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'."

Comments

My Review of 28 Days

[HunterZero]

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.

Re:damn the science

[geekoid]

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.

Re:I'm Not Casting the First Stone

[Dun Malg]

One would think that his time is more valuably spent running important medical institutions, searching for new cancer insights/cures, etc

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?