28 DAYS LATERReviewed by: Mike Koger
Starring: Cillian Murphy, Naomie Harris, Megan Burns, Christopher Eccleston, Brendan Gleeson | Directed by: Danny Boyle | Produced by: Andrew MacDonald | Written by: Alex Garland | Distributor: Fox Searchlight
Producer’s Synopsis: “A virus that locks those infected into a permanent state of killing rage, is accidentally released from a British research facility. Carried by animals and humans, the virus is impossible to contain, and spreads across the entire planet. Twenty-eight days later, a small group of survivors are trapped in London, caught in a desperate struggle to protect themselves from the infected. As they attempt to salvage a future from the apocalypse, they find that their most deadly enemy is not the virus, but other survivors.” This is a well-made, although very violent and disturbing film coming out of Great Britain, released there in 2002. Its film style is a gritty, almost documentary style which leaves you feeling that you are more of a participant than a viewer. Although I generally enjoy films of this nature, I was very disturbed by this film. The nature of the violence in this film surpasses the traditional George A. Romero style usually connected with films of this genre. There is a strong message delivered through this work, a message that “people kill people… and always have.” Sad, but true. However, this is not enough of a morality play to suggest that Christians pay for such a lesson. I strongly urge any Christian with a tender heart to avoid this film… or at least prayerfully reconsider before going. It is a cruel film, with a great deal of inhumanity and violence. I cannot recommend this for any age or film taste. The scriptures tell us to “guard your heart with all diligence” and I say use this as a measuring stick for this or an other film. Violence: Extreme / Profanity: Extreme / Sex/Nudity: Moderate Year of Release—2003 in U.S. (2002 in U.K.)See review page on the sequel to this film: “28 Weeks Later” Movie Critics
…Extreme profanity… Abundant and graphic violence…
…a blood-soaked, post-apocalyptic zombie movie in the tradition of George Romero's Night of the Living Dead… …Men forcibly take off a woman's clothes …and prepare to rape her. …women with bare breasts …nude man lies in a hospital bed (genitals, bare buttocks)… nude man stands in a shower (bare buttocks)… 49 F-words… …It has been a long time since we've seen a horror movie as wild, weird and scary as 28 Days Later. …horribly scary movie… For its first hour or so, “28 Days Later” is about as good as it gets, inside the horror genre and out. …loses steam in its final stretch… …An extremely creepy mood prevails over the production… …Use extreme caution / spoiled by humanist elements, very strong foul language, gory violence, and graphic… Negative - …From start to finish, its violence, gore and attitude upset me a lot. The idea is that we are the danger to ourselves because in the end people were killing people. Avoid this work of the devil. My sister was in tears, because of the nude zombies and attempted rape. I couldn't watch as the zombies caught people. The main actors assault on the priest was unforgivable, whether he be alive or dead. Disturbing. Bad. Neutral - This movie was the most horribly violent movie I have ever encountered. Movies of this nature do not usually bother me, but this one did. It is hard to put into words the type of violence it was. It was truly brutal. As I left the movie theater I realized that every muscle in my body had been clenched for the last hour and a half. I would say that in this movie you see over 1000 dead bodies and you watch probably close to 200 people viciously, brutally murdered. This is not a “Horror Movie” by typical definition, so if you are looking just to be a little scared and a slight adreniline rush, this is NOT the movie. If you are looking to be subjected to nightmare creating brutality, I would still recommend seeing something else! Aside from the violent content, this movie was well made, the actors were terrific, the writing was good, and even the “lesson” behind it (“rage”) was a good one, but the violence that was portrayed was simply hard to embrace. Neutral — I had no idea this was going to be a bloodbath! Nor did I know this was a scary movie. I saw this movie with my husband, and I literally held his arm throughout the whole movie. I had to close my eyes and ears. I was really scared/shaking throughout this movie. If you truly like a scary/cliffhanger movie experience, and can handle killing after killing not to mention nudity and bad language. Then this is for you. Otherwise, stay at home and rent a decent movie. My husband on the other hand, liked this movie, and is looking forward to the DVD. Positive - This film should really not be seen by children, and I am fairly certain that the film maker did not intend for it to be viewed by children. Now the only scene in the movie that could be considered an attack on Christianity is the hitting of the priest. This, in my opinion was not meant to attack Christian thought, but was meant as a thought provoking way of showing hopelessness. Yes, it was rather shamelessly used solely for effect, but their most likely weren't bad intentions. The biggest fears I have about kids seeing this film is its negative looks at society, more so than the blood thirsty infected (which were still, mind you, were still rather inappropriate for kids) The soldiers who the survivors represent and express some very dark themes of human existence that kids might not comprehend. So, in a nutshell, this film is very well made, perhaps the best of its genre, but should definitely not be seen by children middle school aged and younger, at least not without adults there to supervise, to censor some of the worst scenes (the nudity, the rape) and to discuss the film with them afterwards. Negative - If you like a good horror movie, this is not the one. I was very disappointed. It was boring and the story wasn't good at all. It was basically pointless. The writing and acting were not good either. If you haven't seen it, I wouldn't waste your time. Positive - What an interesting movie! It had its share of violence and blood, but I never thought the gore was over the top. It was just disturbing enough to let you see the gravity of the situation for these characters. And what amazing characters they are! Jim is the most charismatic character I've seen in a long time. But most importantly, this movie asks questions about the question of humanity—what is it? What makes the “zombies” different than us? Is there any difference between what they are doing and what we do in war? Filled with tough questions and really scary zombies (they're fast and mean), this movie is a thriller that's not necessarily frightening, but definitely intelligent and exciting! Positive - …excellent movie, one of the greats of all time, really enjoyed the movie. Welcome back to a classic Horror. Better than American trashy horror movies. Positive - Reviewer concern about profanity, nudity and violence has left people ignoring significant issues this film poses: Comments from young people
Neutral - I'm used to horror films. I'm used to the blood and gore.this movie was not by any means a film that I considered to by graphically violent. I do however say that the violence in this film is very brutal, which is harder to watch than cheesy low budget violence. There was full frontal nudity which surprised me. there was attempted rapes and the most pervasive profanity I've ever heard in a film.also some drug references and usage.the film itself wasn't even very good.it had some decent scary sequences and some cool action, but the overall filthiness of this film takes away from it all. It wasn't a pleasant film, at least, I'll say for most people, don't see it. It was very violent, very profane and very brutal. That's basically all the film was—brutal violence, the end. I caution anyone to research this movie and pray about it before going. It isn't a run of the mill Hollywood flick, and people did scream and the blood vomiting sequences in the film. Positive - …yet another fantastic film from British director Danny Boyle (“Trainspotting”), is the terrifying story of the entire population of the UK completely wiped out by a medical experiment gone wrong, appropriately titled “rage.” Offering something much more entertaining and thrilling than most run-of-the-mill zombie movies, 28 Days Later is a thoroughly enjoyable horror thriller, with a truly ironic and shocking final half hour. Despite the unnecessary, but unfortunately expected bad language, I recommend “28 Days Later” highly. Positive - I will freely admit that there are numerable instances of swearing, violence and nudity. The swearing and violence, bear in mind that these people are essentially two adults and one child, alone and unprotected. Swearing can be offensive, but here it was used in times of extreme stress, where it is, in my view forgivable. The violence, doing what it takes to survive is a human trait. While the nudity was not necessary, it reminds us that the main characters are indeed human, it grounds them from the bloodshed and horror of the outside world. This movie is an amazing piece of work, the scenes of London empty are stunning. It did scare the living daylights out of me, but then I get jumpy in horror flicks. All in all the movie had a moral: Rage is bad, and the heros eventually escaped rage. To all those children that found this offensive, the movie was given an 18 rating, consider it before watching it. Positive - If you like zombie or post apocalyptic settings, you'll find no better than “28 Days Later.” Whereas other zombie movies focus more on the run and gun aspects of the genre, “28 days Later” shows an emotional side we rarely get to see. The real effects on human psyche. |