The film starts six months after the Rage virus has spread
throughout the city of London. The United States Army has restored
order and is repopulating the quarantined city. But a peculiar carrier
of the Rage virus enters London and unknowingly reignites the spread
of the deadly infection, wreaking havoc on the entire population.
Would we have a movie otherwise?Some of my friends are
sequel haters, but I’m just not one of them. Sure, a lot of
sequels are wastes of time and simply look to cash in on a built-in
audience. But when someone tells me that 1986’s Aliens
was unnecessary, and just “the same thing all over again,”
I just about fly out of my chair. “Aliens was a well-
done continuation of the first film!” I cry. I hoped for the
same thing with 28 Weeks Later, and I think it delivers.
Instead of following one character’s journey, Jim (what
a great name!), from the first film, this sequel follows a family who
(mostly) escaped the virus and try to relocate in London. Both films
certainly grasped the theme of “if this virus were real, our
story is a realistic possibility,” which helps to erase
unnecessary supernatural elements. It elevated the story and the
characters’ plights above cheesy zombie fare. This sequel also
plays its cards right by focusing on a relatively ordinary family in
extraordinary circumstances played across-the-board by strong actors
playing empathic roles.
28 Days Later was sheer
chaos; in 28 Weeks Later, people have a strong idea about
what they’re up against and have a plan in place to overcome it,
similar to Aliens. But since it’s obvious that
everything is going to get out of control, what we behold is how the
planned defenses come into play against another outbreak. And the
family becomes the link that pulls us into the drama.
I
must admit that much of the film retreads the core theme of the first
film, which asks the question, how would we try to survive and
overcome a violent viral outbreak such as this? But consider that just
because movies were made about World War I, Hollywood shouldn’t
and didn’t ignore movies about World War II. There was no fear
of repeating similar themes.
I liked this film partly
because I’m a sucker for survival films where people are running
for their lives, but also because I liked the family and found myself
rooting for them to survive. In fact, a few of the characters that
sacrificed themselves for others really drew me into the pathos of the
film. The plot is strong and involving, despite one unrealistic scene
in which some characters get separated (in life, they would not
have).
Yes, there is brutal violence and lots of bloodshed,
executed with quick-cut editing, for which I was thankful. And a
defensive move by a helicopter against some infected victims is sheer
kick ass. But beyond being a flashy action horror show, be aware that
this is a grim, grim film that feels possible.
The
Video: How Does The Disc Look?
The film’s
theatrical aspect ratio of 1.85:1 is presented in anamorphic video.
Video quality is purposely very rough. The first explosive scene
almost looks like it was filmed in 16 mm, especially during chase
sequences; the director wanted to make a “horror
documentary” and it shows. Dark scenes limit chroma to a drab
assortment of browns, blues, and dirty greens, which certainly evokes
the grim survival tone of the film. Some exterior sunlit scenes become
more vibrant with colors looking more naturally saturated, but that
doesn’t last. Such scenes are best to judge small object detail
in backgrounds and they are nicely visible. Unfortunately, that is
also when minor edge halos become apparent. There are quite a few
close ups, and when they are static – during a down time –
finely grained textures of the actors’ hair, skin, and rough
clothing appear clear and fairly sharp.
The chase and rage
sequences are extremely rough, handheld, you’re-in-the-action
and engender the roughest film grain I’ve seen in years.
Sometimes it became more distracting rather than compelling, but
admittedly, it was very gripping. This rough style also wreaks havoc
with contrast ratios. In fact most of the film’s exterior
daylight scenes appear a bit hot with crushed, but extremely deep,
blacks, and whites that bloom slightly. Dark action scenes can appear
a bit faded and lack good grayscale range. Yet some day for night
shots look clean and very alluring. The compression artifact of
macroblocking emerges on a few occasions. The intended rough style has
its benefits of making the film look interesting and tough. But the
costs certainly degrade the picture quality, which can be so
distracting that it makes the film less involving. I can’t give
the transfer a poor score, simply because the picture quality appears
to be what the filmmakers intended.
The Audio: How
Does The Disc Sound?
The disc’s Dolby
Digital 5.1 track has a solid front soundstage with airy highs, rich
lows, and some involving stereo panning. Dialogue is very clear,
although some accents are so strong I had to turn on the subtitles
more than once. The film makes great use of low frequency effects that
kept my subwoofer busy; a scene with a swooping helicopter vibrated my
pant legs. Midtones are clean and decently rendered throughout much of
the madness. Surrounds are frequently active, have a nice dynamic
range, and certainly enhance envelopment especially with the throbbing
score. However, the surrounds can be very mushy, ill defined, and with
imperceptible discrete effects. I engaged EX decoding for grins, and
it simply surrounded me with mushier surround. The audio mix is
certainly sufficient, but more precise detail in the nuances would
have been welcomed . . . and creepier.
A stereo track with
English audio for the visually impaired is included (and interesting)
as well as French and Spanish Dolby Surround 2.0 tracks. English
Closed Captions are included as are English and Spanish subtitles (the
latter two worked on my DVD player, but not my computer).
Supplements: What Goodies Are There?
We
begin with an audio commentary by Juan Carlos
Frensnadillo and Enrique Lopez Lavigne. Both are enthusiastic about
the film and they admire its predecessor. They discuss some of the
technical attributes they employed and why, as well as casting and
production challenges with a film on a tight budget. Both men spur
each other on and make this a great commentary.
Next is
deleted scenes with optional audio commentary by Juan
Carlos Frensnadillo and Enrique Lopez Lavigne. The scenes are The
Canteen (2:59) and Andy’s Dream (2:21). The
quality is rough and a bit faded. I thought both scenes were cool and
should have stayed in the film; they add more character development
and would have made the sacrifices later in the film more potent.
Code Red: Making of 28 Weeks Later is a
featurette (13:06) with behind-the-scenes footage and
interviews with principle cast and filmmakers. Discussions about
budget restraints, casting, infected status, and story linking between
this and the first film are interesting. The AIDS reference regarding
stronger tolerances against the strain by some people and how the
filmmakers incorporated that fact into the film was a brilliant
move.
The Infected is the next
featurette (6:58) with lots of fun discussion and
behind-the-scenes-footage of the extras in “infected rage”
costume design and attitude. It’s rowdy great fun as most would
expect. It’s interesting to note that many dancers were employed
as “the infected” to give the zombie’s a more fluid,
exuberant presence.
Getting into the Action is the
last featurette (7:14). Lots of clips from the film
are included as well as behind-the-scenes footage. Actors talk about
the energy required to exhibit fear and run for their lives. Juan
Carlos Frensnadillo talks about how he focused on the film as a real
“horror documentary.”
There is also a
website with the trailer, story, photo gallery, and
an infected game.
The 100-minute film is organized into
twenty-nine chapters.
Exclusive DVD-ROM Features:
What happens when you pop the disc into your PC?
There are no DVD-ROM features on this DVD.
Final
Thoughts
Despite some overwrought camerawork, I
got sucked into 28 Weeks Later. This sequel is a legitimate
follow-up to its hit predecessor of 2003, 28 Days Later.
Beyond the flashy horror action, be aware that the story is very grim;
for most viewers, this is not a date movie. The picture quality
sufficiently represents the rough film style, the audio is quite
engaging, and some supplements are solid. If you are in the mood for a
better than usual zombie flick, this is most certainly recommended.