CHUD.com Community › Forums › CREATURE CORNER › Creature Corner Main › 28 Days Later Question
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

28 Days Later Question

post #1 of 36
11/18/03 at 6:13pm
Thread Starter 
I just watched this movie and enjoyed it. I have a few questions though:

1) When the people are infected with "rage", how come they don't tear each other apart like they do to the normal people? If you got rage, I'd imagine that everyone and everything would be a target (including fellow "ragers").

2) Why don't they like sunlight? I don't remember this issue being addressed in the film.

3) Is the world infected with "rage" or is it just England. A friend of mine mentioned that its just England and the rest of the world basically quarrantined it to keep the infection from spreading. I should watch the movie again, because I don't remember anyone saying that.

In all fairness though, I kept getting interrupted by friends and phone calls so I might have missed out on a few details. I'm gonna rewatch it next Saturday night.
Reply
post #2 of 36
11/18/03 at 6:17pm
1) Why don't zombies eat other zombies? Who knows? Sometimes it's better not to ask.

2) It wasn't addressed, and obviously they CAN come out in the light. My theory is that the rage dilates their pupils weird so that they don't like brightness, 'cuz it hurts. But again, that's just my conjecture.

3) One word: airplane. Although the alternate ending I haven't seen might screw with this.

That's all I got.
Reply
post #3 of 36
11/18/03 at 6:17pm

Re: 28 Days Later Question

Quote:
Originally posted by Inky Binky
3) Is the world infected with "rage" or is it just England. A friend of mine mentioned that its just England and the rest of the world basically quarrantined it to keep the infection from spreading. I should watch the movie again, because I don't remember anyone saying that.
Your friend is right if you are discussing the film with the original theatrical ending. The jet was flying over to keep track of the zombies progress. Keep an ear out for what the pilot says at the end. Also, look out for the newspapers flying and lying around when he leaves the hospital.
Reply
post #4 of 36
11/18/03 at 6:19pm

Re: 28 Days Later Question

Quote:
Originally posted by Inky Binky
I just watched this movie and enjoyed it. I have a few questions though:

1) When the people are infected with "rage", how come they don't tear each other apart like they do to the normal people? If you got rage, I'd imagine that everyone and everything would be a target (including fellow "ragers").

Apparently not.


2) Why don't they like sunlight? I don't remember this issue being addressed in the film.

They're British. They're just not used to seeing the sun.


3) Is the world infected with "rage" or is it just England. A friend of mine mentioned that its just England and the rest of the world basically quarrantined it to keep the infection from spreading. I should watch the movie again, because I don't remember anyone saying that.

Turn on your answering machine and watch it again. You'll probably like it a whole lot more.

In all fairness though, I kept getting interrupted by friends and phone calls so I might have missed out on a few details. I'm gonna rewatch it next Saturday night.
Reply
post #5 of 36
11/18/03 at 6:21pm
Thread Starter 
Interesting. I did notice the plane in the middle of the movie and I have to admit, my first thought was "hmm... maybe the rest of the world is ok". But given the bleak nature of the movie, I eventually concluded that the world is screwed. lol.

Good movie. Thanks for clearing up a few thing.
Reply
post #6 of 36
11/18/03 at 7:55pm
there's also the scene where jim specifically sees an airplane flying. right after he jumps over the wall.

ummmm.... also, i dont believe that they were zombies in the movie.
1st: they never really ate anyone, they just seemed to like to tackle someone, vomit blood on em, then run away.
2nd: they ran
3rd: they could starve to death

anyone care to add more reasons to this?
maybe a counter-example?
Reply
post #7 of 36
11/18/03 at 7:58pm
Can anyone find the old thread in Creature Corner? I cannot which is kinda funky. All these questions (and more!) were discussed to death in it's battle scarred pages. There must have been two pages alone on whether or not the infected are zombies.
Reply
post #8 of 36
11/18/03 at 8:07pm
I thought it was well established that the "zombies" in 28 Days Later were not zombies, but just made "zombie-like" by the virus. Taking "White Zombie" without the voodoo or the Dead movies without the unknown whatever that's causing it all and replacing it with man-made bioweapons. A "reinventing" of the zombie that shares many of its characteristics but is also a new creature. Depending on your pov, this was either a bold innovation on the director/writer's part or a bit crap. But no, they're not the walking undead.

It was just the "zombie movie" tropes Boyle used that got it the zombie-movie label. And in some ways, it fits. Just not in purist ways.

Still, awesome, scary movie, imo.
Reply
post #9 of 36
11/18/03 at 8:11pm

Re: 28 Days Later Question

Quote:
Originally posted by Inky Binky
I just watched this movie and enjoyed it. I have a few questions though:

1) When the people are infected with "rage", how come they don't tear each other apart like they do to the normal people? If you got rage, I'd imagine that everyone and everything would be a target (including fellow "ragers").
This bothered me too for a while. In hindsight, the film does start with those graphic images of some mob violence. Maybe 'rage' makes the infected herd together in a lynch mob like mentality, similar to those first real life scenes. I remember seeing some documentary on stuff like football hooliganism and suchlike, analysing the psychological side of how herd mentality works and can drag folks into a violent single minded group.

I wish we'd seen some intense result of a rage mob attack though, like someone else here said all we really got was some tackling and vomiting.
Reply
post #10 of 36
11/18/03 at 8:17pm
About the zombies not fighting each other...I thought that was part of the reason that the city wasn't overrun with them. I know that some people were evacuated, but I have to imagine a huge proportion of the country was infected. If the zombies weren't attacking each other, I'd think they would have been all over the place.
Reply
post #11 of 36
11/18/03 at 8:20pm
Quote:
There must have been two pages alone on whether or not the infected are zombies.

Of course.....they weren't


Reply
post #12 of 36
11/18/03 at 8:24pm
Agreed, but they acted zombie-like. Still, the war that raged over that topic and others regarding 28 Days Later chewed up many pages.

I wish I could find it...
Reply
post #13 of 36
11/18/03 at 8:25pm
Quote:
Originally posted by Farmer Vincent's fritters
Agreed, but they acted zombie-like. Still, the war that raged over that topic and others regarding 28 Days Later chewed up many pages.

I wish I could find it...
It all disappeared into the ether when the boards changed. Hey-hey, it's a new day...
Reply
post #14 of 36
11/18/03 at 8:42pm
the reason they didn't attack each other is the same reason the zombies in movies don't attack each other. They understood who was infected.


AS for the sunlight thing....I don't think they had a problem with sunlight per-se.....I believe that the movie just worked out that way.....OR!!!! The infected knew that they would have a better chance attacking at night so they just bided their time
Reply
post #15 of 36
11/18/03 at 8:44pm
Thread Starter 
I knew they weren't zombies. To me, the looked, and acted like diseased maniacs. At least with the "Living Dead" films, you know that they're dead. The 28 Days Later "Ragers" are clearly alive...if only for a short time.

Dunno whats worse: facing "Ragers" or "George Romero's Zombies". I'd rather not meet any of 'em, but maybe the "Ragers" are worst. They're fast, plus they're so out of their mind that it looks like they don't feel pain or just don't care. At the beginning of the movie, when the 2 survivors firebombed a couple of "Ragers", those suckers didn't even slow down and just kept on runnin after 'em. Freaked me out!
Reply
post #16 of 36
11/18/03 at 8:51pm
Quote:
Originally posted by Scott Standridge
It all disappeared into the ether when the boards changed. Hey-hey, it's a new day...
You doubt my thread finding prowess?

The 28 Days Later Debate

It starts off as a thread about box office receipts, but quickly turns into a debate of Boyle's themes and ideas.
Reply
post #17 of 36
11/18/03 at 8:53pm
I'll never doubt you again...
Reply
post #18 of 36
11/19/03 at 11:53am
Come on, let's not go crazy with the hair-splitting.

Yeah, yeah, they were zombies, mindless killing machines, bloodthirsty automatons, whatever. Whether technically they were dead or still alive is pretty much a moot point. Once you're gone, you're gone for good.

That said, I got the impression Boyle (or maybe Garland, the writer) didn't put a whole lot of thought into details like this. A lot of this movie came off as a little half-baked, in my eyes.

I mean, really, weren't they all having a little too much fun in that supermarket early on, with the possibility that at any minute a bunch of berzerk killer zombies might rush in through the doors and pounce on them? Wouldn't you still be maybe a little anxious at that point?

All in all, not a bad effort, but ain't no second coming of Dawn of the Dead neither. No how.
Reply
post #19 of 36
11/19/03 at 12:35pm
they were not zombies, if they were, then they wouldn't starve
Reply
post #20 of 36
11/19/03 at 1:54pm
And they could run



Zombies can't run


Reply
post #21 of 36
11/19/03 at 5:23pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by Living Dead Milkman
I mean, really, weren't they all having a little too much fun in that supermarket early on, with the possibility that at any minute a bunch of berzerk killer zombies might rush in through the doors and pounce on them? Wouldn't you still be maybe a little anxious at that point?

All in all, not a bad effort, but ain't no second coming of Dawn of the Dead neither. No how.
When I was watching that shopping scene in 28 Days Later, I was having an original Dawn of the Dead flashback where the survivors were shopping happily in the mall, hehe.


Quote:
Originally posted by bunnymud wants tacos
And they could run

Zombies can't run
In the Dawn of the Dead remake they can. I can't wait for that one!
Reply
post #22 of 36
11/19/03 at 5:36pm
well


they are only doing that because of 28 Days Later



next thing you know...Michael Myers will be running also
Reply
post #23 of 36
11/19/03 at 5:42pm
Quote:
Originally posted by bunnymud wants tacos
well


they are only doing that because of 28 Days Later



next thing you know...Michael Myers will be running also
And Jason will be FRIKKIN' FLYING!
Reply
post #24 of 36
11/19/03 at 5:51pm
Quote:
Zombies can't run

What about Return of the Living Dead?
Reply
post #25 of 36
11/19/03 at 7:46pm
*THINKING*






Doesn't count
Reply
post #26 of 36
11/19/03 at 8:45pm
Why not?
Reply
post #27 of 36
11/19/03 at 8:55pm
they were speed walking
Reply
post #28 of 36
11/19/03 at 11:17pm
heh, cardiovascular workouts..... for zombies
Reply
post #29 of 36
11/20/03 at 12:30am
Quote:
Originally posted by El Steve-O
heh, cardiovascular workouts..... for zombies
You mean cadaver -vascular workouts!

*rimshot*

Thanks, I'm here all week. Tip your waitresses!
Reply
post #30 of 36
11/20/03 at 12:46am
Quote:
they were speed walking
Ok I won't argue too much, but there was a scene where they were clearly running....................
Reply
post #31 of 36
11/20/03 at 12:54am
another example of zombies running is the resident evil game remake (the crimson heads) which there's really no arguing there
Reply
post #32 of 36
11/20/03 at 12:54pm
Quote:
Originally posted by Inky Binky
When I was watching that shopping scene in 28 Days Later, I was having an original Dawn of the Dead flashback where the survivors were shopping happily in the mall, hehe.
Really? Sure, that whole scene is an obvious riff off similar shopping scenes in Dawn of the Dead, but the differences between the two movies are pretty glaring. It works just fine in Dawn because the characters there are completely safe; they've locked up the mall and turned it into practically a fortress-- it makes sense that they're having a ball in there. The complete opposite is the case in 28 Days Later, where the characters are all jumping around the supermarket having fun even though they're still stuck out in the open in the middle of the dead city, and presumably at any minute they could be attacked and killed by a pack of roaming zombies.

We're not talking subtle gradations of meaning here. Viewed in context, the scene in Dawn works just fine and the scene in 28 Days Later just doesn't work at all.
Reply
post #33 of 36
11/20/03 at 1:18pm
Quote:
Originally posted by Living Dead Milkman
Really? Sure, that whole scene is an obvious riff off similar shopping scenes in Dawn of the Dead, but the differences between the two movies are pretty glaring. It works just fine in Dawn because the characters there are completely safe; they've locked up the mall and turned it into practically a fortress-- it makes sense that they're having a ball in there. The complete opposite is the case in 28 Days Later, where the characters are all jumping around the supermarket having fun even though they're still stuck out in the open in the middle of the dead city, and presumably at any minute they could be attacked and killed by a pack of roaming zombies.

We're not talking subtle gradations of meaning here. Viewed in context, the scene in Dawn works just fine and the scene in 28 Days Later just doesn't work at all.
But in 28 DAYS LATER they are protected by an even more powerful fortification: The impregnable walls of PLOT CONVENIENCE
Reply
post #34 of 36
11/20/03 at 1:40pm
I saw the 28DL shopping scene more as a release for the characters--you know, they're living under such intense stress, always worried about whether the zombies are coming for them or not, and the shopping trip is kind of a release valve on all that. Sure it's dangerous, but they're reasonably sure that the zombies hunt mostly at night, and they see a chance to let their hair down and do something that hearkens back to the normalcy of life before the apocalypse, and they take it.

Like when you've been under the gun at work for days, and you go out on a weeknight and get hammered. You know you shouldn't have that fifth drink, but you do it anyway, even though you have to drive home and further have to be at work in the morning.

Well, not much like that, but a little...

Anyway, it didn't bother me as much as it did some here, apparently. Sometimes you do stupid things because you feel the need to let it all go, and you just hope that it won't come back to bite you. And in some cases, it doesn't. This was one of those, imo.
Reply
post #35 of 36
11/20/03 at 3:03pm
I see it as a release also


but too, in DotD the shopping spree was a release


so....I'll have to say that it was a bit of a nod



side note: The scene when they stop to get gas and Jim wants a cheeseburger. That whole scene reminded me of another movie. I can't quite put my finger on it. My brain wants to say Maximum Overdrive....but it is a stupid brain



GO ISOTOPES!
Reply
post #36 of 36
11/20/03 at 3:07pm
Quote:
Originally posted by bunnymud wants tacos

side note: The scene when they stop to get gas and Jim wants a cheeseburger. That whole scene reminded me of another movie. I can't quite put my finger on it. My brain wants to say Maximum Overdrive....but it is a stupid brain
I think that's a Dawn of the Dead riff also, isn't it?

SPOILER
Early on doesn't the black guy have to kill some kids in a gas station?
END SPOILER

Yes, it "borrows" heavily from Dawn...almost to the point of "stealing"...but as someone once said about literature:

"Good writers borrow from their influences. Great writers STEAL."
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Creature Corner Main
CHUD.com Community › Forums › CREATURE CORNER › Creature Corner Main › 28 Days Later Question