't it be a little scarier to wake up and have nothing. Your environment is beautiful, yet run down. You meet a group of people like you...trying to survive the disease. This movie is brilliant, and I loved it. Shots of the group driving through an empty country side is plain amazing and beautiful. I really like the scene where the father is looking and sees the horses running. That is one of my favorite scenes from a movie. This movie is beautiful, yet horrifying in a way that most "horror" films don't come close to acheiving. This is the best movie of the year, and is one of my favorites ever. This is a must see if your tired of these lame horror films with psycho killers chasing teenage girls ... This is, perhaps, the scarriest movie ever made. It seems only a few people what the point of the movie is.
Rating: 
Summary: effective atmosphere, derivative story
Review: "28 Days Later" could easily be the fourth installment in George Romero's "Living Dead" trilogy - only this time the zombies have a bit more get up and go to them. When Jim wakes up out of a coma one day, he discovers that not only is he the only person in the hospital but virtually the only person left in the entire city of London. After wandering through the deserted city streets for awhile, he eventually runs into a couple of stalwart survivors who inform him that 28 days earlier a plague began sweeping across the planet - catalyzed by the release of some infected test monkeys - causing people to turn into mindless killing machines and passing on the virus to their victims through their blood. Although "28 Days Later" is little more than a rip-off of those earlier zombie classics, director Danny Boyle does bring a certain level of artistry to his handling of the material, particularly with his apocalyptic visions of a London and an English countryside utterly bereft of human beings. There's a real end-of-the-world eeriness to much of what we see on the screen, a product more of suggestiveness than of blatant visualization. Indeed, Boyle shows the zombies as little as possible, a wise move for a couple of reasons: first, because leaving a threat unspecified allows the audience to use its imagination, thereby heightening the suspense and tension, and, second, because, quite frankly, these fleet-footed zombies simply aren't all that terrifying when we get a close-up view of them (certainly not on a level with Romero's lumbering - and truly horrifying - originals). And that, perhaps, is the biggest complaint I have against the film. For all the impressiveness of the visuals and the tone, "28 Days Later" just isn't a very scary film in the long run. The plotting is derivative, the characters not very well developed, and the poorly staged final showdown more laughable than frightening. Like two many horror films, this one suffers from a weak third act, with the anticipatory windup more impressive than the delivery. There's a lot to admire and recommend in "28 Days later." But it just doesn't get under the skin the way the best horror films do - and the nightmares just don't come.
Rating:
Summary: Not a zombie movie; just a great film.
Review: I and one of my most nitpicky friends went to see this, and when we came out, neither one of us could find a single thing wrong with it. That everyone involved with this movie actually cared about what they were doing, from the director all the way down to the caterers, shows through.
The plot is not revolutionary; what makes this a great movie (I want to call it the best movie of the year, but Last Samuari and Return of the King do make me hesitate...) is the incredible way in which it's done. It is an astounding execution of an isolation drama (rather than a zombie movie, which it is bizarrely called). The acting is solid and sincere. The music is so subtle that you are barely conscious of it at times, but it creates and complements the moods of the film wonderfully. The grainy quality of the DV cinematography also puts you very much in the film with the characters. Nothing looks crystal-clear, nor perfect, nor certain--just as it would be if we awoke to find the world we knew in ruins. In a certain sense, it evokes the quality of memory, and seems far more real for it.
This is not perfect social commentary, and it doesn't aspire to be. Jim is not a perfect person, he's just Jim--the everyman. The question this movie asks is simply "What would you do?" and it answers it in a way that doesn't preach, but merely makes you think.
Buy it, watch it. You won't regret it.
Rating:
Summary: False Advertising...Not Scary
Review: If "In the Bedroom" was a zombie movie, it might look something like this. I applaud the director for his goregeous cinematography in many areas, such as the panoramic views of the deserted cities and countryside. Also, I enjoyed the documentary style. The soundtrack does not overwhelm the action and is not overly manipulative, which is certainly refreshing in this day and age. The characters are witty and likeable. However, the movie simply isn't scary. In fact, it comes dangerously close to "feel-good" territory. And while there's nothing wrong with feeling all warm and fuzzy at times -- especially at the end -- the sense of dread that was advertised is entirely missing. By no means is this a bad film, but I am diappointed that so many critics chose to misrepresent it. Ultimately, the film is a good change of pace and perspective, but I don't see it having much more value than that.
Rating:
Summary: 28 days is more than enough time for society to fall!!
Review: This movie is very well made. The direction is disturbing, the acting is decent, the script is also very good. The plot is a little far fetched, but this is a movie. There are always discrpencies in movies as oppossed to reality. And do you know why that is? It is because this is a movie, not reality. Pointing out little details that are wrong or inconsestant obviously makes some reviewers feel smart and special, hurray for you!!! Maybe I can join the fun and be smart like you! In this moive there were no cars clogging the streets, Why? It seems to me that if a disease was wiping out the population people would try to flee in cars, the cars would get in epic traffic jams, and then would be abondened on the roads. In this movie the streets are empty. Look I just found a discrepincy, something that does not make sense in a movie. WOW!! I am so smart. Let me congragulate myself, I feel so superior now, hurray for me!!! This is the kind on nonensense that reviewers who do not like this movie write, but that is o.k. because they are worthless fools anyway. The "infected" are great villins, puking blood onto others to infect them, very oringinal. The scene where the black girl hacks up the guy because he got infected was amazing, sick but fascinating. This is what people have to do to survive now in this nighmare world. I thought that a lot of reviewers overestimated the social messages of this movie, there were some but they act like this movie was nothing but a trojan horse by which the directors snuck thier political views into the film. I thought that the social messages were but a sidebar, the point of the movie was to tell a scary story about a world gone to hell, and in this they were successful. The music was haunting, and the transformation from a regular person to a "infected" was grotesue. However, just becuase most people have become infected does not mean that those who are not infected are all good or friendly. Horny soldiers by themselves in such circumstances could very well do what they did in this movie. It seems to me that a lot of people do not like this movie because it is honest, and thus it contradicts their brainwashed mentality which is built on a foundation of lies. Given the chance soldiers would not become rapists? Espically in a post-apocolptyic setting where there is no authority beyond their own desires and power? The soldiers are the law now, they are the last remnet of the government and their power is now unchecked because they have to answer to no one. Given those circumstances soldiers would rape, as would men in general. Animalistic desires which are constantly held in check most of the time are now given free reign, power corrupts, regardless if it is a soldier, a priest, or even a bleeding heart liberal we are discussing. Another reviewer suggusts that we come back to reality, sorry pal, you are the one that is deluded if you honestly think that what the soldiers did in this movie is that far fetched. Just look at what soldiers have done to women throughout history even when there was someone to punish them for their actions! Now imagine what they would do if they were never held accountable! It is idiotic statements like the ones made by that reviewer and others that really make me wonder what they are thinking. It is obvious they are in denial and live in some sort of fairytale universe where authority is never corrupt or evil. You guys should stick to GI Joe cartoons or FOX NEWS. The social aspect of this movie is really only a complimentary part of the plot, yet some reviewers have fixated on it. This is a sign that the social observations have touched a nerve. This movie is not nearly as bad as you portray it to be, espcially the reviewer named Ian from England. Why is it that every reviewer from England is arrogant, obnoxious, condencinding and a total jackass. "this might have gone over American's heads", wow! you are so sophisticated in England, so much smarter than everyone else. Please!!! Most of you people are nothing but tame, exploited establishment intellectuals that jusitify the status quo. You are the kind of people that would be singing the praises of Hitler if you lived in Nazi Germany, and singing the praises of Stalin if you lived in Soviet Russia. England is nothing but one big prison, cameras everywhere, watching everyone, but that is fine by you right. Sure you are an independent thinker, yeah right you are nothing but a brainwashed fool!
Rating: 
Summary: Scary? No way! / Boring? Definately!
Review: Wow, was this movie a disappointment! On the DVD box it is suggested that this is a "terrifying film." Try boring and un-scary instead. It is "terrifyingly bad" and shouldn't even be considered a "horror" film at all.
Rating:
Summary: AWFUL!!!!
Review: When I first saw that this movie was coming out on DVD, I was excited and wanted to buy it. The reviews on the commercials said that it was one of the "Greatest Films of the Summer!" Let me tell you, it wasn't. I'm glad that I rented it before I bought it.
It was the dumbest movie I have ever seen. The first 1/2 hour of the movie is really boring. Just this guy wandering around an empty city. BORING! This film also had really terrible picture and sound quality. It was all grainy, it looked as though it had been shot in the 70's. The acting is very terrible as well. I would definitely not recommend this movie to anyone. If you want to see a movie with infected zombies, I suggest that you watch Resident Evil. This is much more exciting than 28 Days Later.
|
