28 Days Later [Blu-ray] [2017]

Product Information

Alternative Theatrical Ending (with optional audio commentary by Danny Boyle and Alex Garland) (4:29) A few days later (not 28, like 5...) a friend told me they had the Blu-ray at home so I borrowed it. Upon watching it, I thought there was something wrong with the Blu-ray too. The movie was as blurry and unwatchable, and my friend hadn't watch it before so couldn't confirm is that was right. I even tried to get the movie from less legal ways, just to see, but same result. People did complain about the movie looking awful in theaters. Some movie critics gave the feature's standard-def origins a pass, saying the crude look lended itself to the drama of the show. Utterly disappointing" is the only phrase that comes to mind at the moment. This Blu-ray edition of '28 Days Later' arrives with a hazy 1080p/AVC MPEG-4 transfer that's only a meager step up from the already-problematic DVD. In fact, I found the finalized image incredibly similar to the upscaled DVD presentation.

Having said all that, there are still some fundamental technical issues with the mix. First off, directionality is slightly off in several scenes, and the design occasionally places rear sounds into all the channels for an artificially increased effect. There are also some treble issues that lead to random frequency whistles beneath the audible components of the soundfield. To top it off, the soundscape generally doesn't feel very organic, with key elements (including voices) often sounding disjointed from other sound effects. picture is what it is and this disc represents it as well as you will ever see it. This 1080p Blu-ray is All of the supplements from the original standard definition DVD are carried over here. First is the magnificent," director Danny Boyle says in the featurette on the disc regarding his decision to shoot On Saturday night I made a post about how I couldn't find anywhere to stream 28 Days Later. It's not on a single streaming platform. The first post didn't get a lot of replies but I wanted to give an update in case anyone had any knowledge of what happened to this movie.I never bought the DVD but grabbed the BD as soon as it was released. I was not disappointed. Not only is the AQ awesome (as mentioned above) but even the PQ benefits from less compression. What you get is "better" version of the source material without the added softness and artifacting of a standard DVD. and grain, the picture appears extremely soft and blurred, and there is very little detail. Again, this

My 2021 discovery watchlist included 28 Days Later, the well known zombie movie from Danny Boyle, a director I'm usually really fond of (Sunshine is one of my favorite space movies). I rented it last week on AppleTV+ to watch on my LG OLED but it looked blurry as hell, and I stopped watching, thinking there was something wrong with my Internet connection or the stream. Actually, I remember very clearly a woman behind me in the theater complaining to her companion about it. I could hear her questioning whether it was the "film" or the theater and projector.its hard to explain it. its about a virus that infect people and make them have the hunger to consume others who haven't been infected yet/angry and can't control anger. they act like zombies, yet they aren't. i wonder what category would they fall under. Infected or Zombies, or.....God knows. Isn't shaun of the dead is based on the same idea of 28 days later. sure a disease infects the population, and the ones aren't infected call them zombies. believe me i am not trying to be sarcastic, but just wondering if 28 days later falls under zombie/gore/horror. Worst thing is, the end scene is actually shot on film and looks great, so Danny Boyle had access to correct cameras and chose to shot 99% of the movie with a 480p camera for what seems like an artistic decision. A very poor decision, that makes the movie unwatchable on a modern 4K TV. And impossible to remaster. It could be a budget constraint, but I can't see why the director of Trainspotting couldn't get himself a fine film camera.

I do know for sure the lesson learned from the original 28 days later, that humans can be a lot scarier/worse than the infected.

Similar titles you might also like

The performances are grounded in reality as well. In the capable hands of Cillian Murphy, Jim doesn't miraculously transform into Joe Hero. His character is quiet and confused, resorting to violence as a means of survival rather than for our entertainment. The supporting actors are excellent, as well (particularly Brendan Gleeson, who many will recognize as Hamish from 'Braveheart'). Each member of the cast seems to understand their role in Jim's tale, while still infusing a level of complexity into their own character. I challenge anyone to find a single actor in this film who doesn't bring their A-Game. After looking for this online, the fact is, whatever source I use, 28 Days Later was actually filmed with a digital miniDV camera, only capable of a 480p definition. Which, well, is only 4% of the pixel density of a 4K TV. No amount of software upscaling can fix this difference and I had to watch it on my laptop to stop being bothered by the poor video quality. This is certainly not a new concept and is one that has been seen in film before, but is effectively Now I know it was shot in standard def, BUT it was projected in theatres on giant screens... so how come no one said it looked awful in the theatres? And surely it benefited SOMEWHAT from the higher bandwidth of Blu ray ? Surely Blu ray gives us closer to the cinema look than the DVD release did?