Director Danny Boyle and screenwriter Alex Garland wisely understood that the most interesting part of returning to the world of their 2003 zombie picture 28 Days Later for 28 Years Later is to see how a society has reshaped itself in the wake of a devastating, isolating event. In the world of this series, a zombie apocalypse has left the island of Great Britain cut off from the rest of the globe to prevent the spread of the “rage virus.” Talk about Brexit. Picking up the story so many years after the original’s inciting incident gives Boyle and Garland a chance to show a people re-forming, finding a deeper need to cling to family and to ritual, new and old. The older folks can remember the world before zombies roamed the countryside and the uninfected live in small fortified villages or lonely domiciles in the wilderness. But 28 years is a long time, and for the younger folks this is all they’ve known. They were born into this world. What reads to us as post-apocalyptic is, for them, merely the world. It’s humbling to be reminded that, throughout history, generations have lived through what might’ve felt like an end, not surviving to see descendants emerge into a different world not knowing any different.
It’s grief that animates 28 Years Later. It’s a small troubled family story seen through the eyes of a tween boy in the British isle’s tradition of naturalistic films about just such a subject, like Kes and Ratcatcher. But it’s one turbocharged by its genre premise promising violence and gore. It finds young Spike (Alfie Williams), a sensitive boy who lives in a small community sealed off by fort walls and even further isolated by a land bridge that disappears at high tide. He has a sick mother (Jodie Comer) and a rough father (Aaron Taylor-Johnson). His dad thinks it’s time he takes the boy zombie hunting on the mainland. His mom disagrees, but is feverish and bed-ridden and confused, and so father and son head out, armed with bow and arrow, into a survivalist horror movie. Its moves might not be all that surprising—jump scares and splattering fluids—but the characters encountered are vivid, striking, memorable. We see new iterations of zombies—most ominously, an imposing Alpha (Chi Lewis-Parrry) and his pregnant mate (Celi Crossland). We meet a stranded Swedish soldier (Edvin Ryding), proof that the world beyond the country is very much ours, and a doctor (Ralph Fiennes) who has made a towering memorial to the dead out of their bones, proof life in this country is very much not like ours. And yet both are reflections of mankind’s reaction to mass death, those who would make austere peace with its heavy import, and those who’d turn a blind eye until it’s very much in their face. Between them is the boy, lead into this world by a father and a mother whose interactions with danger will inaugurate him into the heavy decisions of life in these times.
Boyle delivers it all in elegiac tones that bolster the intensity of its life-or-death stakes. It’s grief for things that aren’t any more, and never will be again. It’s grief for the mournful facts of life that never change. And yet it’s just as muscular and jumpy as any of his hard-charging films. He shot the original on chunky pixelated consumer-grade digital video, and here trades it for an iPhone. Its images are both prosaic and painterly in the hands of cinematographer Anthony Dod Mantle. He gets a eye-bogglingly intense green and blue in the landscapes, and an eerie blackish red in the blood. It’s always both hyper-real and intensely stylized, never more so than a swirling star field over a body of water like a mirror. These images are then cut together with Boyle’s usual frenetic montage and stutter-step editing, tableaux of gorgeous pixelated saturation and ugly spectacle occasionally layered with stock footage and references to Kipling and Shakespeare. It’s an extension of the script’s interest in sci-fi devastation exposing what’s essentially human at root, a stripping away that reveals continuity with British pastorals and Romantic ideations of national identity. And because Garland is interested in societal procedures and human frailty (Ex Machina, Civil War), and because Boyle is interested in social dynamics and the ways in which our surroundings and our relationships shape us (Slumdog Millionaire, Trainspotting), this new picture is a triumphant apotheosis of their intermingled thematic concerns. It’s prickly, propulsive, unexpected, and, amazingly for a movie about the undead and dying, viscerally alive.
What’s just as amazing is that they can hand the director’s chair over to Nia DaCosta for a sequel a mere six months later and get a new movie that continues those ideas while finding ways to jolt and surprise that are all its own. The action moves to Ralph Fiennes’ neck of the woods for 28 Years Later: The Bone Temple. There he’s working through some experiments to see if he can calm the zombie beasts. He doesn’t have a cure, but he’s got some theories. In a quiet moment, he admits to another that the world used to feel certain. We have a sense that he’s a compassionate man of science who misses the certainty, and in fact clings to a kind of dignity and respect for all life that allows him to maintain a steady center. And yet, coated in disinfecting iodine, living in an ossuary, and stalking the fields with a tranquilizing blowdart mumbling Duran Duran lyrics to himself, he cuts a figure that, from a distance, approaches madness. He scares people, but he’s the most sensitive to their pain. It’s that tension of a sensible man in insensible times that gives the character such a beautiful charge, a patient bedside manner with a dash of danger.
The Bone Temple slowly draws him toward climactic confrontation with a dangerous, feral gang we met briefly in its predecessor. They’re a roving band of Satanist Teletubbies fans. (That phrase alone signals what mad imagination is on display here.) They all call themselves Jimmy in tribute to their leader, the self-proclaimed Sir Lord Jimmy Crystal (Jack O’Connell), and wear shaggy white wigs in honor of a British TV personality of the same name (who, in our timeline, was revealed to be a sex criminal). They represent death and easy destruction; the doctor represents life and stubborn hope. Of course they’ll collide. The movie takes its time rooting itself in characters (including some carry-overs from the last one), drawing out their perspectives and tensions, and then winds up the plotting with tension until it snaps. It’s just as nasty a violent picture as the others, but this one ends ecstatically with fire, and religious imagery, and a last-minute dash toward a better world. These movies are incredible feel-bad horror efforts about holding on to the faintest glimmer of light in the darkness, even as you—and society—bleed out in the mud.
Showing posts with label Jack O'Connell. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jack O'Connell. Show all posts
Monday, January 19, 2026
Saturday, May 14, 2016
Cash Out: MONEY MONSTER
Money Monster goes
to dramatic lengths to find what it’ll take to make a cable news show do some
actual reporting. It starts when a smooth-talking business news host (George
Clooney) – think an even more buffoonish Jim Cramer – starts his daily stock
tip program. He usually offers up some buzzword advice and hyperbolic
recommendations to buy and sell. But not today. An angry young man (Jack
O’Connell) sneaks on set with a gun and demands the man behind the anchor’s
desk strap on a homemade explosive vest. He wants time on the air to demand
answers. He’s furious about Wall Street greed, the rigged system of a casino
economy legalizing fraud – he’s definitely a Bernie bro – and despondent over a
glitch in a certain stock’s price that wiped out his life’s savings.
The once-cocky host sweats with a gun to his head. The
director (Julia Roberts) is trapped in the control room capably keeping crew
running like usual. Lights, cameras, mics, and the rest must continue moving
without a hitch, the better to keep the dangerous intruder calm while police
(led by Giancarlo Esposito) gather outside, debating how to get in without
setting off the bomb. With little setup, the screenplay quickly launches into
this tense scenario. Writers Jim Kouf (Rush
Hour), Alen DiFiore (The Bridge),
and Jamie Linden (Dear John) build a
convincing cable news environment, a hectic and frivolous place that falls
silent when real danger enters the frame. As the man with the gun shouts and
threatens violence, the crew scrambles to find him his answers.
An engaging effort of slick competence, Money Monster is the sort of meat-and-potatoes topical movie star
thriller that used to be a staple of Hollywood filmmaking. Now, outside Oscar
season, it’s mostly found on tiny VOD budgets or on TV, so it’s nice to see
this old fashioned form of glossy, well intentioned, reasonably involving drama
play out on the big summer screen. Here we have the likes of Clooney and
Roberts playing perfectly to type in a plot that’s tautly structured and built
on sturdy genre foundations while engaging with some interesting ideas floating
around the news these days. It’s about Wall Street corruption and the news
media industrial complex, and somehow makes it into the stuff of entertainment
without going too obvious or too hypocritical. This is a diverting movie that
works out genuine and legitimate class frustrations in the guise of a ticking
bomb plot.
Roberts deploys producers and reporters to discover the
secrets behind the man’s grievances, while on camera two very different men –
poor and out of options, controlling what little he can through intimidation;
rich and out of touch trying to talk his way out of the worst situation of his
life – come to a cautious understanding. They’re stuck in one place, while in
the world beyond the studio people are watching the events unfold with rapt
attention. Some are amused, others angered. Still others are getting a little
nervous, like a slimy C.E.O. (Dominic West) whose dastardly company IBIS (a fitting
name for a bad corporation, like BS, IBS, and ISIS rolled into one acronym) was,
through mysterious and sketchy business practices, responsible for the market
fluctuation that left the hostage-taker with nothing.
There are clearly delineated good guys and bad guys here,
but there are some welcome moments where expectations are upended in small
ways. A scene where negotiators bring in the hostage-taker’s tearful girlfriend
goes in a surprising direction, and the movie’s not unwilling to see the situation
from a variety of angles. Someone seemingly in the wrong can come over to the
other side, and vice versa. Directed with a steady hand by Jodie Foster, the
events unfold with clarity, cinematographer Matthew Libatique’s camera finding snappy
simple frames as the studio simmers with tension and many outside – techs,
journalists, cops, PR people, hackers, bankers, and so on – scramble to figure out
how to bring the danger to an end. The plot is involving on a surface level,
while the simmering ideas underneath are just broad enough to be crowd pleasing
and just specific enough to avoid feeling too condescending.
In the end it succeeds on the strength of its lead trio of
performers, who bring a capable sense of weight and believability to their
characters actions and decisions. Clooney could play a perfect wealthy dope in
his sleep, here bringing unctuous charm covering repressed decency as a market
mouthpiece who slowly grows a conscience at gunpoint. Roberts is security and
stability under pressure as an expert manager trying to maintain some semblance
of order and safety, speaking carefully and soothingly through her boss’s earpiece,
helping him see the bigger picture. And O’Connell is a fine vessel of
frustrated millennial economic angst, jumpy and tense, wound up with hopeless
rage, smart but treading water in a dead end minimum wage job just to make ends
meet. This story, with sensationalistic elements and vigorous political points,
is too conventional and interested in small humane shadings to be a trashier
satire or a sharper indictment. Instead it relaxes into thriller mechanics, looking
at its characters with compassion and condemnation while finding its way to a
logical conclusion.
Wednesday, December 24, 2014
Survivor of the Fittest: UNBROKEN
Unbroken tells a
true story with bright, well-built, Hollywood epic storytelling. That’s
fitting, since its subject, Louis Zamperini, lived a full and amazing life,
built out of the stuff movies are made of. He’s a man for whom the adspeak
“incredible true story” seems to have been made. He was born in 1917, became a
juvenile delinquent, then a high school track star, an Olympic athlete, a World
War II bombardier whose plane was lost at sea, a captive in a Japanese prisoner
of war camp, and a survivor of all the above. I’m sure he was one of the only
people who could’ve seen Memphis Belle,
Bridge on the River Kwai, Stalag 17,
Chariots of Fire, and Life of Pi
in their original theatrical runs and see something of his own life experience
reflected back at him.
The film is an effective dramatization by turns unflinching
– gaunt bodies caked in dirt and blood – and sentimental – wistful flashbacks
and swelling score. It’s button pushing in that way. It coasts on the easily
apparent drama of the story itself, which certainly has enough surface incident
to fill a run time. It starts in the skies over the Pacific front in the middle
of WWII, a tense dogfight shot completely inside Zamperini’s plane. We linger
behind the various gunners and pilots, watching as small dots grow into enemy
fighters, spraying bullets and getting return fire. It’s exciting stuff,
brightly lit, displayed with convincing effects courtesy Industrial Light and
Magic. We then cut back to our hero’s early life, following childhood scrapes
through his Olympic competition, notable backstory swiftly filled in. Then
we’re back to the war, where his dangers are just beginning.
Directed with smooth competence by Angelina Jolie from a
screenplay with credited drafts by Joel and Ethan Coen, Richard LaGravenese,
and William Nicholson, the film has clear admiration for Zamperini’s
resilience. They’re most concerned with portraying his indomitable spirit,
returning again and again to his face as Jack O’Connell plays the man staring
purposefully past the problems at hand. He’s stranded on a lifeboat with the
survivors of his plane’s crash (Finn Wittrock, Domhnall Glesson). They’re lucky
enough to be rescued, but unlucky enough to find their rescuers are the enemy.
He ends up at a POW camp where he’s beaten by a cruel Japanese sergeant
(Miyavi), and falls in with the scarred and weary prisoners (Garrett Hedlund,
Luke Treadaway). He looks purposefully into every obstacle, the punches, the
backbreaking labor, the blood and bruises. He grits his teeth and lives to see
another day. He’s unbreakable.
What gives Zamperini the strength to go on? How did he
survive? Was it luck or happenstance? Determination or divine intervention?
Optimism or sloganeering? I don’t know. The movie’s more enamored with the
facts of his survival than investigating him as a character. It’s a surface
level examination, which is fine when the plot’s hopping, but drags down the occasionally
monotonous dark night of the soul in the POW camp. The film hits every big
mark, but I was starving for small details to color in the time between.
There’s never a sense of who the characters are, just what misery they’ve been
through.
I couldn’t tell you much of anything about the people
trapped in various conditions with Zamperini, or his family, or his captors.
They’re simply facts of his life, the elements that make the miraculous
extremes possible. There’s some great early details in the young man’s
homelife, scenes of discipline, religion, and discovery of his talents. In some
ways it plays like the opening moments of a superhero origin story. The film’s
first hour is its best, time to follow an eventful life on its first, positive
trajectory with energetic sequences of sports and war. But it seems to skip so
quickly through these vital foundational moments that by the second hour it
starts to feel like a catalogue of miserable incidents where I’d hoped to find a
character study wrapped up in epic trappings. Instead, it’s all smaller.
But Unbroken is
respectful, handsomely made, and technically proficient. Jolie has
cinematographer Roger Deakins behind the camera and he does sharp, solid work.
She has a fine cast, and they inhabit their roles convincingly. The editing is
propulsive, the sound crackling, the score syrupy strong. In style and
perspective – the square, proud, sturdy take – it could’ve been made more or
less exactly like this ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty or more years ago. It’s
old-fashioned, made with professionalism and care, but it’s also anonymously
produced and a bit bland. There’s plenty of craftsmanship put into a story
interesting enough on its own the filmmakers didn’t feel the need to really dig
into the details. They simply evoke the big moments and trust our interest will
follow enough to excuse the all-surface approach.
Thursday, August 28, 2014
Locked In: STARRED UP
Starred Up is a
tough sentimental father-son reunion story set entirely in a prison. It’s an
unusual fit, the caged brutality grabbing peculiar tenderness while leeching
menace into its softer spots. In terms of other contemporary prison-set
entertainment, it’s not nearly as softhearted and diverse as Orange is the New Black or as hardnosed
and pained as A Prophet. It carefully
occupies a tricky middle ground, balancing between a desire to hang back and
observe a prison’s inner workings and a plot-driven need to push emotional
buttons with currents of conflicts. It’s a surprisingly effective mix.
The film opens on a teenage inmate (Jack O’Connell)
transferred from a UK juvenile facility into a bigger, more dangerous adult
prison. He’s been moved – “starred up” is the term for this transfer – because
of his violent temper. Sure enough, the first thing we see him do, after a
strip search and walk to his new cell, is carefully turn a toothbrush into a
shiv and hide it in a light fixture. It’s not long at all before he’s knocking
fellow prisoners unconscious and picking fights with guards, who storm into his
cell in full riot gear. He still manages to get the better of them, beating
them with the legs of a table he’s flipped over, pinning one against a wall
with a makeshift weapon. This encounter ends with the boy needing to be talked
out of biting a guard, paused mid-chomp.
We soon learn the boy’s now in the same prison as his
estranged father (Ben Mendelsohn). His old man is a shifty character, well
connected with the prison’s underground politics. The boy’s violent
unpredictability is making him a target from administrators and vicious
criminal elements alike. A mixture of fatherly frustration, machismo, jealousy,
and fear animates the older man’s relationship with his son. There are years of
resentment and damage between them, but as they try to reconcile in such an
extreme context, there’s real poignancy to their fumbling. The boy is pushed
into an anger management group run by a kind psychotherapist (Rupert Friend).
It might help. His father wants him to succeed. But it’s hard to tell if the
man has his son’s best interests at heart. There’s no trust there, from either
side.
Director David Mackenzie creates an enclosed sense of
verisimilitude, free of many jokes and tropes more openly exploitative prison
films fall back on. Instead, there’s an unflinching tension as the inherent
ugly reality of the location becomes the backdrop for a pulpy, nakedly
emotional story of a broken pair of men, bound by blood, hesitantly,
tentatively, forging an understanding. Shooting in a real decommissioned prison
from a screenplay by Jonathan Asser, who once worked as a prison therapist, the
film takes on a close feeling of loud noises and clanging ambient echoes as the
dangers of a location built on systematic struggles of violence and power
become palpable.
But it’s the powerful and convincing performances that truly
bring the world to life. The ensemble of rough men speaks in thick accents with
sometimes-impenetrable slang vocabularies. (The press notes include a “Prison
Speak” glossary.) They’re lively and convincing, uncomfortably intimidating
presences surrounding our leads. O’Connell and Mendelsohn bring a forceful
history to their roles. I bought them as a long distant father and son pairing,
uneasy about their new positions, forced into close quarters by their legal
circumstances and into competition by competing places in the prison hierarchy.
O’Connell, in a compellingly charismatic wounded smolder, brings a livewire
violent possibility to his scenes, which makes his humbled silences and quiet
revelations all the more surprising. Mendelsohn delivers another of his
dangerously squirrely weirdoes, but there’s a pained compassion here as well.
Because the characters are as convincing as their world,
it’s easier to go along with its moments of same-old-same-old prison process
and father-son tension. I believed in the reality, this place, and these
people, which helps sell the truth of their emotions as the realism gives way
to elements both pulpy and sentimental as the story resolves. I’m not generally
one to go for prison movies, though A
Prophet seemed like something of a masterpiece at the time, and is due a
revisit by me. But Starred Up has a
good hook and uses it to tell a solid relationship drama in an unusual setting,
letting some fresh emotions into what could’ve been only a suffocating cell of
cliché.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)



