Danny Boyle reinvented the zombie genre with 28 Days Later, as the Alex Garland-penned film did away with the slow-moving undead that American filmmakers had adopted from George Romero’s Living Dead franchise. Although the rapid, animalistic nature of 28 Days Later’s villains was unnerving, it was Boyle’s stylized direction that made the film so eerie. With the “fly on the wall” griminess of early digital software, mixed with handheld camerawork and minimalistic production values, 28 Days Later was essentially a snuff film about the collapse of society. 28 Days Later aged gracefully because of the distressing similarities between Boyle’s post-apocalyptic world and the madness of the Covid pandemic. The empty, ravaged streets of London, in which characters were forced to question if they’ve been infected, offered hard truths about human decency that the world itself was forced to face in 2020.
Boyle and Garland opted to set aside work on the sequel, 28 Months Later, in favor of the space opera Sunshine, which unfortunately failed to inspire its own franchise; while Sunshine may have found its audience in a post-Interstellar world, the moody, atmospheric depiction of space travel didn’t resonate with blockbuster-pilled viewers in 2007. Boyle and Garland may have both found success when separated, but 28 Years Later is the culmination of a collaborative partnership that began with the often-mocked 2000 survival drama The Beach. Based on the box office performance of 28 Years Later, it could be the start of a new saga; another sequel directed by Nia DeCosta is slated for a January release, and Boyle has prepared a potential third installment that is dependent on his financier’s enthusiasm.
Outside of taking place in the same universe of the previous two entries, 28 Years Later is easy to engage with as an original story, as there’s no pointless cameo from Cillian Murphy used for fan service. In the decades following the initial outbreak of the “Rage” virus, a small community of survivors has settled an island that’s separated from the mainland by a causeway submerged in water. The brief periods in which the waves part from the shore has allowed scouts to tour the mainland in search of resources and other humans, but they’re not afforded the dignity of a rescue mission if they become lost. Having just turned 12, Spike (Alfie Williams) is expected to join his father Jamie (Aaron Taylor-Johnson) on an expedition. However, the glory of killing zombies wouldn’t give Spike the answers he has desired; his mother Isla (Jodie Comer) is riddled with an unknown disease that’s caused her madness, but there are no doctors available to diagnose her condition.
A comparison could be made between Boyle and Steven Soderbergh, as both directors have found excuses to incorporate formal experimentation within mainstream genre films. The difference is that while Soderbergh has allowed his aesthetic exercises to supersede storytelling, Boyle found a surprisingly earnest coming-of-age story to hang his spectacle on. The abundance of Catholic imagery (floods, parted waters, crosses) might strike some as discordant, but Boyle can’t be accused of sentimentality, given the extremes he has pushed with the gore. Although audiences may have learned through The Substance and Final Destination that body horror can be fun, there’s nothing about the nihilistic, grotesque anatomy of 28 Years Later that’s designed to be appealing.
28 Years Later is orchestrated to create paranoia and confusion. Boyle has allowed for extended frames that indulge in graphic dismemberments, frozen and sped-up shots to fixate on split-second decisions, and overlaid footage of historical military parades to note the degradation of society. It isn’t enough for Boyle to simply depict his characters in their natural state; he had to bludgeon the viewer with the same cacophonic terror that Spike, Jamie, and the others face as they descend into hell.
The surprise of 28 Years Later is that of Boyle’s entire filmography, its thematic interests are most similar to that of Millions, a family-friendly speculative drama from 2005 about a young boy who discovered a stack of cash. Both films feature a child’s reckoning with the systems of value that have been imposed upon them; if Millions questioned whether it was possible to be ethical within a capitalistic society, 28 Years Later is an examination of what survivalism does to a culture. Although Spike’s been trained on the necessary precautions needed to preserve himself and others, the island community has shown no interest in the celebration of life. Children are taught to be military instruments, fathers and sons can only bond through killing, and a sick person like Isla is forgotten because she has no immediate value.
Spike’s decisions aren’t inexplicable because he’s reached a realization about futility that most don’t face until they’ve gained more experience; risks must be taken, as to live in fear is to accept the depression of the status quo. The metaphorical search for serenity is strengthened by the film’s best performance; Ralph Fiennes is phenomenal in the role of Dr. Ian Kelson. Despite disparaged by Jamie as a heretic for his studies into undead biology, Kelson has been so devoid of human contact that he’s come to recognize the profundity of life. The disparity between appearance and behavior is clever, as Fiennes is gentle and instructive, even if he’s adorned with the same full-body makeup worn by Colonel Kurtz in Apocalypse Now. On the flipside, Taylor-Johnson’s rough and rowdy, Indiana Jones-esque charisma is evaporated after Jamie’s ethical bankruptcy is revealed.
A majority of 28 Years Later is so thoroughly unpleasant that it could be seen as a more artful alternative to recent “anti-fan” sequels, such as The Matrix Resurrections and Joker: Folie à Deux, which chastised viewers that took the wrong takeaways from their predecessors. It’s remarkable that 28 Years Later retains the hypnotic, hyper-sensationalism that defined Boyle’s early work on Shallow Grave and Trainspotting, but the film’s momentum is unfortunately cut short by a final scene obviously inserted to drum up excitement for the sequel. Perhaps this was unavoidable given the hesitation about the commercial viability of 28 Years Later, but it isn’t enough to ruin a frequently brilliant work of outsider art from one of cinema’s greatest living auteurs.