What if....

Rating: 10/10 (19 May 2007)

What was scary as Hell about 28 Days Later and it's excellent sequel 28 Weeks Later is that it shows us a virus-created from apparently(I read in some back-story literature) a splicing of the very real Ebola and Borna viruses. Ebola explains the violent hemorrhaging, Borna-a little know but real and scary disease-explains the rage. Souped up with some very fast incubation time. Borna was named after a town in the early 20th century in France, which was an unknown-origin virus that struck a horse farm with no warning. Apparently contagious, all the horses went into "rage" trying to kill each other until they all had to be put down and burned. No one knew where it came from-or where it went.All their brains were infected with this bug. But it has never thankfully appeared again. Borna was used in the 1985 virus film Warning Sign. What better way to spread a virus than by vomiting blood and bodily fluids all over people as you run into them? To sum up without spoilers, this film is a lot less disturbing on the human level as the previous film was which was truly disturbing at the last third. The characters here, this time, are warmer and this balances off the terror of the virus. A couple of people make some very stupid mistakes which re-activate the virus otherwise it may have been totally wiped out. The gore is there but the way it's filmed,staccato-like... your mind fills in more than is really seen. I like that, where violence is not lingered over but only flirted with. Also, in this film, it's apparent the virus is ready to mutate.
Also, to answer the Dawn of The Dead vs 28 Days/Weeks..."are they or aren't they zombies?" No, they're very much alive and in the throes of an uncontrollable virus. So, this film is less in the category of "Zombie" film and more in the category of "Virus" film such as The Omega Man(1971) Virus(1980) Warning Sign(1985) and Outbreak(1995) A worthy sequel to 28 Days Later....