28 Years Later Has A Tightrope To Walk

by

Summary

  • 28 Years Later must balance staying true to the rage virus’ grounded origins while innovating in a saturated zombie genre.
  • The originality of 28 Days Later came from infected humans, not undead zombies, adding intrigue to the genre.
  • To stand out, the movie must avoid generic zombie tropes and recapture the originality of the first two films.

As a cinephile with over three decades of film-watching under my belt, I must say that the announcement of 28 Years Later has left me both excited and cautious. The originality of 28 Days Later was its unique take on the rage virus, deviating from the traditional zombie trope by infecting humans rather than turning them into undead monsters. This twist added a layer of intrigue that set it apart in the genre.

With the debut of the initial trailer for “28 Years Later,” and an official release date now confirmed, enthusiasts of this long-running movie series are brimming with anticipation. Given that this new film is by Alex Garland and Danny Boyle, it appears that we’re in store for a significant shift from the narrative and formula that have defined the franchise thus far. Balancing the need to adhere to the franchise while distinguishing itself within an increasingly crowded horror genre will be a crucial challenge for “28 Years Later.

The popularity of zombie films and series on television has never been greater, with many horror movies featuring undead monsters at their core. Consequently, most elements of the genre have already been explored. This is one reason why 28 Days Later, despite being part of a popular trend, stood out as an impressive film. It provided a fresh perspective for fans of zombie movies by introducing an unexpected twist. However, it seems that this unique twist might be absent in 28 Years Later, which could potentially pose challenges for the third installment of the trilogy.

Does 28 Years Later Miss The Point?

28 Days Later broke new ground in the zombie movie genre by presenting something other than the usual. The “creatures” wreaking havoc initially through cities and later rural England weren’t traditional monsters. Instead, they were infected humans, not transformed into zombies. They remained human, but due to a rage virus, they lost control of themselves.

In the film, it was shown that despite appearing as invincible zombies, these creatures could still perish due to factors like starvation and dehydration. This added an intriguing layer to them compared to typical zombies, as it addressed a question that viewers might have pondered: “Can these things truly last if they’re just infected people?” The movie also hinted at some complexity in their survival mechanisms, suggesting that they could still be killed or die naturally. However, the specifics of how their biology functioned were left somewhat unclear.

28 Years Later
Screenplay Alex Garland
Director Danny Boyle
Starring Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Ralph Fiennes, Jodie Comer

In essence, the central theme of the movie is that these creatures are not typical undead; they maintain their physiological functions, requiring food and water, and can experience pain. The rage virus in the 28 Days Later series simply causes them to disregard such needs except for satisfying their uncontrollable rage.

Indeed, it’s crucial to note that a significant portion of the storyline in “28 Weeks Later” revolves around the fact that most of the infected have perished, allowing the rest of the world to attempt rebuilding Britain. However, if the London populace hadn’t stumbled upon an infected woman who appeared healthy on the surface, the virus might not have resurfaced. This raises an intriguing question: How is it possible for “28 Years Later” to take place in such a setting?

28 Years Later Can’t Fall Off The Tight Rope

The initial plotline of the movie “28 Years Later” presents a tale of a world that’s been plagued by a virus, but its persistence and spread throughout the globe seems contradictory to the events depicted in the first two films. What allowed this virus to linger for so long as to dominate the entire planet? And how did those infected manage to survive long enough that it appears there’s a new generation being raised in a world where the infected still roam freely?

In what manner did those who contracted the infection manage to survive for an extended period, giving the impression that entire new generations are growing up in a world where the infected persist?

One key feature of the film “28 Years Later” involves the virus-infected individuals transforming into what appears to be genuine zombies. This element adds an element of tension and uncertainty, as the story seems to be deviating from the typical zombie apocalypse narrative. Indeed, it may turn out to be another end-of-the-world zombie movie, but with a unique twist provided by its creators, Alex Garland and Danny Boyle.

In simpler terms, Boyle and Garland face a significant challenge. They must devise a means to keep their work within the boundaries set by the initial two movies of this trilogy, while also making it distinctive amidst an oversaturated zombie film genre.

To create an engaging and distinctive sequel to “28 Years Later“, it’s crucial to clarify right from the start how the virus has evolved. This should be done clearly, without any room for ambiguity, as early speculation or confusion about the rules could diminish audience enjoyment throughout the film. Boyle must find a way to present this development in a manner that still maintains the unique essence of the original films, avoiding the pitfall of becoming just another generic zombie movie after all the effort invested in making the first two stand out.

Read More

2024-12-16 20:05