28 WEEKS LATER

UK, 2007, 108 minutes, Colour.
Robert Carlyle, Rose Byrne, Jeremy Renner, Harry Perrineau, Catherine Mc Cormack.
Directed by Juan Carlos Fresnadillo.

It seems to me quite a while since I found myself watching a film in which my hands and arms and my legs kept so tense, conscious that the impact of the film was having such a physical (and visceral) effect on me. 28 Weeks Later is quite an achievement in presenting movie horror and terror.

This is the sequel to the surprisingly successful 28 Weeks of 2002 where a ‘rage virus’ has been let loose on the population of England and a British ‘living dead’ are on the rampage with isolated individuals and groups desperate for survival. The British military offers help – but that turns out to be an illusion.

Director Danny Boyle and writer Alex Garland become involved in their very successful Sunshine, so took on a group of Spanish film-makers to come to England to make this sequel. (Boyle did do some Second Unit direction and he and Garland collaborated with the writers.) The sequel is an authentic follow-up in the spirit of the original – which has been highly admired as reinvigorating the vampire genre. This one reinvigorates the living dead genre.

It starts darkly, just over six months since the first film ended. Some refugees (especially husband and wife, Robert Carlyle and Catherine McCormack) are in hiding from the rampaging rage creatures. Tragedy strikes as the refuge is broken into and the husband flees, leaving the wife behind.

In the meantime, American authorities and military have been sent in as an occupying force to pacify the situation and rebuild society (though the screenplay never mentions the name Iraq – it is simply for the audience to think it). London is cleared and a small number of people are allowed back in (via security at airports which will look familiar enough to contemporary travellers). The daughter and son of the husband and wife come back home. Quarantined, they slip out of custody, breaking curfew and boundaries and visit their home – only to find their mother still alive. Her genetic makeup means she is a carrier but is not transformed. This has been passed on to her son. The father, declared well, has become a security guard.

As might be guessed, this precipitates a new crisis with repeats of infection, crowd panic, escapes, pursuits and elimination with extreme prejudice.

The final group consists of the two children, a sympathetic military nurse (Rose Byrne) and an American soldier who cannot kill any longer (Jeremy Renner). His contact is a helicopter pilot who could rescue them (Harold Perrineau). Since they left the Isle of Dogs and Canary Wharf and have to make their way to Regents Part for the rendezvous, the chase takes the group through a deserted central London (as did the opening of the original film). The aerial photography of London makes the city a character, reinforced as the group make their way over the Thames, through Trafalgar Square and Shaftsbury Avenue and, especially, with rifle green night light for sighting to Regents Park. The climax occurs at the new Wembley Stadium.

The pace is constant, editing effectively intense, scare and fright continuous. The special effects are gory at times and the makers seem to be showing off, flaunting (as well they might) their skills. However, unlike so many American films of this kind which exploit the violence and the usual young-adults-whom-you-wouldn’t-want-to-know-in-real-life in grizzly peril, this film is intelligent in its approach and, given the apocalyptic scenario, offers credible characters and situations.

Without giving away the ending, can one now expect Vingt-huits mois plus tard?

1.The impact of the first film? Cult status? Recreating the zombie, living dead genre? The sequel as equal? The connections?

2.The British horror tradition, combined with the Spanish tradition? Contrasting with the American style? An intelligence behind the film rather than box office exploitation? The universal interest?

3.The visual impact of the film, tension, shocks, sense of realism? The special effects – and the blatant use of the effects? Audience response? The musical score?

4.The basis of the story, its plausibility, the virus, the rage infection, the results, the living dead, anger, pursuit of the innocent, destruction? The need for eradication? The firing on the infected, the possibilities of an antidote, the nature of the carriers?

5.The connection with the first film, twenty-eight weeks later and the resume of the previous story? Peace? The return of the inhabitants, the plan for rebuilding London and life, the needs for security, the techniques at airports? The quarantine?

6.An American occupation, for rebuilding? Iraq not explicitly mentioned – but behind the screenplay? Rebuilding, American control, mistakes, the personnel and their qualities, ordinary Americans, types, the commanders and the responsibilities, helicopter flyers, snipers? The need for research? Decision-making?

7.The prologue, the small group, sharing the meal, no light, the husband and wife, the old couple, the girl wanting her boyfriend to arrive, the husband and wife and their being glad that their children were safe? The attack, the wall, the daylight, the father and his running away, the wife at the window, her gaze, her being taken by the infected? His escape, the boat, selfishness, the struggle with the boat? Giving a tone for the film? Audience shock at the husband’s behaviour?

8.The children, their return, arriving at the airport, the security, the importance of the boy’s eyes, his being a carrier? Her being held, examined? Meeting their father, his story about their mother’s death? His being a security guard? Their being quarantined, their decision to get out and find their home?

9.The characters of brother and sister, strengths, their dependence, the impact of the events? Their getting out, evading security, yet their being watched? Their father and his being upset? The bike, going to the house, the sadness, discovering their mother alive? Their being caught, quarantined again, the mother taken to the laboratory? The husband, his apologising to the children about the story? Going in to his wife, his apology, kissing her – and being affected, infected by rage?

10.The consequences of the new infection, the crowds, the loss of control? People afraid, panicking, crowds, escaping? The children trying to escape? The investigator and her dealing with them at security, sympathy for them, wanting the antidote? Their teaming up with her? The young soldier, his friendship with the helicopter pilot, firing on the crowds – his having the children in his sights, unable to fire any longer? His moving with the crowd? The children being separated, hiding, skills in surviving, finding each other?

11.The picture of London, empty, its look, the helicopter sequences, the overviews?

12.The decision to fire on the people, the American loss of control, indiscriminate shooting, the victims? The killings, the setting fire to the sector? It being consumed, the mother and her being consumed by the fire? The confrontation with the father, his death?

13.Rose Byrne and her help, Jeremy Renner and his decision? Coping with the panic, hiding, getting the children together? The ingenuity with the escape? Evading the pursuers? Going through the familiar streets, across the Thames, Shaftesbury Avenue, Trafalgar Square? Their going down into the Underground, the use of the night light, the darkness, the chase, the railway lines? Rose Byrne and her getting the car, taking them to Wembley Stadium for the rendezvous?

14.The helicopter pilot, his character, keeping in touch, following them through, the rendezvous at Wembley? The pursuing infected people, their being mown down? The group getting to the gates? Regent’s Park – the infected, having to go further?

15.Rose Byrne and her being killed, Jeremy Renner and his trying to save the group, his death? The man following and his being killed?

16.The final rescue, the timing? Their being taken to safety, to France?

17.The ending and the infection in Paris? Ready for a sequel?