Horror.com Forums - Talk about horror. - Review of "28 Days Later" (2003) DVD

A second opinion

~Spoiler~

How is it that a movie can have such critical success, and yet horror fans are not pleased? How is this film so incredibly different from Romero's own zombie films. Yes, I'm aware that it's not a zombie film (regardless of what the back of the DVD claims) but it still parallels the classics. 28 Days Later reminded me so much of Dawn/Day of the Dead that I had to love it. The scene where they enter a supermarket and go on a shopping spree: Dawn of the Dead. The scene with Mailer, an infected soldier, chained to a wall: Day of the Dead. Jim killing the kid at the gas station: more Dawn. The evil military: more Day. I for one loved this movie. I dug it mainly because it had solid characters, characters I cared about in a horrific situation. Jim is the everyman. He's a character that every person should be able to identify with. Jim awakes from a coma to find his world empty. Or so he thinks. A rage virus has overcome the city of London (perhaps more) and it has left infected, zombie-like creatures in its wake. The virus is in the blood; one bite or scratch and it's curtains for you. Jim is played brilliantly by Cillian Murphy (Jeremy Sisto's English cousin??). I hope to see more of this young actor. The rest of the cast is perfect as well. Naomie Harris IS her character, Christopher Eccleston and Brenden Gleesen are incredible as well, and this is only Megan Burns' second film. Plus, the film had an undeniably "real life" feel to it. I believe this situation is possible. And that scares me. This film hit theaters during the SARS epidemic and that only adds to the chilling and effective atmosphere the movie creates. The digital filmmaking also adds to this sense of realism and compliments the film magically. Another thing going for it was the empty city of London. I could keep going with what I feel are "positives" but let me talk about questions that the fim has raised. One such question is if the Rage Virus causes uncontrollable anger, then why don't the infected kill each other? Why didn't Romero's zombies attack each other? The infected "recognize" one another (perhaps through pheromones or maybe just animal instincts) and have a strong to desire to spread the virus. The virus is trying its best to survive (like any living creature) and the infected attacking the infected would be pointless. That's the best explanation that I could come up with. I think Danny Boyle (who impressed me more with Shallow Grave) and Alex Garland did a hell of a job on this thing.

"If you look at the whole life of the planet, we, you know, man, has only been around for a few blinks of an eye. So if the infection wipes us all out, that is a return to normality. "