By Carl Zielinski

Gargoyle staff reporter


Posted Sunday, May 13, 2007, The OG, arts

AS A MAJOR fan of the film “28 Days Later,” I was immensely excited at the prospect of a sequel. The 2003 film was groundbreaking in its portrayal of a post-apocalyptic society, and it was the first film of the “survival horror” genre that didn't appear to me to be insanely violent trash.

Much to my disappointment, “28 Weeks Later” not only came about two years too late, but it also partially tainted my memories of the first film.

While “28 Days” was directed by Danny Boyle, “28 Weeks” only features him as an executive producer, with Juan Carlos Fresnadillo stepping in as director. As such, the film manages to retain many of the same elements as the first, but it also overuses them. In the end, “28 Weeks” seems to me more of an unworthy imitation of “28 Days” rather than an actual sequel.

The gritty, not-quite-finished production of “28 Days” is retained to good effect but becomes tiring by the time the film's 99 minutes are up. Similarly, the highly unsteady camera allows you to see the world as one running from zombies might, but it doesn't give a very comprehensible view on important plot developments.

The only continuity between both films that can be seen is the plot. Both films take place in Britain after a massive infection has decimated the population and turned survivors into mindless, raging beings only called “the infected.”

The few who were not infected have to deal with their new situation, by means of avoiding the infected at all costs, and killing those who become infected. Also, the film reprises the idea in “28 Days” that almost no character, no matter how important, should have a last name.

However, that is where the plot similarity stops. While the prologue to the film takes place in the “28 Days” setting, no characters from the first film are mentioned at any point, which leads me to presume they died sometime after the first movie ended.

Married couple Don (Robert Carlyle, of “The Full Monty” fame) and Alice (Catherine McCormack) and various other survivors are initially safe in a cottage, but after a brief discussion over dinner, an attack ensues and all but Don, Alice, and a little boy are killed. In the process of escaping from the cottage, Don leaves Alice and the boy, presuming them dead.

Six months later, the infected have starved to death and a United States-led NATO operation is in place in London, clearing out the dead and attempting to repopulate the city.

Accordingly, the city is guarded by American military forces, and survivors as well as newer arrivals are living in London's “Green Zone” (found any Iraq War references yet?). Don is now the caretaker for a residence complex, and he is joined by his children Tammy (Imogen Poots) and Andy (Mackintosh Muggleton).

After sneaking into the forbidden areas of London to retrieve a picture of their mother, they find the real thing, and she is taken into quarantine by the military. In need of further plot, the infection is spread by Don in a scene that gives the term “kiss of death” new meaning.

After some unbelievably violent scenes, the virus is loose in London once again, and the military is scrambling to recover. In the process, they activate “code red” and go about killing all residents of London to contain the virus, regardless as to whether their intended victims are infected.

The rest of the movie is then dedicated to how Andy, Tammy, Sergeant Doyle (Jeremy Renner) and Dr. Scarlett Ross (Rose Byrne) are going to get out of London alive, a feat that only two of them manage.

This is probably a good time to point out something important: This film is violent. Very violent. Psychotically, desperately, unbelievably violent. “28 Days” was quite tasteful in how it dealt with the infected, and their attacks were so quick that most of the action was very quick, and even though there was a lot of blood it never became overpowering.

“28 Weeks” reverses the action completely, making much of it more deliberate and drawn out. The infected spew as much blood as they do in the first film, but they also now have the ability to ram their thumbs into victims' eyes and bludgeon them with the butts of their own rifles. All in all, it's not a very tasteful move, even if it provides a bit of shock factor to make some slower scenes move along.

One thing the film definitely has going for it is the original theme music from “28 Days” (you'll know it when you hear it). It isn't overtly unsettling, but when played behind scenes of seeing London firebombed it becomes almost surreal and dreamlike.

However, a good score and some Iraq references can't overcome the film's unbelievably predictable ending and undeniable plot holes. For example, why would you try to repopulate an area that is still being cleared of infected bodies? Also, why would you give a building caretaker an access card to highly quarantined areas, other than the need for plot advancement?

If you have a strong stomach or are a fan of the first film, go ahead and see “28 Weeks.” At the very least you'll be entertained by people running from the infected for close to two hours. Otherwise, go see “Delta Farce.”

“28 Weeks Later” is playing at the Beverly 18 and Savoy 16. For showtimes at both theaters, click here. Runtime: 99 minutes. Rated: R.

RELATED

— External link: The film's official site (U.K.)

— External link: The film's official site (U.S.)