Dir: Danny Boyle
Cast: Jodie Comer, Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Alfie Williams, Jack O’Connell, Ralph Fiennes
This highly anticipated zombie sequel sees Danny Boyle and Alex Garland recapture the urgency and visceral intensity of the ground-breaking original by addressing modern social anxieties
In 1968, the horror genre was introduced to one of its most iconic monsters: the zombie. While the concept of zombies has roots in Voodoo folklore that predate “Night of the Living Dead” by several decades, George A. Romero‘s ground-breaking film was the first to present these brain- and flesh-eating ghouls as we know them today. This innovative portrayal has left a lasting impact, shaping our understanding of zombies in popular culture and instilling fear in audiences ever since. After decades of success in popular culture, largely due to George Romero’s significant contributions to the zombie sub-genre, zombies appeared to return to their cinematic grave by the 1990s. An oversaturation of zombie films led to a rapid decline in quality and originality, contributing to the sub-genre’s downfall. This decline also coincided with the rise of more popular horror sub-genres, particularly slasher films, following the success of Wes Craven‘s “Scream” in 1996.
Zombies had been largely absent from mainstream media for several years, but they made a significant comeback in the late nineties with the success of the “Resident Evil” video game franchise. Inspired by these popular survival horror games, author Alex Garland decided to write his first screenplay, which centred around a zombie apocalypse set in his native Britain. Having previously collaborated with Garland on the film adaptation of his 1996 novel “The Beach”, filmmaker Danny Boyle became interested in this new project. By 2002, audiences were introduced to “28 Days Later”, which went on to become one of the most influential British horror films of all time.
“28 Days Later” was not only a critical and financial success, but it also played a significant role in revitalising the seemingly defunct zombie subgenre. Garland’s introduction of fast zombies—referred to as the infected—added a new level of terror to the portrayal of the undead, which had previously been criticised for their slowness and lack of intelligence. This concept of fast zombies has been embraced in various media ever since, from Zack Snyder‘s 2004 remake of Romero’s “Dawn of the Dead” to the recent television adaptation of the popular video game “The Last of Us”. Over the past 23 years since the release of “28 Days Later”, zombies have evolved into some of the most beloved and feared icons in horror cinema, demonstrating that they remain as popular today as ever.
Since the release of the equally frightening and socially relevant, though not as impactful, “28 Weeks Later” in 2007, there has been much speculation about a third film in the franchise. After stepping back from the sequel to focus on their collaboration for the sci-fi thriller “Sunshine”, it was always intriguing to consider the direction Boyle and Garland would take the franchise if they returned. Now, five years earlier than the title suggests, the wait for the long-awaited third film, directed by Boyle and written by Garland, is over with the release of “28 Years Later”.
For those who haven’t caught up on the original film, or have simply forgotten what the initial outbreak was like, we are quickly reminded by a cold open following a young Scottish boy named Jimmy as he looks to escape a horde of infected that have turned all of those around him.
Fast forward 28 years to an alternate 2030: the rage virus has been eradicated in the rest of the world, but Great Britain remains under permanent quarantine. Our 12-year-old protagonist, Spike (Alfie Williams), is part of a small survivor community that has taken refuge in the island village of Lindisfarne, located in the northeast of England. As part of his rite of passage, Spike is to accompany his father, Jamie (Aaron Taylor-Johnson), to the mainland to hunt his first infected kill, while his seriously ill and confused mother, Isla (Jodie Comer), stays behind on the island.
During their time on the mainland, Spike encounters various mutated versions of the infected, including the bloated “Slow Lows” and the incredibly large and powerful “Alphas”. After narrowly escaping several infected, Spike spots a fire in the distance while he and his father take refuge in an abandoned cottage. Upon discovering that the fire is coming from the apparently unstable Dr. Kelson (Ralph Fiennes), Spike decides to seek him out in hopes of obtaining medical attention for his mother.
I was incredibly excited for the long-awaited third instalment of the series. My love for the first two movies had me eagerly anticipating how an infected-ridden Britain had changed over the past 28 years. Knowing that both Danny Boyle and Alex Garland had returned to the franchise only heightened my excitement. Since the release of the first film, both have achieved significant success in the industry. Boyle won an Academy Award for directing the Best Picture winner “Slumdog Millionaire” (2008), while Garland has established himself as a talented writer-director, producing remarkable works like “Ex-Machina” (2015), “Annihilation” (2018), “Civil War” (2024), and very recently “Warfare”.
To add to my anticipation, me and movie lovers worldwide were treated to one of the greatest trailers of all time in December 2024. The striking visuals were accompanied by Taylor Holmes‘ haunting recital of Rudyard Kipling‘s poem “Boots”, written over a century ago, which sent shivers down viewers’ spines – including my own.
Having entered my screening with high expectations, I could have easily set myself up for disappointment. Thankfully, I can happily report that this long-awaited return to the franchise is well worth the eighteen-year wait. Despite the significant advancements in filmmaking technology since the release of the first film in 2002, Boyle and returning cinematographer Anthony Dod Mantle do a fantastic job of recapturing the urgency and visceral energy of the original.
“28 Days Later” was mainly shot using low-quality digital cameras, which allowed Mantle and his crew to capture the unforgettable images of a lone Cillian Murphy wandering the streets of an empty London. This remains one of the most impressive filmmaking feats in horror history. Although the crispness of the visuals suffered as a result, the low-resolution imagery of the original contributed to the raw tone that both Boyle and Garland strived for in their depiction of a derelict London.
To recreate the distinct visual style of the original film in today’s filmmaking environment, Mantle shot most of “28 Years Later” on iPhone 15s. This approach resulted in stunning visuals while preserving the kinetic and hard-edged aesthetic of the original, only this time, the film beautifully captures the natural splendour of the Great British countryside, contrasting it with the concrete jungle of central London in the first two instalments.
The zombie sub-genre has a long history of exploring social themes, and “28 Days Later” is no exception. Released shortly after September 11, the film’s examination of mass panic and societal collapse was particularly timely. Garland has capitalised on the years since the first film to ensure this latest instalment addresses issues relevant to modern society, particularly in the United Kingdom. Prominent political themes in “28 Years Later” revolve around both Brexit and the Covid-19 pandemic—the latter being eerily anticipated in the opening scenes of the original film. The narrative depicts a scenario where the UK is cut off from the rest of Europe and forced to survive without outside assistance, reflecting the UK’s decision to leave the European Union in 2016.
One of the most striking images captured by Mantle in “28 Years Later” is that of our protagonist as he passes the Sycamore Gap. In this alternate 2030, where the majority of the UK has been infected with a virus for nearly thirty years, the iconic tree remains standing. As the infected population overrun Great Britain, there are fewer living humans left to damage the environment, including the vandals who, in 2023, cut down the beloved tree.
The resonant social themes presented in “28 Years Later” are intertwined with a relatively straightforward coming-of-age narrative centred on self-discovery, as Spike learns to navigate life on the mainland despite his youth. Newcomer Alfie Williams delivers an impressive performance in the lead role, holding his own alongside seasoned actors like Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Jodie Comer, and Ralph Fiennes, who makes a brief but impactful appearance. Spike’s journey truly embodies the heart and soul of the film, which differs significantly in tone from its predecessors. By shifting the focus away from the rampaging hordes of infected and towards the survivors, we are treated to a surprisingly tender story that yields genuine emotional moments. However, there are instances where the coming-of-age narrative makes the tone feel overly light-hearted for a horror film. If I were to point out one criticism of the movie overall, it would be its tonal cohesion, as it seems to jump from comedic to serious to completely outrageous within just a few frames.
This brings me to the final scene, which felt inconsistent with the rest of the film. While I don’t mind that it sets up the forthcoming sequel, “28 Years Later: The Bone Temple”, the jarring creative choices surrounding it left me puzzled as the credits began to roll.
The Verdict:
“28 Years Later” demonstrates how the zombie franchise has evolved over the years. It largely moves away from the traditional flesh-eating carnage to focus on a heartfelt narrative that explores contemporary social anxieties. After waiting seventeen years for this film, we now only have to wait another seven months for the next instalment, which is the second in a planned trilogy directed by Nia DaCosta – I cannot wait!
28 Years Later is now showing in UK Cinemas
Dan Loves Film 
Thanks for the review.
LikeLiked by 1 person