Review of 28 Days Later (2002) by Gareth R — 13 Aug 2012

Ten years later and Danny Boyle's lo-fi post apocalyptic horror plays as a mixed bag of success' and failures. Filmed on digital video cameras, the film has a raw quality that compliments the visceral tone stated strongly from the offset.

Almost creating a zombie sub-genre of it's own,'28 Days' tips it's cap to George Romero (a shopping scene) and most strikingly, Day Of The Triffids. It's simple stuff, a virus breaks out that's transmitted via blood and saliva which causes it's unfortunate hosts to become blood curdling zombies on speed.

We see the world through the eyes of Jim (Cillian Muprhy) who after having recently woken from a coma, stumbles across an iconic London landscape bereft of human life. If there's a money shot, then this is it.

It's a haunting sight that sets the film off with some strikingly memorable imagery. Like any film akin to the zombie genre, what follows is a tale of survival against everything and everyone. 28 Days is at it's best when exploring the world left behind but sadly falls short on character development.

Brendan Gleeson's warmth is a welcome and likeable addition, but Naomie Harris and Cillian Murphy aren't able to muster much, while Megan Burns playing the teen child of the group is career-endingly awful.

What's most disappointing is the third act which starts promisingly but becomes all too formulaic and feels rushed and tacked on. Attempts to develop a love story between Jim and Seline (Harris) fall flat and in the end there is a feeling that style has overpowered substance.