Blogcritics: Comments on 28 Paragraphs Later... : A Veritable Plague of Thoughts About 28 Days Later

Comment by Chris Puzak

Tue, 9 Sep 2003 16:12:35 EDT

Good review. A couple of points: 28 Days is not the first movie to feature fast-moving zombies. The most well-known example I can think of is Dan O'Bannon's Retrun of the Livng Dead, in which all the zombies were quite capable of running. Also, if we want to stretch the definition of zombie a bit, there are plenty of fast-moving possessed people in Mario Bava's Demons movies. I'm sure there are others, but those are the only ones I can think of at the moment. 2. I'm surprised you didn't mention of George Romero's Day of the Dead from which this movie draws a whole lot of influences. Both movies focus on feature crazy military guys who are just as much a threat to the survivors as the zombies are. Both movies even have zombies being held in captivity, although the zombie in Day of the Dead had a little more personality than the one in 28 Days Later.

Comment by Dave

Tue, 9 Sep 2003 15:38:53 EDT

"And the film's opening section, in which a chimp is forced, a la Axl Rose in the video for "Welcome to the Jungle," to watch countless looped clips of horrific mob violence the world over added a chilling tone" "a la Clockwork Orange" is probably closer.

Comment by Doctor Slack

Tue, 15 Jul 2003 21:42:24 EDT

"the kind of blanket support that GYBE apparently offers the Intifada seems tantamount to endorsing the pointless, purposeless violence which characterizes it" Sorry for my late reply, but I just realized what bugs me about this sentence. Whatever violence has characterized the Intifada has never struck me, on either side, as being purposeless. You could certainly make an argument for pointless, but human violence even in the nastiest tribal war always has an underlying web of justifications, rationales, strategies and goals. Anyone who believes this isn't the case with any sector of the Palestinian Intifada -- most especially the extremist suicide-bomber factions -- is kidding themselves. To bring this back to the realm of the zombie film, it strikes me that precisely what makes zombie movies creepy is that they're a metaphor for inhuman violence -- violence stripped of reason, of justification, even (in the case of 28 Days Later) of motive. At least olden time zombies were motivated by appetite, but Boyle has purified even this trait out of zombiedom. For that reason, talk about the virus serving as a metaphor for human intolerance or "rage" strikes me as somehow wrongheaded. It's rather that the "rage" provides an action-packed way of dramatizing the merciless power of nature -- particularly a nature lightly toyed with. (I can see other reviewers are already circling the wagons against that most Coulterish of demons, "unexamined left-wing attitudes," but really, this strikes me as a most justifiable kind of filmic commentary on a world which has seen 1) thankfully clumsy attempts to use anthrax as a weapon of terror, and 2) cattle industries ravaged by a disease born when some bright spark decided to feed cows to other cows.)

Comment by Charlie Murtaugh

Sun, 13 Jul 2003 21:24:17 EDT

Terrific review! You really hit everything I enjoyed about this movie, along with every minor problem about it (esp. your #2, about radio signals from outside the Infected zone). On your point about how it would be hard to spread off Britain, you might enjoy this article on the movie, from last Sunday's New York Times, by former NIH director and Nobel Prize-winning virologist Harold Varmus.

Comment by Sean T. Collins

Fri, 11 Jul 2003 20:30:13 EDT

Hey, Doc: Yeah, you're absolutely right, and I was worried about that. The point I was clumsily trying to make was that the kind of blanket support that GYBE apparently offers the Intifada seems tantamount to endorsing the pointless, purposeless violence which characterizes it (a particularly jarring lapse in GYBE's case because the album itself is dedicated to people whose lives are threatened by unexploaded American ordinance). That's no wiser than expressing support for Israel without condemning the settlement policies, the apparently reckless bulldozing of homes, etc etc etc. Mainly it was just a digression prompted by the synchronicity of seeing a movie full of GYBE music and then going outside and seeing the pro-Palestinian demonstration. And if we can't digress on our blogs, the terrorists have already won! So, uh, anyway, how 'bout them zombies!

Comment by Doctor Slack

Fri, 11 Jul 2003 19:42:46 EDT

I liked your review of the film, Sean. But yes, your political digression irritated me: "To me, this is a bit like there being a group of people in the world of the film who are militantly pro-zombie," mainly because I don't sense you're the kind of guy who's really irresponsible enough to want to compare the population of occupied Palestine to mindless zombies (even of the non-flesh-eating variety). But that's what your digression kinda basically implies.

Comment by Donald Joseph

Fri, 11 Jul 2003 16:28:02 EDT

Great comments about a great film. Another fake bit, however (albeit a minor point): The father-daughter team in the high rise used blinking X-mas lights to attract uninfected humans. When the infected "zombies" saw the humans going up the high-rise stairs, the "zombies" followed them right up. Why, though, weren't the "zombies" attracted up the stairs, in the first place, by the blinking lights? That is, why did the lights attract only the uninfected?