New Injection of Creativity Needed..............*May Contain Spoiler*

Rating: 3/10 (31 May 2008)

Much has already been said on this board regarding the disappointing interpretation of Boyle's highly acclaimed source material - in developing a sequel that paid little heed to the triumphs of the original and opted instead for the completely over-the-top spectacle that Hollywood is renowned for. When substance is substituted for spectacle in some vain attempt to seduce popcorn-munching audiences into cinemas, not only do filmmakers, or rightly Producers, risk the sort of backlash already seen on this board, they also risk losing the long term support of audiences disgusted at the lack of respect shown in providing them with intelligent story-telling. No longer will we sit in darkened rooms, slurping on cola, and filling our faces as we numbingly consume any old dross put before us. No! We want smart, intelligent, quick-witted, and clever storytelling that leaves us with quality questions and talking in hushed gatherings long after the movie has finished - not with frustrated cries of "but that didn't make any sense". And to all film producers out there - we are many in number so please don't take us for granted. This story was wholly (forgive the pun) unacceptable, ill-conceived, thoroughly under-developed, and despite the enormous budget and the quality of the special effects, severely underwhelming. I left the cinema feeling cheated - and so disappointed in what I saw that I want to write "28 Months or 28 Years Later" myself - and maybe I will. As a screenwriter new to the business (and I mean in the business and not on the outskirts of it) it frustrates me to read, or to watch films that have under-developed narratives, or ones where the fundamental elements that tie events, characters, subplots, decisions, and resolutions together, are at best, not thought of, and at worst, ignored. That shows either a margin of contempt for the audience that is just not warranted, or a level of ability well below that perceived as necessary to succeed in the film business. You wouldn't catch David Koepp, love his work or hate it probably the busiest writer in Hollywood, creating such a mess. If he did, he wouldn't be working so often I would suggest. Just take for example (and many have been cited) the cottage in the opening scenes. When Carlisle leaves McCormack in the bedroom, she is whisked from the window before his eyes. We know many Infected entered the bedroom. His violence towards her later in the med centre was not atypical of other Infected behaviour. In fact the violence as the Infected pursued Carlisle to the boat and thereafter in the river is the standard by which his wife should have been treated. How then did she end up with only a bite on her forearm? By rights she should have been torn to shreds! And this is just one criticism of the lack of thought that went into the story-world creation. For all its aspirations "28 Weeks Later" remains a spectacle of the modern, and thus becoming more and more traditional, Hollywood model - explosive, rich in look, and texture, epic-reaching in scale and design, yet ultimately floored at its foundation - it has little or no story worthy of such immense effort. And if the proof is in the pudding, you only have to read the comment boards - the end users' verdict. It is the admission paying public after all for whom the film is ultimately made. And more heed should be taken of audiences' response. Let's hope that any further offerings in this franchise deliver more closely on Danny Boyle's superb creation and not on this over-blown, and over-budgeted disappointment - and maybe I'll just write the next instalment! What do you say Mr Boyle?