Rating: 
Summary: The Omega Man takes a "Stand" against the Living Dead
Review: I watched this movie on Halloween, hoping for a scary expereince. I didn't get one; "28 Days Later" rates about 2 points out of 5 on the old scare-ometer. But is it a good movie? Well, sorta, but it's VERY derivative. The first third, where Jim wanders around an empty London, borrows heavily from "The Omega Man" -- which in turn borrowed from "The World, The Flesh and The Devil." The middle feels a lot like the midsection of "The Stand" -- complete with the drive through a dark tunnel. And the final third is like a hyped-up version of the "Living Dead" movies, with "the infected" running amok. If you haven't seen any of the movies I mention here you'll probably find "28 Days Later" more gripping than I did. And if you HAVE seen them, you can play "spot the borrowed reference" as you go along. Worth watching, but not in the same class as its predecessors.
Rating: 
Summary: Superb blend of horror and post-apocalyptic fiction
Review: It's very difficult to make a horror film today; audiences are inured to violence and bloodshed, and computer effects have made the exceptional seem mundane. Moreover, most movies in this genre are horribly derivative, stealing from their predecessors rather than paying homage. Happily, neither of these things are true of "28 Days Later" a film which actually transcends the genre in which it is classified. The premise is a familiar one, a terrible plague sweeps through England, leaving the survivors to come to grips with a drastically altered world. However, from the beginning, ""28 Days Later" defies convention. The film opens with animal rights activists ignoring the warnings of a researcher that his chimp subjects are infected with "rage" and liberating the animals. It quickly becomes clear when the first chimp is released that there is something drastically wrong. The next shot, however, is twenty-eight days later, which finds the main character, Jim, coming out of a coma in a locked hospital room. Thus, the viewer, like Jim, is thrown into an abruptly and mysteriously empty landscape. As Jim travels a deserted London, the viewer is treated to a series of remarkable images: piles of money blowing around, cars abandoned in the middle of intersections, newspapers proclaiming disaster, and most poignantly, a message board clearly inspired by those that appeared around the WTC following 9/11. However, it is Jim's first encounter with another living person that defines this movie. Jim, understandably wanders into a church, where he encounters a deranged priest, who within seconds he is forced to bludgeon. Thus, from the very beginning, the director, Danny Boyle, shows that social convention is abandoned in his world; if a priest can become a source of danger, no one is safe. The other compelling aspect of this encounter is the illustration of what this rage disease does to its victims. Essentially, it turns them into zombies, intent on mayhem and destruction. However, unlike zombies of the past, these movie creations are terrifyingly fast and lethal, rather than lumbering and vaguely befuddled. Thus, as Jim encounters other survivors, and they set out in the hope of safety at a military base, they are haunted by fellow humans, infected with the absolute worst in our human nature. To say more would spoil the plot, but the film offers a host interesting elements to consider. First off, the actors are relative unkowns, so there is an "everyman" quality about the characters that is immensely compelling. They aren't brilliant scientists or ex-commandos, just everyday people struggling to survive in a world gone mad. The core characters are the aforementioned Jim, Selena, Frank, and Frank's daughter Hannah. The only actor that would be readily recognizable to most people would be Brendan Gleeson, who played Hamish in "Braveheart", who does a superb job as Frank in this film. The range of emotions and issues that these characters deal with is daunting. Aside from mere survival (which is all the more treacherous due to the absence of firearms in Britain), they face survivor's guilt, and a world in which they must kill infected priests, children and even friends. Even more compelling, however, is another nod to the post-9/11 world: what happens when in fighting the enemy we take on their worst characteristics. Is survival an end unto itself, or does their need to be something more? In drawing on these themes Boyle and screenplay writer Alex Garland, have drawn from numerous influences. Matheson's "I Am Legend" is apparent in a world where normal humans have become the minority and must kill the new majority to survive. There is also a tunnel scene that is strongly reminiscent of Larry Underwood's escape from Manhattan in King's "The Stand". Furthermore, the conclusion of the films looks to have been strongly influenced by Conrad's "Heart of Darkness" in general, and Coppola's "Apocalypse Now" specifically. Finally, the conclusion also puts me in mind of the end of Burgess' "A Clockwork Orange"; although very different in terms so setting and scene, both speak to the short, albeit brutal, lifespan of rage. All that said, I should emphasize that these influences are never ripped off or copied. Rather, in the finest artistic tradition, they are acknowledged as influences and then modified into something new. With all this drama and tension, one might suspect that "28 Days Later" is unbearably serious, but nothing could be further from the truth. The comic relief is appropriate, timely and intelligent. In particular, there is one scene inside a grocery store that had me laughing out loud. Technically, the disc is superb. The film was shot using digital camcorders, so it's never going to have the resolution of a traditional release, and above and beyond that fact, some shots have been left deliberately grainy so as to produce a nostalgic effect. That said, the picture looks as good or better than when I saw the film in a theater. The sound is also excellent and is used effectively throughout the film. Like "The Exorcist" much of the movie is shown without a soundtrack, so when music is present, it heightens the tension immeasurably. The disc also includes an excellent selection of extra features. There are three alternate endings, two of which were filmed and one which was storyboarded and then narrated by Garland and Boyle. There are also several deleted scenes, all of which feature excellent commentary from Garland and Boyle. Finally, there is an interesting making of documentary; in addition to the usual interview with cast and crew, it offers some insight into the nature of infectious disease, and comments on the possibility of a "28 Days Later" type scenario actually occurring. "28 Days Later" is a film of remarkable power, even as it offers a unique horror/post-apocalyptic tale, it explores our humanity and our deepest fears at the dawn of the twenty-first century. It is the rare film that lives up to its hype and is not to be missed. Jake Mohlman
Rating:
Summary: no fear
Review: If your plan was to get that little chill down the back of your spine, pass here and find any other b rated movie. The film looks excellent no doubt and the music is also high on the list. The first two, three minutes are well done till the main actor gets involved. which makes you wonder how and why. Once involved the first ten minutes or so your thinking yeah this is going to be great! Then the let down. Just not enough scares to keep you interested. Some good actors with some big let downs makes this just a so so film with a lousy ending. The extra endings on the dvd are worth a look and one storyboard would have actually made it a much better movie in my opinion. wait till this ends up in the bargin bin and then have a look when your really really bored.
Rating:
Summary: Brilliant post-modern horror flick
Review: So what do you do if you want to make an apocalyptic horror flick in the post-modern, post-cold-war world? For one thing you might populate the Earth with dragons, ala "Reign of Fire," or you loose zombies upon the Earth as we find here in "28 Days Later." I was engrossed from the start. This film is the essence of ground-breaking cinema. From the stark and innovative atmosphere to the witty and gritty dialogue, I found the film completely convincing and riveting. Cillian Murphy is a revelation as is the rest of this cast of "no names." It helps immensely when the cast represents a tabula rasa as it were of faces, personalities and affects. This film ranks high on my list of post-apocalyptic thrillers, but it is so full of twists and turns that it truly cannot be easily compared with another films in the genre. Kudos all the way around!
Rating:
Summary: some love it, some loathe it
Review: This movie is, in a word, terrifying. You will be terrified, too, if you enjoy well-plotted action and suspense, thinking during your movie-going experience, realism on the big screen, and suspsense over blatant gore. You will likely *not* enjoy this movie if you prefer the George Romero-style of horror that zeros in on the undead tearing flesh, bone, and blood from their living victims as they (same victims) scream and writhe agonies of death throes. I can understand why some folks do not go for "28 Days Later." But this movie had me creeped out for many days after I first watched it. The DVD extras are all great bonuses, too, from the extra endings (even the one that is only a narrated storyboard) to the short "making of" feature, which is not really a "making of" feature! It's more like a "how likely are viruses to be the end of the world?" feature. All in all, a great package.
Rating: 
Summary: Money isn't worth the hype ...
Review: I am a huge fan of zombie movies and apocolyptic films. I love all the old originals - Night of the Living Dead, Return of the Living Dead, Army of Darkness, Evil Dead, Resident Evil, Omega Man etc. There isn't one made I haven't seen. These movies have redeeming features, either due to macbre humor psychological suspense, or just plain fright. 28 days has NONE of these qualities. The most enjoyable part of the film is the first 20 minutes which sets a fairly believable scene of destruction in England. After that - it goes downhill quickly. If you get this movie expecting a George Romero clone you will be very dissapointed. There isn't even a scene where someone is assaulted or chased by a huge shambling mob. The biggest might be 10 people vs. 4. What kind of zombie movie doesn't have 100's to 1,000's of shambling hoardes running through it??? What's worse, the majority of deleted scences and even the "radical alternative ending" would have made the movie better, but none were included as the director thought they wouldn't have helped tell the story. And the "infected"? Hey lemme see a few of them up close foaming at the mouth. Instead one is left with the desire to slap the camerman around so he'll hold still long enough to get a good look at the infected. Believe me when I tell you the most redeeming feature this movie has is as a drink coaster for your coffee table so you can watch a decent horror film. Despite that many reviewers indicate that some of us can't appreciate the artistic quality of the film because we "just don't get it", supposedly due to a lapse in intelligence - I would say "Poppycock!!!" The film is mindless drivel, the plot predictable, the acting terrible, and character development worse. Save your money - watch Omega Man or a George Romero marathon.
Rating:
Summary: You'll Either Love it or Hate it
Review: In case you didnt know, this movie is about a lethal virus called rage (makes the person infected in a constant state of savage anger) that has basically obliterates England and only few are left uninfected. I am not usually scared by movies. Sure, Ill jump here and there at a loud sound or sudden scary image, but in general, I tend not to check the backseat of my car, nor look under my bed and in my closet at night. While watching this film, I wasnt too overly scared, but there were a few good frights and shocks. However, behind the all the horror a look into human behavior and the subconscious was being presented. In the end, I found this the most intriguing and preserving quality of the film. But first things first... The cinemetography is breathtaking. From the astonishing shots of a deserted London set against the hazy sky, to the beautiful English landscape with the rows of flowers and endless miles of green, I was definitely captivated. Most of the film was shot with a digital camcorder, as well, providing an extremely effective gritty feeling to the movie. Some parts almost looked like a documentary, making various scenes pretty creepy, kind of like the poor film quality that made the original Texas Chainsaw Massacre so horrific (it could have been a cannibal's home videos). The acting I thought was also very well done, although I have never heard of a majority of the talent showcased here. Now, onto the reason why this movie is just that good... Each of our four road trip passengers represented a different human emotion, therefore representing a different goal and solution. Selena, for example, was very cold, cared only about surviving, and showed little feeling. Frank gave us the laughs in tough times, along with the fatherly care and guidance. Jim obeyed the laws and believed there was always hope and loved the comfort of others. Hannah provided the logic in the times of erratic behavior and self doubt. Most of the soldiers represented the need for an immediate solution and a future thanks to the arrival of women, since rebuilding a decimated country requires people. Conflict is inevitable, especially when everyone is trying to survive. Every character occured a personal change in this movie, and many were subtle but all were important. Selena showed a great deal of emotion and motherly love toward Hannah, which caused her to lose some of her original tough-as-nails disposition. She develops a little thing for Jim, too, but that was expected.The extended ending showed she still had a strong side, though. Frank lost his temper and his hope at a time when it was needed. Hannah toughend up, like when she picked up the gun and exited down the hall in the extended ending (the better one, too), probably because she looked up to Selena. The most vivd transformation, however, was by our bicycle boy Jim. He originally spoke of there always being a government and a law, but he ended up taking both into his hands with brutal results by the film's ending. Jim's actions also illustrated the selfish actions of humans and how we put ourselves before society, the great lengths we will go to for the ones we love, and the shot in the arm a small shred of hope can bring. I know a lot of viewers expected a super scary and frightening movie since it was marketed as one, and Im sure they were a bit disappointed, but looking at the film from a different angle really brings out its true beauty behind those blood red eyes. The DVD has a couple alternate endings, and like I said the extended theatrical ending is quality and I thought should have been the original, but it is only a minor flaw in an otherwise nearly flawless film. As you can probably tell, I loved this. I hope you do and will, too.
Rating:
Summary: A Little Horror, a Little Philosophy, and A Lot of Blood.
Review: A group of animal rights activists unleash a deadly virus when they attempt to free infected chimpanzees from a primate research facility. 28 days later, Jimmy (Cillian Murphy) awakes in his hospital bed to find himself alone. The entire city of London seems at first to be deserted. Unfortunately, it hasn't been entirely abandoned: most of the remaining population are infected humans whom the virus has transformed into homicidal maniacs in a constant state of rage. Jimmy encounters a few remaining sane individuals: Selena (Naomie Harris), a fiercely independent woman who won't hesitate to do anything that might enable her to survive, and Frank (Brendan Gleeson) and his daughter Hannah (Megan Burns), whose close relationship has given them a less cynical outlook. Together they set out to find the source of a continual radio broadcast, hoping they will find safety and other uninfected humans. But as the saying goes, you should be careful what you wish for. "28 Days Later" is not so much a horror movie in the traditional sense as it is a gruesome philosophical drama. There is a lot of slaughter and a great deal of blood. There is only one scene that I found disturbingly violent, but the film is grisly enough to merit a warning that sensitive persons should avoid it. Blood and guts don't actually seem to be the point of the film, though. It's about the rage that dwells within human beings, and it's a philosophical treatise on the nature of violence. Balancing the obligations of a horror film with those of a broad social commentary is challenging, and I don't think that "28 Days Later" quite succeeds. I found the philosophical aspect of the film to be ridiculously simplistic. And I don't think that it creates enough suspense to be a great horror film. "28 Days Later" was shot on digital video to conserve time and money, and it looks it. It's ugly, but that's suitable to the gritty environments in which the story takes place. In conclusion, "28 Days Later" gives the audience a little horror, a little philosophy, and a lot of blood. It isn't bad, but there isn't enough to recommend it either. The DVD: You can choose English or Spanish subtitles. Bonus features include: deleted scenes; a "making of" documentary featuring interviews with the cast, director Danny Boyle, and some paranoid talk about pandemics; a gallery of still photographs, with commentary, taken by the film's still photographer, many of which are quite good; a gallery of Polaroids taken during production for continuity purposes; theatrical trailers; animated storyboards from the film's UK website; and a music video. I recommend the still photograph gallery.
Rating:
Summary: 28 Days Later: Silent Earth of the Living Omega Dogs
Review: During the first half hour of "28 Days Later" I was ecstatic. This, I thought, was precisely the way the "Resident Evil" movie SHOULD have been done. So engrossed was I in it's faux-low-budget style, I didn't even mind that it was just about literally another filmed version of Matheson's "I Am Legend" (previously adapted as "The Omega Man") crossed with Craig Harrison's "The Quiet Earth" (later adapted by Geoff Murphy under the same title). But then I started to get restless, noticing more and more James Horneresqe direct rips from "Dawn of the Dead", "Night of the Living Dead" and even the substandard "Day of the Dead". Yes, I slowly realized that this movie didn't contain a single, original thought. Add to this the incredibly senseless idiocy of the film's hero Jim, who repeatedly gets himself in inanely deadly situations only to escape through sheer dumb luck, and you get a stupendously infuriating movie. Then there's the film's visual style. Though Boyle does allow the digital fluff to somewhat defile his otherwise impressively potent post-apocalyptic setting, some of the early zombie scenes were indeed undeniably effective. Unfortunately, though, he nauseatingly overuses that Saving Private Ryan shutter-strobe effect to cover the disappointing lack of actual gore scenes. He prevents us from getting a good look at anything, not unlike Paul Anderson did in his disastrous "Resident Evil". In it's second half, the film suddenly turns into Peckinpah's "Straw Dogs", with Jim in the Dustin Hoffman role, defending his girlfriend Selena from sex-starved British soldiers, who surprisingly turn out the be the real villains of the film (incidentally, this also closely resembles Romero's underrated "The Crazies"). Now, despite the fact that Jim was earlier established as a complete and utter imbecile, he is somehow able to perfectly predict and control the behavior of the surviving zombies, which he uses as preposterous weapons against the soldiers. I kid you not! In the film's third half, we're actually supposed to be rooting for the zombies as they violently slaughter soldier after soldier, including uninvolved innocents who just happened to be serving with the three rapists. The ending is so eerily similar to "Straw Dogs" that I couldn't help being revolted (not by the violence, but by the plagarism and its implications, considering Peckinpah's original intentions). Plus, the British soldiers are complete idiots, actually deciding to leave the safe perimeter of their base and enter the woods JUST TO KILL JIM! Couldn't they have just shot him in a remote part of the base and added his body to the already existing pile of zombies? But that wouldn't have given him the chance to escape, would it? Blech.
Rating:
Summary: You will be scared of these Zombies
Review: ...hello. Wow, all I can say is this movie is shocking. I must have jumped out of my seat a dozen times. This movie truly frightened me and in more ways then one. It was fun to really be startled and scared again while watching a movie. The camera motion, when the zombies are attacking, is nothing short of brilliant(strobe). It's one of the best concepts of a zombie type movie I've seen yet. After seeing this, you'll wonder why they haven't thought of it sooner(fast zombies, not that's scary). A+ all the way and a must if you like to jump out of your seat in fright. BELIEVE ME, YOU WILL JUMP!
|
