28 Days Later Reviews | RateItAll

28 Days Later

2002 British post-apocalyptic horror film directed by Danny Boyle and written by Alex Garland Website

Approval Rate: 53%

53%Approval ratio

Reviews 50

Sort by:
  • by


    Fri Oct 30 2009

    The film is 5 stars, my complaint is the transfer. Despite the higher resolution it only looks marginally better than on DVD. I even played it on my 1080p computer monitor thinking the problem might have been my 720p television but it had the same problems. The picture is too soft, almost as if it wasn't filmed in HD (but of course it was) and there were specs on the screen as if I was watching it in an old movie house. Hopefully they will release a better transfer of the DVD and give those of us who bought this a discount on it :)

  • by


    Thu Oct 29 2009

    28 Days Later (blu-ray) 9.2 THE FILM ITSELF 8.7 VISUALS 9.1 SOUND 8.5 PACKAGING 8.5 EXTRAS When I first saw 28 Days Later I was instantly stunned. It was like no other "horror / zombie" film I had seen before. It was more based on human interactions and the complexity of staying alive. It seemed like it was based on actual human interactions and what they would actually do. It just seems so real. And so brutally frightening. The film, which revolves around an outbreak of a rage virus in London (and surrounding areas) follows Jim as he awakes in a hospital and tries to figure out what has happened. Seeing the eerie, quiet and abandoned big cities sends a chill up your spine - and I can imagine it would be even more amazing if you live there and see how busy it actually is (me being American, I have never seen these places in person). SPECIAL FEATURES 1. commentary w/ Danny Boyle and Alex Garland 2. 6 Deleted scenes w/ optional commentary 3. 4 Alternative Endings w/ optio... Read more

  • by


    Sat Oct 24 2009

    Great movie, terrible transfer to blu-ray. I bought this when it originally came out on dvd and loved it. Picked it up when it was released on BR hoping to have a brand new experience but I was wrong. I've seen better quality video on VCR recordings left over from the early nineties. It's absolutely disgusting that the blu-ray community keeps paying high dollar for trash transfers like this. DO NOT BUY ON BLU-RAY!!

  • by


    Sun Oct 18 2009

    28 Days Later is one of my favorite 'zombie movie'.. When I first opening the packaging of this BluRay disc, I was wondering just how great would the picture quality be.. But I was full of dissapointment when the film starts.. The picture quality is not much better than the DVD version.. I can notice the digital compression at work.. especially on dark scenes.. Then I remember that this movie was shot on Canon XL-1 MiniDV camera.. No wonder.. :) And the sound, The dialogue level is so low so I had to pump up the volume of my AV Receiver (I'm using Onkyo TX-SR 606), but when it comes to the high-tense scenes, the music and sound FX is like blowing up my speaker set.. So I had to decrease the volume.. It only have 5.1 DTS Master Audio for English language, no 5.1 Dolby Digital; so I can't watch with the 'Night Mode' on..

  • by


    Fri Oct 16 2009

    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. I remember seeing this and thinking man this is pretty intense as I was not expecting it. Still I found it to be a wonderful film experience and thought that it was deserving of the praise it was getting, most of the time movies are not. For those who have yet to see this for some reason it is about a man who wakes up 28 days after a virus has struck the UK and turned most of the population into raging killers. The virus which is called rage I guess makes a person go back to their animalistic instincts and want to survive and kill, nothing... Read more

  • by


    Mon Jun 01 2009

    I wasn't really scared a whole lot by the storyline in 28 Days Later, but I WAS really scared while watching the movie anyway, thanks to the sound system in my DVD player making me jump through the roof whenever an infected zombie-like creature would crash through a window and attack innocent people, or just go absolutely insane at the most unpredictable moments! This movie reminds me of those old Resident Evil video games. Absolutely terrific and scarier than you can possibly imagine. Some people might not like the fact that there's not a whole lot in the way of action, but honestly, there's a good deal of action sequences despite the fact it's not necessarily a totally action-dominated film, and the atmosphere that builds up to those action sequences is pretty terrific too, because you get a sense of constant uneasy feelings around every turn. You really feel the main characters as they struggle to find a way to safety and survive. The only complaint is that the film i... Read more

  • by


    Sun May 24 2009

    Do not buy the Blu-Ray version of this movie! The film quality is so terrible you gain nothing from having the blu-ray....save your money and get the DVD of this movie

  • by


    Sun May 24 2009

    Alright folks, I put the money in and have a pretty decent setup to watch this movie but I'd rather watch the DVD than the Blue Ray Version. First off I'd like to say the movie its self is great but the Conversion to Blue Ray falls flat on its face. I've got quite a large number of blue ray movies here and I swear at the time of this review this is the worst video quality blue ray I could find. It looks like someone took the DVD version and put the movie through a video filter trying to sharpen it and completely failed at it. This is a fantastic example of how not to convert a blueray. this movie was made in 2002 we had the technology to record a quality film. I'm surprised a group of people considered blue ray experts did this conversion sat down and watched the final product and decided this to be a quality picture. I want my money back, I feel kind of used. Blue Ray means they put forth their best effort to give us a great picture *puke*

  • by


    Mon May 18 2009

    Let me say this first: I think this is a great movie in and of itself. The reason for such a harsh grade is the video formatting - the vast bulk of the movie looks terrible on Blu-Ray. I mean terrible! It looks like a bad bootleg, or something that was downloaded off the internet and then "converted" for the format. I've seen VHS tapes look better on my screen! For a perfect example, take a look at the scene right after they leave the store. They're driving in the country side and pass a field of what I believe are flowers. I can't say for sure because the picture is so garbled that all you see are pixelated, artifact-ridden blobs of colors swaying to and fro. As I said before, this is a great movie. I can remember watching it over cable and having an enjoyable experience. But watching it on Blu-Ray was such a terrible visual experience that I was constantly taken right out of the movie and distracted. I would not recommend this movie on Blu-Ray. I can't speak to ... Read more

  • by


    Wed May 13 2009

    28 Days Later / B0000BZJCM *Spoilers* Whether you find 28 Days Later to be frightening will probably depend on your level of tolerance for these sorts of movies. I love zombie movies but am easily frightened, so 28 Days Later definitely scared me on several levels. However, I can see how many people would consider this to be less of a scary horror movie and more of a suspense movie. Either way, I think the film works well. The film opens at a research facility where a group of well-meaning but ill-fated students are breaking in to free the laboratory animal test subjects. The animals are infected with a "Rage Virus" that makes them, well, the Rage virus basically turns you into a very fast, very angry zombie - an unthinking, unfeeling automaton purely motivated by a thirst to eat and kill everything not infected. Unlike the usual zombie set-up, the infected humans don't seem to be *undead* per se, and would presumably bleed to death under the right circumstances, but they don'... Read more

  • by


    Sun Sep 28 2008

    When I first saw this, driving home was no fun! LoL, the first "Zombie" movie that creeped me out.

  • by


    Sat Sep 20 2008


  • by


    Wed Jul 23 2008

    SCARY AS HELL!!!! lol

  • by


    Sat Jul 19 2008

    cool movie

  • by


    Fri Jul 11 2008


  • by


    Fri Jul 04 2008

    I couldn't even make it past the first 30 minutes or so (maximum)

  • by


    Sun Jun 29 2008

    Haven't seen it. Saw the 28 weeks later film not this one.

  • by


    Fri Jun 27 2008

    I saw it but I don't remember it, so it must not have been that good

  • by


    Sun Jun 22 2008

    Good movie...I jumped a couple times!

  • by


    Sun Jun 08 2008

    New classic!!!

  • by


    Wed Jun 04 2008

    zombie movie were the zombies can haul a$$.

  • by


    Wed Jun 04 2008

    I hated this movie! I couldn't wait for it to end!

  • by


    Thu Apr 17 2008

    Typical attempt to exploit the fears of a potential biological attack on America, the film is a waste. Could have been more intense and active, but I got bored about 15 minutes into it.

  • by


    Mon Apr 14 2008

    This was a really well made movie, and it wasn't even advertised that heavily. When I saw this, we went to the theatre to see Terminator III, and 28 Days Later looked interesting, so we watched it as well. T-3 was your typical action/sci-fi movie that was entertaining enough, but 28 Days Later was a real find.

  • by


    Mon Apr 14 2008

    This flick has a good premise and is rather refreshing in the horror genre.

  • by


    Thu Sep 14 2006

    This was not what I expected, but after watching it a couple times, it was hard not to give it at least 4 stars. It's a good movie with good acting and some shocking scenes, and it's as different as any movie in the "zombie genre" can hope to be (although this isn't technically a zombie film; it's more of a people-gone-crazy-from-a-virus film). Lots of people think that "zombies" (or whatever they are) that run instead of slowly lumber along are a rediculous concept, but I think it worked well in this film. Worth checking out if you want to see something different.

  • by


    Sat Jul 08 2006

    I loved this movie. My favorite thing about it though was the lead actor...YuM!! I also thought the use of 35mm film for this movie really made a difference in the emotional effect.

  • by


    Mon Apr 24 2006

    Distracting CGI effects aside, this movie is more of a sci-fi thriller than a pure horror film. Good twists but those special effects bothered me.

  • by


    Mon Jan 09 2006

    One of the best, well put together horror movies of that past 20 years. Great graphics, make up, and acting make this film a must see.

  • by


    Fri Oct 14 2005

    This was definetly different. I thought the story was well thought out. I really could of done without the crotch shot of the lead actor, whoever he was, but other than that, a good effort. I think the concept of running dead was first brought to life here in this film, so cudos for that. The whole movie kept me guessing, I didn't know what to expect from the advertisement. When I went to see this movie, it was an accident, because I went to see Freddy vs. Jason and it was sold out and this was the only other horror movie on at that perticular theater. All in all, I own it, I liked it enough to watch it twice in the theater. So check it out!

  • by


    Wed Mar 30 2005

    As someone else said - great plot, potential - boring as an eternity in hell and acting that makes you want to claw your eyes out. Not British films best - however, Shaun of the dead is great. Would recommend not seeing 28 Days Later - it embarasses us Brits even more. Oh, and British soldiers are not like that.

  • by


    Mon Aug 09 2004

    28 Days Later was a good movie, but in many instances, it was lacking. The story line was decent, but the writing was horrible. There were only a few scary moments. But the extra footage and stuff on the DVD were excellent. The Radical Alternate Ending was very interesting. And one of the alternate endings had a bit of humor in it. Overall, it was an average movie.

  • by


    Sat Jun 19 2004

    If you like creepy, violent, gory films then this one's for you.

  • by


    Tue Jun 01 2004

    chilling from a director who doesn't pander to US styles or cater to their tastes!

  • by


    Thu May 27 2004

    I'll have to disagree with my mentor PBeavr on this one - I thought this movie was pretty damn good. I'm a big Alex Garland fan (the guy who wrote the screenplay), so admittedly, i was a little biased in the film's favor going in. I thought the early scenes in an empty London, with buzzing indy rock blaring in the background were effective, and I really liked the plot. I thought the no name actors were passable, but the movie is made by the cinematography and really cool storyline. There are all kinds of allegories you can read into the plot - how sometimes protection from the danger can be worse than the danger itself. Read into that as you may.

  • by


    Mon Apr 26 2004

    I'm glad to see horror movies making a comeback, and this is one of the best from the last ten years.

  • by


    Tue Dec 09 2003

    I didn't see what was so scary about this one. The scariest thing was the full frontal nude of the leading male. I found myself laughing half the time but other than that it was very well done considering they worked with a limited budget.

  • by


    Sun Nov 23 2003

    I am sorry but I have to disagree with every single one of these comments. Maybe if the ads for this movie were different the rating would be a 3. Everyone was saying this was the scariest movie since The Excorsist. Yeah, right. This is a zombie movie that was not scary at all. It seemed like every scene was pitch black. Its very difficult to find out what was happening. I love zombie movies, but this one showed how many zombies? 5? The zombies looked like normal people just with a little blood on thier face. The movie starts off horrid; animal rights activists cause the disease to spread. After that its good until the action starts, which is where it gets all dark. Finally, too many questions were unanswered. I hate that. This was a good idea at a modern day Night of the Living Dead, but turns out to be a non-scary, pitch black mess of a movie. Night of the Living Dead lives on!

  • by


    Fri Nov 21 2003

    The film was a little too dark in its cinematography. I got the point, but I don't really enjoy the look, especially when you're watching a DVD, and you're not in a theater. It had an ingenious plot: 12 Monkeys meets Dawn of the Dead. I'm glad the message (We were killing each other before; we're killing each other now -- what's the difference?) was naive and thankfully short and sweet. But the mayhem that followed was fabulous! If he had used more light, I would have given it a 5.

  • by


    Fri Nov 07 2003

    i aboustly love this film it is one of the finest films ive seen in while the fliming and direction is wonderfully done and should really been seen any horror fan should enjoy this epicaly with whats out there now a days I find this film differnt and origanl in many levels it should be seen.

  • by


    Wed Nov 05 2003

    As far as horror flicks go, this one is mediocre. A few very scary scenes, but the plot began to bore me. Granted, the story was original and had a lot of psychologically deep meaning, but the plot could have been presented in a more suspenseful way. Overall, I would call this one average.

  • by


    Mon Oct 27 2003

    Although not a completely original concept, "28 Days Later..." is definately a thought-provoking movie. I was relieved also to find out it wasn't another "Final Destination"-like, teenie bopper killing fest. It is actually very intelligent and suspensful, with lots of subtlties (showing often rather then telling) with great visuals (the digital filming). However if you have a short attention span, and/or just want some cheap thrills, this movie isn't for you. This modern apocalyptic tale had me clinging to my boyfriend quite a few times, cringing with what was happen next. Afterward, my mind was happy to delve into the concepts the movie had presented-- something I think any good movie should make us do. Highly recommended!

  • by


    Tue Oct 14 2003


  • by


    Wed Sep 17 2003

    I give this film five stars, not basing it on the entire world horror films, but the horror films of today. It's hard for a horror fan to find a good flick nowaday. The concept of survival is portrayed very well, and the originality of the zombies' behavior, as compared to George Romero's, was incredible. Finally, a new take on old material.

  • by


    Tue Sep 02 2003

    At last, a film that the British movie indusrty can be proud of. We certainly wasn't expecting it to be popular in America. The film has a fantastic plotline, amazing music and some of the scenes take your breath away. It was very strange seeing London without any people or traffic there, especially since I live in London. The action is kept up very well and the fact that the entire film was shot in digital makes a noticable difference, especially when it is raining. The DVD is good as well as you can see the alternative endings and documentaries. Bloody fantastic.

  • by


    Sun Jul 20 2003

    I really enjoyed this movie. True it stuck to the old zombie flick/end of the world formula. But it is the first movie in a long time that has felt like a horror flick and not a prime time teen flick.

  • by


    Tue Jul 08 2003

    I was reading an ad in the paper and it said that you will be looking for the exit at the 5 min mark and thats exactly what I did. The movie was very well made,shot,and acted.The disturbing factor of this movie was through the roof.Many unexpected events and happenings in this movie to keep you on edge at all times.If you want to see somthing push the boundaries of movie making go see it.

  • by


    Sat Jul 05 2003

    Great movie. Not a gorefest, but it has its moments. Eerie. Almost surreal.

  • by


    Sun Jun 29 2003

    Very graphic film (full frontal nudity, lots of language and lots of blood) about a horrific virus which infects people in a matter of seconds, leaving England with only a few survivors and a LOT of zombie-like creatures. Interesting, grainy cinematography, one of the few movies which aren't jam-packed with a ton of special effects (kept to a minimum), and an "okay" storyline. If you can't handle the nude male figure, a lot of cursing, or a lot of blood, then this isn't for you. Otherwise, I recommend it.

  • by


    Tue Jun 24 2003

    A gory, creepy thriller from the director of "Trainspotting." Remarkable acting and frantic cinematography make up for what may lack in terms of plot. Ultimately, this is a fierce critique of the nature of humanity, masked in blood and trauma. If you're looking for more than a mindless action flick, you won't regret seeing this film. But don't see it alone...