Ahead of the upcoming release of 28 Years Later, I took a trip to my local Odeon to watch the original movie, 28 Days Later. But there was one major flaw that I couldn’t take my eyes off
With 28 Years Later set to land in cinemas on June 20, I decided to catch up on what had happened in the previous films, so I’d be perfectly up to date and ready for the action.
28 Years Later will see Marvel’s Aaron Taylor-Johnson and Killing Eve alum Jodie Comer star as survivors living in the UK almost three decades after the rage virus took over, resulting in terrifying attacks from the infected – aka zombies. This apocalyptic thriller will show Comer and Taylor Johnson find ways to survive in their respective groups as they discover a mutation that has spread to not only the infected, but other survivors as well.
But before 28 Years Later, there were two films that showed the effects of the rage virus on the UK. In 2002, the first film in the series, 28 Days Later was released and starred Peaky Blinders’ Cillian Murphy and Bond girl Naomie Harris. It showed the first month of survival following the accidental release of the highly contagious, aggression-inducing virus.
READ MORE: Cillian Murphy’s ‘upsetting’ role in 28 Years Later ‘confirmed’ in fresh trailer
The film was a huge success and has a rating of 87% on Rotten Tomatoes and was named the second-best zombie movie of all time by Stylus Magazine in 2007.
It’s followed by the first sequel, 28 Weeks Later, starring Jeremy Renner and Rose Byrne as Brits begin to return to the country believing that the virus has died out. Spoiler alert: It hadn’t.
As a huge zombie genre fan, when I first saw the trailer for 28 Years Later I was immediately hooked. I’d heard of the prequels, but hadn’t been able to watch them as they weren’t available on streaming sites. Luckily, my local Odeon cinema began showing reruns to help get fans up to speed, so I went along to watch 2002’s 28 Days Later.
Popcorn at the ready, seat reclined and trailers watched, the film began to play. But seconds later I had to ask my partner if this was a joke. The first scenes are set in a dimly lit room as a group of animal rights activists infiltrate a laboratory in Cambridge which houses abnormally aggressive chimpanzees.
I could barely see a thing – and not because the scene was dark, but because of how pixelated the movie looked. I realised that since the film was released in 2002, cinema hadn’t made the advancements it has today.
Help us improve our content by completing the survey below. We’d love to hear from you!
Watching 28 Days Later on the big screen was a huge culture shock for someone so used to watching things in IMAX or super HD, crisp scenes allowing me to see every hair on an actors head. I was immediately confronted with how much cinema has changed in 25 years.
Once I got past the poor quality, I had to give Danny Boyle – the director of the film – his dues. With excellent storytelling and the terrifying realisation that even in an apocalypse, women’s safety is still at risk because of men. With Boyle set to take on the upcoming sequel, I’ve already booked my ticket.
