28 Weeks Later

The surprising success of the small-budget independent zombie film, 28 Days Later, resulted in creator and director, Danny Boyle, as well as many others who were attached to the project, wanting to make a sequel four years after its release in 2002. Due to its minimal budget of only $8 million, strong critical reception from both domestic and international viewers, and a fan-base that were willing to stay with the franchise through various other multimedia expansions like books and games, meant that it had the necessary built-in audience to make this work a second time around (the film even popped back up during the time of the COVID-19 pandemic, proving its lasting appeal). So how well did the 2007 sequel, 28 Weeks Later, fare? After the infection has slowly started to die out due to those afflicted dying of starvation, the world is rebuilding itself with the help of NATO, who have taken control of Britain and have set up a safe zone distract on the Isle of Dogs. Among those that are being brought to this zone are Tammy and Andy (played by Imogen Poots and Mackintosh Muggleton), two kids who were in the countryside when the outbreak occurred and are looking for their father, Don (played by Robert Carlyle) who is the district caretaker of the zone. After reuniting, the three start to reconnect and lament the loss of their mother, Alice (played by Catherine McCormack), so the kids go outside the safe zone to their old house to find a picture to remember her by. However, they come across their mother in a frantic and extremely injured state, and she is brought back into the zone to check on her wounds, but its discovered all too late that she’s infected as she spreads the once exterminated virus to others and causes a mass panic with the city. With the generals at the top resorting to killing everyone infected or not in order to prevent this virus from spreading again, the children find themselves in a death trap of both the living and the dead, only getting help from a deserting sniper named Doyle (played by Jeremy Renner) and US army medical officer, Scarlet (played by Rose Byrne) who thinks the children may have the potential genetics to stop this virus once and for all. 28 Weeks Later didn’t achieve the same level of mass success as its previous, but it was still well received by critics and fans, and even managed to make its money back at the box office with $65.8 million against a $15 million budget. Despite this, its still a glaringly flawed movie with more issues than its previous, making this stand-alone sequel not the triumphant return many had hoped it would be.

The first film has managed to stay relevant through the hype within the fan base, but it’s hard to ignore the movie’s more blatant issues. The lower budget means that the visuals are grainy, blurry, and awfully filmed with an overuse of shaky cam, the cast is solid, but the characters are incredibly bland, and although the idea of resorting back to a more commentary-based exploration of an infected zombie uprising, as well as providing a more visceral and violent threat is appreciated, the narrative was nothing special or interesting for the genre. Some of these can be attributed to the lower budget, independent style, and the fact that they were working within a genre that, while still popular among certain crowds, isn’t strong enough to pack the seats anymore, so it’s hard to imagine what they could do with a sequel. 28 Weeks Later doesn’t even have the benefit of relying on past roles and narratives to bank on nostalgia, as it’s an entirely new set of characters in an entirely new situation, with no returning cast members or even director (although Boyle did still act as an executive producer). Instead, the reigns of the film have been handed off to Spanish director, Juan Carlos Fresnadillo, who had previously only worked on short films and one Spanish thriller in 2001 named Intacto. With the task of having to capture what another creative already produced before him while also adding his own spins to showcase his own style, he honestly manages it to the best of his abilities and decently replicates the visual style, aggressive tone and even heart-pounding adrenaline that the first film delivered pretty nicely, but just in a more mainstream manner (which some could see as a pro or a con). It definitely has less of an independent vibe and features a cleaner, more cinematic look to it that many might have an issue with (especially those who connected so heavily to the first film), but it isn’t like the film entirely disregards its original roots as it still has its fair share of lower-grade qualities that keep it from feeling like a high-calibre theatrical movie. The issue moreso comes in the form of the screenplay written by Fresnadillo, along with Rowan Joffé, Enrique López Lavigne, and Jesus Olmo and how it doesn’t even try and flesh this environment out into something more interesting than ‘’just another zombie story’’. Even though the first film suffers this problem too and did drop the ball when it came to writing its characters, it did at least try a few different things in its premise and commentary, whereas this doesn’t have the excuses the original had now that it has a bigger budget and has concrete proof that people would return for another film. By becoming more traditional and less like an indie film, it ironically makes it so much more generic and unoriginal against other zombies stories that might have less to work with, but do what they can with what they have, resulting in a narrative that explores nothing new or fun about this world and resorts to a very ‘’by-the-numbers’’ plot that just kind of comes and goes without fanfare, it’s quite a dull experience all throughout.

Characters in a horror film usually range from annoyingly cartoonish and only exist to become fodder for the threat, or relatively inoffensive roles that just sort of push through the motions of what the story entails. Once and a while, you’ll get one that has a good solid cast that you actively want to see survive, but they can sadly not be too frequent, and what’s worse than being surrounded by unlikeable people is when you’re surrounded by unlikeable STUPID people. Horror movie characters do have a trademark for making stupid decisions, but a lot of the people in this movie whether they be a side character or a lead, do a lot of idiotic things that only seem to make things worse. It feels like the writers are sacrificing common sense in their characters just so the story can continue happening and it means the audience is stuck with a group that they really just don’t care about and are actively frustrated by for continuing to cause more problems. The two kids really only seem to make things worse for other people and don’t garner much sympathy because of that (also not helped out by both not being the best actors), Robert Carlyle as the father has a pretty great look to him when he’s infected but outside of that, his character doesn’t have anything to work with, Jeremy Renner and Rose Byrne feel like fine enough parts that never blossom into anything bigger because the writing and story don’t support them, and everybody else is just an aimless person waiting to be eaten, or just recognizable faces that haven’t become popular yet. The film seems to house a lot of talent that would go onto better things later on like Jeremy Renner, Rose Byrne, Idris Elba, Robert Carlyle, Imogen Poots, and Harold Perrineau, so in that regard, it’s cool to see a lot of them in their early years. No one does a poor job in the acting department; it just feels like they aren’t given good material to work with and are just stuck doing whatever they can to survive on and off the camera.

One of the more questionable decisions involving the first film was how it decided to film some of its action sequences. While the film had some nice establishing shots of the city, any moment that involved an infected and an up-close struggle involved a lot of shaky cam that made it next to impossible to make out what was going on. Much like the other issues that plagued that film, it’s a horrible element that doesn’t feel warranted and only made things look even less appealing than the film already did with its grainy yellow filter, but it could be explained anyway due to the budget and limited options to showcase something of that calibre. However, this film seems to have that issue too, but it might come more from emulating the original style rather than a necessity. It isn’t as troublesome as before and there are occasionally some good shots from cinematographer Enrique Chediak, but the editing by Chris Gill is so quick that you can never make it out, and the spectacle of seeing an abandoned city isn’t interesting anymore, so it needed to include something more impressive which it really doesn’t (although there is something done with a helicopter blade and some explosions that at least pushes the brand a little further even if they don’t look great). The movie features a lot more expected horror cliches like jump-scares, and typical horror scenarios for the characters to get out of, so it removes whatever was unique about the first film and leaves it as a mostly empty shell of an overdone idea. The hyperactive, fast-paced infected did have a unique feel to them from the first film, and that brutality does make for a few gory death scenes, but due to the poor cinematography and editing, it’s often hard to make any kill out and it just seems like you’re looking at a red blur the whole time.

28 Weeks Later doesn’t have as many aggravating elements as the first film did, if anything it’s so inoffensive that it arguably won’t leave any impression on you at all. But the problem is that the film doesn’t feature anything truly memorable whatsoever and doesn’t even try to stand out against its predecessor which, while flawed in its own right, had goals and desires with its idea and set out to achieve them. This just feels like extending a popular brand in a very predictable manner in order to bank on it, and it’s not like the people involved behind or in front of the camera didn’t care, but rather it’s just hard to salvage something that really doesn’t have a lot of meat to chew on. The performances are passable, once and a while there’s a decent shot and occasionally it benefits from its higher budget and more faith in its property to provide something that looks a bit more expensive and impressive (the opening, while feeling incredibly disconnected, is pretty memorable and makes for a cool sequence), but it can’t escape its bad screenplay, characters that are both bland and stupid, and too many situations and plot lines that have already been explored elsewhere several times before. You can return just to hear that amazing song again (because who wouldn’t want to), but that might be all you get out of this film.