28 Days Later (2002)

Overall rating from 1 to 100: 81

O Masterpiece (95-100)
X Excellent (75-94)
O Good video rental (60-74)
O Merely OK (50-59)
O Pure mediocrity (30-49)
O Medusa: don’t watch (1-29)

Review by Jason Pyles / May 2, 2007

When it was released in 2002, “28 Days Later” was deservingly all the rage, pun intended. As far as zombie movies go, it is one of the finest. And since the sequel, “28 Weeks Later,” is being released next Friday, May 11, I thought I’d revisit the original as a refresher review.

Besides having some of the most unpleasant zombies imaginable, what makes “28 Days Later” so excellent is that it’s a horror story within a horror story, similar to the way that “Hostage” (2005) is cleverly a hostage situation within a hostage situation.

The film opens in laboratory that has chimpanzees quarantined in glass cages. Something is seriously wrong with these monkeys. They’ve been infected — and are highly contagious — with a virus called “Rage.”

Rage basically makes its infected victims go berserk and mindlessly attack any uninfected, moving, living thing with an onslaught of biting, scratching, and tearing — but mainly biting. Like AIDS, Rage is contracted through bodily fluids such as blood and saliva. These zombies have two unique characteristics: They move really quickly and they projectile vomit blood.

So, when some animal rights activists bust into the laboratory to release the “torture victims,” the Rage infection is unleashed upon the human population.

The screen goes black and we’re informed that it’s 28 days later. Jim (Cillian Murphy) awakens from a coma in a hospital bed, and he is utterly alone. He wanders outside and the streets of London are empty. No one is to be found. But he soon discovers that being alone is generally preferable.

Luckily, Jim teams up with the few other uninfected individuals. His new friends pick up a broadcast that summons all survivors to a military checkpoint many miles away. The senders of the message claim that they have found “salvation” and “the answer to the infection.” Jim and his friends venture out on the perilous journey and hopefully investigate the transmission.

This film is suspenseful, well made and legitimately scary. The acting is great, too. The zombies are frightening and grotesque, but as disgusting as they are, “28 Days Later” shows us that there can be even more hideous monsters than zombies. I have high hopes for the forthcoming sequel; if it’s anything like this first movie, it will be excellent.

Note: Be sure you don’t confuse “28 Days Later” with Sandra Bullock’s “28 Days” (2000). (The Rage virus has reportedly befallen those who have mistakenly rented the Bullock movie instead.)

Directed by Danny Boyle
Cillian Murphy / Naomie Harris / Brendan Gleeson
113 min. Horror / Thriller
MPAA: R (for strong violence and gore, language and nudity)

Copyright 2007.
JP0094 : 408