June 27, 2003
By D.K. Holm
Hell and Heaven, Devils and Angels
28 DAYS LATER …
[nota bene: The following review, by necessity, contains some spoilers! If you don't want to know the ending, don't read on!]
Have we reached a stage where only the British can make good horror films?
Recently MY LITTLE EYE proved to be a great if minor philosophical suspense film. Now comes 28 DAYS LATER …, like MY LITTLE EYE, only now reaching America, having been released in Europe last year where it was something of a hit, and now marching toward American shores with fantastic word of mouth (and a few Region 2 DVDs floating around).
Like EYE, it's deliciously derivative, in this case of about 40 or more other zombie and end of the world movies — everything from THE CRAZIES to LIFE FORCE — and Danny Boyle's crazy new movie suffers only from the vice of actually being ultimately optimistic about the life force, within the context of a zombie-virus movie. If 28 DAYS LATER isn't as scary as MY LITTLE EYE (not enough exploding heads, I guess), it is nevertheless a fine twist on a hoary old premise. It's probably the first prestige, high-pedigree zombie film ever made.
 |
It's better to see this film without knowing a thing about it, aside from the fact that it's sort of a zombie film. That said, 28 DAYS LATER … begins with a trio of animal rights activists breaking into a Cambridge lab to free some monkeys, one of whom is bound up like Alex in A CLOCKWORK ORANGE, watching violent videos and newscasts. What they unleash instead is a vomitous virus that gains the nickname Rage, for its obvious quick residual effect on human beings
.
Twenty-eight days later, a London bike messenger named Jim (Cillian Murphy), who has been hit by car, wakes up from a coma to find that he is in a hospital. There is no one around. In a VANILLA SKY moment, he wanders the streets of a deserted city wondering what the hell is going on until he sees a headline proclaiming "Evacuation." (Look for the guy walking past a kiosk and freezing in one of the long shots of the supposedly empty London.)
Dropping into a church after dark he is confronted by several infected people who chase him down the street until he is rescued by a pair of survivors.
Why they chose to remain in the city isn't really explained but Selena (Naomie Harris) and Mark (Noah Huntley) give Jim a crash course in recent history, and how to live in a city that turns into zombietown once night falls.
Essentially, 28 DAYS LATER begins where RESIDENT EVIL ends (though without the sexy chick in red dress and boots). The film charts the consequences of the unleashing of the fast acting virus, which reduces London to an empty husk, like the world shown at the start of James Burke, PBS series CONNECTIONS, a world with no government, no electricity, no medicine, no heat.
Strictly speaking, 28 DAYS LATER isn't really a zombie film. It's more like WARNING SIGN, THE CRAZIES, or RESIDENT EVIL. Still, 28 DAYS LATER cites numerous previous zombie films, many more than I have probably seen, but they include the whole mall shopping surplus of food and material possessions thing in DAWN OF THE DEAD, the chained-up zombie under scientific scrutiny from DAY OF THE DEAD, and the use of a radio to search, SETI-like, for messages from the still living, out of the Vincent Price version of I AM LEGEND, called THE LAST MAN ON EARTH.
 |
The film is divided up into four basic parts. After Jim's intro to the end of the world and Jim being found by the two survivors, the film moves to a third part wherein Jim and Selena find a cabbie (the excellent Brendan Gleeson) and his daughter (Megan Burns) hiding at the top of an apartment building, which leads to a trek out of the city on a quest for the source of a signal emanating from Manchester. The fourth and final part begins when they reach an enclave of soldiers who have barricading themselves in a massive country house (like the place Quilty dwells in LOLITA, a symbol of decayed gentility). In this house, a rather cruel trick is played on the London survivors.
You thought it was bad at the beginning. Well, it only gets worse. In the fourth act, remaining society regresses back to the crudest forms of sexism and selfishness. The soldiers are led by Henry West (Christopher Eccleston, who will no doubt one day star in the BOBBY FISCHER STORY), are his greatest sin is that he has compromised his moral code to keep this disreputable shred of civilization alive.
28 DAYS LATER is very much in the spirit of previous Danny Boyle films such as TRAINSPOTTING and THE BEACH, films about enclosed communities holding off the encroachments of the dominant society … in this case zombies. The difference is that in this one the small community, the survivors, want to be integrated back in society. There's a poignant moment when Selena tells Jim how the world has changed, that he will never read a book that hasn't already been written, and so on. It's one of the best moments in the film.
 |
Another great moment is one that comes late in the movie when Jim, after a suspenseful action sequence, lies down in the grass, shielded by trees. He looks up, as we are inclined to do whenever we find ourselves lying in the grass. Up in the sky, through the canopy of tree-tops, he sees a jet speed by, leaving a thin contrail. It's a powerful moment — the plane says that there still are others out there looking for signs of life. In fact, the sight of the plane is like spinach to his Popeye, giving him the strength to engage in the film's final confrontation.
Unfortunately, though, the film doesn't have the courage of its convictions. It ends on a hopeful note of all things (kind of like THE WORLD, THE FLESH, AND THE DEVIL). After challenging the viewer with the angst of the world's end, it backs off, unwilling or unable to go all the way. And the film suffers from a few other inevitable traits of rushed screenwriting, such as the Syndrome of the Bad Advice, in which people do the wrong thing at the wrong time at the behest of some sudden expert all for the convenience of the next narrative leap. But these minor blemishes aside, 28 DAYS LATER is a strange, funny, odd, and invigorating film.
CHARLIE'S ANGELS: FULL THROTTLE
A colleague who missed the advanced screening for the film asked me, "Is CHARLIE'S ANGELS soft porn or hard porn?" I answered, "Fetishporn."
Within the limits of Hollywood sterility, CHARLIE'S ANGELS 2: FULL THROTTLE is a fetishist's dream. Boots, shoes, hair, and body parts figure more prominently in the film than the "McGuffin" that ostensibly motivates the plot.
Lucy Liu, as is her wont, once again wields a whip and is rarely out of boots. Indeed, boots figure in the plot as a memento mori. Crispin Glover makes a return appearance as a hair fetishist, slavering over the locks he yanks out of women's heads. Most important, and most conventionally of all, CA:FT objectifies the female body. Cameron Diaz's buttocks are presented as an object of worship. Hey, I thought we weren't supposed to do that any more! But here is a trio of women (in a film produced by women) celebrating themselves in the most sexist of self-displays!
This goofy fetishism harks back to old '60s movies such as the Gregory Peck - Sophia Loren parody ARABESQUE. But then, the whole movie is an anthology of previous action films mounted in the gaudy colors of a circus poster. Like 28 DAYS LATER it doesn't bother to pretend that it exists in a vacuum.
 |
Like the last Bond film, DIE ANOTHER DAY, which celebrated the 40th anniversary of the franchise by visually quoting previous successes, CA:FT ransacks the action canon for references. Like a Quentin Tarantino on crank, every movie ever made is fodder for its meat grinder. The opening sequence evokes both Bond and scenes in both RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK and INDIANA JONES AND THE TEMPLE OF DOOM. TERMINATOR 2 is quoted in two ways, by the presence of Robert Patrick as well as with a "walking out of the fire" shot. Other films given a flip of the hair include URBAN COWBOY, FLASHDANCE, and COYOTE UGLY, and with its alimentary obsession, the film even pays homage to one of Diaz's previous films, THE SWEETEST THING.
 |
CA:FT is about the fetishization of women's bodies and their accessories. But to what end, within the plot itself? The Angels know they are sexy. But they are dealing with criminals. So it is OK for the three women to taunt, tease, suggest, promise, and allure men, only to then withdraw their fake affections once they get what they want, because it's all in the service of justice.
Except that a lot of the men tempted are just innocent bystanders who are getting in the way of their goal. It's a weird double standard. They can be objects to their victims for a second because they are themselves disconnected from their bodies and their sexuality. Cynically, like a stripper or a hooker who finds sex itself abhorrent, they use themselves. It's all about girl power. It's the final triumph of feminism. Now women really do get it all.
In fact, the biggest fantasy of CA:FT is girl power. The three Angels are all friends who worry about how they are getting along with their boyfriends, help each other move, and share their feelings. This sounds like no trio of female friends I know. Where is the competitiveness, the backbiting, the boyfriend-stealing? What in reality would be THE WOMEN (or perhaps THE REAL CANCUN) in effect is presented like LITTLE WOMEN.
Don’t get the wrong impression. I found the film fun and enjoyed looking at the three stars as well as at Demi Moore. I was slavering over them like everyone else and can't wait for the DVD so I can watch the film in slow motion. It's just that it's in my nature to ponder the implications of things, even the things I am basically enjoying.
The thin premise is that there are two rings that contain the names and addresses of all the people in the witness protection program. A villain is trying to gather those rings so as to sell the information contained therein to the highest bidders. Several gangs who have been hurt by turncoats are vying for the rings. The Angels get involved, only to discover that the villain is a turncoat Angel. "Why be an Angel when you can be a god," the not-very-hard-to-figure-out villainess asks.
Like most sequels these days, it is same as before only more of it. There are some significant differences, however. I wouldn't say that the new Bosley, played by Bernie Mac, is a racist stereotype. After all, Bernie Mac read the script and consented to be in the film. But at the very least, his role harks back to the very worst of '70s series television. Perhaps it's another homage.
What was weirdest of all about this movie is how ghastly all the women looked in close up. Director McG brings the camera in close, exposing the makeup and other effects that the cast has endured, and cruelly inspecting every crevice, every crow's foot, every horrific super-white tooth. Well, I guess that's were we find the flip side of objectification.
NEXT TIME:LEGALLY BLONDE 2: RED, WHITE AND BLONDE and/or SWIMMING POOL.
E-MAIL THE AUTHOR |
ARCHIVES
