Genres

Visitors Review

redx4 2012-05-19 15:22:11

What the hell

No one else thought that was the worst movie they'd ever seen? It wasterrible! The cinematography was barbaric and juvenile at best. Andhalf the movie was done on green screens. It was horribly noticeablethat the director was trying to "creative" and "artistic" but true artisn't made up it's discovered.However, when the in the rare instance that the cinematography wasatrocious the acting was god awful. The acting was rarely sort of goodmost of the time it sucked. I even recognized a few of the actors in itand well both are pretty good but they did their part so bad it justcounter-acted the feelings I had of them before.Overall I think this movie never should've been made. God awful. I wishI could get back the time wasted watching this movie.

2012-05-19 05:55:01

What... No Sean Pertwee?

This film was greatly hyped as a great British horror-fest. Actually,what I saw was a shoddy UK zombie flick, borrowing from Night of theComet (1984) and a slew of other films. Scenes worth laughing at wasthe tunnel scene that we know is crawling with zombies, and thesoldiers who have turned into maniacs after a month. Nice to see Brendan Gleeson and Christopher Ecclestone again, but thatwas it, the rest of the cast was dreck! Sorry to say this, but in anAmerican version the hero-figure would have found a gun within secondsand we would have gotten a nice action scene (the end of ResidentEvil), this is just a wannabe flick.Not a patch on DOG SOLDIERS, with the great Sean Pertwee, an actor whois always worth watching, just don't stand close to in a movie (BillPaxton Syndrome).Last thing, London was infested right, where were they? Some here andthere and that was it? Extras running around in the dark tunnel do notcount. There should have a bit somewhere with (at least) hundreds ofzombies. And I never mentioned George Romero once - d'oh!

lofan 2012-05-13 14:59:29

boyle,boyle,boyle, i'm looking for a great time (sabrina)

number 3 of danny boyle, which is not a sequel such ast3.he does a good job on having a melange of sci-fi and horror movie with ahandsome cast. this british movie arrives at the right time, where scienceand technology try to dominate the world and the human race has to dealwiththe westnile virus, sars, and most recently monkey pox.here it starts: infected monkeys are released from a research center byactivists,having a rage virus in them and causing the extermination oflondon's population.here it is again, the little hulk in everyone is released.the story deals with the search for noninfected human beings by the last 4survivors, which can be found in the nearby Manchester at an army unit.there is lots of blood and gruesome moments, which make the story appearlike a computer game: survival of the fittest slash smartest. it is goodversus evil and who has to win in the end?! zombies running around withredeyes and all accompanied by great music.the soundtrack is awesome, as always, and some scenes remind the viewer oftrainspotting, this time there is some classical music involved,underlyingthe mood, other times it seems like a techno party with lots of flashes +valium.shot in video, it distributes an i-witness effect, presenting peoplekillingeach other instead of the fear of the virus.fresh, witty, scary, great! two thumbs up, as Mr. Ebert would say.

FrozenDreamer 2012-05-13 01:35:06

Strange how there were monkeys in this one...

I find myself in a little bit or a predicament when I rate this one for youall. For many reasons, I think it best that I try and take a less judgmentalapproach to the movie, and look at it from a 'Pinker' state ofaffairs.The virus has wiped out the whole of the planet... and there are only a fewsurvivors left. Everything else on the planet is either a flesh eatingzombie that pukes on its victims, or four horses that run free on the plainsbetween London & Manchester. Sure... I'll believe that... Ithink.Jim wakes up (careful girls... full frontal in this scene), and walks aroundLondon only to find that the world he left behind (he drove into a van) 28days ago, no longer exists. Poor sod.The plot kinda unfolds from there... but I must admit, the whole way throughthe movie I was thinking to myself... When do Bruce Willis and Brad Pittmake an appearance? It's very 12 Monkeyish in my opinion, but don't let thatput you off.28 Days Later does a few things that not many other films do. It gets youthinking (What if that happened for real), it gets you cringing (why didthat man just puke on that mans face mommy) and it also gets you screaming -loudly - because when you see a deranged man peering through a plate ofglass with red eyes, before pouncing through and going ape... you would bescreaming in fear as well!!!Watch this movie people, it is well worth it. I enjoyed it a lot, and so didmy boyfriend. We also both quite liked the very tiny shower sequence... butI won't get into that.I think it only fair... 9 flaps out of 10

2012-05-10 11:46:06

A Real Mind Trip!

The images in this film fly at you like snow in a blizzard. The camera angles are clever and effective at including you in the horror of what is being said and done and at the same time is mind-numbing due to the intense graphic overload...its like Satan showing you a slideshow...little snapshots of hell. In its slower moments we get too close to the "infected", those infected by the Rage virus, which turns these moments into a feel-sorry-for-these-zombies movie. I would have preferred having seen them in only the glimpses and snatches we are given in the rest of the movie to keep them inhuman and frightening. I also felt the "Mars Needs Women" part of the film, where we learn the real reason why the shortwave broadcast was made by the soilders weakened the film but it made a nice set-up for the "our hero gone bullistic" payback scenes. (I had this strange feeling I was watching a remake of Apocalypse Now where Martin Sheen went on his sweaty, half-naked, grease-painted mission of death). The film itself I rated 4 stars but gave it that extra star after I discovered that this whole beautifully executed film was made on an extremely low budget. Only someone with real vision and intelligence could do so much with so little. Throughout, this film is harsh, shocking and gory but finishes well by its willingness to let you breath the fresh air with at least the hope that all will be well in the end.

Todd Kramer 2012-05-10 00:45:28

What horror should be

28 Days Later is true horror, relying on characterization, mood andatmosphere instead of cheap shock or excessive fanboy gore. Here we getpeople we care about trapped in a nightmarish circumstance and their fatevery well might be inescapeable. The film is dark and depressingthroughoutand up until the last scene you're not sure if the good guys will win orlose. The DVD does give it to you both ways though via the 3 alternateendings. I prefer the happier finish, but if you want to walk awaycompletely depressed you can do that too. :)

Eli_Cash 2012-05-09 10:07:53

Its all the Rage, Not the Hype.

It truly bothers me that many viewers of this film do not find its contentsfrightening. Or that they find elements of the plot and structure insimilar styled movies which preceded it.An honest interpretation of this film destroys both of these falseconceptions. It wasn't formed seemlessly in a vacuum. _28 Days Later..._does indeed pay homage to the heroes of its genres whether they be theapocalyptic or more straight forward horror. This is not to say that itdoesn't spin these themes around on their heads and give them us somethingprovocatively new.Quite simply, _28 Days Later..._ takes one of the most numbingly frighteningaspects of our contemporary culture, that of blind, irrational, andimplacable hatred and lets it destroy the world or most of it. Sure its aninfection but lets be quick to the point here, there's a reason its calledrage. No longer are the 'zombies' the dead ghouls rising to plague theliving. No, these 'zombies' are very much alive, exaggeratedly so,ruthlessly fast and completely indiscriminate in their destruction. Theonly thing they can actively discern apparently is who doesn't share theirboundless blood-lust. And all they want to do is pass iton.Ironically the dead are the only ones at peace and the living no longer needtheir help finding ways to die.This film does have its flaws (I did give it a 7 after all) but notdetriments such as shameless unoriginality or lack of terror. At times itcan be a bit heavy-handed, delivering its morals with a listless dull thump,exactly the kind of strikes I remember _Night of the Living Dead_ zombiesmaking, which makes them all the more unacceptable now that Boyle hasdecided to usurp such creatures. The latter third of the film, theManchester-third (without giving anything substantial away) is far fromsubtle and can be a bit tedious. Thankfully the breath-taking opening andterrific middle portions will be remembered for what they are and payedhomage to in the future in their own right.

Stampsfightclub 2012-05-08 15:28:25

Brillaince from Boyle in good horror

After a group of activists unleash rage infected apes, Britain becomeshome to those infected with the virus, wiping out everybody in theirway and for a group of survivors, they must do anything to survive.28 days later is a mix of strong intelligent thinking, an artisticapproach to direction and an endless spinning narrative that engagesviewers right in to the very core of the gritty and energetic film thatis Danny Boyle's work of genius.A horror is a horror usually for the appearance of an abnormal being or'monster' and here we see a human preaching concept of animal rightsgone horribly wrong when the 'rage' virus affects people. What thecross brings are humans with blood thirsty traits, an inability to goout in daylight and constant appetite. Many have argued the creaturesare zombies but these creations feel more personal and have way toomuch energy and thirst to be stereotyped as such creatures. The factthat they can affect a person by way of simple touch is scary andwhilst this isn't as gripping as it had the potential to be, thephysiological effect of these beings is sustained throughout the twohours.Danny Boyle is a genius. The recent Oscar winner (Slumdog Millionaire)is able to maintain the thrill factor whilst also capturing the scenesin an unforgivably picturesque way. The filming of this picture isperhaps the finest ever made in Britain. The M1 had to be closed, themain road near Big Ben was shut and these are just a few examples ofeffort the team went in and considering these shots are only a coupleof minutes long, it goes to show how appreciative and remarkable thisfilm is.The scenery is unbelievable. Who would have though our country couldhave been so picturesque? Boyle's sweeping landscape shots are to diefor and the thrill factor in the chases is to live for, consistent andperhaps one of the finest directed British films.Murphy, Harris, Gleeson and Burns all do themselves justice withoutbeing too screamy and abnormal as most protagonists in the genre today.The sequel 28 weeks later though not directed by Boyle maintains thatlevel of sublime scenery and adrenaline soaked excitement with a coredesperate and energetic storyline whereas this 2002 hit carries afeeling of drama with the line of characters and their lives in the newworld.Whereas there are lapses and the end feels rushed 28 days is excitingand penetrates the mind with some unbelievable direction and locationwith the writing on top form.

dr_swerve 2012-05-04 16:45:27

False Advertising

I came into this movie expecting a slash'em gory zombie flick. What I gotwas a cross b/w Resident Evil and Lord of the Flies. I think that theytried to make this movie too symbolic. Once they got shelter with thearmy,it seemed as though from that point on it was no longer a zombie moviewhatsoever. I think that from this point on it just got terrible. Ifyou've seen The Beach, it's the same kind of turning point that happenedwhen Leo DiCaprio started running around crazy in the woods.I think the director was too busy trying to make a statement aboutcivilization than actually trying to keep us entertained. "One of akind?"...NO! "Scariest movie since The Exorcist?"...NO! "Would Irecommendthis movie to someone I really disliked?"...NO! I'm not that rude. Don'twaste your time.

kurciasbezdalas 2012-05-04 07:51:15

This movie could use more zombies

I guess every time I watch zombie-movie I'm hopping to see somethinglike George A. Romero's Day of the Dead. 28 Days Later... is prettydifferent zombie-movie. I realised what is good about it only at theending. It looks like home-made movie but that looks pretty creepy tome. The plot have some similarities with Day of the Dead and thebeginning is very similar with Resident Evil's ending, but still thereare some originality in it. The movie is well directed. The atmosphereis calm and some how chilling. The main thing what this movie ismissing is zombies. There were some zombie scenes but only a little andwhen you're watching this film it doesn't seems like you are watching azombie-movie.

2012-05-03 01:01:42

Destined to be a horror classic

It's rare to find a horror movie that is truly unsettling and frightening these days. It's so easy to be jaded by the blood and gore of the Freddy/Jason type slasher films...that when a movie like "28 Days Later" comes along, that does indeed have it's share of gore associated with it, but also has an actual intelligent storyline underneath it all, that it's no wonder so many people were excited by it.The basic premise: a bunch of primates infected with the fictional "RAGE" virus are somewhat accidentally released after a break-in at an animal testing facility in England. 28 days later, the cities are all but deserted and in ruins. The movie then follows the progress of a handful of survivors as they search for others who are uninfected. and try to make sense of what exactly has happened.There is a twist to this that i will not get into, other then to say it was a brilliant move in steering the film away from a typical "zombie-fest". As an avid horror movie fan, i am always thrilled to see a movie go in the less obvious directions, as this one does. the final act of the movie, is actually almost like a completely different film. focusing more on the remaining characters, and their inner relationships, then on running from the monsters. but there are still plenty of monsters...just not in the shape you might have expected.The director sets a tone of dark, and ominous paranoia early on...as one of the main characters wanders down the deserted streets, finally making his way into a church, and seeing hundreds of dead bodies piled up in front of the alter. And he maintains that sense of dread through-out the film. There is a sequence towards the end of the film that is truly frightening...where one of the characters is on the outside of a house, and sets in motion a chilling series of events, and watches it all unfold, going from window to window. The true test of a great horror movie, as with all great movies in general...is that it stays with you long after you've seen it. This is especially true of "28 Days Later". while, the actual ending left a bit to be desired, and will leave you with some questions (ones that may be somewhat answered in the alternate endings that are included with the dvd)...it's a film to be watched more then once, to fully appreciate the underlying horror of the story.

steven shroyer 2012-05-02 15:27:24

A thrill ride

I am starting off by saying what Roger Ebert said about " the Crying Game" :See it then shut up about it. Danny Boyle's latest will have you screaming ,covering your eyes , and shaking all over. I recently saw this with myhorror loving grandma who wasn't phased and asked me if I wanted to leave.Of course I said no and enjoyed my time in the caring if not rough hands ofa master of fright and just relaxed and waited for my next fit of screaming, crying ,and shaking .This is not for the timid and will give you chills . If you want to seesomthing less scary , my brother said " Johnny English " Was verygood.But remember if you see this film dont say I didin,t warnyou>

ronanb 2012-05-01 18:23:36

This is so much more than a horror

I have read through a lot of the comments here and I'm amazed at what I amreading. For anybody who goes to see this a purely as a zombie horrorfilm,then you may be disappointed, because there is actually thought andpotential realism in this movie (Which is scarier than a bunch of'Zombies'or 'vampires'). If you think about it then you might get more our of it.Ifyou want to see a truly gritty non Hollywood horror (it is so much morethanthat) film then this is for you. If you want mindless rubbish then rentoutthe living dead, or go look in the mirror.

a g 2012-05-01 07:01:07

Marketing killed Independance

28 Days Later is probably one of the best films of its genre to come out in 20 years. NO, it's not a horror film. NO, it's not big budget. It's a low budget zombie movie that had more story, more human nature, and more charactor development than any horror or sci-fi movies thats come out in the last fe years. It's not "scarier than the Exorcist". It's not even all that scary. Unfortunatly, when an independant movie goes to major theaters, the company releasing the movie has two choices, either don't publicize and let the picture slip between the cracks, or they can publicize it like they do any other movie, make people want to go see it and then decide for themselves whether they like it or not. Unfortunatly most people I have talked to only say that it's not scarier than The Exorcist. It's sad to me that people can't enjoy a movie, or not enjoy a movie, because of what it is, and not because of what it isnt. I liked it. It's really good. Go check it out without any pretenses.

monkeybone-5 2012-05-01 09:37:06

A disease of rage is spread and its up to a handful of people to get it under control.

This is probably one of the worst movies trying to copy Dawn of theDead, which was 17 times as better.I found the story line to be abit...lousy. I mean, "if you make any contact with them, then you turninto one, too". What is that? How are you supposed to kill them? It'snot like a random person trying to kill one is just going to have a fewgrenades or rocket launchers sitting around, as so they sort of did inthis film. So, what's the deal? The people are pretty much powerlessthen(not trying to point out a spoiler). I just don't understand howthat is possible to put into a film. I think it's just a quick way totry to imitate some other movies and not create anythingyourself(LAZY). Now I look back and see how the director tried to fit alittle of today's movies in there when it randomly shows CillianMurphy's rear-end.

Nick 2012-05-01 03:05:13

This Movie Sucky Days Later!

This movie was alright but little zombies walking around going arghhhhhh!And when he was in the hospital bed naked wow that was disgusting! And hewalked around the city for like 15 minutes yelling hello! Every IMDBusersstay away from at all costs!

laxcat 2012-04-24 19:34:34

Finest zombies one could ever hope for!

I love scary movies, but don't see them very often because of the highimportance I place on production quality. Most scary movies arecontrived,full of stereotypes and are poorly made.It's refreshing to see one that breaks the mold.While 28 Days Later contains a good portion of the stereotypes almostnecessary for any chiller, (a main character stupidly venturing off aloneinto that dark building (attic, basement, alley-way) where he's sure tofindnothing but trouble) we are fortunately free (for the most part) of themorepainful clichés.28 Days' high points are its intriguing story, creative directing, andaboveall, the coolest, most scary zombies ever to be seen. The characters arerelatively well developed, the plot features several twists and turns tokeep it interesting, and. did I mention the zombies?Top rate spookfest for fans of the macabre and normalsalike.[By the way, if you are planning on seeing this movie again for thealternate ending, it was highly disappointing and not even edited intotheend of the film. It's just tacked onto the end of the credits. Theoriginalending, while disappointingly up-beat for some, was also much better andmore natural. Go see it again because it's a good movie but not for thenewending. Wait for the DVD for that.]

pgoochuk 2012-04-24 07:16:14

A game of two halves; from the sublime to the ridiculous

'28 Days Later' could have been a Great British Horror Film. The first45 minutes is packed with some of the most haunting and fantastichorror imagery filmed on UK shores since The Wicker Man and WitchfinderGeneral. It is packed with brilliant compositions, such as the dead andinfected lying scattered in the church, both illuminated by andmirroring the imagery in the stained glass window; Jim wandering adesolate Leicester Square in his pyjamas; the overturned red bus in adeserted street. Unfortunately, the first warning note is sounded when Hannah (MeganBurns) is given some dialogue. What is is with British child actorsthese days? And once the survivors reach the military base, the filmdescends into Carry On territory. While the first half was plausible, the rest will have you in stitcheswith its unintentional hilarity. Listen to incredible Alien 3-style'wanker' and 'bollocks' cockney banter. Watch apparently highly trainedBritish soldiers panic at the first sign of trouble. See a naked anduntrained bicycle courier take out a 9 armed squaddies with his barehands. Shake your head in disbelief as Jim survives a rifle-shot to theabdomen at point blank range without medical attention.But do see this film, and think about what might have been, had someonereigned in Alex Garland's frustrated fantasies.

2012-04-23 23:00:12

A Bad Imitation of Resident Evil !

It was not good nor palatable.It's something to be disregarded.Watch the original "Resident Evil" instead.

Iesius 2012-04-23 14:54:42

This Movie Stinks

The premise behind this film fails to keep my interests because what goesonafter the initial virus hit is so unrealistic that it cannot induce fearinme. A virus turns ordinary people into rage-filled zombies killing mostofEngland's population. Fair enough. The power there goes out and contactwith the outside world is lost. The characters assume the worst, theythinkthe rest of the world has suffered the same fate as England, and don'teventry to get off the island. Unfortunately for the story writer no one evertold him about things like that radios still pick up signals from Franceorthat a smart character, you know, the kind you care about, might try tousea boat to get off the island. What about the Chunnel? Heck some peoplecanswim across the English Channel. Instead the characters listen to theirradio which tells them to come to the British Army...and what a great armyit is, because after only one month they have degenerated into a bunch ofpower-driven thieving rapists -- doesn't Brittan have one of the top 5armies in the world!??! Yet in the film they can't keep discipline for 4weeks...unbelievable. Pepsi is everywhere, annoying! And odd seeing asthestuff is hard to find in England. So poorly written, and as for thetaglineon the commercials "scariest movie since the exorcist." Wow, they wanttheviewer to think taking a digital cam quarter and zooming in and out againreally fast is scary? Or that people making some of the dumbest decisionsever, and paying for them with their lives is scary? Now I know why Ihaven't been scared of a movie since I was a kid. Movies like this makemedead inside.