STARRING Robert Carlyle, Rose Byrne, Catherine McCormack, Jeremy Renner, Idris Elba and Harold Perrineau
DIRECTOR Juan Carlos Fresnadillo
Sequels and viruses live by the same precept -- mutate or die.
So if the makers of 28 Weeks Later -- the second but surely not the last instalment of the 28 Days Later franchise -- know they can't recreate the novelty of demonically fast, rage-infested zombies, they can nonetheless build upon a concept rich with untapped possibilities.
Hence, if Days was comparable to Alien, Weeks intends to be Aliens -- greater in scope, budget and body count. It even has U.S. Marines.
Bigger rarely equates with better. But Trainspotting's Danny Boyle, who helmed the frantically frightening original and executive-produces this episode, and new helmer Juan Carlos Fresnadillo never allow the success of Days to hamstring their fiercely thrilling follow-up.
These zombies -- or Infected, as they're called -- still have bite and, more importantly, brains.
Robert Carlyle stars as Don, a husband and father who lost his wife, played by Catherine McCormack, in the original outbreak.
Six months later, he is a superintendent in a U.S.-led militarized zone established to begin the repopulation of London, now that the virus has abated (the zombies have all starved to death).
Imogen Poots and MacIntosh Muggleton portray his still-grieving children, while Rose Byrne (Troy), Jeremy Renner and Harold Perrineau (Lost) are among the soldiers tasked with rebuilding London and, especially, ensuring there are no future outbreaks.
Given current events, it's hard not to see the story's politically charged parallels with a certain other failed American-led mission -- what with its militarized zone, occupying U.S. soldiers, displaced residents and the viral insurgency that sees the stitched-together peace come apart at the bullet-riddled seams.
As well, Fresnadillo, who also co-wrote the screenplay, understands that true horror lies in the moral choices men and women make in the direst of circumstances.
So while there is enough splatter to satiate the demands of our current so-called torture/porn climate -- in case the ranks of the squeamish needed to be warned, this thriller isn't for them -- the movie's most harrowing moments are grounded not in blood but in character.
Our main complaint? The confused, lacklustre ending, which shamelessly sets up a 28 Months Later and, like the blood-thirsty sprinters on-screen, doesn't quite know when to quit.
Director Danny Boyle's edgy and very gritty 2002 film "28 Days Later" was an outstanding addition to the genre of "plague pictures" -- films, usually (but not always) set in the future, in a dark world being overwhelmed by some kind of disease or infection that threatens to annihilate the planet.
Now, Spanish filmmaker Juan Carlos Fresnadillo is picking up the mantle of Boyle's original concept and propels us forward six months -- after the bloodthirsty and vicious zombies infected with what came to be called the "rage virus" seemingly had wiped out most of Britain. With the American armed forces in command, the military declares the coast is clear, safe to begin the long process of rebuilding the United States' obliterated mother country.
One of the first refugees to venture back to the shell of what was once London is Don (Robert Carlyle) -- allowed back into a small portion of the city the authorities declare appropriate to begin the rebuilding process. Don is soon reunited with his son and daughter, Andy and Tammy, explaining he had barely escaped the zombies, but unfortunately had to leave behind his wife, Alice (Catherine McCormack).
Of course -- no surprise here! -- the initial sense of calm is quickly shattered when the virus resurfaces.
Fresnadillo then takes us on quite the wild -- and I cannot stress this enough -- very brutal and bloody journey. As tough to watch as were many of the scenes in Boyle's original film, "28 Weeks Later" is far more gory. This is not a film for the faint of heart and likely not recommended for viewing too soon after a heavy meal. In fact, I predict concession sales during "28 Weeks Later" may drop drastically because eating is likely the last thing one would want to do while watching this orgy of gore.
While the plot is relatively predictable, the pacing will keep audiences riveted and likely fascinated by the ways Fresnadillo and his team deliver death and mayhem.
In today's political climate -- a time of war when governmental and military morality are called into question on a regular basis -- an intriguing aspect of "28 Weeks Later" involves decisionmaking by the authorities.
As I watched this picture, it was impossible not to think about what extremes people in positions of authority would go to -- believing they had no other choices, as they struggled to harness a crisis that threatened to kill everyone -- or at least turn them into murdering zombies.
This is a truly frightening film and will likely even lead committed horror fans to jump up a few times.
A few aspects are irritating. There were numerous times when Fresnadillo's affection for jumpy hand-held camera shots detracted from -- rather than enhanced -- the urgency of the action the director was clearly trying to achieve.
That approach also seemed to confuse the storyline, making you wonder exactly what was happening for a moment or two.
Also, the soundtrack was far too intrusive, coming across as a constant wall of "white sound" that didn't add much to the film's overall impact.
There is also an interesting secret revealed here, but to know that going in would greatly hurt a viewer's ability to be both surprised and horrified -- two major reasons for going to a film like this. So, naturally, I won't even hint at what that secret is all about -- and don't let anyone tell you about it ahead of time. Trust me, you will be disappointed if you know it beforehand.
While this won't go down as one of Robert Carlyle's best acting efforts, he does deliver about as good a performance as an actor could, given the restrictions of his role. Catherine McCormack, Rose Byrne (as the chief medical officer Scarlet) and Mackintosh Muggleton and Imogen Potts (as Don and Alice's children) are excellent and believable as they inhabit a world so terrible, reality seems far more like a living nightmare.
Here's hoping 28 Weeks Later doesn't get lumped in with all the cheap, bloody junk that's been heading down the Hollywood horror pike. Terse, economical and infused with a low-fi feel that leaves its mark on everything from the film's light levels (low) to its music (mournful yet rocking), it's a sequel that surpasses the original and an apocalypse movie that forces you to confront genuine dread.
If you saw 28 Days Later, you know the basic setup. A rage virus has broken out in London, turning victims into snarling, fleet-afoot zombies who are, well, enraged. As we rejoin the action, the virus has been contained and a U.S.-led NATO coalition has secured the remaining healthy populace in the Green Zone. Like the real Green Zone, over in Iraq, this one offers what turns out to be a rather false sense of security.
But 28 Weeks Later is also, in its own strange way, a family movie (which does not mean you should bring the kids, unless you want to pay for years of their therapy). The first scene of the film, a mini masterpiece in its own right, finds Don (Robert Carlyle) holed up with family and strangers in a dark country house, waiting out the storm. You can tell the storm will find them, and when it does � in a taut, grisly sequence of rapid cuts and handheld-camera immediacy � Don leaves his wife (Catherine McCormack) behind. He's reunited with their kids in the Green Zone, and they want to know where Mom is. At least, they think they want to know.
The first hour of 28 Weeks Later is just about perfect, as director Juan Carlos Fresnadillo mixes the atmosphere of a doomed, nearly deserted London with moments of utter chaos. We're meant to draw parallels with the current war, and the political allegory overplays its hand a little. But it's still heart-stopping when anarchy breaks out and the assembled soldiers can't do a thing but fire at will. Who's infected? Who's not? Can't take any chances; just let 'er rip and worry about the consequences later.
The last 40 minutes get a bit redundant, as the survivors of the chaos � including Don's kids, who may carry an antibody needed for a vaccine (shades of Children of Men) � forge a treacherous path to safety. But with the exception of one over-the-top sequence that should look familiar to those who saw the Robert Rodriguez half of Grindhouse , the aesthetic remains stripped-down and underplayed. Sure, the film is gross, but not like recent horror films that wallow in gore for its own sake.
We close with an early scene that tragically encapsulates the themes of love and sex that lie at the heart of Dracula and so many horror films since. A man, reunited with his wife, kisses her passionately. He doesn't know she's infected. When he finds out the hard way, and falls into uncontrollable fits of convulsion, the look in his eyes falls somewhere between disbelief and heartsickness. You did this to me? I still love you. But now the end is nigh.
The foreigners � at least the bad ones � are barbaric, dangerous killers. It�s up to American troops to occupy the country, bring them under control, and then turn the country over to its own people to run. But how to get out when it seems impossible to eradicate the bad ones? And what do you do when the violence spins out of control?
This could be a documentary about Iraq, but it�s actually the storyline of 28 Weeks Later, sequel to the wildly successful � and wildly scary and horrifying -- 28 Days Later.The dangerous killers aren�t Iraqi insurgents, but �rage virus� infected zombies. And it�s set in the United Kingdom.
While the parallels with the United States� and Britain�s disastrous Iraq invasion are unmistakeable, 28 Weeks Later is more concerned with establishing a terrifyingly dismal atmosphere and then dragging us along for a kinetic, intense race for survival along with a small group trying to dodge both the infected zombies and the �kill them all� Americans.
Focused more on non-stop freaking us out than the first movie, which spent a lot of time wandering the deserted streets of London, this sequel is more into the big picture � showing us the city from the air as the supposedly eradicated virus springs back to life, and then showing us the full force of American military might as U.S. troops do what they believe is necessary to rid London of the scourge.
Amidst all the carnage is a family, some members of which are the reason the virus has returned, and other members whose survival or non-survival might just determine whether or not the virus can be cured. And chances are, we�re going to see another instalment in this series to find out whether that happens.
Despite my disdain for sequels, I must say that this is a solid one. Sure, it tends to favour �big� over �smart� on occasion, but it�s still got that great dismal atmosphere, and the action is crowd-pleasingly intense. Best of all, this is sufficiently no-holds-barred that you honestly don�t have a clue which characters will live and die by the time the movie ends. There are no glossy stars here who can�t bear to have their characters go down, so dispense with predicting the outcome early on and hang on.
I may be the only person in the world who dislikes the use of handheld cameras in super close-up during scenes of intense violence, but I�ll continue to argue that this technique, while it successfully throws audience members right into the midst of the action, reduces the effectiveness of scenes by making it impossible for us to follow what�s happening. Yes, it�s like that if you�re right in the middle of big-time violence, but this is one case where I think filmmakers are better served if they sacrifice a touch of realism in exchange for scenes that better show characters struggling for survival. Thankfully, the worst of this is over after just the first few minutes of the movie.
That peeve aside, 28 Weeks Later has a great premise � an entire nation over-run by a virus that turns people into insane, flesh-eating zombies within seconds of infection � that leaves plenty of room to interpret the movie in the context of 21st century geopolitics and social trends, it�s got a great look � intensely dismal � and it�s a great balance between smart social commentary and zombie movie action.
It�s not brilliant � the first movie gets credit for the best ideas here � but 28 Weeks Later is well made and highly entertaining � if you can stomach all the gore.
As a sequel, 28 Weeks Later... does its job too well - that is, it apes the original's brilliance, but also its flaws. As in the earlier film, the opening sequence is utter brilliance. Taking for granted that the audience know the scenario, we're introduced to Don (Carlyle) and his wife (McCormack) who, together with a group of strangers, are holed up in an old farmhouse. With candlelit meals and access to a decent wine cellar, the scenario could be described as cosy, were it not for the trauma etched on the survivors' faces.
Then, just as we saw in the first film, the slightest mistake lets hell in through the window. To give away the outcome of this opening, pre-credits sequence would be to drop a clunking spoiler, but it's a superb example of the filmmakers' ratcheting up the tension. Would that they had kept it up throughout.
That's not to say 28 Weeks Later... flags as soon as the opening credits have rolled. No, what makes it so disappointing is how brilliant 90 per cent of the film is. Employing the same rough and ready filming technique as its prequel, 28 Weeks Later... evokes a world that feels just one degree removed from our own.
By borrowing from real life situations - the US troops are straight out of Iraq, while the wall of photos and plaintive notes to loved ones recall the aftermath of 9/11 and the 2004 Asian tsunami - the set-up on the Isle of Dogs is thoroughly and frighteningly convincing. There's no horror movie gloss here - this looks as real as the 'News At Ten'.
As with more traditional horror/disaster movies, 28 Weeks Later... throws together a group of disparate characters. We have siblings Tammy (Poots) and Andy (Muggleton) who, having been on a school trip to Spain during the events of the previous film, are among the first children to return to the UK. They are taken under the wing of US Army medic Scarlet (Byrne, star of Boyle and Garland's Sunshine; the writer and director of the first film here take executive producer credits).
For fire-power, there's maverick marine Sergeant Doyle, played by Jeremy Renner, a talented character actor who's been on the verge of fully-fledged fame for years. Just as 28 Days Later... catapulted Cillian Murphy into the stratosphere, 28 Weeks Later... will surely do the same for Renner; he's by far the best element in an outstanding cast. It's just a shame we don't get to see more of him.
Once disaster strikes, the film descends into dizzying chaos. While this provides many bravura set-pieces - including a sight only described in the first film, of the virus's rapid and bloody spread through a crowd of people - we lose our grip on the characters. We haven't seen enough of them to start caring and, when they are picked off like cattle, the effect is numbing rather than horrifying.
With more twists, turns and carefully orchestrated breathing spaces for character development, this could have been one of the best horror movies for years. You won't hear a reviewer say this often, but we could have done with an extra half an hour.
Well worth seeing, especially for fans of the original. But all its brilliance only serves to compound the disappointing and pedestrian final half hour. A director's cut please!
Not so much a zombie flick as a film cut-and-shot with a computer game, 28 Weeks Later takes up where Danny Boyle left off, then continues where the weak-hearted pass out.
It opens in unbearable intensity as a group of survivors, including Don (Robert Carlyle) and his wife, huddle in a farmhouse, counting their remaining cans of food. But it doesn�t last long, as follow-up director Juan Carlos Fresnadillo gets the most out of his 18 certificate with a series of set-plays, paint-the-city-red blood-letting, and a lot of running.
Which is fine, as anyone who comes over with childish glee when a helicopter flies at a 45 degree angle mass-decapitating a festival-sized field of zombies will tell you. But that�s the problem � 28 Weeks can�t decide if it wants to be a tension-building realistically-raw zombie-flick or a schlock-happy gut-buster for the claret happy (ie, me). With an ending that leaves a 28 Months follow-up, we�re rooting for the latter.
28 Weeks Later is the rarest thing you�re going to find at the movies this summer: a sequel that doesn�t suck. In fact, this explosive, nerve-frying followup to Danny Boyle�s much-admired 2002 hit 28 Days Later is a dynamite zombiefest all on its own. Taking over for Boyle as director and co-writer is Spain�s Juan Carlos Fresnadillo, who scored big in the horror lottery with Intacto. He picks up where Boyle left off, showing a few survivors seeking shelter in a farmhouse from a zombie plague that damn near depopulated England. When the attacks start again, Don (Robert Carlyle, he of the mad Trainspotting glint) ) scrams out the window leaving his wife (Catherine McCormack) to serve as a cannibal snack. Fresnadillo ups the gore quotient and shows a penchant for showoff editing and strobe lighting that Boyle avoided. It grabs you though, hard and often.
Cut 28 weeks ahead to London, where Don and other Brit refugees find a fragile safe zone in a hi-rise under American army guard. Don�s two young children, played without an ounce of bogus cuteness by Mackintosh Muggleton and Imogen Poots, are also rescued. They buy dad�s story about mom being munched until she shows up looking only a little the worse for wear. It�s too bad Don bends down for a kiss of forgiveness. Yikes!
Don�t let anyone tell you what happens next, just that the chase is on. Fresnadillo pulls out all the stops. The zombies move even faster than before. And they don�t just nibble on necks, those suckers chew right into the arteries. You�ll want to duck from the blood spray. And watch out for the blades of that heliocopter�it�s a real zombie Cuisnart.
Fresnadillo is savvy enough to realize that there�s no place better than a B movie to tuck in a political subtext. And it�s hard not to think of Iraq and the fear of Islam generated in the Dubya era as the U.S. occupying force starts shooting and bombing without regard to collateral damage. Jeremy Renner, so good as a serial-killing cannibal in 2002�s Dahmer, is equally effective here as a Special Forces sniper who grows a conscience. That thematic resonance makes 28 Weeks Later stick to your nightmares. Hold on for a hell of a ride.
Nothing satisfies the appetite for allegory quite like a movie about flesh-eating zombies. Somehow the genre, at least as practiced by its masters, has the capacity to illuminate some brute facts about the human condition and its contemporary dysfunctions. There are not many recent movies that match, for example, the social criticism undertaken by George Romero in his �Living Dead� cycle.
Danny Boyle�s �28 Days Later� and its new sequel, �28 Weeks Later,� directed by Juan Carlos Fresnadillo, may not quite be in Mr. Romero�s league, but at their best they come close to his signature blend of grisly horror, emotional impact and biting satire. There is, of course, plenty of literal biting as well, since the virus-crazed creatures known as infecteds crave the flesh and blood of their erstwhile fellow citizens.
And also their metaphorical flesh and blood. The first movie, set in the early days of a pandemic that nearly wiped out the population of Britain, followed a small band of strangers who came together to form a makeshift tribe. This time, after the first wave of the virus seems to have run its course, the focus is on families and comrades split apart and set against one another by paranoia, moral confusion and the endless conflict between the survival instinct and the call of duty. If �28 Days Later� was, in part, about the emergence of solidarity in the midst of crisis, �28 Weeks Later� is about the breakdown that occurs in what seems to be the aftermath.
The DVD of Mr. Boyle�s film has two alternate endings, one slightly more comforting than the other. The hopeful conclusion (the one originally released in American theaters) turns out to be a slender thread leading to Mr. Fresnadillo�s more hectic and somewhat grimmer sequel.
The story (written by Rowan Joffe, Mr. Fresnadillo, E. L. Lavigne and Jesus Olmo, with Mr. Boyle and his frequent collaborator, Alex Garland, on hand as executive producers) begins with a terrible failure of nerve. Fleeing a zombie attack, Don (a gaunt, appropriately anxious Robert Carlyle) abandons his wife, Alice (Catherine McCormack), to a gruesome and apparently inevitable fate.
A few months later, he is safe in the Green Zone, an island of security in London overseen by occupying American troops led by General Stone (Idris Elba). There, he is reunited with his children, Andy (Mackintosh Muggleton) and Tammy (Imogen Poots), who had been on a school trip to Spain during the initial outbreak. He lies to them about their mother�s fate, and his dishonesty is punished in due course.
That bit about American soldiers patrolling the Green Zone � see what I mean about allegory? � may make �28 Weeks Later� sound heavy-handedly topical. But as in any good science fiction fable, the analogies it offers to contemporary reality are speculative rather than obvious. The initial benevolence of the occupation is clear enough: a shattered country needs to be put back together, its remaining population protected and reassured.
It is only when things spin out of control that the inherent brutality of the situation becomes clear, but here again the movie poses intractable conundrums rather than scoring easy points. To the soldiers and the survivors alike, there are only bad choices, and doing what seems like the right thing � firebombing an open city or rescuing children from the bombs � can turn out to have horrendous consequences.
Mr. Fresnadillo�s first movie, the Spanish-language thriller �Intacto,� showed him to be a filmmaker with technical agility and a decidedly philosophical bent. Here the thinking is done on the run, as the collapse of order unfolds through scenes of panic and chaos. These are often too frenetically edited and murkily lighted to be truly scary, and the higher dose of gore � infecteds chopped up by helicopter blades; bodies exploding in blood as bullets fly into them � is not enough to increase the horror.
The real terror comes at quieter moments, when aerial shots survey the echoing emptiness of London, or when Tammy and Andy sneak out of the Green Zone into the surrounding desolation.
�London�s mine,� Andy exclaims, and the claustrophobic suspense of the film is occasionally leavened by a sense of adventure. The threat of death brings out noble impulses as well as selfish ones. Don�s cowardice stands in contrast to the selflessness of some of the American soldiers: Scarlet (Rose Byrne), a medical officer; Doyle (Jeremy Renner), a sniper whose conscience gets the better of him; and, more reluctantly, Flynn (Harold Perrineau), a chopper pilot with pictures of his kids taped above the windshield.
�28 Weeks Later� is not for the faint of heart or the weak of stomach. It is brutal and almost exhaustingly terrifying, as any respectable zombie movie should be. It is also bracingly smart, both in its ideas and in its techniques. The last shot brought a burst of laughter at the screening I attended, a reaction that seemed to me both an acknowledgment of Mr. Fresnadillo�s wit and a defense against his merciless rigor.
Anyway, I was glad the person next to me was laughing, rather than chewing through my neck. That level of horror will have to wait for the next sequel.
If it's Doomsday, it must be London. Where famished, flesh-eating zombies, infected with human rabies called the Rage virus, haven't eaten in months.
28 Weeks Later . . ., sequel to that cannibals' rave 28 Days Later . . ., hits the ground running, tearing through the English countryside, believed to be depopulated and virus-free (we know better), back to London. There, under the auspices of U.S. military and medical forces who pronounce that everything is under control (in other words: "Mission: Accomplished"), evacuees return to the city.
Two are children. Andy and Tammy (Mackintosh Muggleton and Imogen Poots) were on holiday in Spain when the Rage rocked the U.K. When they are reunited with their father (shifty-eyed Robert Carlyle), he tells them that Mother (Catherine McCormack) is dead. Feeling incomplete without even a photo to remember her by, the youths slip past security and return to their home where they find Mom is one of the undead and Dad is a liar.
I don't know what's more frightening, the psychological terror of knowing your mother wants to devour you, or the physical terror of knowing she can. I do know that 28 Weeks Later . . . holds the audience captive and unusually vulnerable to psycho- and viscero-terror.
In other words, Juan Carlos Fresnadillo's sequel to Danny Boyle's 2003 sleeper hit is a bloody, button-pushing shot of adrenaline. To the original's parable of an unchecked virus, with its intimations of Ebola and AIDS, Fresnadillo overlays a political allegory of an American military occupation gone wrong, with its chilling references to Iraq.
In the panic where no one has the time to make a distinction between a zombie and an innocent, not all the Americans are of the shoot-first, ask-questions-later variety. There is a sensitive doctor (Rose Byrne), who makes an important discovery about the children's mother and becomes a maternal surrogate for Andy and Tammy. And there is a sniper (Jeremy Renner), who resists his commander's orders.
Driving the film is cinematographer Enrique Chediak's sprinting camera, darting left, then right, looking over its shoulder to escape the ravenous horde. (His kinetic camera has the collateral benefit of not focusing too long on the gore.) And John Murphy's electronic score turbocharges the action, which does things to the nervous system that deep breathing cannot calm.
There's no better fun for movie lovers than a small, unheralded film that turns out to be terrific -- unless it's a small, unheralded sequel that trumps the original. Such is the case with "28 Weeks Later," which comes four years after "28 Days Later," the brilliant riff on zombie flicks that Danny Boyle directed from a script by Alex Garland.
In that earlier example of what might be called genre hop -- a movie that transcends its humble origins -- London was ravaged by what came to be called the Rage virus, a primate disease that, once unloosed on homo sapiens, turned healthy human beings into crazed, ravening monsters. (That description may cover other groups, including paparazzi and teenagers grounded for the weekend, but it's the classic definition of zombies.) The new movie begins six months later, when the city is supposedly free of the disease -- heh, heh -- and U.S. Army troops are repatriating Londoners to a smallish Green Zone in the central city that's been cleared of rotting corpses and tidied up quite nicely. Why the Tommies aren't there to help with this task is unclear, but no matter, because the Yanks -- among them snipers on rooftops -- go about their appointed tasks with courteous efficiency.
Until the Rage virus re-emerges, and all hell breaks loose again. This is not, after all, a remake of "Dr. Ehrlich's Magic Bullet," in which Edward G. Robinson finds a cure for syphilis. It's an action thriller focused, classically, on a small band of brave survivors who struggle to remain survivors until the zombies subside and sanity -- not to mention sanitation -- is restored.
At the same time, it's a thrilling display of virtuosity on a modest scale. The director this time is Juan Carlos Fresnadillo, working from a screenplay he wrote with Rowan Joffe, Jes�s Olmo and Enrique L�pez Lavigne. (The script is occasionally less than logical, but rarely less than exciting.) Until now Mr. Fresnadillo has been known outside his native Spain mainly for "Esposados," an Oscar-nominated short from 1996, and for the 2001 feature "Intacto," an allusive, elusive and stylish meditation on luck and love. This will change dramatically, however, for genre hop applies to filmmakers too. Mr. Fresnadillo is not only ready for prime time but, as of now, in the midst of it. He works exceptionally well with his excellent cast, and tells his story with spellbinding skill that's complemented by Enrique Chediak's stunning cinematography.
The cast includes Robert Carlyle, Catherine McCormack, Jeremy Renner, Rose Byrne and, playing brother and sister as if born to charm the camera, young Imogen Poots and younger Mackintosh Muggleton. "28 Weeks Later" doesn't depend on big moments, but it isn't short of them: the fire-bomb cleansing of Canary Wharf, a helicopter in Wembley Stadium, an inspired helicopter chase, a night-vision venture into the Underground and -- brace yourself for genuine horror when this one comes around -- a husband and wife making not-so-nice in a hospital isolation chamber.
When "28 Days Later" hit theaters in 2002, the popular joke was that the film must be the sequel to the abysmal Sandra Bullock rehab dramedy of two years prior, "28 Days." But when the lights went down and director Danny Boyle's post-apocalyptic zombie flick rolled, the jokes promptly ceased.
As with its predecessor, there is absolutely nothing to laugh about in "28 Weeks Later." As in the first film, mankind's obvious enemy is a simian-borne virus that infects humans instantly and irreparably, causing them to turn into flesh-eating monsters that move like Olympic sprinters. While the first installment dealt with the utter devastation of mainland Britain -- most of which is overrun by the infected as a few survivors cling desperately to hope -- "Weeks" explores what happens when reconstruction begins on unstable ground.
At the outset of the movie, a father of two ( Robert Carlyle ), in a moment of pure weakness, leaves his wife behind in an abandoned farmhouse to fend for herself against an onslaught of raging evil. After a tearful reunion in a slowly repopulating London, his two children (Mackintosh Muggleton and Imogen Poots ) sneak into still-unsecured parts of the city in an attempt to learn the truth about their ravished home and family. Can the two minors survive in a viral wasteland nature never intended? Is there any hope for humanity when the contaminated and their panic-stricken prey are trapped on an island together?
Boyle and his original writing partner, Alex Garland (who serve as executive producers of the new film), recruited a crack writing and directing team for "Weeks." Spanish director Juan Carlos Fresnadillo ("Intacto" ) re-creates the gritty and spastic look of "Days" while brilliantly utilizing dark space and shadow to enhance the terror. Monsters lurk around every corner, and most of the action is shrouded in the most frightful kind of urban pitch-black. While a nausea-inducing shakycam detracts from some of the quieter, more serious moments, it makes the lightning speed with which the hunters and hunted move seem that much more extreme.
The script is biting and timely, as nameless mobs of infected and healthy citizens are treated to indiscriminate sniper fire from the US military, which has been called in to restore order to the gutted nation. When things get out of hand -- and boy, do they! -- military leaders are at as much of a loss as the people they are sworn to protect. A subtle but unmistakable comment on the presence of Western troops in Middle Eastern nations, the governmental forces in the movie aren't depicted as malicious so much as they are scared and desperate.
As the chaos increases, dizzying questions echo off the walls of a decimated London: How can a threat be faced down when it becomes impossible to tell enemy from friend? Can a people be treated as though they are simply an infection that needs exterminating? Boyle and Fresnadillo provide no comforting answers.
In actuality, the screenplay for 28 Weeks Later isn't all that bad. Sure, it's repetitious and much of it has been regurgitated from 2003's 28 Days Later, but it contains some interesting elements and offers enough gore that horror fans might have been able to enjoy it� if, that is, it wasn't for the stylistic approach employed by director Juan Carlos Fresnadillo. Apparently, Fresnadillo believes that the proper way to film any action scene is to shake the camera violently and pan it wildly back and forth, thereby making it virtually impossible to figure out what's going on (and pushing viewers with motion sickness to the brink of voiding their stomachs). As if that wasn't bad enough, in the editing room, Fresnadillo ensured that no single shot lasted longer than about a second. Also, the climactic struggle takes place in darkness, making it that much more difficult to decode the action. I didn't realize a character had died until, a little later, it was apparent that person was no longer around.
I wish this problem was restricted to 28 Weeks Later. Unfortunately, it has become increasingly more common. It's a good way to cover mistakes and encourages laziness. What does it matter if a fight is well choreographed if the audience can't get a clear picture? (My complaint for the recently released The Condemned was similar.) In 28 Weeks Later, it's a source of frustration because I was interested in what was happening but the filmmaker's approach robbed me of the ability to appreciate any scene where there was a fight, chase, or other form of action.
28 Weeks Later is a direct sequel to Danny Boyle's 28 Days Later, although none of the characters from the first film have returned. Instead, we follow a new group of individuals from their first harrowing encounters with the infected during the initial terrorizing of Britain to their attempts to repopulate London six months later. Don (Robert Carlyle) and Alice (Catherine McCormack) have two children, Tammy (Imogen Poots) and Andy (Mackintosh Muggleton). The kids are in Spain during the outbreak, while Don and Alice are in hiding. When their hideout is discovered by a group of infected, the cowardly Don runs off, assuming that Alice has been killed. 28 weeks later, the kids come home, but it isn't long before it becomes apparent the crisis isn't over. Members of the U.S. military, including the lead medic (Rose Byrne), a sharpshooter (Jeremy Renner), and a helicopter pilot (Harold Perrineau), try to contain the new epidemic but it spreads too fast and too violently, triggering the ultimate solution: Code Red.
The first and better half of the movie is primarily devoted to setup and character development. This is where we are given a chance to get to know the new protagonists and given insight into the plan to return London to a living, breathing city from the ghost town it has been for the past half-year. As the movie approaches the one-hour mark, however, it turns into an extended chase, with people shooting, screaming, and being torn apart by the infected as they run around in dark corridors and tunnels and the viewer desperately tries to piece together what's going on. Admittedly, there are limitations to what can be done in a zombie movie, but a whiff of originality or coherence would have been appreciated. (I have a sense that the movie might play better on a television than a big screen.)
Action scenes aside, the look of the film is faithful to that of its predecessor. London appears grimy and washed-out: a dead, decaying city that at times would seem to be a comfortable fit into the world developed by Alfonso Cuaron in The Children of Men. The overhead and long-distance shots of empty streets and abandoned buildings are creepy, but no more so here than in 28 Days Later. This film will not be used by British travel agencies to promote vacations to London.
28 Days Later, while not terribly original, was suspenseful and involving. 28 Weeks Later is neither. The characters aren't as sympathetic or interesting. The kids are generic and the script doesn't care much about the adults. Robert Carlyle, Catherine McCormack, and Rose Byrne are criminally underused. Compare them to Cillian Murphy, Naomie Harris, and Brendan Gleeson from the first film, all of whom inhabited better developed and more sympathetic personalities. Tension in horror movies results from viewers caring about what happens to characters. The audience's connection to the protagonists of 28 Days Later made it a compelling experience. The lack of such a connection in 28 Weeks Later reduces this to a number of sequences characterized by shock moments, frenetic (and often chaotic) action, and stylized gore - all without suspense.
It's too bad, because the fundamental idea of extending the storyline introduced in 28 Days Later is an intriguing one. The problem is that the people entrusted with the responsibility of bringing this to the screen made decisions that resulted in a deeply flawed product. My advice to Fresnadillo: next time you make a movie, allow viewers to see what's happening in real time rather than have to interpolate based on the results. Technique and style are more at fault than any other issue in undermining the effectiveness of this zombie thriller.
Disasters bring out the best and the worst in people. You can step up to the moment and be a Hero, the guy who helps the crippled lady down the burning staircase. Or you can be the Villain, the guy who muscles women and children out of the lifeboat. In this decade we�ve been feeling a little closer to disaster than usual in this country, and I think we all wonder whether we�d be the Hero or the Villain when the time was upon us. In movies the lead is always the Hero, while the heel is always easy to call a mile away. 28 Weeks Later, the useless sequel to Danny Boyle�s minor-key wonder from four years ago, opens with a lead who quickly turns out to be the Villain, and it�s exhilarating.
The film opens during the events of the last movie, but removed from those characters; Robert Carlyle and his wife, played by former Mel Gibson love interest Catherine McCormack, are holed up in a country home with some other people, just trying to survive the rage plague that is wiping out England. Through some heavy handed exposition (during a dinner prep scene that is bizarrely scored with ominous, scary music � are we supposed to be concerned about potential ptomaine poisoning?) we learn that the couple have two children who were luckily out of country when the infection began. But the happy hideaway doesn�t last long � a lone young boy (running from the town of Sandford, by the way, a locale that gave the whole theater a chuckle) arrives looking for sanctuary, and the infected are hot on his heels. Chaos ensues and, when tested by the hand of fate, the once and future Begbie proves he�s useless in a jam, as he leaves his wife and the young boy behind to be noshed by the neighbors.
This is an intriguing premise, I naively thought. An apocalyptic horror movie about survivor guilt, a film that explores what it�s like to be a not-that-bad man who makes a weak decision at the ultimate moment in his life. We all want to be the Hero, but deep down we all fear we�re going to be just like Carlyle, leaving our loved ones behind for a remote chance at safety. In most movies these characters are weasels, despicable human trash, but 28 Weeks Later seems to be interested in exactly the sort of character who usually ends up as zombie fodder.
Do not be fooled. 28 Weeks Later starts strong, but it quickly disavows any potential it may have had as a dramatic piece and veers directly into inanity, eschewing character, tension or plot for a chase scene that lasts for maybe 45 minutes. After the prologue text tells us what happened next, how the infected starved to death after a few weeks, and about how NATO and US forces moved into England and began clearing out the millions of corpses. 28 weeks after the outbreak (or the end of the first movie, I�m not entirely clear, but it doesn�t really matter), Britons who escaped the plague or were overseas have begun to come home. Reconstruction is happening, and the returners are settled on the Isle of Dogs, in the middle of the Thames, a defensible position should the infection, which seems to have burned itself out, return.
The two kids introduced over dinner making have come home, and they are reunited with Daddy Begbie, who�s now a big muckety muck in the resettlement. There are military types everywhere, and the whole group lives under a laid back martial law. But happiness isn�t destined to last in a horror movie, and when the reunited kids sneak off the Isle of Dogs to revisit their old home they make a terrible discovery � their mother isn�t dead, but has been holed up alone and deranged in the attic. At this point 28 Weeks Later is like Carlyle at the beginning of the film, given the choice between a heroic course of action that would involve the flawed man dealing with his mistake and a cowardly course of action where the mother is actually a Typhoid Mary of rage, a carrier who shows no symptoms but who restarts the plague in the secure area. Guess which way they go.
The rest of the film is one crushing disappointment after another. Director Juan Carlos Fresnadillo, who made his name with the Spanish thriller Intacto, occasionally emerges from the muck of incoherent camerawork to showcase a sharp and exciting visual sense, but usually our eyes are left grasping for purchase in deep, deep close ups where the camera shakes with the subtlety of a massive temblor. His reliance on shaking the camera and quick cutting sinks what could have been an incredible set piece � survivors are herded into a containment zone (ie, locked in a garage � you would think the military had better back up plans than this) and an infected gets in (actually, it�s a specific infected � more on that later). Packed in the small space, most can�t get away as the rage virus, which turns victims into savage zombies in seconds, rushes through the crowd like a wildfire in a dry valley. This should have been intense and horrifying, but it�s instead confusing and irritating.
Other set pieces come one after another as the film briefly gets jiggy with meaning (the US army is ordered to exterminate everyone on the Isle of Dogs, even the non-infected. There�s some sort of statement about the military and foreign policy here, but the film is unwilling to work up a thesis of any sort. It�s bad to shoot civilians, I guess. Here�s a cookie, movie) and then abandons all thought for a series of chases and narrow escapes and cheap jump scare after cheap jump scare. Jeremy Renner finally escapes the Creepy Guy role he�s been stuck in since Dahmer to play a sniper who can�t bring himself to kill innocents, and so he tries to help a small band of survivors � including our plucky kids! � escape. Luckily his sniper training involves stuff like Outrunning a Fireball (the single most important action hero skill), since that�s the sort of obstacles our heroes run in to.
28 Days Later worked for me because it was about people. The film wasn�t about their intense, horrifying battle against rage-infected zombies but their intense battle to remain civilized in a world gone to hell. In that film survival wasn�t just making it through everything intact, it held a deeper meaning of retaining essential humanity. 28 Days Later had scares and excitement, but it also had a core. 28 Weeks Later rejects any core right up front and moves on to a series of hollow spectacles: the firebombing of the Isle of Dogs that makes the centerpiece of the advertisements and trailers, a horde of infected against helicopter blades in a scene that was done better in Grindhouse (a film where that sort of absurdity fit), various and numbing scenes of racing away from the galloping ghouls. In 28 Days Later when Brendan Gleeson gets that drop of blood in his eyes you�re not just tense in anticipation of the outbreak of violence, you�re heartbroken because he was a character you liked. 28 Weeks Later is filled with barely there characters who grow on you slightly less than the average Red Shirt on Star Trek, and they�re around to serve the same purpose, but more graphically.
To some extent Fresnadillo and his studio bosses get around that by hiring good, recognizable actors: Idris Elba is a powerful figure, even in a role that requires him to do nothing and then disappear halfway through the movie. Jeremy Renner gives good creepy in other films because he�s playing against his heartland looks that he uses here. Before he�s utterly wasted by a script that has no time for human drama, Robert Carlyle is incredibly effective casting. Of course, some of the casting is disastrous, especially Rose Byrne as a military scientist who I wouldn�t trust to prescribe me Advil, let alone unlock the secrets of rage immunity from someone�s blood.
There are two things that show how debased this sequel is from the original. Instead of dealing with the personal ramifications of what Carlyle has done in the prologue, the movie makes him the first of the new infected, and then turns him into a silly bogeyman who stalks his children across most of London. Again and again he pops up until he gets into a climactic battle with his offspring. His final reappearance, meant to be a shocking reveal, brought waves of laughter in my theater. It�s the zombie movie equivalent of Jaws: The Revenge, where the shark follows Roy Scheider�s family down to the Bahamas.
The other symptom of the sickness deep inside 28 Weeks Later (I call this sickness Aliens-itis, an illness that convinces filmmakers sequels must always be pumped up action versions of the original) are the empty streets of London. In 28 Days Later the empty streets are a mindblowing reveal, a grim dreamscape of desolation. In 28 Weeks Later the same empty streets are a cool shot, a little bit of set design that the film goes back to again and again and again. By the end of the movie the already diminished impact of the dead city has completely dried up and blown away. That�s sad, because in twenty years the image people will have of 28 Days Later is a confused and frightened Cillian Murphy wandering suddenly alien streets, while the image they�ll have of 28 Weeks Later is a big series of computer generated explosions.
The U.S. military has occupied Britain to make it habitable again and stamp out the last vestiges of the "rage" virus that decimated the land in the horror hit "28 Days Later."
Now it's "28 Weeks Later," and the troops are allowing refugees to repopulate the realm, essentially declaring, "Mission accomplished."
We've heard that before. And we've seen it all before, as this woeful sequel presents a strained story and a barrage of turgid action that looks like inferior outtakes from the first movie.
Danny Boyle, who directed "28 Days Later," is back as executive producer, but his storytelling expertise seems entirely absent.
Director Juan Carlos Fresnadillo, who made the well-regarded thriller "Intacto," teams with three other writers on a thin story that sucks away all the frenzied fun a zombie flick should provide. Instead, the zombies are relegated to second-banana ghouls, co-starring behind the human monsters who wear uniforms and carry guns.
The movie opens with a prologue as Don (Robert Carlyle, who co-starred in Boyle's "Trainspotting" and "The Beach") holes up with wife Alice (Catherine McCormack) and other survivors in a cottage stronghold, trying to survive the initial outbreak that has turned most of the population into cannibalistic demons.
When the infected break in, Don flees, and in a moment of cowardice, leaves Alice behind, an action that will have terrible repercussions down the road.
Months later, after the infected have starved to death, Don is among survivors in a fortified area of London guarded by U.S. troops supervising the return of Brits who either escaped or were out of the country when the virus struck.
Don is reunited with his children, Andy (Mackintosh Muggleton) and Tammy (Imogen Poots), who had been overseas. Because of an inherited immunity, Andy may hold the key to curing the rage virus if it ever comes back, but he and his sister also are catalysts whose actions result in the plague's inevitable return.
The key military roles are filled by Jeremy Renner as a sniper, Harold Perrineau as a helicopter pilot, Idris Elba as the general leading the repopulation and Rose Byrne as Scarlet, a medical officer concerned that people are being allowed back home too soon.
Her doubts are justified, given the short time that has passed since the epidemic and considering the idiocy of the troops.
The military has set up a containment zone about as secure as a kid's backyard fort made of cardboard boxes. The troops make snap judgments too stupid to believe, allowing the rage virus to quickly take hold again.
Their final solution for dealing with new hordes of infected makes for pretty pyrotechnics but defies all logic and human decency. The movie's ending is laughable, and sadly, could provide the germ of another sequel.
Scenes in the first film of British soldiers' expediency in coping with the outbreak were chilling, a sign of how humanity might devolve toward savagery amid such chaos. In "28 Weeks Later," the military types are truly more dangerous beasts than the infected, though the message is empty given the stiffness and shallowness of the characters.
The characters in "28 Days Later," none of whom return, were wily, passionate and real. Their counterparts here are little more than lunch meat.
The sequel has a nasty spirit and unlike the original, has no sense of humor, and often, no sense at all.
No matter the precautions, why would anyone let thousands of civilians back in a city rampant with diseased rats and wild dogs just months after a hellish plague, while corpses still litter the streets and cleanup crews burn the bodies?
"What if it comes back?" Scarlet asks the general.
"If it comes back, we'll kill it," the moronically cocky general replies.
It's hard to say if the filmmakers meant it as timely Iraq commentary on the overconfidence of military leaders in an impossible campaign or if it's just feeble writing. Either way, "28 Weeks Later" amounts to bad storytelling.
This summer's movie lineup is afflicted with sequels, and "28 Weeks Later" is one of the more virulent strains.
The follow-up to the 2002 disease-cum-zombie cult favorite "28 Days Later" has been stripped of the real-world urgencies that made the first film compelling and fitted with a more commercial horror-movie prosthesis.
Producer Andrew Macdonald and some of the technical crew from the first film remain. And Danny Boyle, who directed the original, reportedly directed some second unit scenes.
But this is director and co-writer Juan Carlos Fresnadillo's first feature film since his eerie 2001Spanish-language debut "Intacto." And while technically solid, his focus on effects and action comes at the expense of creating engaging characters and meaningful situations.
Fresnadillo's stylish hyperbole is no match for the hell-in-a-handbasket sensibility of the first film, whose appearance shortly after Sept. 11 and the Iraq buildup made its apocalyptic subtext too plausible to be taken lightly, and whose dollop of style and wit came courtesy of screenwriter Alex Garland and Boyle, who also directed "Trainspotting" and "Millions."
At first, the timeline of the sequel is parallel to that of the original, with "us in here and them out there." "Us" are a small band of survivors, including Robert Carlyle, and "them" are the friends and family who have become infected with a manmade disease called the rage. Unleashed in the first film by laboratory experiments run amok, the rage turns its victims into flesh-eating zombies.
In the sequel's ominous calm-before-the-storm opening scenes, the survivors make supper and strained small talk by candlelight before being attacked in a kinetically bloody sequence, causing the cowardly Carlyle to flee without helping his wife.
Fast-forward the 28 weeks of the title, and the zombies are dead, the plague is dormant and order of a sort has been restored in a repopulated "green zone."
Security is maintained by an American-led NATO force. They guard the airport; the rooftops are lined with snipers and helicopters patrol the skies. It is illegal to travel outside the green zone and into the corpse-strewn city. And when Carlyle's children go there to retrieve family photos from their former home, they set in motion events that revive the plague.
And the first infected is Carlyle.
To stop its spread, the military launches a massacre in the green zone - giving new meaning to the term "friendly fire" - in burn-the-village-to-save-the-village fashion. And while the result is a splatter-fest, it is not as clinically graphic as it could have been, since Fresnadillo's synaptic stutter obscures as much as it reveals. He also advances the franchise to the point where sequels set 28 months and 28 years later are feasible, if not likely.
But anyone looking for a current-events metaphor will only find a dispiriting portrait of urban warfare, and the, perhaps false, hope of the original being demoted to no hope at all.
Many religious, philosophical and political organizations hand out annual awards to films that best embody their beliefs, such as Peta's "best animal-friendly movie."
If nihilists have such a group, its hands-down best picture of 2007 will be "28 Weeks Later."
This is a bitter and pointless sequel to Danny Boyle's terrifying and gripping "28 Days Later," a surprise hit from the summer of 2002. Where "28 Days" was a horrific tale of survival, "28 Weeks" is a horrific tale of slaughter.
Moreover, the new characters ("28 Days" star Cillian Murphy does not return) are so shallow and moronic we barely care if they survive - particularly when director Juan Carlos Fresnadillo hints the rest of mankind might be better off if they die.
The prologue happens at the same time as the first film, which may be the reason it is sequel's one meaningful segment. Don and Alice (Robert Carlyle and Catherine McCormack) are a married couple holed up in a cottage in the English countryside along with several people they did not know before the viral outbreak that turned most British citizens into savage, red-eyed cannibals.
The sequence lasts long enough to establish a "Diary of Anne Frank" claustrophobia before the infected burst into the cottage. Don finds himself in a situation where he could bolt and save himself or stay behind and try to save his wife. He bolts.
The rest of the sequel occurs roughly six months after the original. The U.S. military now controls Great Britain (how the British government in exile agreed to that would have made more intriguing movie). Convinced the last of the infected have starved to death, the Army begins the repopulation of the island, beginning with a cordoned off section of London referred to as the Green Zone (that clear reference to current events proves irrelevant).
Don is reunited with his children, Tammy (Imogen Poots) and Andy (Mackintosh Muggleton), who were in a refugee camp in Spain. The children are cleared by a young woman (Rose Byrne) we assume is a low-level lab tech.
After a strong opening, "28 Weeks" begins its downfall when this woman whines into her walkie-talkie, "No one told me that we are now admitting children. I'm the chief medical officer here; I should be informed of these things!"
What? The chief medical officer is a hot babe who doesn't look a day over 28 years old? The film's only hint of her intelligence is that Byrne is a brunette instead of a blonde. I'm not saying that chief medical officers can't be gorgeous or handsome (or blonde), but I do believe the doctor placed in charge of eradicating the deadliest, most terrifying viral outbreak since the bubonic plague should be at least 29.
Most horror films rely on characters doing a stupid thing to advance the plot. This script, credited to Fresnadillo, Rowan Joffe, Jesus Olmo and and E.L. Lavigne, relies on nothing but.
Every action can be categorized as macrostupidity or microstupidity. Under macrostupidity comes the entire premise. Why would the world allow people to return to England, where the virus was confined, while piles of corpses are still being burned in the shadow of the Millennium Dome?
Under microstupidity comes almost any deed performed by every character. Tammy and Andy are the champs, behaving as if they already lost their brain functions. They sneak out of the compound and grab a motorbike (after Tammy takes the keys from the pocket of a rotting corpse) and return to their old house to find pictures of their mother.
Their little jaunt brings the virus back into the compound. Once the outbreak begins, the rest of "28 Weeks" is little more than a long-form massacre with one image - pseudo-zombies mowed down by a helicopter rotor - already seen in "Grindhouse."
Watching "28 Weeks Later" is grueling. Fresnadillo's direction is "stylishness" but no style, plot but no story. Death, blood and doom muscle out any trace of hope or redemption.
Most post-apocalyptic thrillers make you wonder if humanity will survive before the film ends. This one makes you wonder how much of your own humanity will be lost before then.