AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |
Back to Blog
28 days later where to watch1/31/2024 Most reviews have praised the `unknown' cast. It's not without flaws but the film is a very good British horror film - Americans will wonder `where are all the teenager girls to scream' or `why don't they all have guns' or `why is there no real dah-dah music to tell us when something is going to happen' but that is because this is a British film and not Hollywood. The ending is not as good as I had hoped but it wasn't bad and it fitted with the tone of reality that Jim had realised when lying on his back in the woods towards the end. The survivors are not Mad Max style heroes but people clinging to life by a thread or setting up survivalist measures that simply don't work. This film doesn't rely on gore or special effects (although it is there) instead it has genuine tension and fear. The final rain soaked action is excellent - fast, gripping and paced. The only downside is that, at one or two points, the attacks were signalled by a preceding talking 5 minutes, but this is minor. We see things like the characters would see them out of the corner of their eyes, a flicker, a shadow etc and it works to great effect. The direction is better when it is fast cutting and handheld style. Here it is clever and chilling to see much of London totally empty. The opening scene in London just shows how badly Crowe did his bit in Vanilla Sky. I was always more scared by zombie flicks than anything else becomes they keep coming - here they do the same but fast! The direction is good for the most part. The infected are not zombies in definition or in action - they move silently and fast and with pure blood lust. To me scary is things like Ringu - creepy stuff, but most will be freaked by 28 days later. Of course is it scary? Well, not scary but thrilling all the way. The bridging section of the journey north is good as it helps us know the characters better. Both are well told but for different reasons. First the big picture in London and then the smaller battle north of Manchester. At this point his fear becomes ours and what is important to him is not the detail but the bigger picture of the infected and the chances of survival. Details as to what the virus is or what it was created in the first place (by putting monkeys in front of TV's Clockwork Orange style?) but the detail is not important seconds into the film when we wake up with Jim. The plot is simple and omits much detail but not to it's disservice. I excitedly arrived at the preview for this looking forward to a tense British horror movie to make me jump with fear. Jim is rescued by Selena and her friend who tell him what has happened and start a search for other survivors and a quest to find the cure, promised by a military unit stationed in the north. ![]() 28 days later Jim awakens from his state to find London deserted and populated only by a group of those infected by rage. However the monkeys are infected with a new developed virus called rage which is contagious by blood or bodily fluid - at the same time Jim lies in a coma. I’m sure that, at some point, every fan has imagined how things continued.In England a group of animal rights activists break into a research facility to free monkeys. And at the end of the sequel, we saw an ominous scene showing the Rage virus taking over Paris. But me and speak about it, every couple of years it comes up.”Ģ8 Weeks Later definitely upped the ante from the original. “One of the things about 28 Days Later is that it was small and punk, and this idea is less small and punk. On the bright side, Garland revealed that he does indeed have a good idea for a third film. “I have got a really cool idea for but it’s a much bigger movie,” he said. “Everybody needs to want to do it, and every now and then - partly because I think about paying off the mortgage or something like that - I think, ‘Hm, that might be a good idea.’ But me personally I never quite have enough motivation to follow it through.” “It’s possible,” Garland said in a recent interview with Yahoo. ![]() Making a threequel would require a ton of people getting on board. Clearly, the fascination with the Rage virus remains strong. It spawned a successful sequel, 28 Weeks Later, in 2007, but never returned for a third installment, even as we got novels and comic books. ![]() Might that be about to change? While we shouldn’t get our hopes up just yet, writer Alex Garland hasn’t stopped planning.ĭirected by Danny Boyle, 28 Days Later premiered in 2002, breathing new life into the zombie genre. Every now and then a rumor pops up that it may be coming, but nothing has ever happened. We’ve had 28 Days Later and we’ve had 28 Weeks Later… is it finally time for 28 Months Later? A third movie in the zombie franchise has been discussed for years.
0 Comments
Read More
Leave a Reply. |