28 Weeks Later Review [2]
Posted by Trevor Snyder on 05.15.2007
A modern horror classic becomes a fantastic horror franchise.
28 Weeks Later
Directed by: Juan Carlos Fresnadillo
Written by: Rowan Joffe, Juan Carlos Fresnadillo, Jesus Olmo, & E. L. Lavigne
Runtime: 99 min
Rated R for strong violence and gore, language and some sexuality/nudity.
Don: Robert Carlyle
Alice: Catherine McCormack
Tammy: Imogen Poots
Andy: Mackintosh Muggleton
Doyle: Jeremy Renner
Scarlet: Rose Byrne
Stone: Idris Elba
Flynn: Harold Perrineau
OK, let me just start off by saying that yes, I know the rage-infected psychos of 28 Days Later and 28 Weeks Later are not technically zombies, seeing as how they have never returned from the dead. Still, I think it’s safe to say that zombie fans accepted Boyle’s film as one of their own, and the American theatrical poster for 28 Days Later even proudly contained a blurb hailing Boyle for his “reinvention” of the zombie horror film. So I’m gonna go with general consensus here, and for the remainder of this review refer to both films as “zombie movies.” Take it or leave it. Now that we have that out of the way, onto the review:
Although primarily remembered by many mostly for kick-starting the most recent zombie-movie boom, 28 Days Later’s true claim to fame is the same thing that made it such a hit in the first place: it was the first really intelligent horror movie in a long time. Using a zombie outbreak as the backdrop for a scathing commentary on humanity’s capacity to devolve into savagery in the face of crisis, director Danny Boyle’s 2002 film was a much-welcomed break from parade of vapid Scream clones that then flooded the genre, and a nice throwback to the ‘70s, when horror films actually had something to say about the world we live in.
Given the film’s massive success, both commercially and critically, it’s only natural to be a little wary of a sequel, especially with neither Boyle nor screenwriter Alex Garland returning to their original roles (they both remain onboard as executive producers). Thankfully, though, 28 Weeks Later turns out to be that rarest of beasts - a horror follow-up that not only lives up to, but in some ways even surpasses the original.
It doesn’t take long for the new film to establish that it will at least be as scary as the first, opening with a nerve-wrecking sequence set during the time of the original movie. It is here we meet Don (Trainspotting’s Robert Carlyle, giving a heartbreaking performance that is the best I have ever seen from him) and Alice (Catherine McCormack), a married couple stuck in the quarantined English countryside. They and a handful of other survivors have found refuge in a boarded-up cottage, but their tenuous security is shattered when a horde of ravenous infectee’s lay siege to the house. Seeing Alice surrounded by these crazies, Don cowardly abandons her, running away to freedom instead of trying to help her.
The film then flashes forward to, well, 28 weeks later, and things are looking a little better in London. Although the quarantine remains in place, the last of the infected have long since died of starvation, and repopulation has begun. The U.S. Army has been put in charge of this operation, setting up and maintaining a safe green zone of the city, and everyday are shipping in more and more native inhabitants who were dispossessed during the original evacuation. Among these returnees are Don and Alice’s children, teenage daughter Tammy (Imogen Poots) and young Andy (Mackintosh Muggleton), who were off on a school trip in Spain when all the madness first began. They are soon reunited with their father, who, when questioned about their mother’s fate, tells a false tale of seeing her killed despite his futile efforts to save her.
Don’s lie eventually comes back to bite not only him, but everyone in the city (and in some cases, I mean literally bite), when it turns out the dreaded Rage virus is not quite as gone as had been assumed. Soon, the infection is loose again, and the Army’s attempt to protect the citizens turns disastrous, as the violent outbreak spills right over into the supposedly safe area they have cordoned everyone off into. Clearly having lost control, and unable to tell the infected from the rest of the fleeing innocents, the Army general in charge (The Wire’s Idris Elba, who must be thrilled to be appearing in a really good horror movie after this year’s The Reaping) orders his men to simply open fire on everyone, wiping out the entire new populace and quickly putting a kibosh on the whole repopulation thing.
This is all a bit too much to handle for Doyle (Jeremy Renner), a good-hearted American soldier who decides he’s not all that comfortable with the idea of slaughtering innocents. Instead, Doyle breaks ranks and sets about helping Tammy and Andy get out of the city before it is fire-bombed in a last ditch effort to regain control. Joining them is an American doctor (Rose Byrne) who is convinced that Tammy and Andy’s blood might just hold the key to fighting off the infection, and Army helicopter pilot and Doyle’s best friend (Lost’s Harold Perrineau), who agrees to secretly help them get the hell out of dodge.
If you’ve seen the first film, you’ve probably already surmised that this is a lot more action-packed than Boyle’s movie. In this regard, 28 Weeks Later director Juan Carlos Fresnadillo does an admirable job combining the jittery, rapid-cut, hand-held aesthetics of Boyle’s original with the new film’s more epic scale and unrelenting pace. The attacks from the infected are just as brutal and terrifying as before, and once the crap really hits the fan Fresnadillo never really gives his audience much of a chance to catch their breath, instead delivering scene after scene of sheer terror and tension (two sequences, in particular, deserve special mention as two of the most frighteningly effective scenes I’ve seen in some time – the initial outbreak, which sees a room crammed full of panicked people try in vain to flee the infection spreading across the crowd, and a later scene in which our heroes must navigate their way through a pitch-black subway tunnel strewn with dead bodies, with only a single night-vision rifle scope to aid them).
And yes, as one must expect from a horror sequel, the level of violence and gore has been drastically increased this time around. It’s not that Boyle’s original wasn’t a violent film, but I think most would agree that, for a film of its kind, it was surprisingly restrained when it came to the actual amount of onscreen bloodshed it contained. Not so 28 Weeks Later, which never misses an opportunity to shower the screen with crimson and severed body parts. Trust me, if you thought the “helicopter dispatches zombies” scene in Grindhouse was something, you haven’t seen anything yet (and, on that note, let me just quickly say this: the mere fact that we have already seen two major studio films with zombies obliterated by helicopter blades pretty much cements 2007 as one of the greatest years in cinema history).
The good news, however, is that Fresnadillo never lets the blood and guts overwhelm the story or characters. While most recent horror sequels have taken a disappointing “more gore, less thought” approach (Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning, Saw III, Hills Have Eyes 2), 28 Weeks Later does the unthinkable, actually remembering that you don’t have to sacrifice plot for an increase in gore! Even with the increased carnage and mayhem, 28 Weeks remains just as intelligent as its predecessor.
In fact, the overall point remains pretty much the same - sure, the rage-infected zombies are a real pain in the ass, but the true monsters may just be mankind itself. It’s not exactly a new idea – hell, George Romero’s Dead series has essentially been saying the same thing for years. Still, 28 Days Later and now 28 Weeks Later deserve credit for being perhaps the only zombie movies to make the point as well as Romero.
Like the first film, where the third act revealed the film’s real villains to be the military unit looking to forcibly recruit women as sex-slaves, 28 Weeks Later is particularly concerned about the “might makes right” mentality that is so rampant in a military culture, although this time around the message is much more overtly political. After all, it doesn’t take a genius to figure out what current real-world events the film is satirizing, nor who its intended targets of criticism are. A number of the film's elements - scenes involving America’s occupation of London, their arrogant assumption that they can handle any problem, and their instantaneous violent response when they realize they are in over their heads - won’t win the film many conservative fans (believe me, it probably won’t take long for the usual FOX News yahoos to jump all over this one), but they nevertheless lend the story a modern relevance that you just don’t get in very many horror films, not to mention the same sort of eerie realism that made the first film so powerful.
There are a few factors that might keep fans of the original film from totally getting on board with this one. For starters, it is a sequel, and therefore suffers from the unfortunate truth that no matter how good it is, it doesn’t feel as fresh or groundbreaking this time around. Also, the first movie’s sly sense of humor is almost completely absent here, with Fresnadillo much more interested in constantly keeping the audience on the edge of their seats than in relieving tension with goofy moments. And although the sequel retains the intimate feel of the first film by once again focusing on only a handful of characters, it nonetheless lacks a lead character as compelling as 28 Days Later’s Jim (played so hauntingly by Cillian Murphy, in his breakout role).
On the other hand, though, it will almost certainly win over any fans who thought the first film was OK, but could have used a little more action and chaos. Any by hammering home the idea of humanity’s aggressive and overconfident nature right from the start, rather than saving it for the film’s final act, the sequel is arguably even more important as a statement on human nature and the problems it entails.
Whatever the individual viewer’s final decision is on whether it stacks up to Boyle’s original, there’s no doubt it is one hell of a sequel, and a worthy follow-up to the first film. The ending strongly hints at an inevitable second sequel (28 Months Later?), and that’s good news for horror fans. At a time when most of the genre seems content on churning out the same kind of crap that almost destroyed it in the ‘80s and ‘90s, it’s nice to have a franchise around that reminds us how much more these kinds of films are capable of.
The 411: Proof that more blood doesn’t have to mean less story, 28 Weeks Later, the sequel to Danny Boyle’s modern horror classic 28 Days Later, ramps up the original’s action and gore factor, all without sacrificing the modern-day relevance and social commentary that made the first film so effective. Director Juan Carlos Fresnadillo proves a worthy successor to Boyle, and delivers a film both terrifying and thought-provoking. Although by its very nature as a sequel it cannot feel as original or cutting-edge as the first film, it is nonetheless an amazingly effective sequel, and even surpasses Boyle’s film in certain elements. The hacks at production companies like Platinum Dunes and Dark Castle should take notes; this is what a horror film can be.
