Review of "28 Days Later" (2003) DVD

It reminded me more of the movie "DEMONS" than a any zombie movie.

[avenger00soul]

Originally posted by Unregistered
It reminded me more of the movie "DEMONS" than a any zombie movie.

I can see why you would think that since the virus spread so fast when anyone got infected. That's about all the similarities I can see though.

after seeing 28 days later, i fail to understand the hype and positive review given to it. the premise of a zombie movie has always been bad compared to the many other monsters and undead available. they're decaying stiffs who reach a top speed of 1 metre per hour and have no intellect or special abilities to make up for it. the only way they seemingly get anything killed is waiting in a closet for days on end for someone to be stupid enough to hide in there with them. even then the person has a pretty good chance of just walking out again since the damn things are so slow.

so in answer to that, the directors made the zombies faster. does it make it scarier? nah, not really. why? well, because they're still crap. one thing thats always bugged me, especially with this film, is why the military and police are so overwhelmed by decaying flesh. if a bunch of british commandos were able to fend off those thigns for 28 days, and subsequently be wiped out by one guy who has had no military training whatsoever, why is it so hard for even better armed soldiers with even bigger guns to keep the damn things at bay?

the start of the movie was excellent. the emptied london sets an eerie backdrop, though the fact that there are no bodies or anything at all around makes little sense. the message of the end of the world is nigh put my expectations pretty high, and it was definitely creepy. and thats about all the good thins i can think of. the countryside scene made the isolation thing a bit more into perspective.

now to the bad parts. besides the zombie, (whos uselssness is reinforced by the fact that some buy in a riot suit managed to beat them to death) there was the confusion of what actually happened. did other countries become infected as well? they said america and other places were infected but then we see a jet fly over them at the end and some speech about london being quartenined? if this is true, why say that other countries were under attack?

the whole thing about the real monsters being the soldiers who were meant to save them irritated me a lot, but i cant figure out why. maybe because it seemed hackney and tacky. as mentioned before, the protagonist manages to wipe them all out, in an incredibly unbelievable fashion. he had a gun, why not shoot them with it at least? why go about doing all this fancy stuff like stalking them when it would ahve being easier to simply pull the trigger? the sort of thing he was doing felt unbelieveable by an alleged ordinary guy trying to survive.

i think why most people rant on about it is that they dont want to say its bad, because its more effort then it seems to be worth. theres nothing severely wrong with it, and it certainly will appeal to the right audience, but thats like any film. i dont consider this a classic in any sense, or would recommend it outright. it just seems poor. this may be due to me personally, but i fail to pick up any horror or such. there was no bone chilling moment or suspense. there seemed no inspiration or ingenuity. i will happily debate this with anyone if any are willing but personally, most people simply dont seem to raise justifiable points on why the movie is good or even decent. that i walked out wanting my time back definitely does not rate well for the film.

[avenger00soul]

I just have one thing to say: There are no zombies in this film. The film is about "infected humans" not the undead. In no way, shape, or form does the film mentions the dead coming back to life. I also think I made a pretty good case as to why I feel it is a quality horror film earlier in this thread.

true enough, i understand they aren't truly zombies, but act in similiar enough manner to draw comparison. they arise very much like the zombies in 'resident evil', whom were infected by a virus and were classified as zombies. and like in 'resident evil' lore, they co-operate in spreading the virus. therefore, i justify the classification of zombie due to the similiarities between the two. they survive primarily on instinct, not intellect; they are both essentially mindless. the question of what those 'infected' eat also pops up. either they eat humans, and thus have a limited number of 'infected', or they simply keep spreading, and the earlier 'infeceted' die off. nothing is provided clearly and i do not think the writers cared to think upon this.

i did not sympathise with the characters, something a lot of critics and reviewers consider the most important factor in the movie. i didnt care for them because i couldnt relate to them. many of the actions in the film i consider irrational and illogical, things that are important in films driven on the fear that it may be real. i failed to see why the father and daughter couldnt simply leave with the car at the beginning. though the 2 protagonists provided good company, there was no real logic in simply waiting around as more 'infected' kept on increasing and the chances of people coming dropped. and if the two people at the begining managed to produce explosive weapons, why werent they able to retrieve firearms from dead corpses? it would certainly be more effective then a baseball bat and ax.

if the film wasnt on such a major scale, such as an entire city like london, possibly it would be easier to understand. but one of the most influencial capital in the world falling in a short period of time, with no signs of any major resistance seems ludicrous. the only other movie that falls so short of common sense would be 'Signs". this seems to me to be the major falling point. in other horror movies, such as the 'texas chainsaw massacre', the believability of such events occuring is legitimate. however, the complete take down of one of the most powerful countries in the world in a matter of days with no actual sign of conflict from military personel is ludcrious. the movie would have certainly be more believable, and more enjoyable, in my opinion, if different perspectives were shown, not just one group, but of many trying to survive.

the ending was cliche as you get, and the alternate ending provided in the end for australian viewers seemed weak and poorly thought out. it did not hold my interest, though it certainly had its moments here and there. the acting was acceptable, though i prefer to concentrate on the story. an appocolyptic tale needs to have some sense to it and an explaination that is legitimate and reasonable needs to be provided if viewers are to believe in it.

this is simply my personal opinion, and differs to many, i understand. however, i found myself disappointed with what many were hailing as one of the scariest movies of the year. the infected human were not frightening, as they could easily be replaced with hoodlums or an angry mob and still achieve the same affect. the solution of them simply starving to death felt a very weak to wrap it up. would it not be more likely that other countries would attempt to purge the threat via bombings if the danger was that great? the end certainly points to some military power in place still, and since the british forces seemed to not exist anymore, i assume it is that of another country.

[Arioch]

I gotta say i got your back on this one avenger:cool:

This movie really impressed me. From the different look of the all digital cameras to the infected to the great casting. Yes if you went into this expecting to be scared out of your wits or the perfection of the zombie genre your going to be dissapointed, granted. Yes the movie is slow and takes its time building to a climax. But come on, that last scene with the thunderstorm and Jim (main character) hunting the soilders just like an infected. Not to mention the soundtrack really kicked ass. Especially that scene.
Ive noticed that alot of people walked out on this movie, and it is pretty slow sometimes, but you guys really missed the whole climax that really brought the film together. I think its pretty intelligently directed and all the actors do a pretty good job. A refreshing break from all the hollywood clitched horrormovies,
*cough*TCM Remake*cough*

Definitaly a love it or hate it film and im kinda sorry to see it missed most of the horror audiance.

[avenger00soul]

I think the earlier infected simply die off from starvation (which is a bit weak but I don't mind). Remember the ones they showed at the end that were just laying on the ground? They were so weak they couldn't move.

Also, the pilots at the end of the film were Finnish I'm told.

[Arioch]

lol ya that scene was weird but atleast it explained what was going to happen to the rest of the infected. Didnt try to keep it open for a sequel or anything. Summed it up well. What did you think about the alternate endings on the dvd? i think i like the original hospital death ending scene better.

[avenger00soul]

Originally posted by Arioch
lol ya that scene was weird but atleast it explained what was going to happen to the rest of the infected. Didnt try to keep it open for a sequel or anything. Summed it up well. What did you think about the alternate endings on the dvd? i think i like the original hospital death ending scene better.

Actually, I wasn't impressed with any of them. I love the ending the way it is. I love that one flash of "HELL" before we see the characters again. That's a fabulous touch.

[Arioch]

Ya the subliminal sequence at the end of the original ending really do rock. Very unnevering.