Slashdot Mirror
Nobel Prize Winners on Sci-Fi Flicks
scientistguy writes "In case you missed it, Harold Varmus, Nobel prize winning retrovirologist and cancer biologist, former NIH director, and current
head of Memorial
Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, has written a review
of 28 Days Later
in this weekend's New
York Times. One would think
that his time is more valuably spent running important medical institutions,
searching for new cancer insights/cures, etc, but the dude's also an English lit major and has a penchant for
sci-fi. 28 Days Later
is the new flick from director Danny Boyle (Shallow
Grave, Trainspotting, etc.) about a virus termed rage
that is advertently released from a Cambridge primate research facility and
goes on to devastate much of merry old England more rapidly than the dragons
did in Reign of Fire. Although Varmus appears to go out of
his way to be even handed, it's clear that he has a problem suspending disbelief on a
topic (virology) that is near and dear to him. Reviews from
professional movie critics on 28 Days
Later have been mixed, but Ebert
and another NY
Times reviewer were into it.
Good, clean summer fun - aside from 'the scenes
of maiming, dismemberment, clubbing, shooting, bayoneting and shoplifting'."
In my opinion, the film was a wonderful Zombie film. It didn't get bogged down in trying to explain the how and why of the virus so it didn't bother me a bit. Not explaining the details also plays another role: it puts the audience into the same position as the characters. The characters don't give a flying damn about the details, they just want to survive.
The film manages to spook you but doesn't often give in to the common traps that most horror films fall into. Sure, some things are pretty obviously going to happen, but the film doesn't go for cliques(sp) which was a pleasant suprise. Of course, the differences between American and European film styles is quite clear, especially their repective attitudes towards violence and nudity.
Something else I should note was pointed out to me by my artisticly inclined friend, which was that the fact that it even made it over here to the states is a statement in and of itself. Most of their films don't make it over here for a theatrical release and are relegated to the foriegn film isle at the local rental store. The camera work is also different with some seemingly awkward angles that work well for the film. The music fits the mood of the film as well.
All in all, I highly recommend this film for Zombie film fans, and I can also recommend it to those who aren't really into zombie flicks since the plot is decent and they don't try to gross out the audience.
"They told me it was impossible. I replied with maniacal laughter." http://www.mydailyrant.com/
it is a metaphore.
humans getting infected so quickly represents how quickly some can attack another for a small reason.
the watching tv represented the original (the kernal) of the creation of the 'rage' - i.e., what we see on TV every day conditions us to the point our anger and rage becomes infectious, and this spreads like wildfire above. See how the humans, in the end, are not much less brutal than the infected. What is the difference between them in the end? One kills another, one wants to kill all others. Genocide.
IMHO anyway.
--
It is not the commies, the government, the nigger, nor the corporates. It is your paranoia.
"One would think that his time is more valuably spent running important medical institutions, searching for new cancer insights/cures, etc, but the dude's also an English lit major and has a penchant for sci-fi."
Because people who do research that is potentially groundbreaking and life saving are no longer allowed to do things they enjoy, right?
------SPOILERS---------
I'm intrigued by his basic point.
I saw the movie with friends yesterday (both with MFAs and wide and deep knowledge of film) and we agreed that 28 Days later is, in it's own weird way, a wish fulfillment.
As the review says, you always know who is infected so there is no uncertainty.
There is no latency to speak of, so it's containable.
Everything is black and white. Nobody has any real obligation to anybody else. Food is either unavailable or unlimited.
People are either wonderful and sweet or crazed maniacs waiting for their chance to (kill/steal/rape).
Now, I've gotta say, as far as it goes, it's a great flick. It has quite literally entered my dreams.
But like Star Wars, there is an underlying philosophy there and it isn't a good one.
Compare this to any of the first three Aliens movies, where ambiguity and uncertainty define every moment and this is thin gruel indeed. An MTV movie for a hot summer day.
Go, have fun, but if anybody starts quoting lines from this movie as some sort of compressed wisdom, offer to stick a long butcher knife through their chest, leaving them to die "in a heartbeat".
Rustin
Data is the lever, rigor the fulcrum, brains the force that drives it all.
Acutallu, you can see those same 'inconsistancies' durng real catastrophies.
Areas that for some reason are completly untouched, or effected a lot less then there surronding.
I haven't seem the movie, but have seen totally scorched areas with one house untouched.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
The Nobel winners are going to hate the movies because the movies inevitably get the facts wrong, that is why most /.ers hate a vast majority of computer/tech related movies, because they can not suspend disbelief. But I do have to admit, NMAP in Matrix:Reloaded (which BTW was awesome, I don't care what anyone says) was pretty freaking cool.
I hate sigs.
"microbial plagues have displaced nuclear winter in the public's mind as the way the world will end. "
There have been movies about this for a great many years, and probably a book or two.
"Wouldn't it be better if we could confine AIDS and Ebola to Africa and SARS to Hong Kong, and then return to repair society once the microbial damage was done -- done, of course, to others and not to us?"
Of Course it would. He seems to imply some insidouse plot of genocide, when in fact containment of a virus the can cause an epidemic like the one in 28 days is key for others to survive. It doesn't mean we should ignore them while it happens. Of course we should help the victimes, anyway we can. If not for humanitarian reasons, then as an opportnity of how to survive if it should get out of containment.
It is difficult to know in the midst of all the immediate terrors of "28 Days Later" what Mr. Boyle meant for us to think about such things. But it is one of the strengths of his accomplishment that it makes us think about them at all.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
If you live near an army you would know it only
takes 10 minutes in the presence of alcohol.
As if people reading Slashdot had a right to criticize anyone else about not working. :)
Heh. Yeah, this is yet another case of the old /. armchair-philanthropism. Whenever a story pops up wher some guy builds, say, an Atari 2600 emulator made of Legos, there's always a bunch of holier-than-thou jackasses who wonder aloud why the guy is wasting his time doing that when he could be "volunteering to teach children to read", or "helping build low-cost housing". What's the problem with those types? I personally think it's poorly-disguised self loathing. They haven't lifted so much as a finger to help anyone for years, so they criticize others for it. Sick bastards. Can't a guy go to a movie once in a while? Or does he have to sit in front of a Viro-Matic Analyzer all day just to please them?
If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
Which is not to say that movies can't ever stretch reality to fit. In point of fact, they pretty much have to, because that's the only way to fit a reasonable story into 90 to 120 minutes of narrative. I have no problem with this, as long as they don't through out the rules every time they get inconvenient. When an SF writer works that way, it's not "suspension of disbelief" it's just ignorance and/or lazyiness.
It seems to me that Vamus is at pains not to be judgmental about these issues. If you read his review without being so defensive, you'll note he title's his review: "Virus as Metaphor" and praises the movie for the social issues it tries to raise.
When Vamus points out the scientific flaws in the movie, he's not being pendantic or spoil-sporty. He's just helping to educate the public as to some serious scientific issues. A very appropriate thing for a Nobel laureate to be doing.
Either that or it was a subtle critique of the Bush administration's use of fear of biological terrorism to justify it's foreign policy.
Most of the points Varmus makes about the movie also apply biological weapons. These include points include the time required for the the organism's replication, the difficulties of transmission and the idea that the world is already under constant biological attack already (many times the number of people killed in 9/11 die every day of preventable biological diseases).
I would imagine that Varmus has to be pretty constrained in his critique of the government if he wants them to continue giving him money. If he didn't he'd probably be like: "Hey idiots! Quit beating up the Middle East and get real about stopping the biological organisms that are actually killing people right now!"
For a mere £15 [amazon.co.uk] you can watch it on your region-free DVD player. Eat that, MPAA fascists!
Uhh, the MPAA is still getting a cut of that, you know...
The picture quality is not bad, it's just different from what most movies choose. As you point out PAL miniDV can look good and the look of this film is a deliberate choice. It's just a different aesthetic from what most films choose.
The coloration and sharpness fit in with the movie. You really get a sense that you are watching some post-apocalpyse news item that has been put together in ad hoc fashion by a handful of survivors struggling to keep the technology working. In the recent Gulf War the choppy video footage may not have been ideal but it certainly lent authenticity to what you were watching. It's the same with 28 Days Later, the story and the presentation of that story are just more tightly integrated than most movies.
Good point on this movie matching the demands of the times. But I would counter with the amazing run of antihero films of the Seventies.
As for "popcorn flick", yeah, as I said, I actually enjoyed it.
As for me and good stuff, I've concluded that, with all the filmmakers out there these days, there are probably tons of good complex movies being made. It's just that we simply can't keep track of it all.
memfree, where are you in our time of need?
Rustin
Data is the lever, rigor the fulcrum, brains the force that drives it all.