It was back in 2003 that I first reviewed the film 28 Days Later.  I rated the film a 7, appreciating it for the good story and some scary moments.  28 Weeks Later is a follow-up to the story, albeit with different characters and a different thrust of thought.  In 28 Days Later, Danny Boyle did an incredible job addressing spiritual themes as well as incorporating a new type of “Zombie.”  (I say “new type” because many purists don’t consider the virus-infected creatures of 28 Weeks Later to be Zombies.  But, to avoid getting too far off on a tangent here and for the sake of argument, we will refer to the creatures in the film as Zombies.)  
 
Boyle used the Church and faith as a significant part of the backdrop in 28 Days Later.   But the new director, Juan Carlos Fresnadillo, tackles something different.  While some might say he stays away from any spiritual parallels, I disagree.  He maintains the original intent of the Zombie genre, understanding the political environment and addressing it in a way that hopefully too many don’t lose sight of.
 
In 28 Days Later, the Rage Virus has primarily impacted England which, as an island, has kept the virus isolated (as far as we know).  The film concludes with the virus still intact and wreaking havoc in England.  28 Weeks Later starts up, well…28 weeks later.  It starts off by reminding viewers of the Rage Virus and the horror it produces.  Then, it introduces the character Don, who is apparently passionately in love with his wife.  Later, Don is shown at a place where his fears are greater than his love. It reveals the power and potential of what can happen when fear is allowed to rule.  After escaping an attack by the Zombies, he makes it to London.  Some weeks later, the Rage Virus dies out, and it seems that the Zombies have died from starvation.
 
Here is where the political commentary enters the story.  England has been torn apart and is in obvious need of leadership from the outside.  Thus comes the good ol’ USA . The United States Armed Services occupies and polices England in an effort to bring about order.  Soldiers are placed in positions of power where they don’t question orders, but see only the objective and mission ahead of them. It becomes clear rather quickly that this movie is in many ways a commentary on war, and in particular, to some extent, the Iraq war.  

Throughout the film, we see high-ranking individuals who care more about protocol than about finding appropriate answers and solutions to the problems—even when those solutions are presented to them. This is especially evident and frustrating when the higher ranking US officials cannot understand appropriate solutions to the Rage Virus when it returns and sticks up its ugly head.  They are more concerned about doing what they know best (killing and destroying) than solving the problem.  

Continue: 1 2