Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Movies Media

Nobel Prize Winners on Sci-Fi Flicks 261

Posted by michael from the b-movie dept.
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'."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Nobel Prize Winners on Sci-Fi Flicks More

Nobel Prize Winners on Sci-Fi Flicks

Comments Filter:

  • 28 Days Later is Sci-Fi? (Score:4, Funny)

    by Jason1729 ( 561790 ) on Sunday July 06, 2003 @03:54PM (#6378915)
    I thought it was a sequel to the Sandra Bullock movie, 28 Days.

    Jason
    ProfQuotes [profquotes.com]
    • Yeah, I'll respond to your heading though not your post...

      28 days is a sci-fi movie but it is a classic plot. It uses sci-fi as an exploration of the human psyche under pressure, alienation, group behaviour.

      As a sci-fi it is entertaining and somewhat thought provoking, but as an analogy to human behaviour (and spot the metaphores: chimps as the origin [of the 'virus' hence of life], waking up in a hospital representing saviour, the exploration of killing, the grouping behaviour representing tryst and an
    • It is. You get the "rage" from watching the first movie and over and over again. Then the sci-fi end of the world stuff kicks into high gear after everyone has gone nuts from the bad dialog of "28 Days"
    • Close, it's a zombie flick.

  • aside from the scenes of maiming, dismemberment... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by nairobiny ( 601844 ) on Sunday July 06, 2003 @03:56PM (#6378929) Homepage
    and the rare fact that this film was released in the UK last summer, making this rather old news for anyone in Blighty. Makes a change for us to get a film first, eh?
    • Not only that, the DVD was out about a month ago as well.

      Time the folks in the US to look-up on-line stores that ship region 2 stuff to the US!

    • Re:aside from the scenes of maiming, dismemberment (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Tumbleweed ( 3706 ) on Sunday July 06, 2003 @04:14PM (#6379044)
      > Makes a change for us to get a film first, eh?

      Yeah, but look at the film that you got first, then brag later. :)

      Seriously, I saw this movie yesterday, and it's not bad. You have to be really good at suspension of disbelief, but it's okay. It's not original by any means, but it's definitely enjoyable at matinee prices.

      After the disappointments that were Matrix 2 and Charlie's Angels 2, the summer movies have a lot to prove this year.

      A much better summer movie is, amazingly enough, Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines. More willing suspension of disbelief required, but overall, a much more enjoyable movie. Surprised the heck out of me that it was a good as it was, considering the lack of James Cameron, but hey, remember that it also lacks Linda Hamilton & Edward Furlong, and that might explain something. :)

      I can't make myself go see "Hulk" due to the extraordinarily-bad look of the Hulk CGI. *blech* I'd honestly prefer a green-painted Lou Ferrigno, thanks.

      I'm still awaiting "The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen"...

      • hulk cgi (Score:2, Informative)

        by jDinK ( 638269 )
        You can't call the CGI in the hulk movie bad without having seen it. They actually pulled it off quite well.

        The trailers and commercials certainly DO look bad. They look worse than the worse parts of the movie, IMO. I don't really know why they put crappy shots in the previews, but they did.
      • Charlie's Angels 2 disappointing? What did you expect? It delivered:

        * Women in various states of undress

        * Said women shaking their groove things

        * Explosions and wire-fu

        * No pesky plot to distract you

        Admittedly, John Cleese was wasted, though his acceptance of his daughter's real job was somewhat priceless...

        C'mon, going into that movie expecting ANYTHING redeeming was asking too much.

        (And the car wash for the final credits - excellent!)

      • I thought 28 Days Later was retarded. I didn't care about any of the characters, and the damn virus thing has been overplayed as it is. I didn't expect much, and I didn't get it.

        Resident Evil was almost exactly the same movie, only set underground, and for a much better apocalyptic plot there's always Terry Gillam's 12 Monkeys...
      • After the disappointments that were Matrix 2 and Charlie's Angels 2, the summer movies have a lot to prove this year.

        And what exactly were we expecing from Charlie's Angles 2?
    • Good, clean summer fun - aside from 'the scenes of maiming, dismemberment, clubbing, shooting, bayoneting and shoplifting'.
      I give up. What can be more fun than scenes of maiming, dismemberment, clubbing, shooting, bayoneting and shoplifting?

  • damn the science (Score:2, Interesting)

    by alphakappa ( 687189 )
    '28 days later' didn't even try to be a sci-fi-horror movie.. that is, no explanations about the virus, or a long-drawn buildup to the final release (as in the Hulk). So even though, the whole idea of the virus getting transmitted to humans was insane, I didn't care. I do have some questions though.. they show this monkey being 'initiated' by showing him scenes of riots and mayhem, so I guess the rage virus is activated only if the subconscious is 'trained' by those scenes... then how come, humans go crazy
    • -----SPOILERS-----

      Well, from the little that we're told, the chimps are under a drug regimen designed to *repress* the rage. So,
      A.) The virus quiets down momentarily when the victim has satisfied the desire to attack (which matches the behavior of the "zombies" in the flick, who slow down and wander off after any confrontation)
      or
      B.) The chimp seeing the videos was being monitored for threshold levels or some such.

      Remember, the researcher said (pretty much) that "we need to see the phenomenon to understand it"

      Frankly, what little hope I had of reasonable consistency died when the lights were on in the supermarket.
      Science this ain't. After all "all of Manchester" is burning down but London, with more old buildings and the same lack of controls has not a single fire, even WITH their blowing up a gas (sorry, "petrol") station. I was wondering about the lack of fires *way* before they showed the burning skyline.

      It's a thrill flick, dude. You're not going to find the logical reason for everything. You'ld be better off trying to find logic in the sequence of stardates in early Star Trek episodes.

      Rustin

      • Re:damn the science (Score:5, Insightful)

        by geekoid ( 135745 ) <{moc.oohay} {ta} {dnaltropnidad}> on Sunday July 06, 2003 @04:29PM (#6379102) Homepage Journal
        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:damn the science (Score:4, Interesting)

        by JWSmythe ( 446288 ) * <jwsmythe@@@jwsmythe...com> on Sunday July 06, 2003 @05:29PM (#6379385) Homepage Journal
        ---- Spoiler ----
        ---- Don't read me if you haven't seen the movie. ----

        It's a thrill flick, dude. You're not going to find the logical reason for everything.

        That, I definately have to agree with.

        The beginning was interesting.. The agenda of the movie seemed to be to show that researchers are evil, playing with things they don't understand, and animal rights activists are evil or stupid, disturbing things they have absolutely no clue about, and no respect for (i.e., when the researcher tries to explain what the rage virus is to them).

        The post apoclypse London looked cool.. When he's wandering around town is probably the best part of the movie.

        After the movie, all I could think was that this was a bad rewrite of "12 Monkeys" mixed with "Night of the Living Dead".. The whole "We're going to rape the little girl and chick" thing was way too drawn out.

        There were some pretty serious holes in the movie.. Ya, the supermarket lights were one, but that could have been generators.. I know, 28 days running on generator power?? But it kept the beer cold. :)

        If the guy was slick enough to hook up all the christmas lights to the batteries, it must have been with a power inverter. 110v/220v lights won't be very bright at 12v, right? So, why was he using a hand-crank radio?

        There is satellite TV available in the UK. Sky is at least one provider. It doesn't take a very creative mind to find an apartment with a satellite dish in front of it, and hook up the battery and inverter to the TV and receiver. At least they could see what the rest of the world was saying.

        What about secure installations? Particular federal offices, like the FBI, you have to go through man traps before you can even consider getting physical contact with anyone. Jails, and even office buildings, are rather secure. Most buildings I've worked in, even if the lobby is compromised, without elevators, the upper floors are unaccessable.. Well, the infected weren't exactly using tools to break down firedoors.

        I'm sure, with them knowing the extend of how bad this virus was, even after only the first day, something would have been done.. How long does it take a bunch of infecteds to walk the length of England? At least days.. At best, I would expect the outbreak wouldn't travel at more than 5mph. By the end of the first day, after loosing all of London, there would be a substantial military force killing anything that came close. It wouldn't just be guys with guns at roadblocks either. How long would it take the remainder of the gov't to ask the US to send bombers to lay a wall of napalm across the island? Maybe not that simple, but something would be done quickly.

        Even after the second 28 days, the area wouldn't be safe. It's a bloodborne virus that survives beyond death of the host. Remember the infection of the dad.

        Too many holes and logical errors in the movie made it just an action/blood/gore movie, rather than something I could really get into..

    • 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

    • Re:damn the science (Score:2, Informative)

      by dewie ( 685736 )
      So even though, the whole idea of the virus getting transmitted to humans was insane, I didn't care.

      You find the idea of a virus being transmitted from other primates to humans insane? Maybe I'm misunderstanding you; if so, I apologise. I haven't seen the movie, but from reading the review this seems like one of its least unrealistic aspects. Cross-species viral infection is quite common, and the primate-human jump has been made by, for example, the ebola virus.

  • new way to get an R rating? (Score:3, Funny)

    by skydude_20 ( 307538 ) on Sunday July 06, 2003 @03:57PM (#6378943) Journal
    aside from 'the scenes of maiming, dismemberment, clubbing, shooting, bayoneting and shoplifting'."
    shoplifting goes with maiming, what the..?

  • You don't have to pay $9 for this movie (Score:3, Informative)

    by 0xdeadbeef ( 28836 ) on Sunday July 06, 2003 @03:58PM (#6378948) Homepage Journal
    For a mere £15 [amazon.co.uk] you can watch it on your region-free DVD player. Eat that, MPAA fascists!

  • Suspension of disbelief (Score:3, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 06, 2003 @04:02PM (#6378969)
    The only thing that I found hard to believe was that anyone would be able to tell the difference between a comatose bike messenger and one that wasn't.

  • For those of us old enough... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Penguinshit ( 591885 ) on Sunday July 06, 2003 @04:07PM (#6378997) Homepage Journal
    ...isn't this a re-do of an old Charlton Heston film named "Omega Man", where a plague strikes the Earth and the infected turn into homicidal Edgar Winter impersonators? Heston plays the lone scientist who is apparently immune, and he meets a band of uninfected persons holding out against the organized night fighters.

    I think I'll save $7 (diff between new movie and old rental) and just see Omega Man again.

    • Well, the Omega Man... (Score:4, Interesting)

      by HunterZero ( 102709 ) on Sunday July 06, 2003 @04:11PM (#6379023) Homepage
      Was just an adaption of the wonderful Richard Matheson book "I am Legend" which came out back in the 1950's (I believe). I personally would love to see the book put to the screen but those damned screen writers keep changing the plot so that it fits with what the studios think we want: ie love interest, more action, etc etc.

      It's really a shame, since I highly recommend the book and a film of it would bring it to the masses.

    • What in the hell are you talking about? (Score:5, Funny)

      by rob-fu ( 564277 ) on Sunday July 06, 2003 @04:35PM (#6379138)
      Omega Man was released in 1987 by Capcom for the Nintendo Entertainment System, and it's about a man with a pellet gun for an arm, who subsequently battles through 10 levels to fight the evil Dr. Wily. I don't know where you're getting you information from.
    • "...who is apparently immune,..."

      actually, heis on th way to deliver an immunization drug when his helicopter crashes. As he lay there he gave himself the shot. That is why he is immune.

      Here is a money maker:
      Package a Charlton Heston 3 pk. Omega Man, Planet of the apes, Soylent green. Through in some extra footage, and a retrospective by Charlton Heston, and I'd buy it.

  • My Review of 28 Days (Score:5, Insightful)

    by HunterZero ( 102709 ) on Sunday July 06, 2003 @04:08PM (#6379003) Homepage
    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.
    • cliches is the word you were looking for, not cliques :)

    • Shotgunless zombie movie (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Chris Y Taylor ( 455585 ) on Sunday July 06, 2003 @04:50PM (#6379205) Homepage
      Since most Zombie films I have seen were set in America, it was interesting to see one set in a nation where personal firearms are rare.

      It is a lot scarrier to watch someone nervously waiting with a baseball bat (why not cricket?) for a group of zombies to close with them than it is to watch someone picking them off with a rifle or shotgun as they approach.

      • If you get rage-infected blood onto a cricket bat, you won't be able to use it to play cricket without taking serious risks. Blood on bat, transfers to ball, transfers to hands... just not worth taking the risk. Baseball bat to kill, cricket bat to play cricket.

  • I'm Not Casting the First Stone (Score:5, Funny)

    by jmt9581 ( 554192 ) on Sunday July 06, 2003 @04:10PM (#6379017) Homepage
    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. :)

    • Re:I'm Not Casting the First Stone (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Dun Malg ( 230075 ) on Sunday July 06, 2003 @05:07PM (#6379268) Homepage
      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?

  • Is 28 Days Later a remake? (Score:3, Informative)

    by cliffy2000 ( 185461 ) on Sunday July 06, 2003 @04:12PM (#6379028) Journal
    Vincent Price's "The Last Man on Earth" released some time in the 60s-70s had virtually the same exact plotline: disease infects all of mankind, and Price is immune. Except the infected aren't zombies. They're vampires. It was a crappy movie, but somewhat affecting. So... can anyone answer this? Was Boyle merely influenced by this classic? Or is it a total rip-off?
  • Saw it at the cinema.
    And it was wonderful in its originality of presentation and atmosphere. It scared the pants off me in certain scenes, in other words..

    As far as if what is presented is feasible/realistic is not my concern. It's a horror/sci-fi flick, the key element being the "fi" part, fiction.

    The next critic/expert, that tries to do similar analysis better remember that.

  • Time Better Spent (Score:2, Insightful)

    by frostgiant ( 243045 )
    "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?

  • Triffids? (Score:3, Funny)

    by powera ( 644300 ) on Sunday July 06, 2003 @04:16PM (#6379054) Homepage
    Wasn't this the same in Day of the Triffids, except everyone went blind and was eaten by vegetables?
  • aside from 'the scenes of maiming, dismemberment, clubbing, shooting, bayoneting and shoplifting'."

    Rated R for extreme acts of unadulterated shoplifting.

    Banned in Egypt due to graphic depiction of bayoneting.

  • Favorite 28 Days review from the T3 thread. (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward

    C'mon.

    That movie could have been named "One Dumb Move After the Next"

    The only reason for calling it 28 Days Later is because it had more blood and rage than a menstruating lesbian convention.

    No kidding.

    "The zombies hate light. Let's drive during the day to get to the military base. Hey, let's take this shortcut through this underground tunnel. I'm sure it will be safe."

    "It's getting dark. Let's all sleep out in the open with a big campfire and take some ludes to sleep. Never mind that the zombies

  • shoplifting? (Score:5, Funny)

    by G27 Radio ( 78394 ) on Sunday July 06, 2003 @04:23PM (#6379080)
    um, Frank left his credit card at the cash register before they left the store. And besides, everyone was dead anyway...which made the fact that he left his card kind of cool. What were they supposed to do, starve to death because there was no one alive to give the money to? Furthermore they only took necessities like food, medical supplies, and single malt scotch.
  • ------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
    • Right after I saw 28 days later I saw terminator III. When I saw the last scene of T3 the 28 days later line (paraphrased) "What, you got a plan or do you want to just find a hole and fuck?" rung in my head. Indeed, what a coincidence.

  • Oh the humanity! (Score:3, Funny)

    by Kenard ( 540102 ) on Sunday July 06, 2003 @04:36PM (#6379144)
    aside from 'the scenes of maiming, dismemberment, clubbing, shooting, bayoneting and shoplifting'.
    Shoplifting, what's this world coming to?

  • Deathwatch (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Idimmu Xul ( 204345 ) on Sunday July 06, 2003 @04:40PM (#6379164) Homepage Journal

    Whilst we are plugging a UK film I'd also like to advertie Deathwatch. [deathwatchthemovie.co.uk]

    From Amazon [amazon.co.uk]:

    A small group of English soldiers find themselves in a labyrinth of abandoned German trenches in Deathwatch, a reworking of the classic British supernatural horror tale as a redemptive allegory amid the wider horror of the Great War. The very earth has had its fill of blood and this lost company may already be in hell: imagine the BBC TV film All the Kings Men (1999) crossed with Cube (1997), as realised by a young Ridley Scott. Only Charlie Shakespeare, an impressive Jamie Bell, is sufficiently innocent to realise the evil of the trenches is turning comrade against comrade, resulting in the gradually escalating carnage.

    Ok, not entirely related to the main topic, but it's a good film and it's not often the UK actually put out a good film in a year, let alone 2 great films!

  • Now what all shoplifters should do is start blaiming that movie on their behavior.

  • I do not have to read the article. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Raven42rac ( 448205 ) on Sunday July 06, 2003 @04:55PM (#6379218)
    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.

  • a review, of the review. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by geekoid ( 135745 ) <{moc.oohay} {ta} {dnaltropnidad}> on Sunday July 06, 2003 @05:00PM (#6379242) Homepage Journal
    "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.
  • You never hear about this one. Christian Bale had difficulty acheiving "suspense of disbelief" with his human actors, but the dragons and fire were some of the most beautiful CG work I've ever seen.

  • Hell freezes over! (Score:3, Informative)

    by pommaq ( 527441 ) <straffaren@@@spray...se> on Sunday July 06, 2003 @05:35PM (#6379419) Homepage
    Wow. It's a NY Times story, but someone finally figured out you can use the Google affiliate link to skip all the free reg hoo-haw. I think that's a first. Been waiting for that ever since the account generator [majcher.com] stopped working.
    Please keep it up!
  • The lack of microbial verisimilitude in "28 Days Later" may surprise viewers who recall the vividly accurate depiction of heroin withdrawal in Mr. Boyle's popular "Trainspotting" (1996).

    Myabe, just maybe, because heroin withdrawal is a reality in that it can be seen/studied/pondered upon relatively easily, compared to microbiology?
    Maybe because such correctness in the film would both reduce/limit its effect on the thought processes it causes/initiates and because it would have required a big budget?

  • Rabies (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Scrameustache ( 459504 ) on Sunday July 06, 2003 @05:55PM (#6379495) Homepage Journal
    When I first saw the ads talking about a virus and seeing the people turn, seconds from contamination, into bloodthirsty maniacs, I thought "Oh, so its flash-rabies, big whoop".

    Rage is the french name for rabies.

    The rabies cure was found by a french man.

    And from Webster's [webster.com]:
    Main Entry: 1rage
    Pronunciation: 'rAj
    Function: noun
    Etymology: Middle English, from Old French, from Late Latin rabia, from Latin rabies rage, madness, from rabere to be mad; akin to Sanskrit rabhas violence

    PS Anyone trolling with the usual, boring, old crap about french surrender, wich is automatic anytime france or french is mentioned will thereby prove their lameness.
    • Your observation is all the more insightful because Brits are really paranoid about rabies. Until a couple years ago, a dog or cat couldn't travel to the U.K. without spending six months in quarantine. The rules have been loosened for people travelling from the rest of the EU -- provided they start the process six months in advance.

      Terry Nation [museum.tv] once did an after-the-virus show for the BBC called Survivors [virgin.net]. Aside from destroying civilization, the virus also allows rabid dogs to escape from quarantine. In o

    • No no NO no.

      There is NO CURE for rabies. It is ONE HUNDRED PERCENT FATAL when it kicks in. THAT'S why they give the vaccination shot to anyone who's even SUSPECTED of exposure to rabies.

      The French guy developed the VACCINE. There is no cure.

      What pissed ME off is that they don't do this pro-actively. I'm not vaccinated against rabies and neither are you, probably. Yet, in Canada, where Moose rule, they scatter vaccinated tidbits around the forest to keep it down among raccoons etc.

      Apparently a freaking r
      • Oh, right. I checked and it is a vaccine.

        Its the "after exposure" part that made me think it was a cure.

        Apparently a freaking raccoon can get vaccinated and I can't. I hate that.

        Well, the racoons get more rabbies than we do, and they bite the dogs that then bite us. So vaccinating the racoons is a way to protect us.

  • Suspended in disbelief (Score:4, Insightful)

    by fm6 ( 162816 ) on Sunday July 06, 2003 @05:57PM (#6379506) Homepage Journal
    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.
    Whenever a slashdotter refers to "suspension of disbelief", usually what they really mean is "I enjoyed that movie/novel/manga, and it isn't fair of you to destroy my enjoyment by picking scientific nits." Come on, people. When you tell a story, you can't just ignore the real world. If somebody made a movie in which Julius Caesar and Daniel Boone got together to battle Nazis from the Bermuda dimension, nobody would "suspend disbelief". That fact is that a lot of science fiction relies not on "suspension of disbelief", but the credulity and ignorance of the audience or reader. I happen to think it's the main cause of the downfall of the Star Trek franchise, where most fans seem to be rather better educated than anybody who works for Paramount.

    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.

    • Whenever a slashdotter refers to "suspension of disbelief", usually what they really mean is "I enjoyed that movie/novel/manga, and it isn't fair of you to destroy my enjoyment by picking scientific nits." Come on, people. When you tell a story, you can't just ignore the real world. If somebody made a movie in which Julius Caesar and Daniel Boone got together to battle Nazis from the Bermuda dimension, nobody would "suspend disbelief".

      Curiously enough, you can get away with this in a book. In John Barnes

  • (When it came out in Belgium).
    Bloody great movie, mate, a remake of John Wyndham's Day of the Triffids only wiff cockney vampire zombies. Bloke wakes up from a come, finds himself all alone in London on a grey monday morning. Not a bleedin' soul. Stumbles into a church, gets attacked by a bunch of howling crazy red-eyed winos, and saved by a duo dressed in tank glasses and leather. The film only gets better and better, exploring some serious themes in a generously superficial manner: the individual against society (what bleeding society, they're all dead!), sexism (army squad saves hero and ladies, then tries to kill hero and rape ladies), abuse of power (same army squad) and armageddon (play with fire, get burnt).
    Actually it was a cool movie, going lightly on the monster makeup and relying heavily on the viewer's own imagination. It may be too subtle for the US market, clearly a UK film, dry and sharp. Think of it as the film as the sequel to Resident Evil, without Milla Jovovich but with an equally sexy Naomie Harris.
  • In the beginning the protagonist is walking through an abandoned London and then running from some Infected and Godspeed You! Black Emperor is rocking out in the background with "East Hastings."

    Tim

  • A Parasite does this for Real (Score:5, Interesting)

    by frank249 ( 100528 ) on Sunday July 06, 2003 @06:55PM (#6379772)
    In the movie 28 Days, a virus causes those infected with it to turn into killers. It turns out that there is an amoebic parasite called T. gondii [google.ca]that actually manipulates the behavior of its intermediate host, the rat, to reach its ultimate target, the cat. Rats become infected with T. gondiii by eating infected beetles or worms. Once infected, the rats lose their fear of cats and become aggressive towards them and thereby becoming dinner for the cat. The parasite is then passed on to the cat where it reproduces in the cats brain but does not appear to change any of the cat's behaviours. After a time, the parasite leaves the cat via its feces where it is picked up by bettles and worms and the cycle starts again. The scary thing is that all mammals are susceptible to infection by T. Gondii, however for now it appears that the amoebas can reproduce only within members of the cat family.

    So while there are infections like rabies that cause madness, it appears T. Gondii only affects the select behaviours in rats it needs in order continue as a species. There are societies where people eat cats and/or rats. I wonder how long it will be before T. Gondii evolves to affect humans?
    • "Rats become infected with T. gondiii by eating infected beetles or worms. Once infected, the rats lose their fear of cats and become aggressive towards them and thereby becoming dinner for the cat."

      "I wonder how long it will be before T. Gondii evolves to affect humans?"

      Don't worry, even if you lose your fear of cats it is unlikely that you will become their next meal, unless you live in Africa where there are some really big cats or if you are an old woman.

  • Warning - don't go to see this movie- poor picture (Score:3, Interesting)

    by nattt ( 568106 ) on Sunday July 06, 2003 @07:03PM (#6379801)
    The picture quality on 28 days later is so bad it's unwatchable. It's not a low budget movie (15 million) but for "artistic" reasons they shot it on miniDV, and didn't take any care with the picture quality at all. PAL miniDV can look quite good in the cinema if you take care to enlarge it correctly with good interpolation, and shoot it carefully so you don't over expose, and especially turn down (or preferably off) the sharpness control on the camera.

    The people who shot this movie did none of these - or should I say, the opposite of this. They turned the bad digital sharpness full up (which makes the picture look like bad VHS) and over-exposed. The film print was obviously made with no attempt to improve the picture in any way at all.

    The end result is a movie that looks so bad on the big screen it's barely watchable - and they expect you to pay real money to see it. There's no excuse for this - it's a movie that doesn't treat the viewer with respect.

    If you must see this movie, see the DVD, because that's the same picture you'll see in the cinema - just many times larger....
    • 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 v
      • "The picture quality is not bad, it's just different from what most movies choose" - wrong.

        The picture quality is BAD - actually very bad. It's technically inept. It looks atrocious. To say that the picture quality gives you "a sense that you are watching some post-apocalpyse news item" is just rubbish. A good director can make you see grit and realism while presenting you with a perfect picture - a poor director will just show you a gritty picture. It's not clever to make a picture look deliberately bad

  • Sounds interesting (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Erwos ( 553607 ) on Sunday July 06, 2003 @07:51PM (#6380001)
    Didn't see the movie (can't stand the zombie flicks myself), but...

    If the movie happened in "real life", it would take roughly a day for the rest of the world to figure out roughly what's happening. You'd see:

    1. Extreme quarantine measures. There'd be a total blockade of Britain, a large, well-armed regiment blocking the Chunnel from all traffic, and escorts of air traffic. Anyone who doesn't stop gets killed. There will probably be a few infections outside of Britain, but the authorities will be rather more prone to use lethal force to deal with them.
    2. After two weeks, the world is throughly scared to death. All British survivors are told they are remaining in quarantine indefinitely. Scientists discover what the plague is, but have no cure.
    3. Weeks 3-6: the civilized world tries to figure out how the hell to deal with this plague. Massive military rescue operations to grab survivors, conventional military operations, and the use of nuclear weapons to contain the plague are discussed.
    4. Weeks 7-9: Rescue ops are carried out against known survivor colonies. Coalition militaries (primarily NATO) take only a few casualties, mostly from equipment failures.

    How would it play out in the end? I don't know. But the fact of the matter is, if it's between the lives of 500,000 people and a plague that could possibly end the world and destroy all of humanity... I know I would consider using nuclear weapons to destroy the British Isles and cauterize the remenants of the disease. I don't think I'd do it, but I'd have the option down on the table.

    In extreme times, you may have to use extreme measures. They may or may not be over-reactions, but the safe side of an issue is obviously continuing the human race.

    -Erwos
    • I know I would consider using nuclear weapons to destroy the British Isles and cauterize the remenants of the disease. I don't think I'd do it, but I'd have the option down on the table.

      I would be really careful with this option. The English Channel just isn't that wide a body of water. In addition to the radioactive fallout, there is also the risk of picking up infectious material. Some viruses are very hardy, and remain viable for quite a while outside the body. The prevailing winds would carry all

  • Paraphrased:

    A movie where the zombies run faster than you can.

    Not your typical limping, sedentary zombies. More like track runners on crack.

  • It looks like it from the ads, and I don't like horror movies, so I will have to wait and see it on DVD or decide from reviews...

    ttyl
    Farrell

  • Varmus missing the point (Score:3, Informative)

    by Marcus Brody ( 320463 ) on Monday July 07, 2003 @07:12AM (#6382091) Homepage
    This film came out in the UK a few months back. It's basically a zombie flick, so you should ignore any scientific ponderings about the nature of viruses, and suspend disbelief.

    However, this is in places an intelligent film, and worthy of good review. However, Varmus critisices the scientific implications of the film, whereas the artistic and social aspects of the film are much more insightful.

    For example, the film contains a nice twist on the whole zombie-movie genre. The fact that in a post-apocolyptic world, the survivors will be the last people you want to inherit the earth (e.g. stupid young men tooled up with ridiculous firepower), is a good point, and speaks some volumes about the direction our world could go.

Slashdot Top Deals

C'est magnifique, mais ce n'est pas l'Informatique. -- Bosquet [on seeing the IBM 4341]

Close