The 28 Days/Weeks/Years Later film series is fairly odd as far as franchises go. The first film was from a clearly an attempt at artistry despite being in a classic genre that COULD just be lowest common denominator genre fodder. They established an Alien-like quality where the films are gonna be different in regards to cast and tone and director with the sequel.
But then the franchise seemingly just died after two films due to rights issues. And then it became oddly hard to legally watch the first film unless you had the DVD? Now, all these years later, Danny Boyle and Alex Garland have a three-film plan with the first two films shot back to back?? In an age where all studies are desperate to mine IP, it was inevitable they would land back at this franchise. But its path to get there has been odd to say the least.
3. 28 Days Later [2002]
The first film is so fucking annoying and in your face – it is an ugly film about an ugly world. And while I did genuinely find the style Danny Boyle took with how this film was shot and edited more annoying than interesting, I do give it credit for really trying to mirror the form and content. This film tries to make the audience feel disoriented – the audience should feel on edge and irritated and confused. But it is just sort of undeniably mid that I cannot celebrate its “success” at being annoying all that much. I appreciate the effort though, and the film is perfectly fine overall.
2. 28 Weeks Later [2007]
I was a bit surprised to find the sequel to be better than the original. It feels less personal, and it has less of a sense of artistry to it in any way. And yet, I found it to be more interesting and a little more self-assured in what it was attempting to do.
I was particularly struck by the portrayed of the United States military in the film. They are so confident that they have everything under control, and that they keep things in order through sheer force and hierarchal structures. Their soldiers are downright glib about their mission to contain a potential world-destroying virus.
And yet for all their strength and might, there is really nothing they can do that stop western individualism eating away at everyone from the inside. Robert Carlyle’s cowardly individualism destroys what is left of the surviving community. If not profound, it is a touching film that I enjoy a great deal even with its lack of ambitious compared to the predecessor and immediate successor.
1. 28 Years Later [2025]
One of my favorite concepts in discussing the NBA is the idea of a “spin the wheel” player: a player who you have no idea what you’re going to get from year to year (Dennis Schroder) or game to game (Caris Lavert) or play to play (Obi Toppin). I have realized this applies to some film directors as well whether it is hacks like Martin Campbell (who has made some real shit but then also did Casino Royale) or even aspiring true artists like one Danny Boyle. You just never know what you are going to get from him; sometimes it is perfectly competent (Steve Jobs), sometimes it’s genuinely interesting (28 Days Laters), and sometimes it’s just humiliating (Yesterday).
The spin-the-wheel was at play again here for Boyle but within his own film. It seemed like Boyle spun a wheel and let fate decide the camera angle of every shot. It led to some genuinely spellbindingly beautiful shots and other times where you’re just wondering what the fuck is going on. It is a total bozo mode performance from Boyle in ways that are both delightful and frustrating.
There is a tension in this film that is undeniable. Boyle goes for a total emotional sincerity to this film; the arcs and journeys that the characters go on are totally devoid of irony or anything that would on the pagethat could cause the audience to feel detached from the big emotional beats the film goes for.
But simultaneously, Danny Boyle throughout the film, time and time again, apes Terrence Malick (to be reductive) with his shot angles, montages, and other choices. There is a deep cynicism to much of the style of the film that is in constant tension with the thematic exploration of family, parenthood, and raising a child in a dark world with no objective reasons for hope. That is not to say a genre film cannot be shot or treated like a “serious” film, but how seriously are we really supposed to be taking this?
This tension between the sincerity and cynicism came to the forefront at my local movie theater.
The movie gets to the most emotionally devastating moment at the climax of the film. And during that moment that should have been emotionally overwhelming, many people started laughing. Then one person loudly shushed them. This contradiction captures the film where I understand the reactions of everyone. The film was both sincere and emotionally cheap. This film was both beautiful looking and visually incoherent. This film was both overwhelming and underwhelming. This film was something; and the fact that the film is worth talking about and disagreeing about is exactly why I am overall found of it despite it all.
The Reel World 