28 Days Later (2002)

The critic praises Danny Boyle’s exhilarating new film as a muscular, virile piece of film-making, highlighting its use of locations and digital video shooting, while noting it flags during some scenes with redundant gore.

The critic views the film as a timely post-apocalyptic tale of a rage virus turning people into cannibal killers in Britain, linking its themes to real-world anxieties around 9/11, biological threats, and SARS. Boyle is praised for blending fluid digital video camerawork with surreal, nightmarish imagery of the infected.

The critic praises the terrifying start, inspired digital-video cinematography, and fresh fast zombies used sparingly for shock value. They single out the frustrating third-act shift into gory, over-the-top bloodshed and ham-fisted allegory that diminishes the earlier scary poignancy.

The critic hails Boyle's return to form with a back-to-basics genre hybrid that delivers pacey entertainment on a modest budget. It singles out the striking use of digital video for its hauntingly poetic vision of a devastated London and strong performances, especially Christopher Eccleston's menacing soldier.

The critic calls it a genuinely scary post-apocalyptic zombie movie that works well on its own merits with economic storytelling and empathy for characters. They single out the hard-driving intensity and topical rage-virus metaphor while noting minor faults like blurry digital-video action and familiar army-base conflict.

The critic finds the film an interesting and chilling parable on the fragility of civilization and human nature under duress after a rage virus outbreak. It is praised for its eerie emptiness in early scenes and its debt to George Romero's zombie films.

The critic finds it a crude but sometimes startling serving of schlock horror, with velocity and ferocity compensating for leaden conversation and ugly DV photography. Worth a go, especially for the precise scares and grand guignol excess in the final chase sequences.

The review criticizes the film as a garbled faux-low-budget zombie picture with a poorly worked script that shows disdain for the audience, despite some flashes of flair and effective early scenes. It faults the lack of character development and background while noting shocks and gore in the attacks.

The critic finds the post-apocalyptic setting and use of silence effective but faults the script's lack of logic, thin character development, and implausible plot turns involving the virus and military survivors.