MOVIEmeter
SEE RANK
Down 28,169 this week

Pure Rage: The Making of '28 Days Later' (TV 2002)

TV Movie  -   -  Documentary | Short  -  4 November 2002 (UK)
6.4
Your rating:
    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 -/10 X  
Ratings: 6.4/10 from 216 users  
Reviews: 7 user

Documentary about the making of Danny Boyle's end-of-the-world style horror movie, 28 Days Later.

Director:

0Check in
0Share...

User Lists

Related lists from IMDb users

a list of 144 titles created 29 Sep 2011
 

Connect with IMDb


Share this Rating

Title: Pure Rage: The Making of '28 Days Later' (TV 2002)

Pure Rage: The Making of '28 Days Later' (TV 2002) on IMDb 6.4/10

Want to share IMDb's rating on your own site? Use the HTML below.

Take The Quiz!

Test your knowledge of Pure Rage: The Making of '28 Days Later'.

Videos

Edit

Cast

Cast overview:
Lisa I'Anson ...
Narrator (voice)
Andy Coghlan ...
Himself, reporter, New Scientist Magazine
Brian Duerden ...
Himself, professor, Public Health & Leisure Support
...
Herself
...
Himself
Andrew Macdonald ...
Himself
John Stanford ...
Himself, professor, University College London
...
Himself
...
Himself
...
Himself
Megan Burns ...
Herself
Henry Camilleri ...
Himself, military advisor
Edit

Storyline

This made-for-tv documentary treats horror fans to a behind-the-scenes look at the making of "28 Days Later", about a band of survivors' struggle to stay alive after a killer virus has turned everyone into homicidal maniacs. Includes interviews with dirctor Danny Boyle, along with the cast and crew of the film, who share their experiences from working on the project, as well as discuss the special efforts that went into bringing it to completion. Written by Jean-Marc Rocher <rocher@fiberbit.net>

Plot Summary | Add Synopsis

Genres:

Documentary | Short

Edit

Details

Country:

Language:

Release Date:

4 November 2002 (UK)  »

Company Credits

Show detailed on  »

Technical Specs

Runtime:

Sound Mix:

Color:

See  »
Edit

Did You Know?

Trivia

This featurette is featured on the 28 Days Later... DVD, released in 2003. See more »

Connections

References 28 Days Later... (2002) See more »

Frequently Asked Questions

This FAQ is empty. Add the first question.

User Reviews

Not enough of anything
11 July 2004 | by (London, UK) – See all my reviews

I think that there is a lot to be said about 28 Days Later, as this documentary makes clear. The creation of a deserted London, the military training the actors went through, the camera-work and the special effects, the inspiration for the story- but this documentary just touches on these things without going into any depth. It spends a lot of time on the possibility of a killer pandemic breaking out in a way that is utterly undisturbing. There have been plenty of terrifying disease outbreaks in the world that have been a genuine cause for concern, and this one concentrates on... foot-and-mouth, a disease that is only frightening if you're a farmer. There are lots of very clever people talking about biology pointlessly. The bits dealing with the film itself are equally shallow. We get a few "this movie is great, go see it" bits from the cast and crew (in which Christopher Eccleston ends up looking extremely luvvieish). The bits on the making of the movie tell you very little. What they tell you is enough to make you curious, but is ultimately unsatisfying. Example: we are told the cast playing soldiers went through a military boot camp. But there is very little on the boot camp itself. We learn that the makeup effects were complicated, but we get nothing beyond the standard "gruelling six hours in makeup" anecdotes that all actors tell whether you want them to or not. Then add to that the overuse of clips from the film that are only vaguely relevant to the documentary. Mention of the military intervention in the foot-and-mouth crisis is followed by Major West's "We must be a disappointment to you" speech. Mention of hospitals is followed by Jim awaking from his coma. This is pointless filler if you've seen the film and spoils a lot of the impact if you haven't. Really, this should have been an hour-long documentary on the film itself. As it is, it's rushed and frankly dull. Don't waste your half hour.


6 of 7 people found this review helpful.  Was this review helpful to you?

Message Boards

Recent Posts
Cillian? SLASHerMan

Contribute to This Page

Create a character page for:
?