Blog #2 (Genre)

Danny Boyle’s 28 Days Later as a New “Zombie Film”:

Through Encounters with “Inhuman” to Wars against “Human”

Yukari Higuchi

     Represented by George A. Romero’s works, “zombie films” have established a subgenre in general horror films. Danny Boyle’s 28 Days Later (UK 2002; US 2003) is also classified as a “zombie film,” containing the conventional concept that “dead bodies can return to life” (Schneider 182). As “zombie films” released around 2002 are described as “a new mutation” by Benson-Allott (66), 28 Days Later, however, revitalizes its genre and merges with other genres by employing conspicuous elements of the monsters, characters, and especially the plot.

     Although the monsters of 28 Days Later can be recognized as zombies, who have dark skin, moan in a low voice, and are infective; they are exceedingly different from traditional “shuffling corpses; they have become runners, in some cases blessed with almost superhuman agility” (Benson-Allott 66). They are not only “inhuman” but also “superhuman,” overwhelming both characters and viewers by their speed and sudden attacks like creatures of survival horror videogames. Encounters with the zombies synchronize with experiences in dungeons of videogames; for example, when Jim (Cillian Murphy) explores the church, we become not so much “audiences” as “players” by enjoying the monster’s appearance from his point of view shots. The protagonist acts on behalf of viewers as well as that of videogames.

     However, such a substitutive role of Jim is disrupted at the climax of the film, when he disappears to the offscreen. At the sequence of his escape from and vengeance on the military, the film itself, or its genre, also deviates from a regular “zombie film.” Kawin points out that horror films have oppositions between “Inhuman versus Human” (7); on the contrary, 28 Days Later turns out to be a film embedding a confrontation, that is, “Human versus Human.” Antagonists in the film are changed from “inhuman” with “human” according to the plot development: zombies are introduced as menace to Jim at first, and finally they are employed by the protagonist in order to defeat “human.” The structure of “Human versus Human” can be considered as a characteristic of “war films;” nevertheless, this film remains as a horror film. The reason is that Jim alternately assumes the character of “inhuman” when he fights against “human,” resorting to brutal means such as releasing the zombie, gouging out a man’s eyes, and accomplishing all of them without hesitation. Therefore, the film retains the binary opposition “Inhuman (Jim) versus Human (the military),” that is a trope of horror movies, throughout the whole plot.

     In the context of “Human versus Human,” the film refers to “communication” and the lack of it as a theme; in other words, the contest between "humans" is represented as “an exchange of languages” (Kawin 8). The characters, especially the protagonist, repeatedly say “Hello.” to someone who is supposed to be there. At the very end of the film, the survivors make a huge cloth banner sign of not “HELP” but “HELLO.” Jim is finally given response to his “Hello,” and that signifies his regain of humanity.

Works Cited

Benson-Allott, Caetlin. “Distributing the Dead: Video Spectatorship in the Movies of George A. Romero.” Killer Tapes and Shattered Screens: Video Spectatorship from VHS to File Sharing. Barkeley: University of California Press, 2013.

Kawin, Bruce. “The Mummy’s Pool.” Planks of Reason. Barry Keith Grant and Christopher Sharrett, Eds. Scarecrow Press, 2004. 3-19.

Schneider, Stephen. “Monster as (Uncanny) Metaphors: Freud, Lakoff, and the Representation of Monstosity in Cinematic Horror.” Horror Film Reader. Alain Silver and James Ursini, Eds. New York: Limelight Editions, 2000. 167-192.