10 Great Films That Are Ugly On Purpose
2. 28 Days Later
Taking a cursory glance at Danny Boyle's hit horror film 28 Days Later, you'd be forgiven for assuming it was a micro-budget feature, considering that large portions of the movie were shot on prosumer-grade DV cameras and as such lacked the cinematic gloss of film.
But in actual fact, 28 Days Later cost £8 million, and given that Boyle had numerous hit films under his belt before shooting began, this was actually an intentional choice on his part.
Boyle was keen to experiment with digital filmmaking, resulting in a film which, while still impeccably lit and framed by veteran DP Anthony Dod Mantle, has an unmistakable early 2000s digital murkiness about it.
It's as though every shot has been wrapped in a roll of cling film, and yet it is entirely effective in accentuating the movie's highly plausible post-apocalyptic atmosphere.
It just goes to show that with a world-class filmmaker, a great script, and a killer cast, the visual delivery medium isn't quite so important.