I'll rate this 8/10 just my opinion and i dont have enough reason why its 8 or 10 😄

Watched.

because

I originally saw this in the Cinema and left un-entertained. I thought it was a good idea that was shoddily executed. Some acting was appalling especially the daughter, can't remember her name. Also, Danny Boyle isn't a good director, he's meant to be making a horror film here and he puts a stupid supermarket scene in. It starts with trolleys being ridiculously choreographed through the checkouts and the 2 girls having great fun helping themselves to the chocolate, forget 5 minutes before, when they were nearly savaged by the sprinting zombies. And the ending?! What a joke. Cillian Murphy is suddenly an action hero. Nowhere before in the movie did it reveal that he had such stealth skills and the nerve to take out trained army personnel. 28 Weeks Later was by far a superior film. So when 28 Days Later was on TV last night, I thought maybe I was being a bit harsh with it, so I watched it again. After two hours, I realised I wasn't being harsh enough.

Danny Boyle is an exceptionally gifted filmmaker and I've been enamored with his work since the brilliant "Shallow Grave." "Trainspotting" only gets better every time you see it and "A Life Less Ordinary" has some bright moments. (The singing and dancing number is parfait.) Mr. Boyle hit a bump in the road when it came to "The Beach," but then he forsake us all by casting DiCaprio. He's back to redeem himself, as is Alex Garland, with "28 Days Later," a marvelous twist on the apocalyptic film. IMDB's summary isn't completely accurate in that "nearly the entire planet has been wiped out." But that's a plot twist you'll have to uncover for yourself. What occurs - a la "12 Monkeys" - is while trying to expose the work taking place at a primate research center, a group of activists unwittingly release a virus called rage. The way it works is if a person is bitten by an infected person, he or she develops a murderous rage and desire to kill within 10 to 12 seconds. (Infection can also occur if the afflicted person's blood enters another person's body, through the nose, eye, mouth or open wound.) Twenty-eight days after being hit by a car, Jim, a bike courier and our film's hero, wakes up to find London deserted. He eventually meets two other survivors and then encounters another two. After picking up a radio broadcast that calls all uninfected people to Manchester, the survivors fight off the infected and make their way to what seems like the promised land. Complications follow is all I'll say. Some have compared this film to George Romero's "Night of the Living Dead," giving some people the wrong impression that this is the British take on the zombie flick. Wrong. The infected aren't zombies but they are terrifying. They can be killed and the director doesn't gross us out by showing the infected feasting on human flesh. (All in all, "28 Days" isn't visually disgusting. It's the thought of what's going on that bothers you.) The acting in this film is really first rate, with Cillian Murphy giving an emotionally compelling performance. As in most Boyle films, the camera work also is exceptional and in the first part we are shown some phenomenal long shots of an evacuted London with a soundtrack devoid of sound. The effect is gooseflesh raising. Boyle also adds in other nice touches, like a bunch of goldfish swimming in about five inches of water. (Symbolism?) And a scene with wild horses is another fine moment. The story too goes beyond what we might expect. We get the jumps associated with zombie films - they come out of no where and travel in packs - and yet the heroes don't come off too much better. One character suggests that the virus, by killing off humankind, returns things to normalcy. Christopher Eccleston, a terrific actor, retorts that before the virus man killed man and now he's still doing it. So what's changed? The film also suggests that to save yourself, you would have to kill anyone - child, adult; family member, stranger. And these characters do. But what's noteworthy is we see how having to make those sorts of decisions affects them, particularly Jim. Like Lord of the Flies, the film strips away the civility we all think we possess and demonstrates that we, too, are bound by the laws of the animal kingdom - it's survival of the fittest and to have a future we need to reproduce. Another reviewer said the film fell apart after the first 45 minutes when, in fact, I felt it only got stronger. The last half of the film proved to be very intense. Garland truly raised the stakes. If you enjoy your scares with a bit more thought to them, "28 Days Later" won't disappoint. (And if you do, try these similar films - "12 Monkeys," "Quiet Earth" and "Lord of the Flies.")

28 Days Later successfully takes the zombie genre to a new level, this movie is far more than just a horror flick. There are some great characters, that you actually care about, some you'll like, some you'll be glad to see killed, but all solidly performed. The story is well written and avoids the clichéd cheesy scripts that are too often attached to the horror genre. And I must add that the direction is exactly what you would expect from 'Danny Boyle' top class. For me though the real difference between this movie and many others made in this genre is as follows - The infected (the zombie like folk) are more menacing, they turn instantly and they move fast, a combination that would instill fear in every one of us. I don't mean to run down the zombie movie genre - I am a huge fan of most of these films, but lets be honest its been done to death, re-animated and done again, and this was the first movie to break the mould and transcend to a new level. If you like your horror flicks, then this is certainly worthy of your attention. 9/10

This film was fantastic. I was expecting something along the lines of a combination of "Resident Evil" and "The Day After Tomorrow" but this is quite different from that description. Yes, it involves a terrible disease that leaves its infected victims as blood-sucking, mindless zombies who pray on the not-yet-infected and yes, it involves a group of survivors who are left together to fend for themselves. But it is quite different from Resident Evil (no comic-book or video-game type plot here and no explosives or automatic weapons) and is a much more thrilling "survivalist-type" film than "The Day After Tomorrow". An awful virus is spreading through the streets and cities of Great Britain. Soon nearly everybody is affected by this deadly disease that turns its victims into zombies, who are quite noticeable and different from normal people due to their odd/rapid body movements, their blood red eyes, foaming at the mouth, and their inability to communicate with normal people unless they are trying to bite them. A small group of survivors manages to stay alive and uninfected, but not for long. Eventually, they one-by-one fall victim to the awful disease and the remaining survivors have sealed a pact that involves them instantly killing any member of their group that has become infected, not to endanger those who are still alive and not yet zombies. As the survivors count their time left, they attempt to make it to a British military base near Manchester where they believe they will be safe. They do eventually make it there, but what can stop zombies (who are mindless, blood-thirsty and have nothing to lose) from invading an army base? Are the survivors and British soldiers safe? Or will they soon become zombies themselves? This film is quite scary and exciting and perhaps one of the best British films that I have seen from modern times... Please feel free to email me with any questions or comments...

The 2003 State-side release of Danny Boyle's "28 Days Later" was advertised as being a shockful scare-fest of a movie. I didn't get around to seeing it until a few days ago and I gotta feel like that was somewhat of an embellishment on the promoters' part. When environmental terrorists attack a lab that contains diseased chimps who are infected with a "Rage" virus, they unwittingly let loose a plague that lays waste to England and(perhaps)the rest of society. The 28 Days later of the title cuts to a mostly abandoned London where a coma-tized bicycle courier named Jim(Cillian Murphy,effective) wakes from his stasis to find himself alone in a hospital. As he searches London for signs of life,he is rescued from raging zombies by a couple of survivalists(one of them,the lovely Naomie Harris)who he follows from place to place to keep alive. From there,he also meets a man and his daughter(Brendan Gleeson,terrific,and Megan Burns,good)and they try to find a refuge out of London-town. A recorded message of a "paradise" where "salvation" can be found is tracked by Frank(the man) on his shortwave radio. This film feels more like a meditation on what happens to people when they are reduced to their lowest elements. A friend of mine told me that this movie's running zombies was what inspired the zombies in the remake of "Dawn of the Dead",but where "Dawn of..." was pretty much a full-throttle action/horror hybrid from about start to finish,this film plays more like a "What if..." movie,with less emphasis on the creatures themselves and more on the (lucky?) survivors. There are also disturbing lessons on the nature OF survival,too. An very interesting and disturbing flick that probably sold itself wrong.

Back in good old Great Britain, Danny Boyle proves that he's still a gifted filmmaker even though his short Hollywood career wasn't as fruitful as initially hoped for. The opening sequences of this "28 Days Later…" are downright astonishing and – for a moment – you suspect that you're about to watch to most brilliant horror film in a long, long time. Especially the already classic sequence in which Jim (Cillian Murphy) wanders through the entirely deserted streets of the otherwise so lively and crowded London, guided by disturbing music, is efficiently creepy. The plot centers on an extremely aggressive virus that turns people into blood-crazed maniacs. It's only 28 days since the virus was unleashed and the entire population is wiped away already, while a few lonely survivors desperately prepare for the total apocalypse. Jim is one of them, as he just awoke from a coma, completely unaware of the vile events that took place the past 28 days… Even though the story isn't very original (Romero's "The Crazies" come to mind as well as "Last Man on Earth" and "The Omega Man"), Danny Boyle succeeds in portraying a gripping mix of drama, action, suspense and – oh yes – gore! Now, I really wished I could end my user comment here and conclude that "28 Days Later…" was a simply great new horror film but unfortunately the script takes a complete U-turn halfway and becomes a repetitive lesson in which Boyle and writer Alex Garland try to convince us that mankind still remains the biggest threat of all. The last survivors end up at a military post where their lives are even in bigger danger. The tension and carefully built up atmosphere disappears and is replaced by tedious macho speeches and gratuitous brutality. The acting performances in this film aren't very spectacular but that's understandable considering most cast-members are debuting here. The fact that this project was entirely filmed with digital cameras might be a nice trivia element, but I'm not too keen on this type of cinematography. Overall, Boyle's film is worthy viewing for horror fans but experienced fanatics won't be too impressed.

I 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.