
This review is a little overdue because I had a bad sense that this movie was going to be bad, and I wanted to wait till it was on TV and I didn’t have to go through the same horrors and exertions as I went through for the first instalment of this duology. So, I waited until I could get it on Apple TV, and I still consider the 1300 yen I paid to rent it to be daylight robbery.
I don’t think 28 Years Later: The Bone Temple is better than 28 Years Later, even though that movie suffered from many flaws and had an awful ending, because the sequel suffers from the same fundamental flaw of not knowing what it’s doing, but with the added challenge of being a zombie movie with no zombies in it.
That’s right, this is a zombie movie without zombies. I think that’s a first! It probably also opens itself to all kinds of cultural analysis[1], but I think the reason doesn’t require much care and attention: Boyle and Garland wanted to do a self-indulgent homage to A Clockwork Orange and the only opportunity they’d ever get was if they crammed it into the framework of their zombie series. So that’s what they did! And we had to watch the results.
There is only one actual scene with actual zombies in the movie, near the beginning when the three community members are ambushed by surprisingly healthy zombies and have to flee back to their fenced-off home, leaving one of their number to die. Even this scene is irrelevant, since the zombies don’t hang around and they could have been shown returning to their home without any zombies chasing them, without affecting any of the rest of the story. After that we basically don’t see zombies again, and they aren’t a threat. Sure, we see Samson the Alpha, but he’s lost his touch[3]. From then on the movie becomes a reflection on human cruelty, punishment and redemption, with a really awfully mismanaged soundtrack. Basically, it becomes a bad remake of A Clockwork Orange. Let’s review this, and some of its bigger flaws, and ask where we’re going with this whole zombie project.
Warning: This review contains spoilers. If you haven’t watched the movie yet I recommend you don’t, but if you must, don’t read further!
Fingers and Droogs
the majority of the movie follows the nihilistic, ultra-violent rampage of “Sir Lord” Jimmy Crystal and his Fingers, a gang of young men and women who dress like Jimmy Savile and move between communities of survivors, killing them and robbing them of their stuff. Usually it seems that they torture the community members, administering what King Jimmy calls “charity”, which in the long drawn-out scene we get to witness involves flaying a group of ordinary people while they’re still alive. All the Fingers are called “Jimmy”, whatever their real names, and have the catch phrase “howzat” that they use when they’re impressed, showing fealty, or giving emphasis. These aspects of the group’s structure are based on Sir Lord Jimmy Crystal’s surviving memories from before the zombie apocalypse, when Jimmy Savile was an important figure on British TV (for more about Jimmy Savile and to get a sense of how godawful this plot decision is, see here). There are only seven Fingers, and occasionally Sir Lord Jimmy pits one of their victims against one of his Fingers, with the promise that they can become a member of his gang if they kill the current Finger. This is how Spike, the boy from the first movie, ends up in the gang. No explanation is given for why this gang operates this way, how they made it through the 28 years since the apocalypse, or indeed how they eat – there don’t seem to be many surviving communities out there and we’re mean to understand that the UK is a zombie-infested disaster zone, so how did they do it? I guess we don’t need to care.
Unfortunately their raid on a small community of survivors goes wrong when one of the sruvivors – a pregnant woman who we never hear from again – manages to kill a Finger and get away, and in the ensuing confusion one of the flayed victims starts a fire that kills another one or two Fingers. In the aftermath one of the Fingers discovers Dr. Ian Kelson, sees him daubed in red and talking to Samson, and concludes that he must be Satan, who all the Fingers believe is Sir Lord Jimmy Crystal’s dad. She leads the group to a meeting with Kelson, to see whether Crystal is telling the truth about his dad or is full of shit. Sir Lord Jimmy Crystal goes ahead to meet Kelson and threatens him with horrible death if he doesn’t pretend to be Crystal’s dad, and then they have a group audience, at which Kelson is able to miraculously play Iron Maiden’s Number of the Beast very loudly and impress the Fingers with his satanic dancing (this is the picture on the poster). There follows a kind of process of judgment, in which Sir Lord Jimmy Crystal asks for Kelson’s blessing. Let’s be clear here: Kelson was going to give Crystal his blessing, until he realizes that one of the Fingers (who are masked) is Spike. He then changes his plan, demanding the crucifixion of his only son. Violence follows but the Fingers turn on Jimmy Crystal and crucify him, after which Samson turns up to carry away the dying Kelson while Jimmy Crystal is forced to watch the person he now thinks is actually satan (Samson) carrying away the guy he pretended was his dad.
This is basically a degenerate, incoherent version of A Clockwork Orange, a gang of young people on a nihilistic mission of ultra-violence who end up being judged and their leader forced to watch a movie that changes his view of the world, accompanied by weirdly out-of-place music. In place of Droogs we have the Fingers, in place of the court we have Dr. Kelson, and in place of the stupid weird movie that Alex is forced to watch we have the final scene of Samson carrying away Kelson. We even have the raid on an innocent but wealthy family (the survivors with their farm rich in food and supplies), and the change in perspective of the old man when he recognizes the bad guy’s connection to part of his past.
It’s just a shit version of A Clockwork Orange, which, let’s be fair, wasn’t that good (the first half was interesting but the second half was tedious and the entire thing had Kubrick’s classic over-directed stiffness). It lacks A Clockwork Orange‘s aesthetic novelty, and it has much less clarity in its philosophical message than A Clockwork Orange (which was pretty weak in this regard anyway). Why bother? And why try to force this weird homage into a zombie setting? What a dumb idea.
The Importance of the Evil that Men Do
Typically the key themes of zombie movies are a mixture of hopelessness with a sense of damnation and judgment (Night of the Living Dead), along with some sense of humans as the real monsters (28 Days Later), hubris (28 Weeks Later) and desperate measures to cling onto humanity (some parts of The Walking Dead). All of these challenges occur against the backdrop of, and are generally directly related to, the collapse of human society brought about by zombies. In these stories zombies play an important role as signifiers of social collapse, human savagery, or some other kind of sociological pressure. They aren’t just scenery!
For example in 28 Days Later the main characters are forced into a terrible dilemma when, seeking security, they stumble on a group of army men who decide to kill the male survivor and rape the women. These men are soldiers, so they’re supposed to protect the civilians, but instead turn into monsters, for reasons that their leader explains directly to the man in the group. This is a clear model of the pressures of collapsing society driving men to do evil things, and a description of our moral responsibilities even in the face of social collapse. An important part of this is that the men have made these choices because of the pressure of the zombie apocalypse, and ultimately the zombies play an essential role in helping the human survivors overcome their evil captors. It’s a kind of post-apocalyptic Shakespearean tragedy.
We see none of this in 28 Years Later: The Bone Temple, because there are no zombies. There is no sense of the pressure they exert on the social environment in which Sir Lord Jimmy Crystal and his Fingers operate, because the zombies just aren’t there. The Fingers just wander around doing their thing for no reason, Kelson is just building his bone temple for no reason, and everyone is just cast into a state of nature for nothing. We also don’t see any intervention of zombies in the final confrontation where the bad guys get their just desserts, not even Samson, even though Kelson has been chummy with this uber-zombie for the past week! Why doesn’t Samson save everyone? Why doesn’t the super loud Iron Maiden performance draw zombies? What has happened to this world? Why am I watching this?
Zombie movies without zombies, and without humans making a difficult choice between individualism and humanity, aren’t zombie movies. They’re just nihilistic trash, the worst kind of horror. Zombies aren’t interesting in and of themselves, like say the demons in Hellraiser, and they don’t have a malicious will like a good vampire. They’re just a force of nature, but human. They should force moral choices and difficult decisions, and we should all walk out of the movie questioning what we would have done, and if we would be able to stand up for humanity in those horrible moments when the horde comes.
Those questions can’t be asked if there’s no horde. We’re left with a bad version of the first half of A Clockwork Orange, without even the textual hints at a background dystopia in which the main characters can exercise their egos. We get … nothing.
On Samson’s emasculation
The one interesting extra point in this movie is Dr. Kelson’s discovery that the rage virus could be a kind of psychosis. With Samson at his disposal he tests this[4] using some anti-psychotic drugs, and manages to bring Samson back from his inhuman state at least a little. That’s an interesting development! It also means that the big scary alpha zombie loses all his power, and becomes just a big lump who Kelson dances and sunbathes with, so quiescent that when Kelson is attacked by a gang of obvious degenerates Samson doesn’t do anything to help. He isn’t drawn by the loud Iron Maiden music and doesn’t do anything to intervene in Kelson’s death. Not only is this a break from the themes of the first two movies, where zombie intervention aids or hinders the main characters, but it’s a waste of a great character. Why introduce the concept of the alpha in the first movie and then instantly emasculate it in the second? Do you know what you’re doing? Do you care?
The same phenomenon applies to the Bone Temple. Not only is this a zombie movie without zombies, but it’s a movie called The Bone Temple in which the temple made of bones plays essentially no role. The bone temple was essential to the first movie in the duology, enabling Spike to come to terms with the death of his mother and playing an explicit role as a symbol of humanity’s loss. In the second movie it’s just a set, not really referenced or used in any meaningful way.
Every interesting thing about this setting – the zombies, the alpha zombie, the bone temple, the moral challenge of the apocalypse – has been stripped out and replaced with the empty shell of moral conflict induced by a bunch of lost boys who do bad things for no reason.
That’s a complete waste of everyone’s time, and an insult to this genre. It’s a hollow shell of the genre!
Why do they do this?
There’s a different version of this movie where Kelson’s euphoric drugs run out and Samson returns to the wild; Kelson uses the Iron Maiden performance to attract zombies to intervene in his convocation with the Fingers; Samson comes with his zombies and lays waste to the Fingers but at the very last Kelson realizes one of the Fingers is Spike and intervenes to stop the death of the boy he knew, with a direct appeal to the humanity he had previously awakened in Samson’s heart. It works and Samson leaves, and the movie finishes with the open-ended possibility that some humans have found a way to live alongside zombies. Spike is redeemed for his previous violence by using some of his trickiness to kill Crystal, the other Fingers get what they deserve from zombie violence (as they should!) and Kelson never has to reveal his moral weakness with the strong hint that he was going to give Crystal his blessing (which is very clearly implied in the actual movie). In this movie we see people make moral choices, forced upon them by the zombie threat, and in the end come to terms with their new world and themselves. Hell, in this new version of the movie maybe the pregnant woman who escaped the Fingers at the beginning actually gets her vengeance, instead of disappearing into the night with her story untold[5].
We don’t see any of this though. Instead we just get nihilistic violence and a bit of treachery. What a waste of time.
My reviews always come back to this question: why? Why do these directors rip the beating heart out of their own work in this way? Boyle and Ballard developed this concept originally and by the fourth movie it has been reduced to barely even the aesthetic shell of its original self. These last two movies aren’t just degraded versions of the original concept, they’re hollow shells, not even shadows of it. What leads a creator with all these opportunities and all this money to hollow out their own concept like this?
Has Hollywood been turned into the personal plaything of a small number of lucky people, who get to express whatever shit is in their hearts at any moment without concern for what their viewers might think, or any greater respect for the art they’re supposed to be elite masters of? I’ve seen so many good ideas ruined by this arrogance over the past two decades. It’s such a terrible cultural degeneration, and I want it to stop.
It won’t, of course, but we don’t have to lower our standards just because our creative elite have. This movie was shit, a disappointing betrayal of the good work that was done to expand on an interesting genre. No one involved in writing, producing or directing this should work again. They will, of course, and we’ll have to endure more of their dreck, but I won’t be putting up with it. No more of this series for me, and I recommend you don’t waste your money on this movie or anything that follows it.
Addendum: Quarantine Breach
If you appreciate my critical appraisal of this zombie series and you’re interested in an alternative story that incorporates all the concepts developed in the series into a single coherent narrative, consider checking out my novella Quarantine Breach on Royal Road. It’s free, and very good!
fn1: If zombies represent the western fear of the colonial hordes rising up, what does it say about the colonial hordes – or the west’s fear of them – if their allegorical beastly form is not in the movie? Is this some reflection of the west’s post-Gaza id, where we have now accepted we can just exterminate our brutish shadows, and so we don’t need them in our movies anymore? Has the zombie movie lost its main character because the western sub-conscious recognizes the attempted extermination of its most symbolic colonial subject[2]?
fn2: If you don’t think Palestinians are the most basic source of the western zombie fear, reflect on the scenes from Israel in World War Z.
fn3: And interestingly, now that his ferocity has been contained, we get to see lots of his enormous cock. A coincidence of filming, I’m sure!
fn4: I note he does not apply for any kind of ethical approval before undertaking these experiments!
fn5: Why did they leave this chick’s story hanging??? What shit writing!








