I FUCKING LOVE COLOURING
28 Days Later...
His fear began when he woke up alone. His terror began when he realised he wasn't.
Twenty-eight days after a killer virus was accidentally unleashed from a British research facility, a small group of London survivors are caught in a desperate struggle to protect themselves from the infected. Carried by animals and humans, the virus turns those it infects into homicidal maniacs -- and it's absolutely impossible to contain.
Signifying the dawn of a new era of post-apocalyptic horror, Danny Boyle's 28 Days Later... is the biggest leap zombie horror has taken ever since George A. Romero established the sub-genre in 1968 with Night of the Living Dead. The film discards the now outdated concept of reanimated corpses & replaces it with a contemporary idea of a viral epidemic, thus changing the supernatural phenomenon into a psychological one.
The movie opens with a prologue that teases with the origin of a highly contagious virus which amplifies the rage behaviour in infected humans, thus turning them into aggressive, zombie-like beings. The story concerns Jim who wakes up in an abandoned hospital 28 days after the disease outbreak only to find the…
All of this was new in 2002. Saying that this isn't new is like saying that Citizen Kano's cinematography is old.
My favorite movie in the zombie or horror genre.
Sunday Morning Review!
Staying alive's as good as it gets.
In the early 2000's horror was at an odd place. Without knowing it, the world of horror was moving towards remakes, reimaginings, and found footage gags, so there were a few key films that threatened to change the pace of horror films to come and shake up the norm a bit. While 28 Days Later was a familiar sub-genre, it was pulled off in a unique fashion and managed to have remarkably human emotions in a film populated by snarling, bloody infected husks.
Danny Boyle drops us right in the middle of the apocalypse without showing the beginning panic and the failure of military, but instead like we are just…
What I have always loved about the early Romero zombie films is that they were always more than mindless horror films, they were riddled with religious themes, social commentary and asked questions about human nature. And they were sufficiently gory and disgusting to boot.
Boyle's film transports that approach to the 21st century, amping up the adrenaline, touching on some tough subjects and covering it all in a, by now, recognisable Boyle sauce.
The first half of the film is a frenetic escape from an infected city and while it is never really scary, it most definitely is tense. That has a lot to do with this film's interpretation of the zombies. They are perhaps not zombies in the traditional…
Not Quite Hoop-Tober: Day 6
Danny Boyle's 28 Days Later used to be one of my all-time favorite zombie movies, but whether I've finally seen it too many times or my tastes have shifted since the last time I saw it, I find myself falling out of love. Boyle's story about a man who wakes up in the middle of the apocalypse still has its merits, but on this visit I felt its strengths almost overwhelmed by the weaknesses in between them.
Three scenes I still love:
1. The whole opening sequence with Cillian Murphy walking the empty streets of London. It's wonderfully atmospheric, and the wide angle presentation of the vacant city even surpasses 1971's The Omega Man in…
The Zombie genre was going through a bit of a lean time when this new and vibrant twist on the horror concept found an audience back in 2002. Giving us a mix of horror and high-adrenaline action sequences that are truly frenetic and pulse-inducing, this film was more than just a run of the mill gore fest.
Danny Boyle's zombie-apocalypse starts with some of the finest shots of a deserted London ever put on film. Following an attack on a research facility by animal activists, infected monkeys bring carnage to the human population as the "Rage Virus" turns mankind into raging beasts with a blood-lust. At the center of the story is Jim (Cillian Murphy). A bike courier who has…
What this film does right is not mention the virus that caused the infection to initially happen. The audience is then left feeling just as confused as the characters; lost in this dystopian, zombie-filled, England. My only issue, and this is the same with all zombie films that I have seen, is why do people turn into zombies instantly? Why isn't it a process that takes time? Regardless, strongly acted and directed, this is one of my favorite zombie films.
Acclaimed modern zombie movie about a virus that is spreading all over Britain, turning people into zombies. It's definitely a good picture but it's no masterpiece as most critics comment. I prefer the sequel.
Similarly to Eisenstein, Danny Boyle uses the contrast between slow, long, peaceful shots and rapid, terror-filled shots to cause uneasiness and fear in his audience. For example, in the opening sequence of the film, when Jim wakes up in the abandoned hospital, Boyle uses long, languid takes in order to portray the desolate, deserted streets of London. He focuses on certain Mise-en-Scene elements, such as the papers on the ground, or the pieces of paper flying around to match the tone of the slow editing. Then, as Jims desperation grows, the shots become more rapid and abrupt, and the pace picks up. As shots grow shorter and the camera begins to shake more, Boyle brings about the bulletin board, covered…
28 is a very well constructed, acted and scripted intense zombie movie with great action and a couple of beautiful scenes, but the visuals look cheap and it diminished a little bit the overall quality of the film.
Danny Boyle uses punctuation in some of the fight scenes in order to amplify the terror first felt by the audience when the scene began. He also uses this technique to make the montages more Oneiric (if the actions are doubled and actions take more than one shot to complete, everything feels more dreamlike and surreal and unnatural). This can be compared to Eisenstein's style of editing in Battleship Potemkin. The use of punctuation in both films highlights a dream-like terror with everything that is happening.
Haunting but action packed zombie movie, only diminished by an overall lack of polish.
28 Days Later is a very well written zombie movie, but I have some issues with the way it's presented. It looks very cheap. Yes, the film was shot on camcorder to make shooting scenes of abandoned London much quicker and more feasible, but there are way too many shots that feature a bad special effect in the background and it takes me out of the movie. There is also a distracting amount of dutch angles.
Other than that, it's a pretty great movie. Cillian Murphy gives a great performance and Naomie Harris matches him, for the most part. Perhaps the characters could have been a little stronger, but that's a minor complaint because the film never drags.
Watched with Audio Commentary by
Danny Boyle (Director)
Alex Garland (Screenwriter)
Another great commentary listen! Boyle, as always, talks with such energy. You definitely get his passion for film. Garland is the opposite, so they make for a good pair to balance each other out.
A lot of great info here on the filmmaking process. Boyle talks about filming with the digital video recorders, speeding up the frame rate when zombies were onscreen, etc. Garland is self critical of his writing several times, which was interesting. They also revealed the alternate ending which was bleaker, yet understandably considered for its boldness.
Garland reveals his favorite moment in the movie is when Jim has the flashback with him and his family and I agree it is my favorite is well. Brilliantly executed.
If you like listening to commentaries this is one I definitely recommend! Adds perspective to the film!
A lot of fun, and it undeniably has truly astounding moments, but it doesn't add up to all that much at the end.
I was thoroughly entertained by much of the action in the film. The zombies were super creepy too, so thumbs up for that. I also loved the bleak, empty shots of London and the M5 - crazy for the sheer scale of them. Cinematography of the film was often beautiful.
On the flipside, a lot of it felt quite disjointed and the plot lurched around messily. I feel this held the undeniable pros of the film back.
I expected a bit more from one of Danny Boyle's classics, but I'll say this: it was at least unique, so I'm glad I took the time to watch for that alone.
I'm a sucker for films set after an apocalypse so I thought a list might be useful. It is by…