The positive critical reception and box office success of famed British director, Danny Boyle’s, latest zombie epic, 28 Years Later, has hit the multiplexes like- well a zombie outbreak. Cinemagoers can’t get enough of this new entry with its bold artistic choices and boundary pushing commentary.
The critical and commercial success of the film is unprecedented. The two-decade spanning franchise that has been on ice since 2007, with more emotional weight than flesh-chewing is performing at the level of traditional horror movies. Such traditional success for such an unconventional film prompts a wider conversation… is the general audience’s taste shifting?
Arthouse film has always been a staple of cinema, the whole existence of the Academy Awards is to award the excellence of craftsmanship and nuanced performance that often is neglected in big spectacle films. As such there has always been a divide within the industry between the ‘artsy’ films and the big tentpole films (Marvel, Star Wars).
But with the dwindling demand and box office for the stereotypical blockbuster, there has been a fusion of these once-separate sides of the industry. In the place of the superhero capes and flashy cars are cerebral and intelligent blockbusters that have the grand spectacle of a blockbuster but the story and visuals of something much more profound.
This is by no means a new development, Greta Gerwig’s 2023 opus Barbie was anything but a safe, brand-friendly endorsement of the Mattel toy. The director tapped into a deeper cultural connection to womanhood and patriarchy that only served to create a more nuanced blockbuster. With a $1.4 billion dollar gross and an Oscar under its belt, Gerwig recognised the shifting cultural landscape of blockbuster cinema and catered her film accordingly. Similar statements can be made for fellow Oscar winners, Everything Everywhere All at Once, the Dune franchise, Ryan Coogler’s Black Panther franchise, the recently released Sinners… and now 28 Years Later finds itself amongst said giants.
What sets writer Alex Garland and director Danny Boyle’s zombie thriller apart and inducts them into this new cinematic experience is the exploration of boyhood and the challenges of growing into a man. The work is so nuanced in bringing central 12-year-old protagonist, Spike, to life, that strays 28 Years Later away from typical zombie horror into a moving piece of Oscar-bait cinema. From watching the horrors of what it is like to be born into a world of violence (emphasised through parallels between the virus and young being drafted for war in a startling open sequence), to the exploration of manhood in the first hunt. Even the beautiful relationship built between Alfie Williams’ Spike and Jodie Comer as his mother is so beautifully rich, and layers in commentary on the importance of motherhood on a young man, and the harsh reality that that can be taken away at any moment.
I could go on about the dissection and condemnation of the British empire in a post-World War 2, or the influence of Ralph Fiennes ‘bone doctor’ and what a beautiful arc that creates in the narrative, or even the looming threat of notorious sexual abuser in the imagery of Jimmy Saville in that controversial final scene. In any case, Garland and Boyle have crafted a story that is so dense with imagery, powerful messaging and revolutionary discussions about manhood disguised as a zombie horror movie that it is reigniting chatter amongst film fans and general audiences. Not only is it inspiring chatter but it is confirming the growing trend that audience’s these days want to be intellectually challenged and expect profundity of their blockbuster films.
To see 28 Years Later find its audience and be celebrated for its artistic boldness, again, aligns it with Barbie, Nolan’s work, Dune and many, many more that are reinvigorating what it means to be ‘blockbuster cinema.’ In a world that is becoming increasingly political to have such messages of positive manhood, the influence and importance of women in a young man’s life, the fragility of the human experience and a forthcoming dissection of the horrors of sexual abuse in England is all very intense work but work that Garland and Boyle shoulder with gusto. They have not just created a cinematic work of art, but an important piece of cinema that will undoubtedly aid in continuing this renaissance of cerebral and arthouse blockbuster films.
— Darragh Evans