Another interlude

Supernatural Romance must be stopped.
Look, I'm not averse to a Sookie Stackhouse book. They're a fun combination of mystery and soft porn, with monsters and mayhem thrown in for jollies. But I see bookstores increasingly dispersing their horror content across the store into thriller or general fiction settings, to replace that prime shelf space with 'Supernatural Romance'. Twilight books and books with covers where Fabio has been turned into a vampire or werewolf are becoming horribly predominant.

It is a pretty common thing for people to rip on Twilight. I confess, I am more often than not the ringleader of such discussions. But Stephanie Meyer, you have up-ended a proud and noble literary tradition with your series of twonk young romance novels. There's more to horror and the supernatural than getting shagged by a bare-chested vampire.

If you are reading this and care about horror, I urge you, grill your bookstores about why they have no horror section any more. Twilight and its ilk are a passing blip, a trend. Shonky hand shandy material for teens and soccer moms who should know better.

I don't mind if these books try to hang out IN a horror section, but the day they displace the horror section is the day the world goes topsy-turvy. I refuse to see why Poe, Lovecraft, Bierce, LeFanu, Stoker, Barker, King, Rice, Brite, Koontz and everyone else should stand aside for an illiterate Mormon with a penchant for writing domineering vamp boyfriends.

I implore you, stop them before the only place we can find a vampire is writhing on black silk sheets with a blank cypher Mary-Sue. It's not too late.

Rant over peeps. Go back about your business.

Laziness

So I was meant to do those two reviews (Phibes and After...) last weekend. I am a creature of terrible laziness. Still, to make up for it, I'll try to squeeze one extra in today if possible. Just don't hold your breath, is all I'm saying.

After...

2006 • Dir: David L Cunningham • St: Nobody of any note.

Premise: A crew of 'extreme urban explorers' consisting of Nate, his wife Addy, and her brother Jay embark on an exploration of Moscow's subway in search of Stalin's rumoured Metro 2 and Ivan the Terrible's secret torture chambers. Along the way, things go wrong, as you'd expect really.

Analysis: Looking over my notes from watching this and Phibes, I see that my notes are limited to one word on this film - 'balls'.

Maybe I'm being harsh. My wife picked this up, because she is interested in the actual Metro 2 rumours, that Stalin literally DID have a secret underground rail network. The Russian government deny this. I can't fault her for this. Whether Metro 2 or the Parisian catacombs, underground secrets hold a strong allure for many people. I am not immune to this myself, which means my disappointment in After... was even stronger.

In a nutshell, Nate, Addy and Jay sneak into a building illegally to basejump from the roof. Before she jumps, Addy tells Nate she has something to tell him, some news she'll tell him 'after' the jump. Security arrive on the roof as Nate is last to jump, and and he jumps off the building.

Cut to an indeterminate time later, and the crew are flying into Moscow for their planned exploration in search of Metro 2.

What follows is a ramshackle wander through tunnels that could be anywhere, mysterious appearances by a faceless man and gasmasked soldiers, and fleeting ghostly hints at the presence of Nate and Addy's daughter, who you are led to believe has died.

Things go from bad to worse, as they realise at some point they have been exposed to radiation. Jay sickens, and later dies, Addy also goes away, leaving Nate alone, wandering the tunnels hoping to find a way out.

In my opinion, this is a film we've seen before, done better. The Metro 2 angle was almost pointless - this film could have been shot in any claustrophobic rotten locale. The claustrophobic angle has been done better in such throwaway films as Descent, and the main point of the film, which I'll get to later has a much better parallel as well. The filming itself is horrible to watch. Lots of grainy handycam, rapid choppy cuts, and poor sound quality unassisted by a soundtrack by the Crystal Method, that while a nice soundtrack, does not suit this film at all, lead to a film which is confusing to watch, and much of the time makes little sense.

Now, I am the guy who is all about the filmic mindf@#k. I love films that set out to bewilder and confuse you. I love Inland Empire by David Lynch after all. After... does not stack up. I got the very definite sense that if the film is confusing, it is not because it is intelligently or intentionally confusing, it's just bad.

SPOILER (in black type below-select to read)

Okay, so you're sure you want to know? Okay, it goes like this... Nate and Addy's daughter disappears at a playground after he is distracted by a Russian woman. It is inferred that she is distracting him, so an associate can kidnap his daughter. Presumably the kidnap was for purposes of child slavery or child rape, or some other such loathsome thing, because it becomes clear that the kid is gone and not coming back. Addy is going to tell Nate she's pregnant after she basejumps. He, in turn, had planned to commit suicide on the basejump, because he couldn't take the guilt of his daughter's death. He jumps off, sans parachute, and the whole film is a psychodrama played out in the moments before his death. One is left to presume that the imagined trip to Moscow's Metro 2 is some dubious connection to the Russian couple who kidnapped his daughter. Or something.

END SPOILER

After... has many parallels with Jacob's Ladder. The sad truth is that Jacob's Ladder does all of them better. After... is confusing, messy, ugly and hard to watch. Still, it could be worse, I could have watched Cannibal Holocaust again (which I'm dreading having to do when I get to the C's).

Stars: 2 out of 5

The Abominable Dr Phibes

1971 • Dir: Robert Fuest • St: Vincent Price

Premise: Doctors start turning up dead, killed in novel and bizarre ways. It is discovered that the long-believed dead Dr Phibes is killing the doctors he holds responsible for his wife's death in ways descriptive of the 10 plagues of Egypt.

Analysis: The Abominable Dr Phibes is many things: a black comedy, a lush and over the top revenge film, and also the 100th film done by Vincent Price.

Perhaps something that is overlooked by people when they discuss this film is the silence of Dr Phibes and his assistant in revenge, the terribly gorgeous and terribly named Vulnavia. The first 10 minutes of the film has no dialogue, and indeed Vulnavia remains mute throughout the film. Phibes himself only speaks via a cord plugged into his neck. I found myself wondering how Price dealt with acting a character that at no point in the film actually opens his mouth.

Is The Abominable Dr Phibes even a horror film? Many books I own on horror cinema refer to it, and the fact that it's on my horror shelf has caused me to analyse how I define horror. True, Phibes kills people in a number of cruel ways, that if they had some gritty sepia tones and a ton more gore, would not be out of place in a Saw or Hostel, particularly the last averted kill, where the last doctor has to operate on his son, to retrieve a key that will unlock his gurney from a position underneath a rig designed to drip acid on the son's face in 6 minutes. Phew!

The plot of Phibes is very simple - a revenge film through and through, with the largely comical and bumbling police desperately trying to catch up to Phibes as he works his way through his shitlist. Naturally they fail again and again, until they arrive in time to mop up after the last kill is averted. In many ways you could phone this plot in, and in many respects the ending is no real surprise to anyone, so no spoiler section this time.

What is remarkable is the lush visual insanity of the film - Phibes in a black robe churning out dirges on a pipe organ, clockwork musicians, and an impeccably dressed gorgeous mute assistant make this film highly surreal. Price as Phibes is also a treat, though he does get to verbally ham it up, he must do so while only using his eyes to express anything, his face is completely impassive.

So is Phibes a horror film? A question I ask myself over and over again. More properly it is a comedy in the blackest vein. I would probably include it in my horror collection for only two reasons - one, despite the humour, the murders Dr Phibes commits are actually pretty cruel, even if some of them are just plain silly or hilarious to see played out on screen, and two, I'm coming to the opinion that horror is a pretty broad church. Let's face it, Phibes would look pretty sinister sitting in the comedy section of your local video store, just as Jacob's Ladder isn't quite a simple thriller. Horror, I think must be defined as a genre which expresses feelings of despair, dread, terror and/or cruelty, and often but not always features an over the top or even outright supernatural antagonist, that could not sit comfortably in what we like to call real life. Phibes is definitely an over the top antagonist, and the film definitely portrays Phibe's anger, despair and his cruelty.

All up, The Abominable Dr Phibes is fun. Not one of my all-time favourites, but still worth a laugh with a glass of adult beverage in your hand.

Stars: 3 out of 5

Merchandising interlude

So, I've ordered some more t-shirts. I ordered the first two off MiniCasette Tees, and they're very awesome shirts. MiniCasette can be found up in the Fiends section in the sidebar if you want to check them out.

Oh, and first person to match implement to monster and film in the 'Personal Effects' t-shirt gets a banana*.

The third tee is from the supremely excellent Last Exit To Nowhere site.

*Note: you will have to buy your own banana.

The tyranny of boxed sets

Something else I should also mention. I have a few boxed sets. I really didn't want to go through those as well when I was going alphabetically, so I've decided to leave them to the spot they're in on the shelf at home - ie last. I have a couple of Hammer boxed sets, so this means that the single films I have that tie into them, the Draculas and the Frankensteins notably, are going to wait until I get to those boxed sets. Life would be much simpler if I had all these just sitting on a hard drive, but I am a good person who purchases original copies, so my job is a little more complicated.

*sigh*

Next 3 films

Next up are the following;
• As mentioned earlier Vincent Price's classic 'The Abominable Dr Phibes'.
• The film that really, really wants to be Jacob's Ladder but isn't, After…
• And I know it's not really horror, but Altered States scared the shizz outta me when I was a kid, so it's on the list.

The Abandoned

Note: When I file my DVD's away, I do that library thing where you skip the 'the', so The Abandoned is filed as Abandoned, The. That's why it's here, and not under T.

2006 • Dir: Nacho Cerda • St: Anastasia Hille, Karel Roden

Premise: A woman is told that she has inherited property from parents she never met in Russia. Going there to learn more about her mother and father, she is plunged into an inescapable fate.

Analysis: I'm coming right out and saying it: I love this film. It is a genuinely creepy offering from Spanish director Cerda.

In essence, this film is a claustrophobic loop, where the main characters Marie Jones (played by Hille) and her long-lost brother Nicolai (played by Roden) are pretty much doomed the moment they appear. In the old, rotten house where they were born Marie and Nicolai are constantly haunted by ghosts of the past and future. I especially like the two leads. Hille and Roden are convincing as very ordinary 40-somethings. They don't have the artificial polish that characters in a Hollywood film would have. Hille especially is refreshingly realistic as a 40-year old woman.

What is most scary in this film is the appearance of the doppelgangers of Marie and Nicolai. The film sets up their existence, and rationale relatively early, though that does not detract from their pure creepiness one iota.

I cannot discuss this film in too much detail. The events of the film, and its conclusion are so intimately bound, that to unveil too much in one place is to undo the film in another. I will say that it is a bleak and horrific film, but one that you will enjoy, if - like me - you're fond of a good ghost story. It also deals with a truly dysfunctional family dynamic, where possessiveness and resentment reach a point where obsessiveness is too small a word to describe just how screwed up it is.

This is well worth a play on a dark and stormy night, with the lights out. Just make sure you're wearing your adult nappies when you do.

Stars: 4 out of 5

30 Days of Night

2007 • Dir: David Slade • St: Josh Hartnett, Melissa George, Danny Huston

Premise: The tiny Alaskan town of Barrow goes through 30 days without sunshine every year. This year, a gang of vampires decides to take advantage of the 30 days and engages in an orgy of blood-drinking. Only the local Sheriff and his estranged wife can stop them.

Analysis: 30 Days of Night is based on the IDW graphic novel of the same name by Steve Niles and Ben Templesmith. Steve Niles contributed to the screenplay as well.

The set up for this film is pretty straightforward and does not veer too far away from the graphic novel. Early on, seemingly random events conspire to make the already remote Barrow almost inaccessible - the town's mobile phones are stolen and destroyed, the sled dogs are brutally killed, and eventually the power is killed just after the final sunset for a month.

Josh Hartnett plays Sheriff Eben Oleson (Olemaun in the comic), and Melissa George plays his estranged wife Stella (both are happily married in the comic). While Eben is dealing with the strange, random events that will eventually isolate Barrow, Stella becomes stranded in Barrow when an accident causes her to miss the last flight to Anchorage for a month. Hartnett is quite convincing as the heartbroken but diligent Sheriff, and seems to carry a repressed weariness in all his early scenes.

I don't really need to cover the events of this film too closely - a community of 150-odd people stranded in a remote town with no sunshine for 30 days, plus a gang of hungry vampires led by Danny Huston's truly creepy vampire leader Marlow. Yep, it's pretty much what you think it's going to be - a savage and brutal war of attrition, with most of the attrition on the side of the helpless humans.

What I will touch on are some of the differences between film and graphic novel, as well as the portrayal of the vampires.

As noted above, there are some differences in the two leads between their comic and film incarnations. Usually film adaptations of comics make me want to pull my hair out. Some are note perfect, or thematically strong (Sin City and The Dark Knight leap to mind) while others miss the point in small or often catastrophic ways (Watchmen and A History of Violence leap to mind here). 30 days of Night the film does leave out one important subplot from the comic, namely the notion that not all vampires think slaughtering a whole town is really a good idea. In place of this sacrificed subplot is a much more detailed focus on the survivors in Barrow. The sacrifices they make, the grief they suffer, the fear that dominates them. 30 Days presents us with survivors who look, tired, dirty, hungry and mournful, rather than a group of pretty 20-somethings with designer dirt that other films like to give us *cough* *Michael Bay* *cough*.

The term 'survival horror' gets bandied about a lot these days, and while its origins and definition in console games are quite defined, its filmic parallels are not always so neatly identified. In fact survival horror in film has become almost synonymous with the zombie. I think 30 Days of Night presents an almost text book example of what defines survival horror - helpless people in helpless circumstances facing a horrific rate of casualties to the enemy, and an enemy that is implacable, relentless and bloodthirsty. Watching not only the deaths, but their knock-on effects - panic, helplessness, fractiousness, shame and disgust - unfold in 30 Days, leaves me convinced that Steve Niles not only translated his comic to film, but in some regards drastically improved it.

Which leads me to the fangers. The vampires of 30 Days are truly horrifying. No elegant European Counts, or whiny sparkly things here. No, the vamps of 30 Days are snarling, black-eyed, shark-toothed monsters. They move like agile predators. Their guttural vampire language sends shivers down your spine, and the tactics they have used to isolate Barrow engender a feeling of creeping unease long before you even see them. The blood splattered over their very pale skin, and all over their clothing only reinforces their savagery. They look, and act, like monsters. And not a moment too soon I say. 30 Days delivers what was sorely needed for vampires - an iteration that makes you remember why vamps are supposed to be scary. 30 Days' undead fangers are true monsters in every way, and restore vampires to their spot as the kings of the horror monster. The helplessness of the humans before these monsters is made truly stark when Huston's Marlow and his gang have captured one of the helpless Barrovians. Tearfully, she begs God to save her. Marlow angles his head quizzically 'God? No God.' he merely says before she is ruthlessly slaughtered. Marlow's statement leaves us in an almost Lovecraftian universe, a world that is godless as well as actively hostile to mankind. When his female off-sider is hideously burned with a UV lamp, he mutters 'What can be broken must be broken' before killing her - a truly shark-like ethos. The savage predation of these vamps extends even to their own kind.

Special mention must be made here of Ben Foster's character 'The Stranger', the henchman who paves the way for the vampires' arrival. His psychotic demeanour, almost English like teeth and peculiar accent make him a 'Renfield' above Renfields. Though his fate is the traditional fate of all loonies who choose to serve vampires, he still stands out as a truly unsettling henchman.

The violence is not tucked away quietly either. After some early scenes where the vampires hunt from the shadows, glimpsed briefly before vanishing again, the last half of the film does not shirk from splattering the old ketchup around, mainly from Eben's handy fire axe. Mark Boone Jr's character Beau Brower (the town recluse) also dishes out a spectacular action scene that slices and dices no small number of the interloping fangers.

Spoiler Alert: the Ending

Well actually, this time I'm not going to spoil it. The ending makes sense in a very selfless way, that I think fits in very neatly with the survival horror ethos.

So, is this film worth seeing? Hell yeah. If you're after a vampire flick, you could do far worse than this gem. The comic and the film make good companion pieces, rather than necessarily fuel for an argument as to which one got it 'right'.

Stars: 4 out of 5

What's next

Up next are the following;
• 30 Days of Night, a classy modern vampire film based on the excellent graphic novel of the same name.
• Abandoned, a nice little film set in Russia, exploring the doppelganger legend.
• The Abominable Dr Phibes, starring the undisputed king of cheese horror, Vincent Price.

28 Weeks Later

2007 • Dir: Juan Carlos Fresnadillo • St: Robert Carlye, Rose Byrne

Premise: The sequel to 28 Days Later, London has been mostly cleared of the infected by the Americans, and Londoners are slowly being returned to the city, as a second outbreak occurs.

Analysis: With the success of 28 Days Later, it was perhaps inevitable that there would be a sequel. 28 Weeks continues the use of the rapid jump-cuts of the first film, and also the very moody and haunting music of 28 Days.

I will be perhaps briefer with this review than I was with 28 Days. This is largely because, while 28 Weeks is entertaining, the tone of the film is much more frenetic, feeling like it does as one long chase.

In essence, Don (Carlyle) and his wife Alice (Catherine McCormack) are holed up with some other survivors in a farmhouse. Their kids have been sent away in one of the big evacuations that had been carried out before the UK became quarantined. In the space of about 3 minutes, one of the infected break into the farmhouse, and everyone dies. This is an excellent start to the film to attempt to establish it's credentials as a worthy sequel. Don tries to help the others and save his wife, but in a wrenching moment chooses survival over love, and makes good an escape.

Later, Tammy (Imogen Poots) and her little brother Andy (Mackintosh Muggleton) are entering London, along with a large number of other evacuees, to stay in a safe area on the Isle of Dogs and Canary Wharf. This was ostensibly done to contrast the 'old' London of 28 Days, with the 'new' London of 28 Weeks. They are reunited with their father, Don and processed by an American military scientist Scarlet (Byrne), who is annoyed because no screening process had been approved yet for children.

Tammy and Andy ask how their mum died, and Don lies to them, ostensibly to mask his guilt and spare their feelings. Don tells them they can't go back to their old house. Naturally, movie kids being movie kids, they do the exact opposite and sneak out the next day. At this point, it's also worth mentioning the paranoia the film evokes by having everything constantly under surveillance. We are introduced to scenes often by seeing them on a security camera first, and one of the snipers who protect the area, the American Doyle (Jeremy Renner) routinely scans the area through his rifle's scope.

When the kids escape, they are spotted almost immediately after they've left the safe zone. After a sobering introduction to what post-infection London really looks like, they make their way back to their old home. Inside, they find the film's bombshell - their mother, infected but not affected by the rage virus. The army swoops in and the film's rollercoaster ride toward sweeping oblivion begins.

Scarlet is fascinated by Alice's immunity and thinks she could find a cure from Alice's blood. The disinterested Gen Stone (Idris Elba) wants none of it, and orders Alice to be killed. After a resentful reunion with his kids, Don has to face his shame and admit he left his wife to die. He sneaks in to see her, and one kiss starts an apocalypse that will destroy the Isle of Dogs. Don becomes infected, and the second aberration of infected behaviour appears - Don seems to retain some memories and actively hunts down his kids.

From here on out 28 Weeks is a non-stop chain of massacres, gore, explosions, and brutal but necessary military crackdowns. Unable to pull the trigger on Andy, Doyle teams up with Scarlet and the kids to escape London with his chopper pilot friend Flynn (Harold Perrineau). I found this half of the film entertaining, but to be honest also a bit ordinary. 28 Days engaged you with drastic shifts in mood and tone, while the latter half of 28 Weeks is like Michael Bay Brundle-Flyed with Renny Harlin.

I will make one exception for the helicopter lawnmower-style kill of a horde of infected. That was just so implausibly crazy, it made me laugh.

SPOILER (in black type below-select to read)

As with many survival horror style films, we get a steady attrition of characters, losing Doyle to fire, Scarlet to Rage-Don, and finally Rage-Don to Tammy. Finally only Tammy and an infected Andy make it to Flynn's chopper, and escape, flying past Dover, over the channel to France. At the end, we are left with a shot of Flynn's abandoned chopper and a mob of infected running toward the Eiffel Tower (I guess they wanted to be the first in line when the ticket box opened, or at least see it before Destro and Cobra melted it with nanites).

END SPOILER

28 Weeks Later is not a bad film by any means. It is quite entertaining, but it's also a little flabby, and the headlong run into a pointless ending does let the film down. While it felt like 28 Days and sounded like 28 Days and looked like 28 Days, the double whammy of infection immunity and retained memory during infection did little to improve the film and only really bogged it down with elements that ultimately led nowhere. Still, watch it for the f@#king awesome helicopter scene.

3 out of 5 Stars

28 Days Later

2003 • Dir: Danny Boyle • St: Cillian Murphy, Christopher Eccleston

Premise: Bicycle courier Jim wakes up to find that London is deserted, except for those infected by the Rage Virus, people who have been turned into mindless, brutal killers.

Analysis: 28 Days Later was, I think, the only film that had a valid use for the sort of rapid, jumpy, quickly cut camerawork that has turned up in other horror films, most notably the remake factories. This style is prevalent in the film and is an integral part of the 'Rage Zombies', whose jerky, twitching movements, and rapid speed let you feel like you're getting an infected's-eye view of the action.

The film starts with animal activists breaking into a facility where chimps have been wired up to watch looped feeds of human brutality - wars, riots, hangings and so on. A lone scientist (obviously stuck working graveyard shift because he's the newbie) tries to warn the activists that the chimps are infected with rage, hatred distilled down into a viral weapon. Activists being who they are in films, they don't listen and let a chimp free, which promptly savages the crap out of the activist who let it free.

I have some issues with the way scientists and activists are sometimes presented in film. The military are more likely to want to weaponise rage, and I fail to understand what the experiment was all in aid of anyway. The activists also become the scapegoats for the release of the rage virus, which is pretty standard for a world that likes to shoot the messenger a lot more often than the author of the message. I would still point out that someone was trying to turn emotions into viruses, which sounds like the sort of idiot plan a corporation or military organisation is more likely to come up with. Who signed the work order on that piece of nonsense, that's what I'd like to know.

It's then that we cut to Jim (Cillian Murphy), waking up in hospital. What follows is simply breathtaking, as we follow him through a deserted, hastily abandoned London. A silent, empty London is quite unnerving. I lived there for a year, and I have to say - London is NEVER silent. What is perhaps most heart-breaking is when Jim finds a wall of final messages - notes from the damned. There are cries for the whereabouts of loved ones, photos of those who have been lost to the virus, letters, declarations, testaments, confessions, drawings. The few glimpses you get of each letter or photo ram home the idea that these are not numbers. Every Londoner killed or lost to the virus was a person with hopes, dreams and fears. This is quite atypical for a 'zombie' movie.

This is when Jim enters a church. As he ascends a staircase, we see graffiti on the wall 'The end is extremely f@#king nigh'. The church is also where we see our first Rage Zombie. As Jim is calling out, he sees the floor of the church littered with hundreds of bodies. His shouting attracts the attention of 2 people who simply stare at him wide eyed, faces contorted. Jim is distracted by banging at a door, and a crazed infected priest bursts out and runs at him, before Jim beans him in the head with a shopping bag full of pepsi cans.

The thing I found interesting about all this is that the film is slowly destroying every institution known to man. Science is destroyed by being shown as immoral, activism is shown to be misguided and foolish, and then the church is shown to be a refuge which only allows people to destroy each other. Think about it, who killed all the people in the church except the church-goers themselves? One drop of infected blood in there and it turns into a massacre.

Running for his life from the church, Jim is eventually saved by Mark and Selena, two other survivors. Jim's protestations that there must be a government or military doing something are flatly rejected, adding to the theme that human civilisation has been completely destroyed. Mark and Selena give Jim (and the audience) a potted history of the rage virus and its effects.

During an abortive attempt to find Jim's parents, Mark gets infected blood in an open cut. Selena, without hesitation, hacks him to death with a machete. This scene hits you like a sucker punch. It is raw, relentless, and once you think about it, absolutely necessary within the bounds the film has established.

There are three kinds of survivor presented in the film, that fit into three key arcs in the film. Mark and Selena's scavenging, ruthless, no-hope method is presented first. We see that the weakness of it is that it is without purpose beyond survival. They play a war of attrition just to live day by day. It is fitting then, that soon after Mark's death, we are introduced to two more survivors - Frank and his daughter Hannah, and the middle arc of the film starts. Frank and Hannah are introduced when Jim and Selena enter a tower estate block, that they have seen lights coming from. Running a gauntlet up a staircase, pursued by infected, they are saved by Frank in full riot gear who fights off the infected. Inside, the scene is quite a domestic one. They get to sleep, eat, drink, and Jim has a scratchy attempt at shaving.

Frank introduces us to a broader idea of survival. The tower block has been rigged up like an impenetrable fortress. He has every receptacle you can imagine on the roof to collect rainwater, although it hasn't rained for 10 days. He then reveals a plan. There has been a recorded message playing on the radio directing survivors to an army base, just outside Manchester. He admits that they need Jim and Selena more than they need him and his daughter, but he urges them to join him in heading north. Hannah then says one of the sagest things she'll say in the film - that Jim and Selena need them more, that they all need each other.

Hannah is correct. In their occasionally hazardous escape up north in Frank's London cab, the four of them get to feel normal again. They find connections in each other. Cold and ruthless Selena finds a little sister in Hannah. Jim finds a father figure of sorts in Frank. They stop in the ruins of an old church, and see 4 wild horses running free. Frank comments that they're a family. The connection between the survivors and the horses is an obvious one. The four survivors have also become a family.

It is appropriate then, that just as they are at their most blissful, everything is about to go straight to $hit again. They find the roadblock/army base and it is completely abandoned. Frank cracks up, the let down too much for him to deal with. Before long, Frank is infected, a single drop of blood falls in his eye. Frank pushes Hannah away from him, knowing what is coming, Selena screams at Jim to kill him, and finally Frank is shot down as the army make their belated presence felt.

The family unit is shattered. The weakness of their kind of survival is shown to be optimism. Their happiness had distracted them from the harsh reality they live in.

As Jim, Selena and Hannah are driven to an old country estate, now occupied by the remnants of the army, we enter the final arc of the film and are introduced to a third kind of survivor in the form of Major Henry West (Eccleston) and his men. They seem to have rigged up their stately country mansion as an impenetrable fortress as well - what Frank did, but on a higher budget. It's not long before we get the feeling that something is deeply wrong. Despite the initial sense of camaraderie among the soldiers, we are told that one has attempted suicide and another, Sgt Farrell is shown to be particularly bleak and at odds with the other men. West also keeps one of his infected men chained up in a yard, as a ruthless, but practical experiment to see how long the infected live.

A few hints are dropped, but finally West baldly informs Jim of his plan. There is no cure, no hope of rescue, so he has promised his men women. Selena and Hannah are to become sex slaves of his men. Jim and the dissenting Sgt Farrell are to be taken away and shot. When they are taken out into the woods, the spot they are taken to is already littered with bodies. An understated message that West and his men have been kidnapping and abusing survivors for a little while now. Farrell is shot, and in the confusion Jim escapes.

SPOILER (in black type below-select to read)

We have seen a desperate and ruthless method of survival that had nothing worth fighting for. We have seen a co-operative, happy method of survival, that proved to be too optimistic for its own good. Finally Maj West has shown us a cruel and delusional method of survival, where the survivors are little better than the infected. Now we see the lessons that Jim has learned from all of these methods.

Jim attracts both infected and West's men to the abandoned roadblock by sounding the alarm there. With brutal efficiency and a kind of guerilla warfare, he kills off a couple of West's men, before heading back to their base. In the streaming rain, he not only frees the infected soldier, but kills any of West's men he can get his hands on. He is out-soldiering the soldiers. Selena and Hannah meanwhile have been dressed up in pretty dresses, as a prelude to what the audience can only presume will be a gang-rape by West's men. Hearing noises, Hannah tells the soldiers that they are going to die. As chaos breaks out in the house, they try to escape, but finally Selena is trapped in a room with one of West's soldiers, as Jim comes in and brutally bashes the soldier's head against a wall, before ruthlessly thumbing his eyes out. It is extremely brutal, and Selena is initially unsure if he is one of the infected, as is Hannah who beans him over the head while he and Selena are kissing.

In their escape, they leave West to the tender mercies of his infected men, and Jim gets shot. We then cut to many days later, where Jim wakes once again, echoing the start of the film. Selena, Hannah and Jim have survived and have made a sign out of bedsheets to attract the flyover of an American jet. They will be rescued, finally.

The escape from West's mansion is, for me, the ultimate point of the film. Jim shows ruthlessness, even a degree of sadism, and finally complete rage to rescue Selena and Hannah. He has united Selena's ruthlessness with West's sadism in the cause of Frank's compassion. His final weapon is rage, the rage he uses to kill a soldier with his bare hands. He uses the weapon of infection without being infected. Finally it tells us that the infection is really a ruse. We don't need to weaponise rage, we only need the right cause to let it loose. The use of this potent weapon enables Jim, Selena and Hannah to escape and become the family they need to be to truly survive.

END SPOILER

The English, I feel, have a better grasp on the true bleakness of horror. They can reveal a number of subtleties in horror, that many American film-makers would bludgeon with hammy fists. 28 Days Later is the best non-zombie zombie film you can treat yourself to.

4 out 5 Stars

Some more recent purchases

Some more recent purchases to round out the collection;
• The Australian bizarre zombie film 'Undead'
• John Carpenter's cult classic 'They Live'
• and the 'based (loosely) on a true story' ghost film 'The Haunting In Connecticut'

Three Mothers trilogy

Finally got my hands on a copy of Inferno, so this means I can review the complete 'Three Mothers' trilogy. Sadly this Argento trilogy is going to have to wait until I reach 'S' for 'Suspiria'.

What's up next

Up first is the British Zombie apocalypse film '28 Days Later' and its sequel '28 Weeks Later'.