I actually think that this film has ridden the test of time pretty well. Yes, some of the dialogue and camera work isn't top-notch, but it's also not terrible, and really doesn't detract from the overall excellent quality of the film itself. Like everyone else who's commented on this post, the first time I watched 28DL I also thought that they were zombies. However, they are not. Zombies are - in every other depiction ever - people who have died and then been reanimated, hence the term "undead". In 28DL "the Infected" are NOT dead, they are living people that get infected with a mutated virus that - like Covid-19 - gets spread contagiously via bodily fluids such as saliva when people sneeze/cough into other people's faces or open-mouth-kiss them, bite them hard enough to break skin, or else via contaminated blood. The virus heightens their rage levels way beyond controllable levels, inhibiting nearly all reason or logical thought. Hellfire, it's even called "The 'Rage' Virus" by the scientists that created it! It does the precise opposite of what it was apparently supposed to do, which was inhibit rage. So they are not undead zombies, they are living people possessed of uncontrollable, murderously psychotic rage. They also do not eat the flesh of their victims.
All of the above info is provided in the film itself, as I discovered when I watched it for the second time this Halloween. More detailed information about the exact nature of the Infected can be found at https://28dayslater.fandom.com/wiki/The_Infected
One thing's for sure though, these Infected rage machines were fast, relentless and vicious. If the zombies in "The Walking Dead" had instead been the Infected from 28 Days Later, everyone would have died within the space of a couple of years at the very most. There would have none of the 'covering yourself in blood to fool them into thinking you're one of them' / herding them en-masse to attack enemy settlements, people surviving on their own for months whilst living off the land / pretty much anything else that ever happened in TWD, where it was possible to easily outrun and outsmart the walkers. Perhaps it would have been better if they had been like in 28DL as it might have encouraged the few who did survive to actually work together against a common existential threat, rather than the only existential threats being from other survivors, most of the time. The only disadvantage of 28DL Infected is that they don't eat anything, so will eventually die of starvation, whereas TWD walkers, being already (un)dead, will last more or less indefinitely if left alone, until the ravages of nature and time eventually cause them to disintegrate.
Review by TygerboiBlockedParent2023-11-09T14:51:34Z
I actually think that this film has ridden the test of time pretty well. Yes, some of the dialogue and camera work isn't top-notch, but it's also not terrible, and really doesn't detract from the overall excellent quality of the film itself. Like everyone else who's commented on this post, the first time I watched 28DL I also thought that they were zombies. However, they are not. Zombies are - in every other depiction ever - people who have died and then been reanimated, hence the term "undead". In 28DL "the Infected" are NOT dead, they are living people that get infected with a mutated virus that - like Covid-19 - gets spread contagiously via bodily fluids such as saliva when people sneeze/cough into other people's faces or open-mouth-kiss them, bite them hard enough to break skin, or else via contaminated blood. The virus heightens their rage levels way beyond controllable levels, inhibiting nearly all reason or logical thought. Hellfire, it's even called "The 'Rage' Virus" by the scientists that created it! It does the precise opposite of what it was apparently supposed to do, which was inhibit rage. So they are not undead zombies, they are living people possessed of uncontrollable, murderously psychotic rage. They also do not eat the flesh of their victims.
All of the above info is provided in the film itself, as I discovered when I watched it for the second time this Halloween.
More detailed information about the exact nature of the Infected can be found at https://28dayslater.fandom.com/wiki/The_Infected
One thing's for sure though, these Infected rage machines were fast, relentless and vicious. If the zombies in "The Walking Dead" had instead been the Infected from 28 Days Later, everyone would have died within the space of a couple of years at the very most. There would have none of the 'covering yourself in blood to fool them into thinking you're one of them' / herding them en-masse to attack enemy settlements, people surviving on their own for months whilst living off the land / pretty much anything else that ever happened in TWD, where it was possible to easily outrun and outsmart the walkers. Perhaps it would have been better if they had been like in 28DL as it might have encouraged the few who did survive to actually work together against a common existential threat, rather than the only existential threats being from other survivors, most of the time. The only disadvantage of 28DL Infected is that they don't eat anything, so will eventually die of starvation, whereas TWD walkers, being already (un)dead, will last more or less indefinitely if left alone, until the ravages of nature and time eventually cause them to disintegrate.