Watching Apocalypto, Children of Men and 28 Days Later back to back all in the same night, had me feeling pretty fed up with over-exaggerations, fight scenes, and ominous music. Now that I’ve had a few days to digest all the doom, gloom, blood, and violence I’ve come to realize that we are relatively limited in terms of creative renderings of the end.

“Change” is a word that has the capacity to induce anxiety in the masses. Apocalypse, though, goes far beyond the anxieties of change. Apocalypse suggests the moment or perhaps series of moments when a person or group of people’s entire sense of comfort, familiarity, and normalcy disappears, never to be restored. This would presumably create a sense of individual and group confusion, fear, and panic that would likely lead to some of the violence and chaos we see in Apocalypto, Children of Men and 28 Days Later.

How, though, can you possibly convey pure fear, confusion and chaos on film? The answer is simple. Shoot heads rolling down the steps of a ziggurat in a river of blood, men leaping off of waterfalls, the murders of every person the protagonist is close to, and a lone man walking down the entirely silent and empty streets of what we know is London only because of the landmarks. Oh, and do be sure to throw in lots of blood and cannibalism for good measure. The exaggeration of it all is entertaining but frustrating. In my opinion, these films fail to really evoke a genuine response or fear of apocalypse in the viewer. The films serve as a lens into the apocalyptic world, but that lens puts the viewer on the outside, incredibly aware of the falseness of what is on screen.

The three films have something in common; they are all aesthetically interesting. Children of Men and Apocalypto in particular are visually stunning, and 28 Days Later, though not of the same caliber has moments of “artsy-ness.” The “artsy” qualities of the movies, though, puts us even further on the outside, and reminds us constantly that we are watching a movie that was created to shock us. Perhaps it’s easier to feel shocked if a film’s very composition is created to create that response, but for me, it makes the experience feel too artificial to have an impact on me after the credits start rolling.

I will say that each film has a few moments that really “hit home,” but for one reason or another the films can’t quite hold onto the sense of fear that I think would come out of an apocalypse. Apocalypto struck me with real fear and escape from my position of viewer in two places: (1) Jaguar Paw’s dream in which the outside villager stands, hyperventilating holding his own beating heart, chest cut open and bleeding and warns, “Run.” And (2) the little girl in the desert who delivers a prophecy, plagued by some disease and standing next to her mother’s dead body. These moments chill me to remember; something about seeing such entirely unbelievable images is striking. The reason, that these moments of exaggeration are effective, though, is that they work with an acknowledgement of something supernatural or out of the ordinary at work. When Jaguar Paw jumps down through a waterfall and survives, the viewer thinks, at first, that this is perhaps because of some alluded to supernatural status, but immediately after all but one of those chasing him manages to survive the drop as well. The exaggeration seems to be for shock value, and doesn’t really mean anything.

28 Days Later is profound namely in the opening scene. Jim walks down the streets of London in scrubs. The green/blue neon hue that pervades the atmosphere adds to the eeriness of the silence and emptiness of the city. After this scene, there are interesting moments that call into question human nature and survival, but in my viewing experience, I felt most drawn into the “action” at this point.

Children of Men’s “moment” for me was when Kee and Theo walk down the crowded hallway of the refugee tenement and all of the violence ceases as the sound of the crying baby fill the air. It’s a powerful moment and it had that ability to really pull me in that I didn’t feel in other places. By far, though, Children of Men, was the best of the three in terms of finding an effective route to imagining the unimaginable.

Essentially, these films show us that exaggeration can be effective. Unbelievable moments can have a lasting impact on the viewer, but it is undeniable that some of the value of these moments is diminished when every other scene is set up to leave us gaping.

It’s hard not to feel like once you’ve seen one apocalyptic film, you’ve seen them all. There is a certain formula that holds up across most approaches to the idea. I don’t think the formula means that films like these cannot be enjoyed or that something can’t be taken away from them. I mean really, who doesn’t love a good, bloody movie. Sometimes, though, the excessive exaggeration hits us over the head leaving us a little disoriented. It’s an issue that I don’t think can be easily addressed, though. Filmmakers are limited from the moment they set out to convey the inconceivable concept of the end.