Production notes for 28 Weeks Later

The first one was alright, I guess. But the second? Total masterpiece!

It’s just a bummer—I'm pretty sure the brother and sister didn't make it since that's where the helicopter was at the time. Haven't seen it in forever. It crashed at the end, right?

Midday movie vibes. I don't know, the first one was okay, nothing special, but this second one? It’s worse.
So, I honestly can't stand zombie movies where the zombie actually thinks. Like, hello? This guy turned into a zombie and still has memories, so if he's gonna hunt anyone, it's his own kids, and then he hides from fire... uhhh... I mean, I have no clue why they even bother with that plotline if the zombie is thinking. A zombie should just be a pile of rotting, crazed meat that eats whatever's in front of it and moves on. They shouldn't be hunting people with a specific target. Give me a break. And the best part? When he hits that female soldier—you know, the one trying to save the kids—with a gun. aaaaaaaaaaaaahhahhahahahhaha. Seriously though... you're a zombie, just eat her already. That was the highlight for me. Anyway, when I see idiots in stupid movies, it's impossible for the film to be any good. There were also some small logic gaps, which sucks because it is a zombie movie, but man.

Are you sure that's actually a zombie movie?

Well, it isn't strictly about zombies in the 28 Weeks Later series. It’s actually a virus that drives people into this state of extreme, abnormal rage. In the first film, for instance, there was an infected kid who managed to say, "I hate you"—though it was barely intelligible because his jaw was clamped shut and his teeth were grinding. It’s not that they've lost the ability to think entirely, but their brains are just completely overwhelmed by the fury.
In my opinion, 28 Days Later is one of the best films in its genre, whereas 28 Weeks Later was a bit of a disappointment, even if I found it slightly better upon a second viewing. There are several lapses in logic, such as when the infection first breaks out and everyone is gathered in that massive hall, practically lined up like cattle. It just doesn't make sense.

Do you really think I haven't seen a zombie movie? It feels kind of pointless to even call them zombies if they're just people who've gone totally feral, especially since all the infection symptoms look exactly like classic zombie tropes anyway.

@redtiger53, fair enough. I guess 28 Days Later was alright, but nothing crazy special. As for 28 Weeks Later, that one was pretty much a snooze fest for me. Maybe I just don't get the whole vibe of these movies where it's just zombies—or, you know, people who have lost their minds. To me, they just stumble around and devour everything in sight without any real strategy. And honestly, if they're running that fast, even Usain Bolt wouldn't stand a chance.

Karen Ward2 said:Are you sure that's actually a zombie movie?

Fair point. It’s basically just a family drama about moving back to your hometown. I mean, how does anyone even look at 28 Weeks Later and think it's a zombie flick? 😲

Anyway, for me, 28 Days/Weeks Later is easily one of the best movies out there when it comes to the whole zombie genre.

They aren't zombies, you really should do a little research on what actually defines a zombie...

evo😁 here we go again. Honestly, who cares what they are? These movies are just damn good.

redsailor15 said:They aren't zombies, you really should do a little research on what actually defines a zombie...

For crying out loud, zombies aren't just slow-moving, undead corpses.😁

evo, here are the different types of zombies—which includes the ones from 28 Days / Weeks Later.

And check out this cool infographic about how zombies have evolved in movies.

"Zombie" is a pretty broad term, 😬

The internet is accessible to everyone and used by almost everyone, yet somehow people still hesitate to actually utilize it when they truly need to...

The concept of what actually defines a zombie has shifted significantly over the decades through various mediums—movies, television, comics, video games, and beyond—leaving the definition a point of heated debate among enthusiasts. Both director Danny Boyle and writer Alex Garland maintain that the film does indeed portray zombies, albeit through a lens we haven't quite seen before. As Boyle noted, "I feel there was respect for the genre, but I hope that we freshened it up in some way" (Production notes for 28 Weeks Later, available here). Keeping that in mind, "The Infected" aren't your typical 'zombies' from Haitian folklore, the classic walking corpses from old Hollywood horror flicks, or even those George A. Romero-styled reanimated bodies hunting for flesh. Instead, they function as mindless drones operating in swarms rather than as isolated individuals. They don't eat, talk, reason, or formulate plans; they simply react via raw, primal instinct, which, in that specific regard, makes them feel very much like traditional zombies.

Eric Patel7 said:For crying out loud, zombies aren't just slow-moving, undead corpses.😁

evo, here are the different types of zombies—which includes the ones from 28 Days / Weeks Later.

And check out this cool infographic about how zombies have evolved in movies.

"Zombie" is a pretty broad term, 😬

hahaha, those divisions really gave me a good laugh... 😁
Just because someone decided on their own that zombies exist doesn't mean they actually do...

Lawrence Richardson13 said:evo😁 here we go again. Honestly, who cares what they are? These movies are just damn good.

I mean, look, people have a point, right? Everyone knows what a zombie is supposed to be—those slow-moving, shuffling types—but nowadays, we’re seeing all these turbo versions, you know, like people who are just infected or something.

But seriously, everything has gone totally downhill lately because everyone just calls everything a zombie now, like "oh, that's a zombie this" or "that's a zombie that," it's everywhere!

Man, my heart was absolutely racing during the opening of 28 Weeks Later... the tension is just unreal.

Too bad they aren't planning a third installment...

To everyone constantly insisting this is a zombie movie 🤦—it’s really not, man... it's a film about the infected. The people aren't actually dead; they're living beings under the influence of a virus.

In this case, you can take one down with a single shot to the chest... just like any other living person.
And if you ask me, movies about the infected feature much more terrifying monsters than standard zombie flicks.

Eric Patel7 said:For crying out loud, zombies aren't just slow-moving, undead corpses.😁

evo, here are the different types of zombies—which includes the ones from 28 Days / Weeks Later.

And check out this cool infographic about how zombies have evolved in movies.

"Zombie" is a pretty broad term, 😬

Zombies aren't a broad term... they have to be dead first and then brought back to life.

So:

The Grapes of Death (1978) — an infected movie
World War Z (2013) — a zombie movie
REC (2007) — an infected movie
28 Days / Weeks Later — infected movies
Zombie (1979) — a zombie movie
Ravenous (2017) — an infected movie
Warning Sign (1985) — an infected movie
The Return of The Living dead (1985) — a zombie movie
The Crazies (2010) — an infected movie

And so on and so forth...

There are essentially two types of zombies—voodoo zombies and George A. Romero-styled zombies (which, again, split into two groups: Romero's slow ones and the fast ones from "ROTLD").

p.s.
Also, "Nightmare City" (1980) is very likely an infected movie, though I won't be able to confirm that until I get around to watching it in the next few days.

I'd love to know what you all think about the Deadites from "Evil Dead"—are they zombies, the infected, or something else entirely?