The movie begins with a brilliant subversion of expectations … as we go into this movie knowing it’s a zombie film, yet this opening still catches you off-guard. We see news footage of rioting and cause in populated areas … but it’s not the zombie epidemic just yet … its simply uncontrollable human events spiraling out of control. Amidst these events, a team of scientists are developing a drug that can help people cope with outbursts of anger. They use Apes as test subjects, which develop troubling results … instead of a drug decreasing anger … it plants the seeds of a virus, which enhances the primal rage in a living host. A small team of animal rights’ activists break into the lab in an effort to free the Apes … only to accidently unleash the virus out into the world. One month later, a young delivery man awakens from a coma, only to find that the UK has been completely evacuated, and ravaging zombie-like creatures are lurking in the shadows. In an effort to possibly start a new life, the young man teams-up with a small group of survivors, and fight for whatever value is left in living. Unfortunately, in a crumbling society, it’s not just the zombies that pose a threat.
If that opening synopsis reminds you of a certain TV series on AMC, then you’re not too far off. This film is what inspired “The Walking Dead” comic series, as well as the 2004 remake of “Dawn of the Dead”, and the novel titled “World War Z”. Prior to this movie, zombies were just seen as lumbering corpses that shuffle and stumble all over. These zombies however behave like rabid animals, and run at break-neck speeds. Fans refer to this particular bread as “Marathon Zombies”. However, there’s something even more frightening underneath the surface of these creatures then just their speed. These zombies aren’t aimlessly looking for brains to feed on, their driven by a blind and uncontrollable rage that has consumed them whole, and now acting on “the rage” is all they have. As such, in a clever piece of commentary, director Danny Boyle and screen writer Alex Garland use this zombie epidemic as a backdrop to a political allegory regarding “Social Rage”, and that if we don’t calm-down, our sporadic and wild anger will be the instruments of our own downfall. One of the core details prominently on display with these zombies are the blood-red eyes … which is a metaphorical representation of “blind rage”. I don’t need to address any specific examples in our current culture, but in general, we see it all the time with either “road rage” or “social unrest”, and it’s this underlining subtext that scares me far more than the actual zombies seen on screen.
On the flip side, our survivors represent hope in dark times, and why it’s important to make life worth living. We frequently see the characters asking why they should bother trying to stay alive in a world that’s dead, and we get counter points on why we should always look for substance in living … because even if it’s small, your life can still carry value. It’s another commentary for people in general, and again, it’s not preachy with its message. The filmmakers were also wise to cast largely unknown actors at the time, who all shine in this film, and give the movie an atmosphere of watching real people in these larger than life events. I’ll always associate Cillian Murphy with his villain roles in “Red Eye”, and for playing the Scarecrow in “Batman Begins”, but he also makes for a compelling lead hero in this film. I also found subtlety in his relation with Naomie Harris’s character, and it’s just cool to have an unconventional relation between different ethnicities. Brendan Gleeson is also a welcome presence, and receives one of the most original and disturbing zombie deaths I’ve ever seen … in which a fresh-corpse drops blood on his face, and turns him rabid. In other words, these zombies are a threat even when they’re not moving.
Director Danny Boyle was still riding the success of his 1996 drama “Trainspotting”, which had elements of grounded, real-life horror, and here we see him carry those same tones over into pure horror. Needless to say, Danny Boyle directs the shit out of this movie, and infuses it with a chilling atmosphere. My favorite scene of the whole movie is the aftermath of when Cillian Murphy’s character awakes from his coma, and goes on a walkabout through the abandoned city of London. Whenever I think of this movie, the first visual that always comes to mind is our lead walking across London’s Westminster Bridge without a single soul in sight. This is where the director’s talents really shine, as he’s not focusing on mass carnage, or burning buildings, and instead is focusing on the wide spectrum of the empty landscape. It’s his figurative representation of Hell on Earth … which isn’t frantic cause or the landscape on fire … it’s simply being alone in a familiar area that’s devoid of activity or life. I wouldn’t be surprised if Boyle took inspiration from the very first “Twilight Zone” episode “Where is Everybody?”, as that too focuses on a single-man who’s suddenly alone in the massive world. If there was any direction I didn’t like from Boyle in this film, it would be the rapid editing during the zombie action. I’ve personally never been a fan of the style, as I just find it more frustrating then exciting.
Also, I’m not a huge fan of the films third act, in which we face a new threat in the form of solders inviting our survivors to their comfortable home-base … only to hold them hostage, as the men are desperate to have sex with the two ladies. The leader claims it’s for a greater purpose to repopulate the planet, but the troops themselves behave with uncontrollable excitement, as well as cultishly dress up the girls like dolls, and are acting on impulse.
In the end, “28 Days Later” is one of my all-time favorites of the zombie sub-genera, and I’ve always looked back on it as a Horror movie classic in its own right. Without question, it was a big film for its respected decade. Back in 2001, many viewers, and even critics were regarding the film as one of “the scariest movies”, right on the same high-bar as the original 1973 classic “The Exorcist”. While I personally didn’t find the movie all that frightening ... certainly not on the same level as “The Exorcist” ... I do at least view it as one of the greats of the genera, and one that was in many respects ahead of it’s time. It still works as a straightforward zombie film, with a fair share of gruesome excitement, but it’s the themes and political subtext of the film that really holds-up, and give the film value. If you simply remember this film as that one big zombie movie that kicked off a decade long craze … I strongly encourage you to give the film a second watch … because I feel there’s more to it than simply another hit zombie movie.
Thanks for
reading my review of the 2001 Horror classic “28 Days Later” … and continue to enjoy the movies you Love!
No comments:
Post a Comment