28 YEARS LATER [2025]

28 Years Later (2025)
Directed by: Alfie Williams, Danny Boyle
Written by: Alex Garland
Starring: Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Alfie Williams, Jodie Comer, Ralph Fiennes

UK 

IN CINEMAS NOW

RUNNING TIME: 115 mins

REVIEWED BY: Dr Lenera

It’s 28 years since the Rage Virus took over parts of the world and things are still bad. Continental Europe seems to be free of this most deadly of plagues, but things have just got even worse in the British Isles, causing them to be quarantined. Some people escaped to a Scottish island, and gradually a proper community was formed on what was eventually named Holy Island. Among its inhabitants are Jamie, wife Isla and 12-year old son Spike. Isla is battling a disease that leaves her disoriented, while Jamie decides that Spike is now old enough to be taken Infected-hunting on the mainland, where they also spot a fire burning in the distance. Learning more about the possible presence of a certain Dr. Kelson at this location, Spike is inspired to return to the mainland with his mother, without permission from his father….

Has it really been 23 years since director Danny Boyle and writer Alex Garland unleashed 28 Days Later, a down-and-dirty combo of the virus and the zombie movie with a gritty, realistic feel. 2007’s 28 Weeks Later lacked Boyle, and Garland just produced,  but the bigger budget and more polished look didn’t interfere with the intensity and rawness of a really fine sequel. But that was it. Boyle going on to tackle a variety of subjects, and usually successfully, but now he and Garland have reteamed, and have  conceptualised a trilogy, with a second film, due out January next year, having been shot back to back with this one. 28 Years Later seems to have had a pretty mixed reception, though with critics often liking it more than general audiences. It really is s mixed bag. Feeling rather more like a spinoff from the first two films than a proper sequel, the very disjointed work sees Boyle and Garland being left to do pretty much what they like, and they throw up ideas and concepts continually, but also sometimes randomly, and, while we know or at least hope that many things will be developed in the next two, it often gets frustrating when films do this, and this one is also frustrating for other reasons, another major one being that, for every two really good scenes and ideas, we get one that either doesn’t quite work or is just darn stupid, with some instances of characters behaving very illogically. But then Garland is one of those writers from whom you never know what you’re going to get – it could be a near-masterpiece, an average effort or a piece of shit, so I guess a script which seems to be a combination of what he does shouldn’t be too surprising.

As with the first two films, we get a prologue. A bunch of kids are watching Teletubbies, which unbelievably is actually a foreshadowing of something, back in 2002, in a house in the Scottish Highlands. The Infected get in and all hell breaks loose, but young Jimmy escapes to a nearby church, where he finds his father, the local vicar, praying. Believing the outbreak to be a sign of divine judgment, the vicar reacts with religious fervour, interpreting the virus as a Biblical prophecy of the end of days – an idea that’s never returned to, and you’d better get used to the film doing this. He gives Jimmy a crucifix necklace and urges him to flee before allowing himself to be overtaken by the Infected, enabling Jimmy to escape. 28 years later, the Rage Virus has been eradicated in continental Europe but the British Isles remain under indefinite quarantine enforced by naval patrol. A commentary on Brexit? Well, Boyle has admitted that it can be seen as that, but it doesn’t have to be, which is the best way really, while of course the spectre of Covid can’t not be thought of either. We join a self-contained community of survivors living in a village on an island connected to the mainland by a heavily fortified tidal causeway, and meet Jamie, ill Isla and Spike. I could have done with the film spending more time here, getting us to know the culture – all we really get is a boozy pub evening. Oh – and a very odd ritual. Boys [it certainly doesn’t seem like Spike is the first] who are coming of age are taken to the mainland to hunt the Infected. It seems bloody stupid that people would leave the safety of their home, risking the inevitability of facing down countless hordes and knowing that once the tide comes in they’re not getting back to safety.

Anyway, Jamie and Spike head off and encounter a pack of Infected. Spike keeps missing with his bow and arrow but in the pub later Jamie boasts of his son’s prowess. Two more themes seem to be put forward here, one of them being parents who want their children to be something they don’t want to be, and that tiresome trope of modern cinema, so-called “toxic masculinity”, though neither are developed – of course. Less obvious might be the intention of the various footage which is cut in to this section, from WW2 soldiers marching to battle footage from the 1948 Henry V to another medieval, even older medieval epic I failed to identify. The pair takes refuge in an abandoned cottage and observe a distant bonfire before returning home in a sequence that’s something of a real sensory experience, that awe inspiring piece by Wagner [Prelude to The Rheingold], heard in at least two other films, accompanying a barrage of often stunning images. Spike learns that the fire was lit by Dr. Ian Kelson, a reclusive survivor and former GP whom the villagers fear because of rumours of him being seen burning bodies in ritualistic fashion. Being not to happy at seeing his dad having it off with another woman, Spike secretly returns to the mainland with his mother, hoping that Kelson can provide treatment. Seeing as he couldn’t hit anything earlier, one might wonder why this little boy takes it on himself to do such a thing. Surely he’d be terrified? But then, even though this is more than anything else a coming of age story, Spike’s journey doesn’t convince, vital scenes showing his development seeming to be missing, and eventually we  get a scene that should be extremely moving but which just aggravates, Spike just going along with something that I’m sure many viewers would consider to be unjust immediately. It just makes no sense and leaves a really sour note.

But then there are a fair few sour notes, or at least things which just make one’s head shake, and it almost pains me to say such things because it’s hard not to have admiration for a film that dares to subvert viewer expectations, to do things which some viewers will consider to be issues and others will consider to be minuses. As we’re given strange whimsy, tense horror, emotional drama and even oddball humour which we’re not always sure is meant to be humour, the lack of a consistent tone prevents full engagement, even if the unpredictability is a plus.  to my eyes it’s just too foo full of flaws to ignore and never finds a consistent ground which majorly hampers emotional involvement even in the central mother / son relationship despite the effective performances of Alfie Williams as Spike and Jodie Williams as Isla; Boyle remaining a very good director of children. One wonders why a few seemingly important ideas from the first two are ignored, most notably the idea of carriers who were immune to the disease. This would have been an interesting concept to explore, especially their right [or not, if you feel that way] to exist. Instead we have rather random stuff thrown up without seemingly much thought. For example we learn that iodine protects one against the virus. Seeing as it’s been 28 years since it broke out, wouldn’t this have been discovered way before? In the final section, we meet a character who lives in a temple made from bones, with a stream and totem keeping the Infected away – I mean, really?

The Infected are no longer really a frightening representation of rage, with blood-filled eyes doing much of the job. Here, they look far less human and just gross as well as naked with lots of prosthetic cocks on display. Fat sluggy ones seem only able to crawl, while not enough is done with the supposedly intelligent Alphas except to supply some more gore. Of course in the first movie it was established that the Infected die within a few weeks, but here we learn that they can reproduce, leading to a key scene which has probably divided many though I rather liked it. As before, scenes involving the Infected tend to employ jittery camerawork and flash cuts, which older readers of my ramblings will know I’m not fond of but did admittedly make the Infected scarier;  here it kinda works in places, and the stylistic overload of some of the early bits does calm down a bit, though we still get some camera gimmickry which possibly belongs in a different kind of film – or maybe it doesn’t We have the return of Anthony Dod Mantle who lensed the first film, and, despite most of this actually being shot on phones, you probably wouldn’t know it otherwise, with some very lush countryside photography that sticks in the mind. And something else that sticks in the mind – and in a good way – is Ralph Fiennes, who shows up towards the end and, despite the material he’s given, gives probably his best performance in a while, even making standard lines into something more by his delivery. shows up he totally steals the show, giving his best performance in some time, supplying real nuance to standard dialogue.

While 28 Days Later employed as much good use of music by others, one misses the sound of John Murphy who contributed a particularly good score to 28 Weeks Later, though hip-hop group Young Fathers do a decent if unremarkable job in maintaining the musical style that Murphy initiated. And one can’t help but love the way that we get a digital recreation of a certain tree that’s famous to some, the Sycamore Gap tree which was felled in September 2023. But when we’re resorting to talking about trees as a way to praise a film, then there’s a bit of a problem, even though it’s possible to have a sneaking admiration for the sheer balls of a truly odd cliffhanger at the end even if you know that it was done purely to get us all talking. 28 Years Later is never uninteresting, but it’s rather unfulfilling, and overall a major letdown despite undeniable moments and passages of real inspiration. But let’s be positive. The next one has already been shot and is out January next year. Maybe this one will then seem a lot better?