REVIEW: '28 Weeks Later' as good as the original and easily the best horror film of 2007!
by Steve Mason
There is no question in my mind that 28 Weeks Later (Fox Atomic), the searing sequel to Danny Boyle's remarkable 28 Days Later, will stand head-and-shoulders above every horror film released this year. It takes the rage virus that decimated England in the 2003 international hit, and adds a haunting familial twist, creating what may be the most visceral, shocking and flat-out scary movie ever made.
I was leery of the idea of a sequel because of the landmark originality of the first film. It took the fear and paranoia of deadly viruses and potential bio-terror -- including everything from SARS to Ebola to smallpox -- and combined it with the good old George Romero zombie pics. When you go back and look at the Romero classic Night of the Living Dead -- as well as the scores of zombie flicks that have followed, with the exception of Zack Snyder's Dawn of the Dead remake -- zombies are slow and lumbering, with a Frankenstein-like gait. In 28 Days Later, once infested with the rage virus people become hyper-fast carnivores, sprinting after their victims and thirsting for human flesh and blood.
Boyle, the genius behind Trainspotting (among other pictures), is executive producer of 28 Weeks Later, but has turned the directorial reins over to young Spaniard Juan Carlos Fresnadillo (Intacto). Fresnadillo collaborated with Enrique Lopez Lavigneon to rework an original screenplay by Rowan Joffe, and the result not only preserves Boyle's legacy, but also finds ways to improve on the original.
As the film begins, a group of Brits is holed up in a house during the original outbreak. Included are a married couple, Don and Alice, played by the excellent Robert Carlyle (Trainspotting, The Full Monty) and Catherine McCormack (Braveheart). A young boy bangs on the door yelling that he's being chased by his infected father. The survivors let him in, but a pack of the Rage-infected are soon breaking their way into the sanctuary. In the end, Don is cornered, and instead of trying to save Alice, he bolts to save himself. He is left with the image of his wife's face in a window as the voracious carriers circle.
The movie then skips ahead to 28 Weeks Later. It's six months after the rage virus has wiped out the U.K., and all of the infected have died of starvation. The U.S. Army moves in to begin reconstruction, and the first wave of British citizens come home to begin repopulating their homeland. It is essentially a military state under the command of General Stone (Idris Elba from HBO's The Wire), with American snipers on every rooftop. His chief medical advisor is Scarlet, played by Rose Byrne from Troy and Wicker Park.
Don is in some sort of building management job, and is still haunted by the death of his wife, when his children, Andy and Tammy, played by unknowns Mackintosh Muggleton and Imogen Poots, arrive back in the country. They had been on a school trip in Spain when the outbreak took place. The kids don't play by the rules, and soon they're venturing out of the secured areas ... and that's when the trouble begins. I'm not going to spoil the story here. Suffice it to say that it's hard to keep the rage virus down. Soon, it is ripping through the secured repopulation areas, and the military is powerless to stop it.
The twist is that even when a father or a mother is infected with the virus, they still have parental feelings toward their children. In the same way that the little boy at the start of the movie said that he was being chased by his infected dad, Carlyle's Don is soon foaming at the mouth and hunting down his kids. When Fresnadillo originally met with Carlyle about the role, the director told him that he really feels for the infected because, "(T)hey had lives too and they have had children and they have lost most through all of this."
It's an interesting and sensitive way to look at these monsters, and it's that quirky view that results in some of the most frightening moments in the movie.
Like its predecessor, 28 Weeks Later isn't for the faint of heart. It's shockingly bloody, with some over-the-top gross-out moments, and it made me jump in my seat at least a half-dozen times. It's got so many heart-stopping scenes that it's hard to watch at times, but it's an great ride for anybody who loves the 2003 classic, or likes a good scare. This is a well-conceived, well-made horror flick with a high I.Q. and a terrific cast. It'll stick in your head long after you leave the theatre.
FantasyMoguls.com Lowdown on 28 Weeks Later
Original FantasyMoguls.com Projections for 28 Weeks Later were for a 4.9 IMDb User Rating, $27.5 million in total domestic box office, 3 Top 5 points and 2 PTA points. Steve Mason's revised projections based on seeing the film, studying updated tracking and reviewing its updated release plan are as follows:
Box Office: $36 million
IMDb User Rating: 6.6
Top 5: 6 points
PTA: 4 points


Can you rate the 'hotness' of Rose Byrne in it? And did she give a good performance?
Posted by: tuan69 | May 08, 2007 at 01:14 AM
Steve, 28 Weeks Later currently has an IMDB of 8.1, do you think it will go down to 6.6?
Posted by: tuan69 | May 08, 2007 at 02:27 AM
There are a lot of things that Mase does well but predicting ratings is not one of them. He often times completely over inflates or understates ratings numbers.
It is not completely his fault. A) He probably thinks of the ratings at a settling point, which doesnt happen through the course of a season. It takes months and DVD viewings to finally solidfy ratings scores and B) Ratings are just hard to guess. My guess is that this film settles in the mid to low 7's for the sake of our seasonal numbers.
Posted by: Rob | May 09, 2007 at 10:54 AM
I love all of Danny Boyle's work. And 28 Days Later is one of my favourite films.
And I don't agree with you when you say that 28 Weeks Later is just as good as the original. Because the only good thing about it was the music (and that WAS in the original).
Posted by: Romina | May 28, 2007 at 03:39 PM