Movies Books Music Food Tv Shows Technology Politics Video Games Parenting Fashion Green Living more >

Lunch » Tags » Movies » Reviews » 28 Days Later » User review

28 Days Later... (2002)

A 2003 horror film directed by Danny Boyle.

< read all 15 reviews

Better to See it On Cable than to Buy it!

  • May 6, 2009
  • by
This movie got a lot of attention like the Night of the Living Dead. I recently rented it and was greatly disappointed. This movie deals with a virus that makes people almost like mutant crazies that go around attacking other people.

A group of people wander London trying to get back to "civilization." While the characters in George Romero's classic were interesting and you really felt for them, these characters are dull and sometimes act crazy themselves.

The British accents were very difficult to understand at times. The climatic ending is in no way as good as Romero's film. In this film the survivors of the group keep trying to catch the attention of some overflying aircraft. They rig a big message and I guess they are rescued because the next scene is says it is 28 days later and the main character is in a hospital. Not worth buying.

What did you think of this review?

Fun to Read
Post a Comment
May 06, 2009
I didn't care much for either one of these 2 films in spite of the fact that they were big hits and I'm virtually alone in my opinion. Neither one of them begins to compare with NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD in my book. The modern running zombie concept just ups the gore factor and eliminates the need for character development.
May 06, 2009
The first two Romero films were great. The third one I wasn't crazy for.
May 06, 2009
That one really had to grow on me. I absolutely loathed it at first, in fact I probably loathed it for the first decade because there weren't very many likeable people in it for starters. But after revisiting it a number of times I see where he was going with it and it all makes sense now and I've grown to accept it. Oddly it was filmed in north Florida of all places instead of Pennsylvania where most of his films are shot. I remember the casting notices for zombies appearing in the newspapers.
May 06, 2009
The main thing I remember is that they train a zombie to shoot a gun. Considering that in the first two the zombies were totally mindless creatures that went to bite anyone (except for the little girl in the first one who used a shovel as a weapon) this would seem highly implausable for the universe that Romero created.
May 07, 2009
That was the film in which he first started to change his zombies into the thinking creatures they eventually became in LAND OF THE DEAD. He didn't really have to teach Bub anything. Bub had been a soldier in life, so when the doctor who had been training him and more or less befriending him was killed in front of him, Bub remembered what to do with a gun--didn't hurt that he had just seen it demonstrated either.
May 07, 2009
I didn't realize that Romero made a sequel to this film. Thanks for helping me remember the details. I guess I might have to give the film another look if I come across it.
May 07, 2009
Actually he's made 5 DEAD films, the last one, DIARY OF THE DEAD, goes back to the beginning of the plague although it doesn't try to recreate the 60s--its set in the present and in a sort of BLAIR WITCH style. Also, there is separate series of films made by Russ Streiner and Jon Russo who were Romero's partners on NOTLD, called RETURN OF THE LIVING DEAD 1, 2, and 3 . When they broke up after NOTLD Romero got possession the "time of day" aspect of the title and his partners got to use "living dead" in their titles.
RETURN is a great zombie film. Its also a comedy, and one of the first films to have running zombies, this was back in the early 80s.
May 07, 2009
I saw the first one with James Karen. I remember it was hilarious. The zombies were fast and wanted brains.
May 07, 2009
Actually, if you really like zombie tales the best one I have come across is called Breathers by S. G. Browne. I posted a review of it on Lunch.
May 07, 2009
Thanks. Yeah, the did speak too. I'm one of the few people who also liked the seond one which was even more of a comedy. The third one went back to being deadly serious and was very good.
More 28 Days Later reviews
review by . March 27, 2011
A mutant virus turns Britain into a wasteland.
28 Days Later...is a film about a mutated bio-weapon that is released from a lab that infects people with a nasty virus that turns them homicidal. The isle of Britain has become quarantined and only a few unlucky survivors must fend for themselves as there is no one around who can help them. One survivor Jim (Cillian Murphy) was in the hospital during all of this and is awakened to a nightmarish Hell. During his travels around London, he meets up with a few others and try to get out of the city …
review by . October 17, 2010
posted in Movie Hype
      28 DAYS LATER      I have argued it for years and it seems that there are still people out there who think this is a zombie when it is clearly not. This film is no were near being a zombie flick as the INFECTED are not dead they are just INFECTED with a virus that was put into monkeys. I don't know why people think of this as a zombie flick but what ever. This is indeed a great film and when it was released one of the scariest films in recent years. …
review by . February 25, 2011
posted in Movie Hype
28 Days Later: Now with MOAR BLOOD!
   It must be prefaced that I'm a wimp with an overactive imagination who cannot watch the likes of The X-Files and Unsolved Mysteries beyond sundown. Horror is not my genre of choice, though I have viewed my fair share of horror, slasher and thriller flicks over time. My experience lies with classic horror (Poltergeist, The Exorcist, The Omen, Night of the Living Dead, etc) and quasi-spooky cheesy nonsensical low-budget nostalgic filler (Evil Dead, The People Under the Stairs, A Nightmare …
review by . July 22, 2010
posted in Movie Hype
I'll start by confessing that I'm not a big fan of Horror films. Don't get me wrong, they are cool. I just haven't seen too many of them. So, I'm kind of a newbie to this genre. This one came highly recommended by numerous friends and acquaintances. So, I decided to check it out.      What stood out the most to me in this one was the way it was shot. It wasn't shot on 35mm film, like most films and a lot of the shots were done hand-held, instead of using …
Quick Tip by . October 17, 2010
posted in Movie Hype
I had a lot of fun watching this when it first came out and still it is fun to watch right now, that's just me. Is this a perfect movie, that is up to you but I have a great time watching it.
Quick Tip by . July 20, 2010
posted in Movie Hype
Please don't call 28 Days Later another zombie movie. This British cult favorite will keep you enthralled the entire film as you put yourself in Jim's post-virus shoes.
Quick Tip by . July 19, 2010
posted in Movie Hype
This is possibly my favorite Zombie film ever. It is just awesome
Quick Tip by . July 18, 2010
posted in Movie Hype
This movie scared me, we talk about this happening in the real world and it made me think too much. If you like that watch it;0
review by . June 23, 2006
I had seen this film a few times and it's surprisingly good. "28 Days Later" is a genre-defying film wrapped in a shoebox budget. The key to keeping the sci-fi horror genre alive is to make sure the material and techniques the filmmakers present is at least competent, at it's average creative, and at it's best something that we haven't seen before or haven't seen in such a style or form. George A. Romero did that back in prime of film-making, bringing forth one of the most memorable trilogies of …
review by . May 23, 2004
posted in Movie Hype
This movie got a lot of attention like the Night of the Living Dead. I recently rented it and was greatly disappointed. This movie deals with a virus that makes people almost like mutant crazies that go around attacking other people. A group of people wander London trying to get back to "civilization." While the characters in George Romero's classic were interesting and you really felt for them, these characters are dull and sometimes act crazy themselves.The British accents were very difficult …
About the reviewer

Ranked #9
I first got on this blog to discuss my first passion which is books. Since I have gotten on I find that books are only a piece of this blog and I can discuss just about anything that comes to mind. It … more
Consider the Source

Use Trust Points to see how much you can rely on this review.

Your ratings:
rate more to improve this
About this movie


The director/producer team that created Trainspotting turn their dynamic cinematic imaginations to the classic science fiction scenario of the last people on Earth. Jim (Cillian Murphy) wakes up from a coma to find London deserted--until he runs into a mob of crazed plague victims. He gradually finds other still-human survivors (including Naomie Harris), with whom he heads off across the abandoned countryside to find the source of a radio broadcast that promises salvation. 28 Days Later is basically an updated version of The Omega Man and other post-apocalyptic visions; but while the movie may lack originality, it makes up for it in vivid details and creepy paranoid atmosphere. 28 Days Later's portrait of how people behave in extreme circumstances--written by novelist Alex Garland (The Beach)--will haunt you afterward. Also featuring Brendan Gleeson (The General, Gangs of New York) and Christopher Eccleston (Shallow Grave, The Others).--Bret Fetzer
view wiki


Director: Danny Boyle
Genre: Horror, Sci-Fi, Thriller
Release Date: June 27, 2003
MPAA Rating: R
Screen Writer: Alex Garland
DVD Release Date: October 21, 2003
Runtime: 113 minutes
Studio: 20th Century Fox
Polls with this movie
28 Days Later... (2002)

Favorite Zombie Flix


First to Review
© 2015 Lunch.com, LLC All Rights Reserved
Lunch.com - Relevant reviews by real people.
This is you!
Ranked #
Last login
Member since