The first time I saw 28 Days Later, I scoffed at the idea of a sequel. The 2002 movie is a unique snapshot of the early days of an apocalypse, and puts aside much of the action for a philosophical approach. The movie ends with an optimistic, yet still unclear, future, and I didn’t like the idea of the world being developed beyond this purposely limited snapshot.
Then I saw the trailer for 28 Years Later and it changed my mind. So I decided to go back and give 28 Weeks Later a chance.
For those unfamiliar, 28 Weeks Later is the sequel to 28 Days Later, which follows the days after an outbreak of the Rage virus, which turns all infected into violent cannibals within seconds of exposure. In 28 Weeks Later, the original infected starved to death, and a US-led NATO operation is working to reconstruct and set up a colony on the Isle of Dogs. Among the settlers are Tammy and Andy, two British children who were away on a school trip during the initial outbreak and are eager to return home. Their dad, already settled, reunites with his children and recalls the story of their mother, who was killed by the infected. When the mother turns up very much alive, things change not just for them, but for the entire world.
28 Weeks Later has many of the building blocks of the original, and you can tell there was real intention to make this a faithful sequel. As the inevitable breakdown of the newly established settlement occurs, the military director makes a terrible choice: kill everyone, regardless of whether or not they are infected. This paints an interesting and compelling trolley problem, one that the film ignores in favor of a classic good vs. evil dynamic. This trend continues, and it weakens the movie as a whole, as all of the interesting “what ifs” about the larger state of England and humanity are half-baked or unexplored. It’s a shame for a movie following such a thoughtful and different take on the zombie apocalypse as its predecessor.
If you examine this purely as an action movie, there is much more to like. The action sequences range from good to fantastic, with a memorable opening sequence that’s arguably the best scene in the whole movie. The infected aren’t doing anything new, but it’s exciting to see them in a much more controlled military setting, overwhelming a seemingly locked-down sector easily.
The cast is pretty great for the most part. I expected to be bored by Jeremy Renner here after being disappointed by his leading action role in Bourne Legacy, but he’s more than decent. Robert Carlyle is by far the most memorable performance, but both Imogen Poots and Mackintosh Muggleton do enough to carry the film as child actors. Rose Byrne is the weakest of the main cast, but she’s more hurt by her clunky dialogue than her performance as the military’s lead doctor.
Overall, I left this movie wishing it had picked a lane. If it had gone all in on being an intimate character piece about the human condition, I would have felt it was a worthwhile sequel to 28 Days Later. If it was a fun, formulaic action thriller, I would have had a great time with it. It’s the fact that it lands somewhat in the middle that makes it worse in both respects. It’s a solidly good film that could have been great, and it’s the lost potential that’s the most disappointing.
