The track-star zombies are at it again.
But “28 Years Later” (R, 115 minutes, in theaters) offers so much more than horror-movie mayhem.
Yes, it’s scary as hell – and its brief, brilliant use of a 1915 recording of Rudyard Kipling’s poem “Boots” (look it up) makes it all the more chilling. But it’s also a brilliant coming-of-age drama about a 12-year-old boy asserting his independence while coming to terms with his mother’s illness and his father’s failings. And it shifts gears unexpectedly from time to time, suddenly becoming a profound, heartbreaking meditation on death, and then, briefly, a rousing, somewhat comical kick-ass action film.
From left, Alfie Williams, Jodie Comer and Ralph Fiennes appear in a scene from “28 Years Later.” (Miya Mizuno/Sony Pictures)
Attempting all of this could be too ambitious. It could be a mess. But in the hands of director Danny Boyle (“Trainspotting,” “Slumdog Millionaire”) and screenwriter Alex Garland (“Ex Machina,” “Civil War”), “28 Years Later” keeps us off balance in the best of ways. It’s my favorite movie so far this year (with Ryan Cooger’s “Sinners,” another horror film, at No. 2).
Following 2002’s “28 Days Later” (another Boyle-Garland collaboration) and 2007’s “28 Weeks Later,” “28 Years Later” is the first in a new planned trilogy. (If you have trouble following that, I don’t blame you.)
As the movie begins, the “Rage Virus” has been eliminated in continental Europe but rages on in the British Isles, which are under an enforced quarantine as a result. Young Spike (Alfie Willliams) and his parents, Isla (Jodie Comer) and Jamie (Aaron Taylor-Johnson), live separated from the dangerous mainland in a community of survivors on the island village Lindisfarne (imagine the town of Jackson in HBO’s “The Last of Us” and you get the picture).
Going through a rite-of-passage by accompanying his scavenger dad to the mainland, Spike gets his “first kill” of a zombie, but not without going through some harrowing near-death experiences himself. He later returns to the mainland with Isla in search of a mysterious, reportedly deranged doctor (Ralph Fiennes) who might be able to cure Mom of her undiagnosed ailment.
It’s a fairly simple plot when put down in words, but that doesn’t take into account the depth of the characters, the complexity of their emotions, and, of course, the sheer terror of their situation, often presented in a rush of quick cuts.
And then there are the performances. Newcomer Williams, Taylor-Johnson and Fiennes deliver riveting portrayals that linger after the film.
As for the brilliant Comer, whose work in last year’s “The Bikeriders” and, before that, in Netflix’s “Killing Eve” was jaw-droppingly great, I was initially concerned that she’d be underused as the bedridden mother. But, especially in later scenes with Fiennes and Williams, her acting chops are on full display, as she projects a poignant mixture of feelings – love, fear, sorrow, acceptance – all at once. She is, once again, extraordinary.
So is this film. **** (out of four)
Fast-paced vehicle for Pitt
I don’t know squat about Formula 1 or car racing in general.
So I can’t tell you how credible “F1: The Movie” (PG-13, 155 minutes, in theaters) – as opposed to “F1: The Fortune Cookie” – is. I’m also sure I missed many of the subtleties related to the racing it depicts.
Regardless – or because of my ignorance – I found “F1” a rush.
Brad Pitt stars in “F1: The Movie.” (Warner Bros. Pictures/Apple Original Films)
The basic underdog story, featuring a clash between a veteran and a rookie, seems familiar, and it leads to a predictable finale that crosses the line into the hokey. But the characters – especially those played by star Brad Pitt and Kerry Condon (“The Banshees of Inisherin”) – are engaging, and director Joseph Kosinski (“Top Gun: Maverick”) knows how to shoot action scenes that leave your heart in your throat.
Pitt plays Sonny Hayes, a once potential Formula 1 superstar whose career hit the skids after a car crash left him severely injured decades earlier. Thus, he’s known as “The Greatest That Never Was.”
His old friend and fellow driver Ruben Cervantes (Javier Bardem), now the owner of an F1 team desperate to turn around its dismal season, invites Sonny to race and to mentor talented rookie Joshua Pearce (Damson Idris). Sonny is reluctant (of course), but relents (of course). Sonny and Joshua clash on and off the track in a battle of egos. Will they turn things around, become good teammates and save the day? Hmmm.
Meanwhile, Kate McKenna (Condon), the team’s expert technical director, catches Sonny’s eye. She resists him – he’s already burned through two marriages and has gambling issues – but only for a while.
It’s not exactly Elizabeth Bennet and Mr. Darcy we’re talking about here, but, thanks to the charisma of Pitt and Condon, the Sonny-Kate romance works as an appealing diversion from all of the breakneck action.
Pitt is clearly front and center, though, and Sonny joins the ever-growing list of badass characters he has played so well over the years, in such films as “Once Upon a Time … in Hollywood,” “Inglourious Basterds,” “Fury,” “Moneyball” and so many more.
“F1” is a must for Pitt fans, action fans, or anyone just looking for some summer fun. It might even get me to watch Formula 1. ***½
More dinosaur dining
As “Jurassic World Rebirth” (PG-13, 134 minutes, in theaters) begins, dinosaurs have lost their appeal.
“Nobody cares about these animals anymore,” paleontologist Dr. Henry Loomis says, bemoaning the attendance at his museum of prehistoric critters.
I say amen.
Scarlett Johansson appears with Jonathan Bailey in “Jurassic World Rebirth.” (Jason Bolind/Universal Pictures)
Other moviegoers apparently disagree, given the opening box office numbers of “Rebirth,” the seventh movie in the “Jurassic Park” franchise. I would have been happy if the series ended after the first film (which, if it had, would make it not a series).
The characters may change, the dinosaurs may change, the specific story details may change. But there’s an irritating sameness to these films.
The pattern goes something like this: De-extincted dinosaurs go bonkers and start having humans for lunch. Usually the worst of the humans die in the worst ways, and the more expendable characters get chomped on, too. You can usually guess which humans will survive. This includes the kids, no matter how whiny. Throughout, there are lots of close calls.
“Rebirth” (please, tell me this doesn’t suggest what I think it does), directed by Gareth Edwards (“The Creator,” “Rogue One: A Star Wars Story,” “Godzilla”) and written by David Koepp (the first two “Jurassic Park” movies, the first “Mission: Impossible”), plods through the same terrain, but with a new cast, headed by Scarlett Johansson (as covert ops expert Zora Bennett), Mahershala Ali (as Zora’s longtime associate), Jonathan Bailey (as Loomis) and Rupert Friend (as a slimy pharmaceutical rep).
Their characters and others sail to an area near the equator to retrieve DNA samples from three kinds of giant mutant dinos (from air, land and sea).
“This is by no means a controlled environment,” one of the characters declares, in what might be considered an understatement.
Hey, dinosaurs: Bon appetit! **
M3gan returns
Speaking of unnecessary sequels …
The A.I. doll from “M3GAN” – pronounced “Megan,” not “Mthreegan” – returns for more mayhem in “M3GAN 2.0” (PG-13, 120 minutes, in theaters).
Now she – She? It? Ah, pronouns – is on the side of good, sort of, and takes on a rival A.I. weapon named Amelia. Allison Williams returns as M3GAN creator Gemma, and Violet McGraw is back as Gemma’s young niece, Cady, M3GAN’s original playmate.
Director Gerard Johnstone, who also directed the entertaining first film, embraces the camp possibilities here, making “M3GAN 2.0” more a comedy than a horror flick. Not that it’s particularly funny, or scary. And as a satire/cautionary tale about the dangers of artificial intelligence? We’ve seen a lot better. **
Living in the material world
Is a relationship an investment, a marriage a business deal?
Such sentiments are expressed through much of “Materialists” (R, 116 minutes, in theaters), writer-director Celine Song’s follow-up to her exquisite debut, “Past Lives.”
It sounds like something Michael Douglas’ Gordon Gekko might say, or anyone who follows the “Wall Street” character’s line of thinking, that “Greed is good” and that money and the power that comes with it (or vice versa) should be everyone’s raison d’etre. You know, make America great again.
Excuse me while I vomit.
To be fair, Song isn’t necessarily promoting such shallow values, but suggesting that practical concerns are a realistic, necessary part of healthy relationships while love still reigns supreme.
If this is the idea, though, her movie doesn’t make a very convincing case for it.
Her film is more successful as a depressing reflection of how our culture currently seems to lean strongly toward material possessions, and the Materialists are, in a general sense, us.
Dakota Johnson plays Lucy, a successful matchmaker for the Adore dating agency. Nine of her pairings have resulted in marriage. She takes a strategic approach to her work, looking at the numbers – height, income, age, etc. – to find the right combination of potential partners. She also must contend with the clients’ often unreasonable, or at least narrow, expectations. No one said her job would be easy.
At the wedding of one of her clients, she runs into two people – charming billionaire Harry (Pedro Pascal), the groom’s brother, whom she considers “a unicorn,” or perfect, and sincere ex-boyfriend John (Chris Evans), still a struggling actor at 37.
Well, what do you know? A romantic triangle. And can you guess where it will lead?
Yes, you can. And that’s how “Materialists” lapses into the conventional, but not before Lucy zigzags with her priorities.
Muddying things up, meanwhile, is a client’s romantic connection gone ugly, leaving Lucy struggling with guilt and questioning her occupation. True, as Lucy’s boss says, such disturbing outcomes come with the turf, and they confirm Lucy’s declaration that “dating is a risk,” but this twist sends the film spinning off in a direction that tonally doesn’t fit the rest of the proceedings.
In its favor, “Materialists” does leave us asking an important question that maybe isn’t asked often enough: What are we really looking for in relationships? Forget the numbers. What does it really come down to?
Song gives us one interesting suggestion, more specific than love or money. I won’t give it away, but, who knows, maybe that’s it. **½
** Click here for Tim Miller’s previous movie columns for Cape Cod Wave **
Please like Cape Cod Wave on Facebook.
Cape Cod Wave Magazine covers the character & culture of Cape Cod. Please see our Longform stories.
Tim Miller, Movie Critic
Tim Miller is co-president of the Boston Society of Film Critics and a Tomatometer-approved critic. He teaches film and journalism at Cape Cod Community College in West Barnstable. You can contact Tim at [email protected] or follow him onTwitter @TimMillerCritic. Or you can ignore him completely.
