Was the idea of him being a bike courier and then an amazing survival-slash-apocalyptic hero all that convincing? Maybe not, but the film on the whole remains convincing. He’s got one of those actor-ly faces that’s pretty enough to look good on the big screen but has enough talent to really pull out a great performance. He can move from The Wind That Shakes The Barley to the Batman films, and then play a transvestite, and it’s all totally believable. I think Cillian Murphy is amazingly talented (also, HOT). And I seem to remember there’s a survivalist community locked away (and crazy) in a country house in Day of the Triffids too, so I wonder if that’s where that comes from? Christopher Eccleston is suitably bonkers. I mean it’s NEVER like that, so it’s very disconcerting - very simple and very cleverly done.Īnd I think what makes this film creepy overall is that IT IS all kind of believable as far as zombie apocalypses go you know? I mean I didn’t really have a problem with the soldier subplot. It’s still amazingly creepy to see London so empty. People infected by the virus are no longer human and - as we’ve discussed before - if it looks like a zombie and wants to eat your face: it’s a zombie, (or a really bad date).Īnyway, it is a great film. I agree that this is definitely a zombie movie, even though they aren’t technically dead. man stuff that tends to happen whenever people are put in situations that challenge their traditional and comfortable modern-day lives.
28 days later movie about vampires movie#
For me, when the movie took that turn it became less about Jim et al‘s struggle to survive and the very traditional man vs. It might be the only section of the film I could convincingly critique. One thing I will say, though, was the Lord of the Flies-type subplot that involves the soldiers is slightly less convincing and way more Hollywood than the rest of the picture. (No offense but he wouldn’t just be pulling IVs out of his arm… if you get my drift, and he would have been suffering from far more severe infections if they would have just been left dry… but anyway, it’s not meant to be totally realistic, right, it’s still a movie.)Īnyway, the freaky nature of the infected brings me to my first point: the debate that arises around whether or not we can convincingly call them zombies. There’s so much to like about this movie: Danny Boyle’s direction, the shocking way it opens (regardless of the non-realistic way that Cillian Murphy wakes up from his coma. Sorry, was this supposed to be PG? I’ll rephrase: it’s farking good film. Let’s just open our discussion about 28 Days Later by stating the obvious: it’s a really fucking good film. Where’s Jim when you need him? I’m sure he’d set us straight. Clearly, the two of us are seriously unqualified in terms of our ability to defend our positions. She weighs in on our categorical mistake of calling this a “zombie” movie. Following the discussion between Dan and I you’ll find a note from my friend Kathleen, who knows more about film than any other person I know. Our final review/conversation of movies in the Undeath Match genre: Danny Boyle’s awesome 28 Days Later.