Just Saw a Movie: 28 Weeks Later

GRADE: B

I don't know why this question gets asked of Horror films anymore, but 28 Weeks Later has been probed for this, nonetheless: Is there an artistic reason for this sequel to exist?

Well, the answer's no. It doesn't blaze any new trails to emotionally or intellectually distinguish itself from Danny Boyle's 28 Days Later. Unless you want to count its political statement on over-aggressive American militarism, which I'm reluctant to consider new in any form.

It does, however, showcase the Rage Virus spreading en masse, whereas the first movie (probably lacking the funds to do much more) followed a band of survivors in the disaster's fallout. What 28 Weeks Later gives you, then, are scares based more on clusterfuck chaos than deep psychological tension. For this reason, 28 Weeks Later can be even more entertaining than its predecessor but rarely as involving.

Most of the film takes place after mainland Britain has been quarantined (for a rather unambiguous period of time) following the initial outbreak. A U.S.-led force moves in and coordinates a re-colonization in London under heavy surveilance and occupying troops. Okay, so you can see where this might be going, not only in terms of plot but also political commentary. Let me just say this: if a major rebuilding of Britain is to be conducted when most of it is dead, who's going to to come put on the big boy pants? And for a proper Horror to ensue, said pants-wearers must screw up massively. And boy, do they.

Fans of Danny Boyle (Trainspotting, Millions) may be disappointed to find that the sequel's direction was handed over to Juan Carlos Fresnadillo (umm... Intacto?). Thankfully, Fresnadillo's style mostly retains loyalty to the oddly-refined grittiness of the original. The most noticeable deviation is his machinegun cutting during action scenes, which leaves you just as frantically dizzy as the zombie fodder in the film. This one's all about the adrenaline.

One of the movie's biggest letdowns, partially due to that action emphasis, is its dearth of sympathetic characters. Unlike the original, we almost never see the protagonists in their human livelihood, trying enjoy life when they're not being chased/eaten/spewed upon by crazies. Not when it makes sense, anyway. Some of the main characters also suffer from that special Horror movie ignorance that distances us from them, the kind where we just beg for natural selection to take its course. Like the unassuming teenage girl who encounters her first flesh-eaten corpse, then snatches its keys to take a joyride on Deadguy McGee's abandoned moped. I mean, she represents us all, wouldn't you say?

Robert Carlysle (The Full Monty, The World is Not Enough) is probably the only recognizable face here, and he plays the character with the most dramatic potential. The fan-freakin'-tastic opening sequence finds him and his wife scrambling to escape a cottage overrun by "Infected," and when confronted with a slim chance of rescuing his wife, he buggers off to save his own panic-stricken hide.

So it becomes a story of redemption, eh? Where a man must atone for that moment of weakness while fighting to protect his kids from the second outbreak?

Would've been pretty cool, huh? But they don't go that direction. Instead they hand the story over to his kids and a couple American soldiers. All of whom, as mentioned, aren't particularly interesting.

Ultimately, though, for those seeking a blood-slathered onslaught of action, 28 Weeks Later can overcome its defects (by "those", I confess, I am often referring to me). The set pieces are so viscerally satisfying that you'll forgive most of the plotwise stupidity that arranges them. Like this one:

Hundreds of confused evacuees. Locked in a hallway. In a blackout.

Now here comes an Infected.


(*Sob*) Thank you, movie.