MovieChat Forums > 28 Days Later... (2003) Discussion > 28 mins in, and turned it off

28 mins in, and turned it off

posted 5 years ago by fzane (1005)
20 replies | jump to latest

After getting about 28 minutes in, i felt that they could have at least shown us one flashback scene. Like the airport one would have been nice, while he told the story, but it was him talking, and felt cheap, like an audiobook or something. This is cinema, SHOW US SOMETHING. Not understanding how anyone would vote this 7.5, i'm thinking the Brits all voted it up because it's one of their few films. It happens all the time with Brit movies (getting falsely inflated ratings). I'm glad i turned it off. I wasted a ton of time on junk movies lately, and wanted to go watch something that actually contained some real cinema.

[–] kellycallie (728) 5 years ago

Was the American copycat ''The walking dead'' pilot episode any better?

[–] wearsalan (5554) 5 years ago

Hahaha!
Nicely put

[–] Moonglum9 (10749) 5 years ago

Heyyyyyy! The Walking Dead is not a copycat. The zombies move slow in it.

[–] fzane (1005) 5 years ago

They are two different beasts. One is a TV show meant to unfold the story in a slow way, and the other is a 2 hour movie that should have the story moving along nicely. If 28 days later was a TV show, the pace would have made more sense.

[–] djangounlamed (1769) 4 years ago

Well how would you know. you'll watch multiple 45 minute episodes of build up in a show but couldn't be bothered to spend 28 mins on a film. Only you are to blame

[–] fzane (1005) 4 years ago

Like I said, I have no problem with a slow burn TV show taking it's time to develop, but not a movie listed as a Horror/SciFi. They should have listed it as a Drama.
So there. I think I've made my point. Two minutes of genuinely scary zombie attacks do not constitute a sufficient payoff for sitting through what is, in summary, a very poor, dull, cheap-looking, boring film. Avoid like the Rage virus - if you go in to this film, it will feel like you're leaving it 28 days later.

[–] djangounlamed (1769) 4 years ago

Guess you've never heard of Jaws then.... Or various other horror movies.

again. willing to put in 10+ hours on a slow burn tv show. couldn't get past 30 mins.. only to miss some serious badass parts. including our hero causing massive chaos with zombies vs bunch of British military people.

you would be better sticking to Michael bay sorta stuff

[–] BourbonKing (5668) 5 years ago

You must have missed the very beginning which clearly shows the root of the problem.

Your issue is sounds psychological, like you have ADHD

[–] fzane (1005) 5 years ago

I have no problem paying attention to slow burn movies, but imo, zombie movies have no business in being slow burn with only 1 action scene. Make it a TV show that stretches over a season or two, and that would be fine, but not a movie. Why were they so cheap that they couldn't have at least one flashback scene to show the hordes of zombies in action? That would have been too much like cinema, and this movie just didn't care about that. It seemed like it was trying to see how cheap it could make a zombie movie by having no special effects whatsoever. I may as well have been reading a picture book with drab scenery to boot. I could have just read the script, and got the same effect using my imagination instead of the dull scenes. That is definitely not my cup of tea when I'm expecting a zombie movie.

[–] McQualude (4231) 5 years ago

Modern zombie fiction owes lineage in part to John Wyndham's "The Day of the Triffids," which is a post-apoc book about plants that kill off the majority of the human race after they are blinded by radiation from a comet. 28 Days Later, The Walking Dead, Night of the Comet, and Night of the Living Dead, all borrow freely or reference the opening of Wyndham's book. It isn't a slow burn so much as just good story telling.

[–] naDaht (1087) 4 years ago

This isn't a zombie movie though. And the POV is Jims.

[–] PaladinNJ (20380) 4 years ago

You missed a good movie.

[–] PaladinNJ (20380) 3 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Moonglum9 (10749) 4 years ago

Well hello there Complainy Von Complainsalot. Nice to meet you.

[–] heyteegs (1207) 4 years ago

hahaha!

[–] djangounlamed (1769) 4 years ago

Cant tell if you are a troll of just someone who doesn't understand film...

i'm sorry there weren't enough explosions, flashbacks, closeups of slow mo American flags or machine guns in the film for you.

[–] ducksoup (3933) 4 years ago

I think there is a bad edit out there. Granted I first saw it a long time ago, but I remembered it being amazing. Watched it recently on one of the streaming services and it was terrible. Sorry I can't be more specific.

[–] Esterhowse (468) 3 years ago

Wow that dude has terrible tastes.

[–] fzane (1005) 3 years ago

Agreed. 28 days later was terrible.

[–] acidraindrop (3055) 2 years ago

lmao. This has got to be a troll post.