Okay… So I just saw 28 Days Later and I only came out wondering about Rupert Murdoch’s influence in the movie. Maybe I’m just paranoid, but it seemed a bit suspicious to see that, according to the movie, those crazy liberals were the cause of worldwide destruction by trying to free the monkeys. We all know, of course, that liberals are all about freeing monkeys.

Not to mention, Frank’s utter relief over irradiated apples in the supermarket. Just how phony can you make a line like “Ahh, yes! Irradiated!”

What’s interesting, though, was what Andrew O’Hehir pointed out in his review of the movie in Salon:

Apocalypse is very much on our minds these days, yeah. But then, it’s been on our minds pretty much steadily ever since the summer of 1945.

…

Every movie I see seems to be about the end of the world these days, some literally and some less so. Next week brings us “Terminator 3,” in which Arnold Schwarzenegger tries to save two cute kids from nuclear war. Mike Figgis’ forthcoming experimental film “Hotel,” which admittedly almost no one will see (although you should, if you’re the masochistic art-film type), offers the spectacle of postmodern celebrity culture literally devouring itself. Later this year Frodo and Sam will save the world and end it at the same time, and Neo will have his climactic showdown with the agents of the Matrix. (I haven’t seen “From Justin to Kelly”; that might be the end of the world.)

This is probably the most telling political influence of releasing apocalyptic films. Somehow, some of us who are obsessed over apocalyptic stories also happen to be obsessed over winning the war on terrorism.