Last night we watched the film 28 Weeks Later, the sequel to 28 Days Later. Obviously. Anyone who hasn’t seen it may want to stop reading in case I give the plot away – if such a thing is possible.

While I enjoyed the film (of course I did. Its basically a zombie film. I love zombie films) I was wound up by the continuity errors, specifically the geographical ones. There is always a bit of a thrill seeing films set in places you are familiar with, but the flip-side of that coin is that its painfully obvious when, for example, someone passes Tower Bridge then turns a corner into Trafalgar Square and turns the next corner into Waterloo Station on the other side of the river.

Bridget Jones’ Diary had something similar I seem to recall, where her commute to work took in all the London landmarks in a strange order.

I shouldn’t let that distract from the story, but it does. Admittedly, not as much as it distracts Jayne when I start pointing all the unfeasible things out. (Creep was a good film for that, when I pointed out all the things which were wrong in its depiction of London Underground, where I worked at the time). I’m sure the same thing happens in films set in New York or Paris or LA, but I don’t know those places well enough to notice.

A few examples: right near the start a plane is seen landing at London City Airport, and then we see passengers disembark at an enormous terminal which didn’t seem right. It turns out they used Stanstead for those bits. When ‘Zone 1’ (Canary Wharf/Isle of Dogs) is going to be firebombed, the soldier on the ground is told by his mate in a chopper that he has 4 minutes to get out and to head for Regent’s Park. Which made me laugh.

The small group are next seen in the foot tunnel from the Isle of Dogs to Greenwich. Hardly the best way to get from Canary Wharf to Regent’s Park – adding 2 or 3 miles to a 5-mile journey. You have to wonder why the chopper pilot didn’t suggest Greenwich Park or even Blackheath. Anyway, when they get to Regent’s Park there is a bit of bother and the pilot tells them to go to Wembley Stadium! Another 5 mile hike.

The whole premise of the film is dubious too. Britain has been quarantined and the UN/US are starting to let the population back in while they are still clearing nearby streets of dead bodies. Don’t you think they would wait just a little while? Wouldn’t they also start by populating a more easily defined and defended area than a part of London?

But despite all that, its a very enjoyable film. Its just a prime candidate for the now-legendary willing suspension of disbelief that my old film studies teacher used to bang on about. As in the first film there are some some great shots of a deserted London. Seeing the brand new Wembley Stadium with grass that would not look out of place in my overgrown garden was very poignant.

There are also some difficult ethical questions involved. Towards the end I think we are supposed to feel that the US army are being unnecessarily ruthless with their methods of containment – gunning down a crowd of hundreds in case some are infected seems a bit harsh. But then you think that the whole situation only came about because they were not ruthless enough when the two kids sneak out of the safe area and are then tracked down and brought back in without any sort of quarantine.

The implication at the end is that the whole world is now infected, or at least that part which is is contiguous with mainland Europe, and the fact is that a population of hundreds of millions would have been saved if those two kids had been shot as a prophylactic measure. But who could really bring themselves to do that? A real ethical dilemma.

In the end the excitement, special effects, violence and amazing shots of London just about made up for all the geographical and other mistakes, and if 28 Months Later ever gets made I’ll be there to watch it.