This is an old revision of this page, as edited by N.MacInnes (talk | contribs) at 19:48, 5 December 2005. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 19:48, 5 December 2005 by N.MacInnes (talk | contribs)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)And then what happens? Is there supposed to be more after the text cuts off? - Puffy jacket 18:52, 7 Jan 2004 (UTC)
- Watch the film! That is supposed to be more, it's just not finished yet. Add a note explaining that if you think it's warranted! --Sam
This is ridiculous. I bet this plot synopsis is longer than the treatment. One short paragraph is enough for just about any film. Can someone trim this? -R. fiend 03:06, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- Why? Yes it's longer than most other movie articles, but why does that bother you? It is very well-written and I find that its length detracts nothing from the article and in fact adds to it. I think its fine the length it is. -CunningLinguist 10:52, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Nothing wrong with long articles - Omegatron 18:40, Jan 9, 2005 (UTC)
The window of opportunuity for filming just after dawn was small? It was reported that the normal activity had been removed by computers.
- Perhaps some was (though I'd not heard that) but it was definately filmed after dawn and before London got massively busy. violet/riga (t) 16:32, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Apparently, the police were very helpful in closing streets for 5 mins at a time, and because they were filming digitally, they could set up and pack up quick enough for them to make this work. The police also slowed traffic on the M1 for them at the right moments to film those cool M1 shots. I expect if anything was edited out by computer, it would have been stuff in the background. --Nathan 19:48, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
Criticism/Public Reaction
Why is there no section on criticism or public reaction?
- I presume because nobody has felt fit to add one yet, feel free but be careful about WP:NPOV! :-) -- Lochaber 16:02, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- There is one now :) Worldtraveller 16:12, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
"England"?
I think it's more appropriate to describe the film as being set in 'Great Britain', as the situation would have been the same across the whole of the island. Changed. 82.36.124.236 20:48, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Eh, that's me above. pomegranate 20:54, Apr 17, 2005 (UTC)
By the way, there is no such thing as the England island. Please check up on your geography. This is what drove me to make the above changes. Referring to Great Britian (the island) or the United Kingdom, as 'England', is very irritating, especially to Scottish and Welsh people. pomegranate 21:00, Apr 17, 2005 (UTC)
storyboards
I've replaced the word 'pictures' with 'storyboards', because in every case I've ever seen, that's what really was used when filling in unfilmed holes in stories on DVD extras. If this case is an exception then feel free to change it back. Also included a link to storyboard sheridan 15:19, 2005 May 27 (UTC)
Spread Beyond the UK?
I should think the disease would have spread beyond England throughout the entirety of the land-linked continents: Europe, Asia and Africa. The problem is the English Channel Tunnel; the Infected could have crossed from there onto the continental mainland. From there, they would have spread througout the entire world, with only the Americas, Australia and the various islands of the world being beyond their reach. Ergo, the section limiting the plague to UK should be deleted, unless of course it was so limited in the film? Tom S.
- It's never made clear in the film how far it's spread. They say at the beginning that the infection reached Paris and New York, but of course Jim sees the plane going overhead, the army guy espouses his quarantine theory, and the Finnish air force arrive at the end. We can speculate, as viewers, but here in the article we've got to stick to the facts - the article notes that it's ambiguous as to how far the virus spread but that the general suggestion is it was limited to the UK, and I think that covers the situation pretty well. Worldtraveller 21:13, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
- I'm pretty sure the French would have quarantined the Chunnel pretty early, and then filled it in later on. Battle Ape 05:52, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
Significance of 28 Days
Is there any significance to the period of time 28 days? I have seen it used in different places, incuding the Australian punk band, 28 days.--Beano311 01:17, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
- 28 days is exactly four weeks, which is also the length of February, the shortest month. Battle Ape 05:53, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
Other Comments'
It isn't very feasible that the virus spread beyond the UK. As noted in the main article, the virus is triggered much too fast for an infected person to take a long trans-Atlantic flight and successfully land. Even if in some bizzare folly they made it to France (by Chunnel) or to New York, it would be fairly easy to contain them (shoot them, etc) by local police.
The main reason England is desoalte isn't because "everyone is dead", as is the common theme in "Dawn of the Dead" films, its because the majority of the population has been evacuated off the island.
The main article also makes a great point that a human could not run around with reckless abandon, let alone live, without water for weeks and weeks.
A question I would have, is if the infected are so filled with rage they attack anyone they see, why don't they attack each other?
However you can't pick apart the plot too much. This was a very good film with good acting and I think it was a direct inspiration for the "running zombies" in "Dawn of the Dead" (2004). This trait of fast moving zombies really gave the whole "zombie films" a refreshing twist. Recently I saw "Land of the Dead" and when compared with 28 Days Later and Dawn of the Dead (2004) the slow moving undead seem boring and less than threatening.
Shaun of the Dead
Surely Shaun of the Dead was mainly inpspired by Dawn of the Dead (the remake of which came out a few months before Shaun...). Yes you can draw paralells between Shaun of the Dead and 28 Days Later, but you probably can with any zombie movie. I put forward a motion to have that bit taken out. --Nathan 21:28, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
- I would say leave it in, Shaun of the Dead makes direct reference to 28 Days Later and I'd dare say it inspired Shaun in the sense that the success of 28 Days Later helped them get their UK zombie movie made and released as well... Also I wouldn't say that Shaun is mainly inspired by George A. Romero's Dawn of the Dead in particular (aside from the title of course) but then that's a question for the Shaun page...
- You haven't convinced me, but unless anyone else says it should be taken out, I won't change it.