Superior sequel, brutal and uncompromising

Rating: 8/10 (20 January 2013)

This follow-up to the Danny Boyle horror flick 28 DAYS LATER takes the premise from the first film and creates a fresh, pulse-pounding horror flick that stands up on its own right as well as being marginally better than the original. Although Boyle only returns here as executive producer (also shooting some second-unit stuff) and the original film's cast are nowhere to be seen, this retains the bleakness and horror of 28 DAYS LATER while adding to the experience. Spanish director Juan Carlos Fresnadillo – this is his first English film – calls the shots this time around and he does well.
My only complaint is with his excessive use of the 'shaky-cam', that annoying way of shooting action in which the camera jerks all over the place making it impossible to pick out anything more than vague shapes. Here it's taken to a nauseating, pointless extreme, although I'm pleased to say that it doesn't seem so bad after it's first used in the initial scene. The shoulder-cam on Robert Carlyle, in comparison, is both inventive and effective.
The film lets loose right from the word go with a brief, 5-minute reprise of the classic NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD zombie scenario. After that, we're treated to half an hour's build up, with plenty more spooky shots of the deserted London streets – these make for very powerful moments. Of course, the rage virus comes back to the fore, and once more the infected roam the streets. Zombies in all but name, these killers are super-fast and bloodthirsty, and quite terrifying. Fresnadillo tends to shoot around them or show them in quick blood-drenched glimpses which makes them all the more frightening. The film has some fun with the US army, drafted in with echoes of the Iraq occupation, and their heavy-handed way of dealing with the situation is perhaps even more frightening than the infected themselves.
Essentially the film is a series of scary set-pieces, each more outlandish and drama than the next. The filmmakers stress this is a family drama at heart, and certainly the actions and reactions of four family members are central to the movie. Catherine McCormack (BRAVEHEART) is disturbing and frightening as the mother, bitten by the infected, who becomes a carrier rather than an infected herself. I didn't recognise her from the Mel Gibson film; she seems to have changed completely in the 12 years since.
Robert Carlyle carries the first half of the film on his shoulders and his performance is outstanding – probably the best I've seen him give. The film introduces two new young actors who play the brother and sister around whom the film is focused; Imogen Poots is a fragile blonde beauty, while Mackintosh Muggleton, despite his silly name, gives a performance that belies his youth in terms of maturity and delivery. The rest of the characters are little more than stereotypes, although TROY's Rose Byrne stands out as a sympathetic scientist, and Jeremy Renner steals his scenes as a genuinely heroic character, a US soldier who rebels against his orders and helps the protagonists to make their escape.
Looking back on the film, I find many scenes fresh in my mind. The rotted bodies in the Tube and in the deserted shops and homes set the horrific atmosphere well. The scenes of soldiers shooting civilians and later fire-bombing the city of London are disturbing in the extreme. I love the shots of the toxic gas clouds slowly moving through the deserted streets. The bit in the car is edge-of-the-seat and the chase through the streets at night is innovative and cleverly-done, no day-for-night shooting here. There's an interlude in Regent's Park in which the infected are dispatched with the blades of a helicopter which rivals Peter Jackson's BRAINDEAD for splatter.
The infected make-up is outstanding, truly terrifying, with blood-red contact lenses and gallons of the red stuff all over their mouths and bodies. Fresnadillo makes a great use of London, with location shooting giving a real sense of the capital's character. The downbeat ending is a little hard to swallow, but I can live with that. Truly, this is a disturbing and effective horror film; the gore flows thick and fast, although the low-light is a gruesome eye-gouging that's hard to watch even in the days of HOSTEL and SAW III. 28 WEEKS LATER is a great film that surpasses the original in most ways, and I wouldn't mind seeing another in the series. 28 MONTHS LATER, anyone?