Now Playing

 

Back in 2002, director Danny Boyle and writer Alex Garland teamed for a unique zombie movie. 28 Days Later was about the outbreak of a pandemic caused by the rage virus in the United Kingdom. It drew fans and inspired a sequel in 2007. The sequel didn’t come from Boyle or Garland and didn’t feature the same cast. It wasn’t met with the same reception.

Now, 23 years later, Boyle and Garland are back in this world. This story now takes place well into this pandemic. With 28 Years Later, as the title suggests, we are well into the world ravaged by the Rage Virus. In this case, it led to the United Kingdom becoming a quarantine zone as the rest of the world rebuffed the virus. 

That’s left those not infected on their own in the United Kingdom. On an isolated island, a group of survivors have created something of a life. When the tide’s low, they can get back to the mainland to forage. But it leaves a lot of dangers to tackle.

Into this world is Spike (Alfie Williams). He’s only 12-years-old, so this broken world is all he’s ever known. He lives with his father, Jamie (Aaron Taylor-Johnson), and mother, Isla (Jodie Comer). But his mother is sick. It’s not clear what’s wrong, but it seems she’s getting worse. At the same time, Jamie is trying to prepare his son to survive this world.

The day has arrived for Spike to take his first journey to the mainland. It’s not without its challenges. After barely surviving, Spike learns that there is a doctor that still lives on the mainland. Despite the warnings of his father, he decides it’s worth the risk to get his mother help. Creating a distraction, Spike sneaks Isla out and begins his quest for help, braving plenty of danger along the way.

A lot has changed in 23 years. We live in a world that is dominated by these kind of apocalyptic zombie stories. We’ve seen series from the world of The Walking Dead dominate for decades, and even spin-off type stories like The Last of Us. To stand out in this world, you need something special and something of a hook.

It’s fair to say the world created by Garland and Boyle feels unique. It’s not just the setting, but the characters and the rules of the world. But does that work for everyone? This film isn’t just a sequel, it’s meant to set the stage for a new trilogy. That means that there isn’t a solid conclusion here. It’s the beginning of a journey that feels open-ended. That, too, will be a challenge for some.

I wasn’t a big fan of the original film. I didn’t take to the style, the world, or the story. So, I wasn’t surprised that this new film didn’t work for me, either. There’s a plot that’s both a bit too simple and a bit too amorphous for me to connect. It feels like there’s a bit too much meandering during the film, especially since it takes nearly the whole run time to connect back to the cold open that starts the film. And that opening and ending is merely leading to a future film. That is a struggle, especially if you’re not invested in what you’re watching.

Boyle has a unique visual style, especially when telling the chaotic story of this world. It doesn’t work for me and often served as a distraction from the story. While some of the set pieces were visually interesting, a lot of the camera work took me out of the world and the story, as did the creative choices of how the world is built.

Despite that, there is a portion early in the Third Act that really hit home. Comer and Ralph Fiennes, who shows up for just a portion of this film, are tremendous actors. Their sequence opposite Williams is powerful at times. I really felt the emotion of the conclusion of that piece of the story. Unfortunately, I didn’t feel that enough throughout the run of the film.

28 Years Later is an ambitious swing. It’s the start of something much larger. If it works for you, you’ll be excited for what comes next. If not, you might be left confused, frustrated, and bored.

28 Years Later is now playing nationwide.

One and a half stars out of five