28 Years Later (2025)

Director: Danny Boyle

Cast: Jodie Comer, Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Alfie Williams, Ralph Fiennes

Have I Seen it Before: Never. Hell, I just recently got on board with 28 Days Later (2002).

Did I Like It: The movie being sold in this film’s trailers seemed like a fine one. Years after the initial onset of the Rage Virus, there’s a little island village in the United Kingdom that got spared the worst of it.

But for how long?

That’s a perfectly fine log line for a movie, and with Danny Boyle back in the mix* it feels like whatever was going to be on tap, it would be both elevated and do its level headed best to transcend the trappings of the genre.

But that’s not what the movie is about. At all. The island of Lindisfarme is just as secure from the Rage Virus as it has been since the beginning of both this movie and the early aughts. What the movie is really about is so much more poignant, genuine, relevant, and—I really can’t believe I’m going to say this about a zombie film—life-affirming.

I really don’t want to tell you what it really is about. If you want to hear my thoughts on the particulars, there’s an episode of Beyond the Cabin in the Woods that is either already available, or will be soon.

Let me leave this then with the thought the film leaves us—when it isn’t setting up a sequel approaching faster than one of the film’s non-obese zombies—and I never thought would come from a Zombie film:

Memento Amori.

As I type this, the film’s opening weekend is still in full swing. It hasn’t nearly reached its full audience yet. I google “memento amori” now, and I get back a bunch of catamaran charters in the Caribbean.

I have a real feeling that the phrase will take on a new meaning very, very soon.

*Did anyone else think the movie would also have a return from a post-Oppenheimer (2023) Cillian Murphy? Did anyone else that one zombie in the trailer was Murphy? Just me? Okie doke!

28 Days Later (2002)

Director: Danny Boyle

Cast: Cillian Murphy, Naomie Harris, Christopher Eccleston, Brendan Gleeson

Have I Seen it Before: Oddly enough, no.

Did I Like It: One has to wonder precisely why I have missed the film over twenty years later. The likeliest suspect on spec is my general aversion to the zombie genre. I’m fine with misery porn when its based on reality—presumably we’ve surpassed or are trying to surpass the ills that introduced said misery—but when its all hypothetical, my threshold is pretty low.

My antipathy isn’t helped much by my skepticism that Boyle* has spent years insisting that the film isn’t really about zombies. How many directors of zombie films—from Romero to Edgar Wright—have insisted that their opus isn’t really about zombies? More importantly: How many of them are right or even remotely believable in that assertion?

So, I’m happy to report that Boyle was right on the money** and joins the elite minority of those  who actually know what their film is about. The film is incidentally about zombies and more about how the institutions we’re supposed to rely on are bureaucratically and temperamentally unable to meet the needs of the future. Jim (Murphy) awakens in a hospital, but there is no care there. He immediately heads for a church, but there is nothing but frightening realization there. He eventually bands together with some fellow survivors and try to find a base of military officers who offer protection, and possibly, answers.

Answers are scarce, and whatever protection they have in mind is a parody of the concept they would want us to believe in.

If you can get over the pronounced British video quality of the cinematography—it is often distracting, and puts one in mind to watch some BBC sitcom of the era—then the film offers plenty to chew on, and even a little bit of hope by the time the credits roll. The Walking Dead couldn’t even manage that much and they’re still trying to bring that thing to a conclusion fifteen years later.

*Not that one. Har har har.

**Har har har.

Steve Jobs (2015)

Director: Danny Boyle

Cast: Michael Fassbender, Kate Winslet, Seth Rogen, Jeff Daniels

Have I Seen it Before: Yes. Hell, I’ve read the book it was (loosely) based on twice.

Did I Like It: It feels like my opinion about the film seems like a fait accompli dependent on the answer to two questions:

1)     How do I feel about Steve Jobs (Fassbender) and the company he created going into the film?

2)     How do I feel about the work of Aaron Sorkin?

The answer to the second question is I enthusiastically love Sorkin’s work. I have no problem with The Newsroom, and I even like Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip, if you manage to ignore the last five episodes or so. Even if he’s starting to repeat himself a little bit and has never quite been as sharp as he was before he sobered up, I watch anything he has written, and I suddenly want to work harder at everything I do. Some people have some track of music or a particular recording artist to get them pumped, I have Sorkin.

Here, he has constructed a film story that reflects the products made by its subjects. Splitting a basic three-act structure across three of Jobs’ product launches, it bobs and weaves through many of the idea introduced in the Walter Isaacson biography upon which it is based. It was the only way to fit the essence of the book and the man into the confined package of a prestige drama. Sure, it creates fictions throughout that narrative, and in a vain attempt to make Jobs a gentler soul end the film at an arbitrary point in its central relationship. These are the realities of the biopic, even when it’s difficult to call this a biopic when it barely glances at the pre-Macintosh Jobs and only hints at the things he will do in the last decade of his life.

Which brings us to an attempt to answer that first question I mentioned above. Steve Wozniak (Rogen) may be the tragic, doomed hero of the piece, imploring his old friend that he can be gifted and kind. For a moment—as I indicated above—that it artificially seems like the lout Jobs was throughout the film may have found that his heart grew two sizes just before the launch of the iMac, but the reality and the text indicates he remained prickly and often hard to deal with for the rest of his life. The man didn’t really change, and he didn’t really mellow, but that’s not what the film is about. To watch him terrorize his colleagues is entertaining in and of itself, but I’m not sure I would have wanted to know the man personally.

Then again, I am typing this review on an iMac, so what do I know? He was probably right.