I only went to see 28 Years Later : The Bone Temple as I had seen the previous three. See my posts of 20th June 2025 (28 Days Later), 4th June 2007 (28 Weeks Later) and 15th July 2025 (28 Years Later). The only good thing about the latest movie is Ralph Fiennes reprising his role from the previous film. This time a violent mob has been parachuted in from A Clockwork Orange but far less interesting. Actually, the second half is far better than the awful first with all it's gratuitous violnce. Surprisingly, we see little of the undead in this version. The ending is pretty spectacular as the ghastly leader of the mob gets his just deserts in the worst way imaginable. But I wish I hadn't bothered.
Let me start by saying the book by Maggie O'Farrell is a wonder. Less so is it's adaptation to a play at the RSC Stratford and here a similar disapointment. So much of the book is fabulous prose that is so hard to capture in a film. Director Chloe Zhao may have been selected after her superb Nomadland, but here she seems to have plumped for a kind of art house film. Visions of a tree at the very beginning is always a give away. A pastoral saga? Maybe I know the story too well, but the family drama that takes up most of the movie is not that interesting. Scenes of birth, for example, take up too much time. The film's success relies on the magical and very last act at the Globe Theatre. And although, like Mark Kermode, even though I was not moved to tears with the ending scored by Max Richter's obvious On the nature of daylight, it is still a very clever piece of theatre. The film almost topples those brilliant last dozen pages of the book.
As for the cast, I must be in a minority thinking that the two Irish actors in the lead roles were right in your face, thinking look at me. There was no subtlety from Jessie Buckley as Agnes nor from Paul Mescal as William. Again except for the ending. I wanted paired back performances. Fortunately those came from Joe Alwyn as Bartholamew and Emily Watson as the mother. Maybe I loved the book too much. The film itself may have been aimed at a young audience coming to the play for the first time with all that intensity. That's my only reason why it won best picture at the Golden Globes and with all those nominations for an Oscar. Is this a mainly woman's film? The writer, director and lead actress tells us about falling in love, birthing children, and bringing them up with an absent father. That is ninety percent of the movie.
The critic's reviews were mainly positive. Peter Bradshaw in The Guardian gave it five stars. Nicolas Rapolo in Sight and Sound magazine describes it as "an immersive account of the desire, grief, love and anger that that course between a woman and her playwright husband". I was more interested, as was someone on mumsnet, with the Echinacea next to where Agnes was working in the garden. Back to thje book, and will always remember meeting Maggie O'Farrell at the Hay Literary Festival where she signed her latest book.
I was trying to think where I had seen something similar to Mercy. I find that might have been Searching (2018) where similar events are played out on a computer screen. Here it's Chris Pratt (I didn't think he could be this good) locked in a chair and given ninety minutes to give A I interogator Rebecca Ferguson enough reason to exonerate him from the killing of his wife. Because we are way into the future, every event is held in banks of video that Chris can call on as evidence.
I liked the fact that early on he is full of anger that hinders this process. But of course in all these things, he gradually gets himself together and prove what a great investigator he rerally is. So we have stacks of video filling the screen with huge energy. The story is at first a slow burner that gradually gathers pace with a resulting last act that is fast, derivative, complicated and totally bonkers. But what went before was jolly interesting. It certainly had to be seen in the cinema.













