28 Years Later review: Long-awaited zombie sequel is warped, shocking and fantastic

Running time: 115 minutes.Rated R (strong bloody violence, grisly images, graphic nudity, language and brief sexuality).

In theaters June 20.It takes some skill to pump new life into the undead.Every possible twist on the zombie movie has been tried in the past 20 years, from deadpan road trips with Woody Harrelson to a bloody British Christmas musical.I’ve just found one I’ll be skipping called “Poultrygeist: Night of the Chicken Dead.”Apart from the send-ups, though, there has not been a strong serious example in the genre for a long time.But nobody does it better than the British post-apocalyptic “28” series — especially the original filmmakers of 2002’s “28 Days Later,” director Danny Boyle and screenwriter Alex Garland.They’re back at it 23 years later with “28 Years Later” — an arresting, sneakily emotional and wildly weird third installment in the franchise.Never has the near-annihilation of mankind felt so good.Fans of the original might, at first, be taken aback by the madness.

If you revisit “Days” today, the influential forebear comes off as awfully quaint.Instead of the eerie calm of a desolate Piccadilly Circus, “Years” bids adieu to the big city for the spooky forest.The main character isn’t a corpse-like Cillian Murphy, as close to a real-life zombie as we have, but a sweet kid trying to save his mom.And there’s the movie’s biggest talker: A depraved, disgusting ritual conducted by an orange-painted Ralph Fiennes had me questioning my own sanity when I teared up at it.I rip into the black hole of creativity that is endless reboots and sequels all the time. Can’t stop, won’t stop. Fantastic “Years” is the happy exception.Almost three decades after the “Rage Virus” ravaged Britain, turning most citizens into snarling beasts, the UK has been quarantined from the wider world.Nobody in, nobody out.Evoking “A Quiet Place Part II,” an enclave of survivors live on a safe island town sur...