20 iPhones replaced traditional movie cameras on Danny Boyle's '28 Days' zombie movie. Why are they better?
Danny Boyle
is returning to the franchise with a fresh set of eyes and a twist on a new technology.
The original film was set against the background of a "rage virus" that destroyed Britain and forced residents into quarantine. It was followed by the sequel "28 Weeks Later", directed by Juan Carlos Fresnadillo.
Even more time has passed in "28 Years Later", which is released this week and reunites Boyle with the original film's writer, Alex Garland.
Starring Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Jodie Comer, Ralph Fiennes and newcomer Alfie Williams, the movie follows a young boy's journey with his father from a closed-off community on an island to the mainland to kill his first zombie.
His mother grapples with an illness which isolates her from the rest of her community and threatens to tear the family apart.
"There'd be occasional screenings of ("28 Days Later") and ... it hadn't really dated," Boyle told Reuters at the world premiere of "28 Years Later" on Wednesday night.
"More importantly, the people's reaction to it felt like they were watching something very present day ... And that led us to start thinking, should we introduce something else into this world?"
One of the innovations was the camera setup. Boyle got in close to the action by sometimes using up to 20 iPhones at a time on special rigs.
"Smartphones, they will now shoot at 4K resolution, which is cinema resolution. So you can use them," Boyle said.
"They are incredibly light. You can go somewhere with a very light footprint and you can also build special rigs with them, which is what we did for some of the violent action in the movie."
Taylor-Johnson said the technique gave the film a "visceral and immersive" texture. "It would make me feel a bit vulnerable at times because it's very invasive."
"28 Years Later" will also be first of a new trilogy of movies, with the second - "28 Years Later: The Bone Temple" - due in January.
(Editing by Andrew Heavens)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
11 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
What Prada did to the GI law and Kolhapuris
The leather sandals seen on the ramp for the Prada Men Spring Summer 2026 collection have recently been in the eye of a storm. While Prada has now acknowledged that the products were inspired by the traditional Kolhapuri chappals (a registered Geographical Indication since 2019) has any law been broken here? PREMIUM Now that the law is done and dusted, the question of ethics and cultural appropriation must be addressed. (REUTERS) To unpack the controversy, one must first understand what a GI registration really means. A geographical indication is a tag given to a product (natural or man made) that originates in a particular place and has a particular set of characteristics. Kolhapuri chappals are identified in the registration as a species of open Indian footwear made of bag tanned leather with vegetable dyes, produced using traditional techniques and tools. According to the registration, these products use buffalo hide, cow hide, calf skins of buff and cow treated with lime (slaked) and tanned using vegetable tanning material (Babulbark and myrobalan nuts), and sisal fibre for stitching. They also involve the use of hand tools for unhairing, fleshing, beaming and scrubbing. The GI law merely serves as a badge of origin and authenticity for a craft or product that comes from a particular region. For example, tea that is not grown in Darjeeling under a specific set of circumstances cannot be called Darjeeling tea. However, if tea grown elsewhere mimics the taste and aroma of a perfect cup of first flush from Darjeeling without using the word on its product packaging or promotion, the law will let you drink your tea (or spill it), without interfering. GI infringement occurs when a product is mis-tagged, i.e. something made elsewhere under a different set of conditions and/or using different raw materials is sold as the original GI tagged product. If Prada sold products tagged as Kolhapuri chappals when they were in fact not made in Maharashtra or Karnataka according to the specifications of the GI registration, only then would the question of infringement arise. That is clearly not the case here. So irrespective of how rankled one may feel, there is no actionable claim that can be made in this instance, for the infringement of a GI or any other form of intellectual property. In this backdrop, should we demand that since these sandals resemble Kolhapuri chappals, Prada should call them by that name? A brand's decision as to where they manufacture their products is a purely commercial one. Prada currently does not manufacture its leather footwear in India. It has its own set of quality control measures and product specifications, that could potentially conflict with the specifications of a GI tagged product. So, a demand that Prada tag their products as Kolhapuri chappals makes sense only if they are manufactured in the specific districts of Maharashtra or Karnataka in accordance with the criteria of the GI registration and are not based on Prada's own specifications and materials. If they don't do either, then it would be a mis-description to tag the products as Kolhapuri chappals and ultimately a disservice to the original craft and its GI registration. I can almost hear you asking, 'then what is the point of the registration?' A GI registration helps set standards for the product; it regulates the place of manufacture, the raw materials and technique used. If the raw materials and techniques are accurate but the place of manufacture is different, it is at best an 'inspiration' — the product cannot be sold under the GI tag, which appears to be the case here. And the question of acknowledging inspiration is a purely ethical and moral question, not a legal one. So does this mean that Prada now 'owns' Kolhapuri chappals? The answer is again, no! Designer apparel and accessories are protected (after registration) under the Designs Act, 2000 in India. For a design to be registrable it needs to be original and not in the public domain. The risk that a luxury brand takes with potentially launching a product that is firmly in the public domain is that it cannot claim infringement against third party knock-offs since the design in this case would not be registrable in Prada's favour. But here again, it is important to remember that the commercial decision of whether these products will traverse the path from ramp to retail has not been publicly declared. So the claim that Prada will be 'selling' these for a lakh plus is at best a click-bait headline for the moment. Now that the law is done and dusted, the question of ethics and cultural appropriation must be addressed. Although there is no actionable legal claim against Prada, the public clamour and PR backlash have resulted in opening up a channel of communication between them and the Maharashtra Chamber of Commerce. Whether it will result in tokenism or a commercial boost to the traditional practitioners of the craft, remains to be seen. The one definite positive outcome I see from this controversy is an uptick in the sales of the original Kolhapuri chappals. With a foreign luxury brand's apparent endorsement, we will hopefully see our heritage products as cool! After all, what's sauce for the goose is chutney for the gander! Shwetasree Majumder is managing partner, Fidus Law Chambers. The views expressed are personal.
Hindustan Times
12 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Lauren Sanchez's wedding dress mysteriously vanishes after romantic Venice ceremony: Report
Jeff Bezos' extravagant wedding to Lauren Sanchez in Venice is still making waves, however, this time for an unexpected twist. Just days after the lavish three-day celebration, one of the new bride's 27 custom wedding dresses has reportedly gone missing. After a grand wedding in Venice, one of Lauren Sanchez's custom wedding dresses is reported missing. REUTERS/Yara Nardi(REUTERS) Also Read: Who is Diogo Jota's wife? Rute Cardoso posted their wedding video just before his death; they tied knot on June 22 According to Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera, one of the wedding dresses has been missing since Bezos and Sanchez tied the knot in a Venetian wedding. No information has been revealed about the designer brand or the label of the missing dress, as reported by the Daily Mail. It is also reported that a woman who is yet to be identified and was elegantly dressed or the event was able to sneak past the security guards. Later, she was 'kindly escorted out.' However, her personal details were not recorded, and now it is believed that she might have taken the dress. Also Read: Who was Anita Wright? Beloved Canadian TikToker and cake artist announces own death by physician-assisted suicide Lauren Sanchez's wedding dress caught on fire Sanchez's Dolce & Gabbana wedding dress reportedly caught fire. Fortunately, it was not the dress she wore for her wedding. During her nuptials, the former journalist wore a lacy white turtleneck Dolce & Gabbana gown. It had lacy floral sleeves, a tight bodice, a high neckline, and a long skirt. In addition, the gown had an enormous train and buttons at the front. Following the nuptials, Sanchez shared snaps of her, Bezos, and her wedding gown on her Instagram and captioned it 'I do.' She also showcased the stunning gown in a pre-wedding photoshoot for Vogue, where she described feeling like a 'princess' during her fitting in Milan.
Hindustan Times
17 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Diogo Jota dies in car crash hauntingly similar to Paul Walker's
Jul 03, 2025 02:53 PM IST Liverpool FC star Diogo Jota, who has died in a car accident in Spain, alongside his younger brother, according to Spanish outlet Marca. Local fire officials in Zamora confirmed that two men, aged 28 and 26, lost their lives when their car caught fire following a crash. Liverpool FC's Diogo Jota and his brother tragically died in a car crash in Spain, poking the pain of Paul Walker tragedy.(Reuters) As the football world mourns the forward's death, the ghastly accident has drawn a similarity to the 2013 death of Fast & Furious actor Paul Walker. Walker was riding as a passenger in a Porsche Carrera GT when it crashed into a pole and a tree before bursting into flames. His friend Roger Rodas was behind the wheel. Both men died at the scene.
