28 Days Later... Movie
Storyline
TAGLINES
His fear began when he woke up alone. His terror began when he realised he wasn't.
Day 1: Exposure - Day 3: Infection - Day 8: Epidemic - Day 15: Evacuation - Day 20: Devastation
The Days Are Numbered
Be Thankful For Everything, For Soon There Will Be Nothing...
A powerful virus escapes from a British research facility. Transmitted in a drop of blood and devastating within seconds, the virus locks those infected into a permanent state of murderous rage. Within 28 days the country is overwhelmed and a handful of survivors begin their attempts to salvage a future, little realising that the deadly virus is not the only thing that threatens them.
| Jukka Hiltunen | Activist |
| David Schneider | Scientist |
| Cillian Murphy | Jim |
| Toby Sedgwick | Infected Priest |
| Naomie Harris | Selena |
| Noah Huntley | Mark |
| Christopher Dunne | Jim's Father |
| Emma Hitching | Jim's Mother |
| Alexander Delamere | Mr. Bridges |
| Kim McGarrity | Mr. Bridges' Daughter |
| Brendan Gleeson | Frank |
| Megan Burns | Hannah |
| Justin Hackney | Infected Kid |
| Danny Boyle |
7.30 out of 10 (44477 votes)
Visitor Reviews
in a word, stylish
posted on 24 Aug 2009**some minor spoilers follow**There's been a bizarre renaissance in zombie movies lately. This is my favorite one, probably because it's merely zombie-like. In place of the usual cannibalism and excessive gore you'd expect from a film like this, "28 Days Later" focuses more on character development and atmosphere. The early scenes, set in a deserted London, are the most effective; it really does feel like the apocalypse has come, and nothing about the production appears phony or staged. Later on, the action is confined to the more modest setting of a manor house, and things slow down a bit. But the opening segment is still some of the most effective horror I've ever seen.I saw this in the company of a good buddy who thought that the characters were badly developed, and I guess she has a point - we don't get THAT much background - but by horror standards, what we do get is exceptional. What really matters to me is that I like the heroes (and I do), so I don't want them to get killed. And that's all you need to drive a movie like this.Could it have been better? Well, yeah - everything can be better - but overall, this is a stylish take on zombie films. My only real reservation is the happy ending, especially since it's tacked on after a sequence in which Jim goes berserk and kills the soldiers. I get the message - Jim succumbs to "the rage" without contracting the virus, proving the theory that "people killing people" is the norm for humanity - but how am I supposed to switch over to cheerful mode after being fed this depressing line of thinking? To me, that's the film's only substantial weakness; a grim ending would have served it better (and such an ending does exist, tacked on to the DVD release as an extra).
Best Horror Flick In Years.....
posted on 22 Aug 2009The story was good, some of the situations are little far fetched but people reacting to being put in extrodinary situations is what the movies are all about...Any person that likes Action Sci-Fi or Horror knows that if the characters used common sense and good judgement no movie would be longer than 20 mins. I like the fact that the movie was low budget, It's like a throwback to the old B-Flicks I used to watch as a kid. I'm so glad that it wasn't like Resident Evil and was true to the Horror Genre. It put emphasis on the scare and less on the action until the climactic scene in the Military Compound. It's better than most of what were supposed to be Horror Flicks I've seen in the last say 10 yrs... I don't know anything about cinematography or whatever, but I know I've seen enough movies to know how a good horror flick is supposed to make you feel and the tension you feel everytime one the characters walks into a dark room. This was the first flick that has actually scared me in yrs.....
28 Days Later...
posted on 22 Aug 200928 Days Later is an amazing film. It's not a "zombie" film as critics call it. It's more deep than that. There aren't really zombies in the film at all, there are the "infected," who are infected with rage and are compelled to kill anyone and anything in their path. Unlike other movies that are realatively close to the same genre, the movie is not focused on the "infected," or zombies as most call them, but the survivors (Naomie Harris, Cillian Murphy, Megan Burns). The "infected" are second in the film. What I like most about this movie is the ending (of course the alternate because all of the main characters live) because it has a twist to it. Not only that, but the "infected" do die off, which gives the survivors, well, an actual chance to survive. Danny Boyle really does a splendid job directing this movie, and Alex Garland has a thing for writing, also. Another thing I love about the movie is the way it is filmed. It's filmed with mainly digital cameras, which gives the film a realistic look. I think that this is by far the best movie created, and, in my mind, everyone should see it :)
One of the best films of the genre
posted on 20 Aug 2009Not since the original 1978 version of "Dawn of the Dead" have I seen such a fine movie for this genre. The cast of lesser-known actors shows that great films don't need star power to succeed. I was completely drawn into the story and unlike most other films didn't find myself guessing when the hero was going to save the day. The plot development doesn't rely on the formulaic buildup of the hero but instead concentrates on the harsh cold realities of such an outbreak. It carries the film and makes it easy to sustain your disbelief as the story unfolds. This is the kind of film, like "Trainspotting", also a UK film, that defies the homogenized Hollywood motion picture machine concept. In short, another great film from the UK. I highly recommend it. Also, don't forget to watch the sequel "28 Weeks later" which is almost as good and stars Robert Carlyle.
Bad, boring, insulting; to be avoided
posted on 18 Aug 2009A cure for insomnia. The same marketing strategy was used for the DVD of Ghost Ship: when you have a real turkey, ship HUGE quantities to the stores so people will believe it's worthwhile (otherwise, why would to store stock so many copies?) Plus, the distributor has to get them out before word of couth can sink the sales. Incredibly boring movie, virtually no characterization, the cliche'd evil zombies are shown for a total of about 7 minutes throughout the film, it uses the now stock shocker of a child-zombie (first used to shocking effect in Romero's Night of the Living Dead) and when the film-makers run out of plot they revert to the old "Mars Needs Women" ploy. I'm not a feminist, but I found that turn offensive to both men and women....and creativity. This movie is good for background noise when it comes to cable - write a letter, read a book, do some home repair, and look up occassionally for a distraction. But under no circumstances buy the DVD or otherwise invest money directly in its viewing.
Heart pounding stuff
posted on 16 Aug 2009This gore fest has its roots firmly in many zombie flicks. I have to say its about 80% a great film but fall apart with shoddy over-emphasis in the script being played out at the deserted manor house. That scene should have been cut down and another one added after. I had had enough of the manor house after about 15 mins, why not have more of City scenes outside London or indeed England.The emptiness was quite haunting, I can see it now Deserted Ports, empty football stadiums, train stations, with trains waiting(hey they could Joy-ride all sorts of transport, Jumbo jets!!) And why didn't they got to the nearest army camp and get themselves armed properly, RPG's, Guns and explosives. Oh yes I can see a cycle of Beautiful arty shots of the deserted public places and the countryside blending into brutal barberry of the unfortunate zombies. Sorry gone off on one there.Anyway the real film, certainly was better than most you will see these days (or in 28 days time) and it really did have my heart pounding (not sure if it was the film or the cocktail of 3 lts of Coke, large Chocolate bar and Popcorn) but either way go and watch it if you like the idea of an empty London (No slow moving packs of Tourists, no guide busses, no Taxi's unwilling to take you South off the river)full over flesh eating Zombies.Only have one question.Why is the main character naked at the beginning in Hospital? Is it some criticism of the NHS not having enough blankets? British Directors often think this is some sort of Arty thought provoking comment. If you find women attractive the last thing you want to be confronted by at the beginning of film your looking forward to watching is that. It was very unnecessary and would have be bemoaned to the ends of the earth had it been a woman.Close your eyes for the first 30 seconds and you might want to do so later on in the movie as well. Well maybe if you have the coke. chocolate and popcorn. 8/10
It seemed like it took 28 days for the film to end
posted on 14 Aug 200928 Days Later…(2002) D: Danny Boyle. Alex Palmer, Bindu De Stoppani, Jukka Hiltunen, David Schneider, Cillian Murphy, Toby Sedgwick, Naomie Harris. A deadly man-made `rage' virus has wiped out most of the planet. A handful of survivors have to save the rest of the human race from extinction. Much-hyped film that was quoted as `the scariest movie since THE BLAIR WITCH PROJECT' isn't in the slightest bit terrifying and is at times mostly just plain boring. It seemed like it took 28 days for the film to end. And what the hell was up with that senseless ending? RATING: 3 out of 10. Rated R for graphic violence, gore, full frontal nudity, and profanity.
The days are numbered for the British film industry...
posted on 12 Aug 2009I first saw this film at a test screening about 6 months ago. I decided not to post a review then, as I assumed that there was no way the film would be released as it was, considering the reaction of the test audience. However, it was.The trailer actually makes the film appear to be quite promising. The audience is promised a tale of virus-ravaged UK, and one man's ordeal to survive. Upon seeing the film, the ordeal is suffered by the audience, who thankfully only have just short of two hours to get through.The film does indeed begin with a virus being let loose upon the good citizens of Great Britain. After the brief set up, we join Jim (Murphy), a bicycle courier who was locked in a hospital room during the initial 28 days, waking from a coma. After the much publicised scenes of Jim staggering around a deserted London, he hooks up with love interest Selena, and a father and daughter. The quintuplet then embark upon a mostly tedious journey to Manchester, where Major West (Ecclestone) resides over a military base.The problems with this film are numerous. The script is abysmal, and is not helped along by the performances of the leads. The dull lines are droned out by Murphy in a whinge-like monotone, whilst the usually excellent Christopher Ecclestone delivers his lines like he's in the school play. Thankfully, single-father Frank (Brendan Gleeson) is performed thoughtfully and with warmth. It is a great credit to Gleeson that he turns in such a performance when given such a disgraceful script.The film is also not helped by the story. It is so ludicrous in places that Jim could have hopped on the London bus at the beginning of the film and driven it through many of the holes. For a capital that has been ravaged by a virus, and evacuated, there is remarkably little evidence left behind. Where are all the vehicles? Why have the shops not been looted?**********SPOILER PARAGRAPH**************** To top the lot, we are expected to believe that an entire army unit has a) managed to do what apparently only four other people have achieved by staying alive, and b) have gone mad. Have they gone mad because of the virus? No. They've just gone mad. That's it. **********END OF SPOILER*******************The film looks cheap. Not in a stylish, atmospheric way - it just looks cheap. To give credit where it's due, the zombie attack scenes are reasonably effective. They are powerful and violent enough to ramp up the tension, but this only contrasts to make the rest of the film feel even lamer.Perhaps the must heinous crime this film commits is that it is excruciatingly boring. A number of people at the test screening actually got up and left. Considering test screenings are free, that goes some way towards explaining just how dull the film is.I think I've made my point. Two minutes of genuinely scary zombie attacks do not constitute a sufficient payoff for sitting through what is, in summary, a very poor, dull, cheap-looking, boring film. Avoid like the Rage virus - if you go in to this film, it will feel like you're leaving it 28 days later.
LONDON AT ITS BEST
posted on 06 Aug 2009After watching 28 days later, I don't think you'll ever look at the Big Ben or St Pauls like ever before.. the film brought a whole new sensation to London.I actually really enjoyed the film.. It is something different compared to all the slasher films we see with west coast nasal american or european voices and squeeches.Well done to Danny "Trainspotting" Boyle and Alex "The Beach" Garland They did it again!
HELLO???? This is a very good movie!!!
posted on 04 Aug 2009Well where do i start. A week ago i saw the 28 days teaser for the first time on the internet and found it very interesting. But since the movie hasn´t hit the big screen in germany yet, i decided to buy the uk dvd. ( the dvd is pretty good and offers a lot of specials like commentary from the director, deleted scenes, alternate ending, music video...)So what do i think of this movie? This is a very good movie. The atmosphere throughout the whole movie is quite eerie and the soundtrack is simply amazing. Even if you don´t like horror movies and won´t watch 28 days, you should listen to one or two tracks of the soundtrack. The movie starts of in the deserted city of london and the first 15 minutes are Danny Boyle at his best. Man you gotta love the beginning. This is filmmaking on a very high level. Then the "zombies" are thrown into the story and you get some nice attack scenes with some minor gore. The zombies are done pretty well and boy, they run so fast that even Lintford Christie would go green with envy. After that we follow a small group of survivors to manchester where they are looking for a group of soldiers who claim that they have found a cure for the devastating virus...Now i´d like to correct some things which have been said about this film:1. It is NOT!!! a Resident Evil rip off. Although the story might sound a bit similar, 28 days is far superior to the lame resident evil. 2. It has some gore, but it is definitely not as gruesome as many people out there want to make you believe. If you are looking for a bloodbath movie like "Battle Royale" stay away from this. 3. The Acting is not a let down. Ok maybe nobody will get away with an oscar here, but they surly act well enough to make the movie work. 4. The second part of the movie is a bit weaker than the first one. But since the first part is close to perfection this comes as no surprise.go and watch this movie or buy the DVD. you won´t regret it.8.5 / 10
Great fun...until they get to Manchester... (SPOILERS)
posted on 04 Aug 2009"28 Days Later" is not as good as "Trainspotting," but not as horrifically boring as "The Beach." 28DL is sort of a mishmash of the concepts of the three classic Romero "Dead" films - "Night of the Living Dead", "Dawn of the Dead", and "Day of the Dead". That doesn't mean it's bad, but like the Dead trilogy, it falls flat in the third act.It has several scenes that echo Night's "zombie siege" mentality.It uses Day and Dawn's post-apocalyptic feel (though, to be fair, lots of stuff is post-apocalyptic).The most blatant similarity, however, is the entire theme of Day's whole military-self-implosion thing. The soldiers were just like the soldiers under Captain Rhodes...perhaps _too_ obviously so. Like Day, it had an overly happy ending (a killer for any zombie apocalypse flick). If the movie ended with no soldiers and no base, and the gang continued into the countryside, fighting infected and learning about themselves on the way, the movie would have been a classic.
Superb!
posted on 29 Jul 2009Wow, films like this show that money still doesn't mean everything. Just compare this masterpiece to the crappy Resident Evil. As a fan of post apocalyptic and zombie movies I must say that 28 days after satisfied me totally. I've seen nothing like this since Romero! And as a Finn I must add that I'm very proud of the notable role which the Finnish Air Force had in this film ;) A small detail, that most likely wasn't noticed anywhere part from here.. but it's nice to know who'll save the planet ;)
An excellent horror film, should not be forgotten
posted on 25 Jul 2009Danny Boyle (director of Trainspotting) was the last person I would expect to see directing a horror movie. Especially a good one. Scratch that. A great one.Shot primarily in digital camera, the movie follows a man (Jim) as he struggles to figure out just what in the world is going on after he wakes up in a Hospital and finds the world apparently devoid of all life. Stumbling around he finds his way into a church where he finally finds signs of life. Unfortunely those people he does run into in the church are infected with "rage" a virus released on accident by Animal Activists who did not heed the pleas of a scientist to not release a batch of chimps from their cages due to a highly infectious disease they carry.From there we see Jim meet up with a few other survivors and as the film goes on, we find that the infected are not the only problem Jim and his acquaintances have.Shot like a documentary the film works on many levels. It scares and at times flat out disturbs the viewer. It's not a horror movie with a "zombie" like theme used for an action platform. Instead it's a gritty account of survival, at times in it's most primitive form.The scene where Jim is shown walking around the vacant city is brilliant. The music for the scene really sets a tone of emptiness and curiosity. One of my favorite scenes of all cinema. Ever.What this film does, is show a tale of survival. The gore is not too intense, and is instead left to your imagination (i.e: Psycho, Halloween). It works that way, and Alex Garland manages to work fear, wit, and humor into his script in almost perfect harmony of each other.28 Days Later is no "zombie" flick. Yes, the infected act like Zombies, but the movie really aims to show that when no rules are in place, we can be our own worst enemy. Great film. Do not miss it.5/5. Perfect.
Best horror in years!
posted on 23 Jul 200928days later takes me back to the way Horror/Thrillers used to be made. Unexplained events make the viewer use his/her imagination as to why things are the way they are. If you can except these conditions the movie will be terribly absorbing. Excellent use of the raging "zombies", As a friend said... I'm glad the plot of the story did'nt involve leading a bunch of zombies into a building and blowing it up!" Great suspense and gripping action. Also som good emotional scenes about what it is or "means" to be a part of the Human experience.Loved it! 9/10
The last thing British Film industry needed
posted on 21 Jul 2009Me and my seven friends went and watched this film after watching all the trailors and the ongoing publicity of how good this film is. After the film we were thinking of asking for a refund. This has to be the worst British film I have ever watched. There's nothing you'll find scary about the film unless you are 5 and watching this film on your own. The idea of Zombies and virus infection sounded interesting at the start but as the film went on, it made no sense at all! I cant see why this film has got a 18 Certificate, i mean it is a bit gory but still 18 is unjustfied!We got talking to other people in the cinema and they had some pretty horrible things to say about the film as well. To sum it up 'one of the worst films ever!'
Has its moments
posted on 19 Jul 2009This concept has been don before -- the world is ravaged and a few have to live on and save the human race. Nothing can come up to the mark of the Day of the Triffids [but then what could?], but this has enough originality and strong performances from an all British cast to keep you interested until the end.The only well known cast member -- Christopher Eccleston -- helped hold things together well in his role as the commander of the army unit.
Everything I hoped for.
posted on 19 Jul 2009I know it sounds stupid having to say this, but this movie was actually BETTER than the previews. It's beautifully filmed, well acted, has some interesting philosophical overtones, a haunting score, the sound editing (which I almost never notice) was perfect, and there was an exciting (though brief) `love story'. Don't mind the haters. I don't know what movie they were expecting to see, though I will admit the ad campaign is a bit misleading. It is nothing like that piece of crap Resident Evil, nor was it intended to be. This film kicks some. Go see it. -a.
The horror of the beach is wiped from memory! A Great Film
posted on 17 Jul 2009This film has one of those "long awaited" tags to it.and it actually pays off.Danny Boyle and Alex Garland have taken a good idea and turned it into a great one. Not a horror film but a film of horrors. Without taking the credibility away from 28 days, it is Red Dwarf on earth or Outbreak in england. But also so much more. This is a film that plays with your mind long after you go home as its the chance that it could happen.It manages to make you jump, scared, laugh, and feel for the characters. as they find themselves in a infected country with a virus all around them.But the best thing to do when you go see this film is not to learn any more about it and read the reviews afterwards! hope this is what you are doing! inventive camera work and a great idea make this worth the visit to the cinemaDid it make you jump too?
I like zombie movies, and this one is not the exception
posted on 26 Aug 2009When I heard of this movie I wasn't sure if it was a good or a bad movie, so I decided to test my luck and watch it. I'll be honest, it was kinda of entertaining at the beginning, watching how the survivors ran away from those zombies. Its like watching a "War of the Worlds", the world (or UK) is in chaos and you don't know how the heck is going to be over. I was like for an hour entertained, the movie was actually well done, it showed what could happen if that weird virus appeared, it showed how the survivors would survive in this ocassion, to good to be truth, isn't it.Something a bit disappointing of the movie is the lack of zombies, I mean, I didn't watched many zombies, just at the beginning when the guy is running from the church being chased by those zombies, too when they appear in his house, in the tunnel and in the army, kinda of disappointing, but not so much as a "House of Dead" by Uwe Boll.That was one of the disappointing things about the movie, but not everything, other thing that I didn't liked was the enormous change on the trama of this movie. At the beginning the survivors were running like a bat outta of hell from the zombies, then they want to be saved so they try their luck and go with the soldiers, and then the soldiers became the bad guys after all, instead of the zombies, that was probably the biggest disappointment of all. Yep, now the bad guys are the soldiers and not the zombies, even the zombies were like the good guys killing at the soldiers. And to worse the things, there's a scene when they are going to escape, then the little girl turns on the car were the general is, crushes and the zombie grabs him, that was one of the greatest disappointments of all.But the movie is not so bad, it keeps your attention for an hour, it let's you thinking: what if...? Make yourself a favor and watch it, it's a good zombie movie.