Read User Reviews and Submit your own for 28 Weeks Later

4

CoreGamer1408Aug 30, 2023

The movie should of been called 28 plot contrivances later? This movie does follow the same theme that the military are incompetent villains, but way overboard. The opening of this film was great and if the movie had of stopped after boatThe movie should of been called 28 plot contrivances later? This movie does follow the same theme that the military are incompetent villains, but way overboard. The opening of this film was great and if the movie had of stopped after boat scene? This would have been a classic short movie for sure.

The plot contrivance of the wife/mother escaping with "tell don't show" I so didn’t buy it. The second major plot contrivance to propel the whole movie was plain dumb. An infected patient was left unguarded and unmonitored so her husband could just stroll in a what should of been a high security military quarantine area. Oh yes how does the infected Father even track his kids all over the city? They was driving around in a car at one point. Dumb out of 10.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

HellHoleHorrorFeb 16, 2022

I didn't like how much it shook around. I thought that it was done just for the sake of doing it and heighten tension but really it made it look a bit poo and distractingly messy. The gore effects looked good. Really good sound. PerfectlyI didn't like how much it shook around. I thought that it was done just for the sake of doing it and heighten tension but really it made it look a bit poo and distractingly messy. The gore effects looked good. Really good sound. Perfectly matched the picture and had good direction. I wasn't too keen on the continuation of the first movie. It somehow didn't work that well. It relied too much on stupid character decisions and coincidence. Robert Carlyle pops up everywhere. Some good and bad points progress the series having changed it for the worse.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

0

jake_siegeJul 22, 2021

Very successfully pissed on the first movie. In this sequel, love and empathy ruins the world and makes everything worse for humanity. Love no one, kill everyone, what a great message.

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

4

ScienceAdvisorMay 5, 2021

The script is 70% tropes and 30% convienence. Unlike the first movie, these are no longer people infected with rage. The virus now just makes them into super-zombies that are still alive without a functioning heart or any internal organs.The script is 70% tropes and 30% convienence. Unlike the first movie, these are no longer people infected with rage. The virus now just makes them into super-zombies that are still alive without a functioning heart or any internal organs. This is only made worse by the fact that if the main characters had just used a radio to communicate the fact that the children are VIPs, then the second half of the movie would have been completely different. The father's ability to magically track his kids is equally baffling in it's sheer convienence. Lastly, the nonsensical claim that a small group of infected are far more likely to spread to other countries, instead of that happening when 20 Million people were infected the first time around, is indicative of how much effort was put into this script.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

7

geewahJan 12, 2021

A worthwhile sequel.
An opening sequence that is as powerful as that of the original.
A tight and well made horror/thriller.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

LoletinAlexisNov 1, 2020

28 Weeks Later, different from the original, but enhancing its disastrous message.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

JLauSep 23, 2020

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. American army thinks they've contained the virus so start bringing British refugees back into London from abroad but they can't even keep a couple of kids in the safe zone.… Expand

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

6

Toasty87Jul 10, 2020

Was never going to beat 28 days later but it's a respectful attempt at a sequel.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

0

DelenaJul 6, 2020

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This movie is a bad joke and is a bad cliche The only good part is the beginning because it’s
Actually really good see the first part when the father of the two kids escape the house and leave his partners then it turns so cliche with the Strong guy that sacrifices himself to save everyone the doctor that things a kids are the cure and literally the kids being the cure it turn so boring because actually you know what is going to happen, when I see the beginning of this movie I thought that will be better than the first one “28 days later” but I get really disappointed of this movie everyone act like idiots and that’s it a bad movie… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

9

PanchogulMay 26, 2020

Está genial, hay más acción y es más explícita, es lo suficientemente buena para estar a la altura de su predecesora, pero los personajes de aquella me cayeron mejor y en esta secuela el conflicto se desata gracias a la imprudencia de losEstá genial, hay más acción y es más explícita, es lo suficientemente buena para estar a la altura de su predecesora, pero los personajes de aquella me cayeron mejor y en esta secuela el conflicto se desata gracias a la imprudencia de los jóvenes protagonistas.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

1

FallenStarJul 25, 2019

A poorly written zombie outbreak...again

This movie was pretty much horrendous to watch that I could barely pull myself through to finish it. The shakey cam is so annoying and awful, the characters themselves are boring without any bit ofA poorly written zombie outbreak...again

This movie was pretty much horrendous to watch that I could barely pull myself through to finish it.
The shakey cam is so annoying and awful, the characters themselves are boring without any bit of character development or personality. Generic through and through.
The scares are predictable, loud jump scare noises some of which are fake and drawn out.
The army...and the characters displayed in this world are so inept. Those infected have much more intelligence than the actual characters for sure.

That being said this movie had a lot of potential due to its setting. The fact that they tried to cover the situation after a zombie apocalypse can be really intriguing but it's so tough to follow and pay attention unless you stop thinking entirely about how this movie is gonna go.

The army having absolutely no one to guard an infected person while someone else is able to pass through pretty much everything is unfathomable. And afterwards that 1 infected person inside the heart of the army is able to pretty much summon an army of zombies for the movie to continue.

+ Nice setting, location

- Below average acting
- Horrible jump scares some of which are fake
- Forced plot through pretty much everything
- Chickens would survive better than these humans in this movie
- The army is absolutely inept at everything
- Unrelatable characters

There are many other zombie movies out there way better than this one. This is pretty much a waste of time.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

5

amheretojudgeJan 4, 2019

The Threat Has Been Wiped Out.

28 Weeks Later Fresnadillo's torch is unfortunately not illuminating as it was when Boyle passed it on. Although it ironically seems accurately titled, since each second spent in here seems like a big oldThe Threat Has Been Wiped Out.

28 Weeks Later

Fresnadillo's torch is unfortunately not illuminating as it was when Boyle passed it on. Although it ironically seems accurately titled, since each second spent in here seems like a big old drag. What it does get right is, the depiction of time driven by fluently that doesn't comes across too much news-y. But this sharp vision of the makers on the execution is barely the major factor in here, the narration that circles around the core material before hitting the point, is way too overridden to be affordable. Ironically, a film with a concept that thrives upon survival instinct and the thrills of the chase, is frankly too dull and slow to makes you sweat.

Let alone bedazzle you, it even fails to grasp your attention, the more the makers try to tighten the grip, the more the sand slips out. On its advantage, the structure is independent of any aspect of commercialism which gives it enough freedom to be fresh and raw. Neither the uncertainty of the antagonist and the threat nor the gore vision of the makers scares you and the primary reason to that is there is very little we care about them, the writers just aren't convincing enough to make us fall in their fairy tale.

And with a solution in his pockets in storyline, Fresnadillo never succeeds on bringing alive those words. Renner and Byrne feels the least of the protagonist themed character which is the ultimate trick that works. But on the other hand, Poots and Muggleton that ought to be the flip or turn of this magic too are left out to rot the viewers. The characters are so undercooked that even the innocence of the kid fails to fabricate the emotion with a bit of poignancy. 28 Weeks Later will definitely take more than weeks to pass by.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

9

DeepKamateApr 1, 2018

I know this is not the most popular opinion among the public, but I believe that "28 Weeks Later" is even better than the first film. It's more intense, it has more interesting plot, it has a more great setting and it's just much moreI know this is not the most popular opinion among the public, but I believe that "28 Weeks Later" is even better than the first film. It's more intense, it has more interesting plot, it has a more great setting and it's just much more terrifying. Is it has more stupidity in it too? Yeah. But the atmosphere and the ending is much stronger than in the original. I know that "28 Days Later" was a breakthrough for the genre of zombie movies, to some extent, but "28 Weeks Later", in my opinion, did everything the same, but did it better.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

9

alejandro970Apr 23, 2017

Preserves the overwhelming and vertiginous atmosphere of previous directed by Danny Boyle, with a higher dose of gore and adding claustrophobia. John Murphy score does enough of acelerate the pulse, and the epilogue is schivering. (28 months later?)

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

sjultiDec 7, 2016

This is a good sequel but it's not as good as the original, their is a lot more characters that the plot has to focus on so it feels more chaotic and not as fleshed out as the original but it's still a good zombie flick.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

talisencrwJul 21, 2016

This was a very good sequel to a fine zombie work (my favourite zombie film is STILL Jean Rollin's remarkable and extremely aesthetically-pleasing 'The Grapes of Death'), and I was very pleasantly surprised. Pardon the pun, but you wouldThis was a very good sequel to a fine zombie work (my favourite zombie film is STILL Jean Rollin's remarkable and extremely aesthetically-pleasing 'The Grapes of Death'), and I was very pleasantly surprised. Pardon the pun, but you would think that by this time, everything in the land of zombie movies would have been done to death, but I remain consistently admiring of just where the best and most thought-out renditions of the template can go. In THIS case, the most intriguing dynamic is a cowardly husband choosing his life rather than helping his wife out of a horrible crisis, then infanticide (or worse) of his own children, rather than face their wrath over the poor decision he had made.

It's interestingly hilarious that when you think about it, humanity is doomed because a 12-year-old had to go back and get a picture of his mother, because he was afraid that without it, he would forget what she looked like...A surprisingly satisfying work, that for horror fans, is worth a purchase and rewatching. I'm admittedly more for classic films, from the 20's to 60's, but for contemporary horror cinema, I liked this a lot, especially Jeremy Renner and Imogen Poots. It's no surprise to me that they soon became superstars.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

MovieMasterEddyApr 3, 2016

Nothing satisfies the appetite for allegory quite like a movie about flesh-eating zombies. Somehow the genre, at least as practiced by its masters, has the capacity to illuminate some brute facts about the human condition and its contemporaryNothing satisfies the appetite for allegory quite like a movie about flesh-eating zombies. Somehow the genre, at least as practiced by its masters, has the capacity to illuminate some brute facts about the human condition and its contemporary dysfunctions. There are not many recent movies that match, for example, the social criticism undertaken by George Romero in his “Living Dead” cycle.

Danny Boyle’s “28 Days Later” and its new sequel, “28 Weeks Later,” directed by Juan Carlos Fresnadillo, may not quite be in Mr. Romero’s league, but at their best they come close to his signature blend of grisly horror, emotional impact and biting satire. There is, of course, plenty of literal biting as well, since the virus-crazed creatures known as infecteds crave the flesh and blood of their erstwhile fellow citizens.

And also their metaphorical flesh and blood. The first movie, set in the early days of a pandemic that nearly wiped out the population of Britain, followed a small band of strangers who came together to form a makeshift tribe. This time, after the first wave of the virus seems to have run its course, the focus is on families and comrades split apart and set against one another by paranoia, moral confusion and the endless conflict between the survival instinct and the call of duty. If “28 Days Later” was, in part, about the emergence of solidarity in the midst of crisis, “28 Weeks Later” is about the breakdown that occurs in what seems to be the aftermath.

The DVD of Mr. Boyle’s film has two alternate endings, one slightly more comforting than the other. The hopeful conclusion (the one originally released in American theaters) turns out to be a slender thread leading to Mr. Fresnadillo’s more hectic and somewhat grimmer sequel.

The story (written by Rowan Joffe, Mr. Fresnadillo, E. L. Lavigne and Jesus Olmo, with Mr. Boyle and his frequent collaborator, Alex Garland, on hand as executive producers) begins with a terrible failure of nerve. Fleeing a zombie attack, Don (a gaunt, appropriately anxious Robert Carlyle) abandons his wife, Alice (Catherine McCormack), to a gruesome and apparently inevitable fate.

A few months later, he is safe in the Green Zone, an island of security in London overseen by occupying American troops led by General Stone (Idris Elba). There, he is reunited with his children, Andy (Mackintosh Muggleton) and Tammy (Imogen Poots), who had been on a school trip to Spain during the initial outbreak. He lies to them about their mother’s fate, and his dishonesty is punished in due course.

That bit about American soldiers patrolling the Green Zone — see what I mean about allegory? — may make “28 Weeks Later” sound heavy-handedly topical. But as in any good science fiction fable, the analogies it offers to contemporary reality are speculative rather than obvious. The initial benevolence of the occupation is clear enough: a shattered country needs to be put back together, its remaining population protected and reassured.

It is only when things spin out of control that the inherent brutality of the situation becomes clear, but here again the movie poses intractable conundrums rather than scoring easy points. To the soldiers and the survivors alike, there are only bad choices, and doing what seems like the right thing — firebombing an open city or rescuing children from the bombs — can turn out to have horrendous consequences.

Mr. Fresnadillo’s first movie, the Spanish-language thriller “Intacto,” showed him to be a filmmaker with technical agility and a decidedly philosophical bent. Here the thinking is done on the run, as the collapse of order unfolds through scenes of panic and chaos. These are often too frenetically edited and murkily lighted to be truly scary, and the higher dose of gore — infecteds chopped up by helicopter blades; bodies exploding in blood as bullets fly into them — is not enough to increase the horror.

The real terror comes at quieter moments, when aerial shots survey the echoing emptiness of London, or when Tammy and Andy sneak out of the Green Zone into the surrounding desolation.

“28 Weeks Later” is not for the faint of heart or the weak of stomach. It is brutal and almost exhaustingly terrifying, as any respectable zombie movie should be. It is also bracingly smart, both in its ideas and in its techniques. The last shot brought a burst of laughter at the screening I attended, a reaction that seemed to me both an acknowledgment of Mr. Fresnadillo’s wit and a defense against his merciless rigor.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

TheFilmDoctorMar 22, 2016

28 Days Later was a traditional British science-fiction/horror movie with added smarts and innovative style. This sequel extends the story in intelligent, suspenseful ways. Simply because it’s a ‘part two’, it isn’t as fresh, but enough28 Days Later was a traditional British science-fiction/horror movie with added smarts and innovative style. This sequel extends the story in intelligent, suspenseful ways. Simply because it’s a ‘part two’, it isn’t as fresh, but enough changes are rung to stop it feeling like a remake. Like Aliens, it ups the action scale by bringing in Yanks with big guns, which — as George Romero has often shown — means even more peril for ordinary folks caught between plague and the authorities.

With Danny Boyle and Alex Garland otherwise occupied by Sunshine, a new creative team takes over. Spanish director Juan Carlos Fresnadillo, of the outstanding and unusual Intacto, evokes what Boyle did on the first film without slavishly copying him. The prologue, which takes place early in the crisis, offers an old-fashioned zombie attack as hands crash through the boarded-up windows of a besieged house. It also serves to introduce an unusual protagonist, the weasely Don (Robert Carlyle) — who puts his survival ahead of all else.

After its first burst, the film hops ahead to the aftermath and takes a few creepy reels before the action starts again — but once the Raging and blood-spitting begins it’s relentless, as panic spreads and inept attempts to eradicate the plague give a whittled-down band of survivors as many problems as the screaming infected.

The fractured British family are an interesting focus for the film: child actors Imogen Poots and Mackintosh Muggleton are terrific, while Carlyle and McCormack get the maximum impact from shifty looks, malign glares and freak-outs. The American contingent — scientist Rose Byrne, grunts Jeremy Renner and Harold Perrineau — offers thinner material, especially once everyone has to start running.

The set-pieces, however, escalate with mostly excellent results: watching it all go wrong for the military — and their desperate response — is harrowing, but the tonal shift in a scene involving a helicopter and the infected on a heath which strays into Peter Jackson/Sam Raimi comic-horror territory is less effective. Momentum is regained, though, for a strong, dark finish.

Bigger action, more amazing deserted (and devastated) London sequences and biting contemporary relevance, if a touch less heart than the original.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

2

royphishoohJan 25, 2016

Extremely poor American follow-up to a classic British horror movie; proving that more is not necessarily better. Horrible performance by Robert Carlyle makes you reevaluate his acting in "Trainspotting"

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

5

JasonCDanielsNov 16, 2015

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. If you want a surviving the zombie-apocalypse film, re-watch 28 Days Later. If you want a ho-hum preachy drama (at its core) with shoehorned in gore and violence, set in a recovering local apocalypse caused by zombies/infected, watch this film. It does an alright job in that regard. I wouldn't suggest paying more than $5 USD to own this, however.

Why? This was largely a dull uninspired drama with zombies and violence shoehorned in, merely passable writing, and decent acting. It has its moments, but they are few. The Romero-esque ending was a nice touch, but ultimately couldn't elevate this addition to the "28 Days Later" franchise from "so-so" to "good". This is a pity as there was a lot of very good source material to expand on from the first movie, much of which was left untouched in this one. While watching this movie, I felt as if it was a rehash of long debated topics, in ways that were none-too-original even for its time. It's not a bad movie to watch, however, it's just not great. It doesn't live up to the thrills and tension set in the first movie. And as many others have pointed out, among other things, the quarantine protocols were all but non-existent, making for a common-sense based break in immersion/suspension of disbelief, which ultimately proves a disservice to the moral/ethical questions this movie tried to raise.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

0

Vault111Nov 3, 2015

One of the worst zombie films I've ever seen. 28 days was incomparably far better than this although it also doesn't make much sense itself. Whoever wrote the script should rethink about going further on their career. Not only there are wayOne of the worst zombie films I've ever seen. 28 days was incomparably far better than this although it also doesn't make much sense itself. Whoever wrote the script should rethink about going further on their career. Not only there are way too many plot holes, but also shows laziness.

For the plot holes, considering the story, the area clearly should've had highest security protocol with well-developed emergency plans in case of a breakout. However, two kids who obviously do not have any military training could sneak out of the area easily. Furthermore, there is no personnel guarding the room where Alice was held although there was a bite mark on her arm and she was still in the middle of health check process to confirm whether she is infected. In addition to that, Donald could swipe his card and enter Alice's room which is a quarantine zone and probably in the medical section where only medical and security personnel should have clearance (yeah, so much of a high security place). Even if all of these flaws could happen by any means, it just seems impossible for a single zombie to kill/infect several "armed soldiers" in a "bright" building where light is everywhere. With the against-all-odds method, the breakout did occur and the emergency procedures are deployed. Civilians were evacuated to a lock down area just to be broken in by a "single" zombie (yes, the door in a lock down area specified to be used for breakout scenario can be broken by just one zombie.)

For the laziness, the writer wanted Alice to survive all these months without sparing details on how it was possible as well as doesn't want to show the logic behind the fact that main characters can't be extracted when there are countless places in London where a helicopter can land.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

9

BritishWolfSep 21, 2015

Brilliant film, but does not fill the boots left by its revolutionary predecessor. I wish the film focused more on human drama and futility, as the first film did, as opposed to action. The human drama of the first film was partly what set itBrilliant film, but does not fill the boots left by its revolutionary predecessor. I wish the film focused more on human drama and futility, as the first film did, as opposed to action. The human drama of the first film was partly what set it apart from the crowd. Despite this, the film is expertly shot and once again integrates a brilliant, eerie soundtrack.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

8

Meth-dudeJun 10, 2015

This sequel of 28 days later is better in every way.More gore,better acting and better action scenes.The story was kind of basic and predictable and some of the characters decisions were stupid but,overall,the movie is good.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

MovieManiac83Apr 25, 2015

Another week, another disappointing summer sequel. So it goes…

In actuality, the screenplay for 28 Weeks Later isn't all that bad. Sure, it's repetitious and much of it has been regurgitated from 2003's 28 Days Later, but it contains someAnother week, another disappointing summer sequel. So it goes…

In actuality, the screenplay for 28 Weeks Later isn't all that bad. Sure, it's repetitious and much of it has been regurgitated from 2003's 28 Days Later, but it contains some interesting elements and offers enough gore that horror fans might have been able to enjoy it… if, that is, it wasn't for the stylistic approach employed by director Juan Carlos Fresnadillo. Apparently, Fresnadillo believes that the proper way to film any action scene is to shake the camera violently and pan it wildly back and forth, thereby making it virtually impossible to figure out what's going on (and pushing viewers with motion sickness to the brink of voiding their stomachs). As if that wasn't bad enough, in the editing room, Fresnadillo ensured that no single shot lasted longer than about a second. Also, the climactic struggle takes place in darkness, making it that much more difficult to decode the action. I didn't realize a character had died until, a little later, it was apparent that person was no longer around.

I wish this problem was restricted to 28 Weeks Later. Unfortunately, it has become increasingly more common. It's a good way to cover mistakes and encourages laziness. What does it matter if a fight is well choreographed if the audience can't get a clear picture? (My complaint for the recently released The Condemned was similar.) In 28 Weeks Later, it's a source of frustration because I was interested in what was happening but the filmmaker's approach robbed me of the ability to appreciate any scene where there was a fight, chase, or other form of action.

The first and better half of the movie is primarily devoted to setup and character development. This is where we are given a chance to get to know the new protagonists and given insight into the plan to return London to a living, breathing city from the ghost town it has been for the past half-year. As the movie approaches the one-hour mark, however, it turns into an extended chase, with people shooting, screaming, and being torn apart by the infected as they run around in dark corridors and tunnels and the viewer desperately tries to piece together what's going on. Admittedly, there are limitations to what can be done in a zombie movie, but a whiff of originality or coherence would have been appreciated. (I have a sense that the movie might play better on a television than a big screen.)

Action scenes aside, the look of the film is faithful to that of its predecessor. London appears grimy and washed-out: a dead, decaying city that at times would seem to be a comfortable fit into the world developed by Alfonso Cuaron in The Children of Men. The overhead and long-distance shots of empty streets and abandoned buildings are creepy, but no more so here than in 28 Days Later. This film will not be used by British travel agencies to promote vacations to London.

28 Days Later, while not terribly original, was suspenseful and involving. 28 Weeks Later is neither. The characters aren't as sympathetic or interesting. The kids are generic and the script doesn't care much about the adults. Robert Carlyle, Catherine McCormack, and Rose Byrne are criminally underused. Compare them to Cillian Murphy, Naomie Harris, and Brendan Gleeson from the first film, all of whom inhabited better developed and more sympathetic personalities. Tension in horror movies results from viewers caring about what happens to characters. The audience's connection to the protagonists of 28 Days Later made it a compelling experience. The lack of such a connection in 28 Weeks Later reduces this to a number of sequences characterized by shock moments, frenetic (and often chaotic) action, and stylized gore - all without suspense.

It's too bad, because the fundamental idea of extending the storyline introduced in 28 Days Later is an intriguing one. The problem is that the people entrusted with the responsibility of bringing this to the screen made decisions that resulted in a deeply flawed product. My advice to Fresnadillo: next time you make a movie, allow viewers to see what's happening in real time rather than have to interpolate based on the results. Technique and style are more at fault than any other issue in undermining the effectiveness of this zombie thriller.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

10

NeelyryMar 21, 2015

One of the greatest zombie movies ever made. I feel like 28 days later may have been slightly better, but the opening scene of this movie is easily the greatest moment in the two combined. If you like zombies you owe it to yourself to see this movie.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

8

SiAScORCHNov 5, 2014

This movie isn't as good as the first one, but it has a great story line as the infection battle has claimed to be nearly won. Then you get some amazing twists and you get to see how different characters adapt to different situations. It'sThis movie isn't as good as the first one, but it has a great story line as the infection battle has claimed to be nearly won. Then you get some amazing twists and you get to see how different characters adapt to different situations. It's definitely worth watching, but you must watch the first one in order to enjoy the second one as much as I did. It's also kind of sad at some parts, but I won't spoil it for you.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

mmyaingSep 28, 2014

Well produced movie with so many logical flaws in the plot that it was hard to watch, and it was as equally bad as 28 days later for the same reasons. The characters that should know better show so much stupidity that it leaves a bad tasteWell produced movie with so many logical flaws in the plot that it was hard to watch, and it was as equally bad as 28 days later for the same reasons. The characters that should know better show so much stupidity that it leaves a bad taste in my mouth. It could have been so much better. What a shame.… Expand

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

10

SliminSep 27, 2014

Perfect correlation of horror and drama. Sound by J. Murphy, play by C. Murphy and own by Boyle on high quality level. I have my top movie list and this movie of course is in that top-list.
One of best horrors of all times.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

3

LemonmanJan 2, 2014

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I would like to start off this review with a joke. The 28 Weeks Later soundtrack!!! Why is this a joke? Because they decided to use the same song that ended 28 Days Later four different times throughout the movie (possibly more, I lost track). That aside, this movie was fairly enjoyable.The action scenes and story line were entertaining, but the moral dilemmas were fairly predictable, some of the acting sub-par, and a lot of the script cheesy. Also, I was expecting a happy, fulfilling ending to this movie after the first one. This ending left me depressed and mad. This movie, while mildly entertaining, will not be remembered.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

10

JohnnyStephensAug 31, 2013

Excellent!! Scary and shocking as the first one. I really like zombie films, and this one is one of my favourites!! Bravo!!!! Do not miss it!!! Brilliant!!

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

Tss5078Jun 26, 2013

In 2002, Director, Danny Boyle re-invented the zombie movie with his groundbreaking film 28 Days Later. Many credit Boyle with the current zombie craze we enjoy eleven years later. What made that film so enjoyable was that at the time it wasIn 2002, Director, Danny Boyle re-invented the zombie movie with his groundbreaking film 28 Days Later. Many credit Boyle with the current zombie craze we enjoy eleven years later. What made that film so enjoyable was that at the time it was a story we hadn't seen in a long time and it was shot in a way that made it look like a much older film than it was. Five years later the studio wanted a sequel and Boyle wanted no part of it, knowing that it would never live up to the original and indeed it does not. 28 Weeks Later is a continuation of the story, which claims that all the infected had starved to death and that England is free of infection once again. People start moving back in to areas of the country that have been fixed up for them and which are protected by the U.S. Government. We are then introduced to a family which has been reunited. The film starts out with a tremendous action scene that was the only part of the film I enjoyed and the only part that is reminiscent of the first film. The terrific opening is followed by a long, sappy, family reunion and then by a sick person being found. From that point, literally within ten minutes hundreds of people are infected and the army is shooting everything in sight. How could zombies have starved in the first place, but more importantly how can so many people change, just like that, within ten minutes? It didn't make any sense at all, to make things worse, all dialogue and storyline ends at that point and the movie turns into one big gory chase scene without any substance whatsoever. As for the cast of this film, they did nothing to help the story. In the first film, Cillian Murphy was amazing and carried us through the low points, but here it's a cast of newcomers and unsuccessful character actors, who quickly bring the story to a halt. I was looking forward to seeing this film, but not only doesn't it compare to the first film, but it doesn't even live up to the broad genre it is exposing us to. The cast was sloppy, the direction was confusing, and worst of all it just doesn't make any sense! 28 Days Later was groundbreaking, but it's sequel is nothing more than an over-hyped movie that never should have been made.… Expand

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

4

EnsiMar 28, 2013

This is a big step down from 28 Days Later. The storyline is pretty bad and there are A LOT of moments that will make you yell at the screen. Almost every character in the movie seems to be as intelligent as a stack of Pringles. It really,This is a big step down from 28 Days Later. The storyline is pretty bad and there are A LOT of moments that will make you yell at the screen. Almost every character in the movie seems to be as intelligent as a stack of Pringles. It really, really pisses me off when characters are that dumb; the movie loses all credibility with me. Sure there are some tense moments, but this is mostly shovelfilm. I just can't take the movie seriously when the characters are so so stupid. And an EOTech optic does NOT have your standard hunting reticle.… Expand

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

9

survivorfan989Jan 20, 2013

Possibly one of the best zombie films out there and better than the first film. The Brits do it a little different to anyone else but in a way that really works. Lead by a great cast with likable characters also. It was very interestingPossibly one of the best zombie films out there and better than the first film. The Brits do it a little different to anyone else but in a way that really works. Lead by a great cast with likable characters also. It was very interesting watching Don's transition from human to infected and following his story as well as the kids. Quite a few jumpy bits also I might say and it's very 'in your face' as far as Horror films go. Overall impressive film and up there as one of the best zombie flicks!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

GodotIsW8ing4UJan 12, 2013

To the movie's credit, it's built almost entirely on scenes that are wonderfully composed individually, and the opening sequence is a thing of beauty that arguably tops any sequence from the original. The catch is that, when strung together,To the movie's credit, it's built almost entirely on scenes that are wonderfully composed individually, and the opening sequence is a thing of beauty that arguably tops any sequence from the original. The catch is that, when strung together, the scenes don't work nearly as well as they should, because this movie has at least as many gigantic plot holes as it has good scenes. The result is a still-good mess of wasted potential, something like a delicious cake that was dropped two feet onto your plate instead of being gently placed there; while you can still very much enjoy the pieces, you're left with the sense that you're missing out on the glory of what could have been.… Expand

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

5

kublay0880Dec 10, 2012

This was another disappointment, should have take under consideration the mistakes of the first movie, very poor direction again, the actors shouldn't have to carry the whole movie on their own. Good job for the actors..

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

2

QvarNov 15, 2012

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The only good scene of this film is the first one. Period. After that, everybody (and I mena EVERYBODY) in it becomes stupid to a stunning point. While in the first movie the soldiers, for once in the whole 'zombie' genre managed to actually mount an effective quarantine, now they have become bumbling idiots for the sake of the plot: They will leave the infectee with the most dangerous virus ever unguarded, so even a civilian may access it undetected, they will be unable to stop 2 kids breaking their perimeter (who was the genius who thought that brining thousands of civilians without even securing AT LEAST the whole city was a good idea, in the first place?), and generally they will be unable to even shoot an infectee who's coming towars them over a 100 meters corridor.

And don't get me started with the kids. It infuriates me that I will have to wait until the 3rd movie to know that they finally are dead for real. Because that's all they deserve after being the ones (who would have expected, uh?) to discover an infectee, generally being a pain in the ass, and eventually get lost in the dark because aparently they suddenly became unable to hear or just say 'I'm here'.

This film was a pain to watch, from start (save for the mentioned first scene, which to be honest is sublime) to end, and I only beared it in hopes that at least the kids would get killed fast, or something would suddenly surprise me. Overall, one of the worst horror films I've ever seen.… Expand

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

9

potatoes351Aug 13, 2012

Danny Boyle made the great 28 Days Later in 2002. Now 5 years later Juan Carlos Fresnadillo takes the reigns of this very human focused franchise. Though the film is now more action focused and lacks the amazing suspense and emptiness of theDanny Boyle made the great 28 Days Later in 2002. Now 5 years later Juan Carlos Fresnadillo takes the reigns of this very human focused franchise. Though the film is now more action focused and lacks the amazing suspense and emptiness of the original it makes its own place in the franchise. After a heart pounding opening with an infected attack on a farmhouse the setting swiftly moves to London which is now being repopulated with British citizens by the US army. However things quickly go down the **** and the infection breaks out again. Two young siblings and their US army guardians must now make their way across the infected regions of London in hope of rescue. Bloodier, gorier and better then its predecessor in nearly every way.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

0

RennersArmyJul 3, 2012

This movie was amazing! I don't see how people can dislike it. Jeremy and Robert braught tears to my eyes and i never cry at movies. I say go watch it because this is the best zombie movie i have seen in a long time! I hope they make a sequal.

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

All this user's reviews

3

RoeylMay 19, 2012

Sure, zombie movies are not about realism, but does every single character have to be so **** stupid?!!!? They leave everything to chance! no wonder they end up dead, it's so full of mistakes: awful security; the soldiers must be thinkingSure, zombie movies are not about realism, but does every single character have to be so **** stupid?!!!? They leave everything to chance! no wonder they end up dead, it's so full of mistakes: awful security; the soldiers must be thinking this is a joke, there is no other way. They let two STUPID kids go into the infected zone, those kids are also stupid enough to go near and even touch dead infected bodies! The soldiers don't keep each other informed, they don't secure the infected mother (no permanent surveillance, no cameras, no alarm), the husband just so happens to pass EVERY security guards like it was nothing and stupidly kisses her, which makes ONE infected and no **** soldier is smart enough to shoot him: they go alone, they're not careful, THEY D'ONT EVEN DRAW THEIR WEAPONS!!! They can't even secure the civilians in the SECURITY room because the infected can easily get there by just OPENING THE DOORS!! Then when they get ALL infected and the soldiers have to shoot everybody they use snipers! Not explosives or flamethrowers as they later do, but long-range snipers who take down ONE infected at the time! Then they decide to bomb the whole zone through airborne attack and release toxic gas (which makes the bombs pointless + it destroys all the buildings) actually both are pointless because some infected even managed to survive that! The remaining survivors try to escape the gas be locking themselves up in a car, which shouldn't work because cars are in no way gas-proof, they do cover their mouths with clothes though, and it shouldn't work either otherwise the army wouldn't be using this gas if it didn't penetrate very thin clothes! Afterwards, they get chased by a helicopter and drive into a metro station to escape the bullets (it is commonly known that trained US soldier can't shoot a car from a heli in more than 2 min), but instead of going back up and waiting for the heli to leave, they go deeper into the completely dark station with NO LIGHTS except for ONE night vision scope on the dead soldier's gun and guess what? they get separated in the complete darkness with an infected, but of course no one shoots until someone dies, no one screams "I'm here! HELP!!!" and they leave the gun behind... -_- It's only at this point of the movie that the two kids realize they're immune and that's why it's so important that they live because it did not cross ANYONE's mind to tell them before, which makes me think that the survivors are as brain damaged as the infected... THE END! This movie surely does not deserve a good rating, except for the good acting and makeup, otherwise SXF was sometimes **** music was nice too. In conclusion, if you want to survive a zombie apocalypse, don't watch this movie, and **** run when you see a zombie. To the writers: next time PLEASE don't do something COMPLETELY predictable or stick with the first 15 min of the film that actually looked like 28 days later!… Expand

8 of 9 users found this helpful81

All this user's reviews

5

RegOzFeb 7, 2012

Compared to the 28 days later, this movie is quite mediocre, and lacks substance. The idea of a re-emergence of the virus was exciting and quite alluring. I couldn't wait to watch it but the movie didn't deliver what it offered. The first 40Compared to the 28 days later, this movie is quite mediocre, and lacks substance. The idea of a re-emergence of the virus was exciting and quite alluring. I couldn't wait to watch it but the movie didn't deliver what it offered. The first 40 minutes of this movie are promising, critical, intense, and gripping; however, soon after the movie loses lustre . The argument could have been better elaborated, because there were good ideas; instead, it becomes redundant and futile. Sadly, the characters were not well developed but shallow. Their reasoning and behaviour were mostly, obtuse, one-sided, and irresponsible. Precisely because of it we never really care about them or feel any connection with them. Personally, I truly disliked 'Scarlett'and Tammy's characters. The ending was quite predictable, and the performances unimpressive.To me, watching this movie once was a 'must' and it was okey but I wouldn't watch it again. Overall: a movie with good intentions, pretentious, but ultimately disappointing.… Expand

3 of 3 users found this helpful30

All this user's reviews

7

DerekKentNov 21, 2011

It was a decent film. It definitely wasn't as powerful as "28 Days Later". I didn't really care for the main character being a little kid. To me, he wasn't even really a character, he seemed to have been put in just because the directorIt was a decent film. It definitely wasn't as powerful as "28 Days Later". I didn't really care for the main character being a little kid. To me, he wasn't even really a character, he seemed to have been put in just because the director wanted him to. Other then that, it was an okay movie.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

grandpajoe6191Oct 19, 2011

Newbie director Juan Carlos Fresnadillo sure knows how to give horror and fun using impeccably preposterous, over-the-top methods. However for "28 Weeks Later", that's how far the film is capable of bringing itself up to.

5 of 5 users found this helpful50

All this user's reviews

7

buzerOct 6, 2011

First scene was amazing, best i've sen in long time in all horror movie. Too bad rest didn't keep up with it, it could have been on of the greatest movies of all time. Still solid 7 from me

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

10

JoseRochaPTOct 3, 2011

Another fantastic sequel. Everything is new, there are new "scares", and ways of doing so. The environment is completely amazing, the story itself captive as I said in criticism of the earlier film is a film that deserves a sequel. For all IAnother fantastic sequel. Everything is new, there are new "scares", and ways of doing so. The environment is completely amazing, the story itself captive as I said in criticism of the earlier film is a film that deserves a sequel. For all I know there will be a sequel that will be called 28 months later and is scheduled to launch in 2013.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

Delta_AssaultSep 28, 2011

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I just watched this for the first time because Left 4 Dead put me in a zombie movie mood.

And goddamn, what a **** disappointment. This movie seriously pissed me off. I'm still angry sitting here thinking about it. It had a pretty cool premise, the US army reestablishing a colony on Britain after the infection died off. Unfortunately, the movie is really short, cause we're already at about the halfway mark by the time the infection comes back. That's just not enough, especially since this is a sequel, meaning we're expecting things to be bigger and better. For the most part, this didn't happen. And they had all the ingredients to make a great sequel.

First off, we're supposed to buy that these two dumb kids can sneak out of the safe zone. The level of military incompetence in this movie is truly a wonder to behold, it's **** everywhere. And seriously, if these kids were real, they wouldn't **** risk their lives going out to their old house, the area's got damn zombies. I'd be happy to stay in my cozy penthouse or whatever the **** their dad had going. The girl apparently went back to pack her lame ass shoes or something, dumb.

Then, when they find the infected mom and bring her in, we're supposed to buy that the dad, Mr. Carlyle, has the handy dandy all access keycard and can sneak around like **** Sam Fisher to get in undetected and see his wife. Again, absolute military idiocy. What kind of military gives a civilian caretaker access to a medical bio hazard quarantine?

So he goes and kisses her all sloppily and gets her saliva, which is icky. Then he gets infected and attacks her. This is odd, because this is the only known case of one infected attacking another infected. In every other instance in the movie, the infected are all running together merrily as one big horde, never attacking each other. How strange.

Later, the military stupidly sticks the civilians all together in one big warehouse for their own safety. And locks it, with one cheap ass padlock. Ok, whatever. However, their brilliant containment plan is somewhat flawed, because this warehouse apparently has a back door which is not locked, and unluckily gets accessed by the infected Mr. Carlyle. Great, all the innocent civilians are locked in a room where they can all get infected together. What the **** movie? Why do you make yourself so damn stupid and nonsensical?

So everything goes to **** and Doyle the Delta sniper comes to rescue them. Cool, this is getting interesting. But then they run into another army sniper who begins sniping at them. Now, this is where they again lost me. Instead of getting on his radio and saying "Whoa whoa, stop shooting at us, we're not infected!" Doyle shoots the sniper. Wait, what? Would a US army sniper really shoot another US army sniper in cold blood? This didn't make any sense.

Now, there were a few things I liked. One was the helicopter chopping up a bunch of infected with the rotor, that was pretty awesome.

Later on, they get stuck in a car to escape a gas attack. Now, I'm not really sure that getting in a car, closing all the vents and breathing through your T-shirt would really protect you from a gas attack, but we'll let that slide. They see that there are gas mask soldiers coming to torch **** with flamethrowers, and the car won't start. So Doyle decides to get out and push. This leads to him getting burned alive. This was really dumb. Nonsensical. Why didn't he just get out and show the guys with flamethrowers that he wasn't infected? Then he wouldn't have been toasted. Or hell, he could've gotten out and shot them all with his rifle, which he happily did before to the sniper. No logic at all. Just a cheap death to shock the audience, after making us like the guy.

Now we come to the worst part of the movie for me, the nightvision trek through the subway. This was **** excruciating to watch. Some ppl actually said this was "artistic" but I don't see anything artistic about seeing everything in green night vision while being whirled around like in the Blair Witch Project. I go to the movies to be entertained and this was not entertaining in the least.

This scene also ended a very problematic element of the movie for me, the dad character as some sort of main villain. Sorry, but this whole thing didn't seem like a good idea. I prefer my zombie hordes to be, well, zombie hordes. Just faceless masses of death. The introduction of a boss zombie like the dad was lame and really took away from the sort of realism that the first film achieved, IMO.

So yea, this film was a huge disappointment, since I really liked the first film. While that was dark, this just seemed pointlessly retarded, especially the cheap deaths of some main characters. Left me feeling full of rage, you could say.… Expand

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

8

ZiggyStardustJul 3, 2011

I'd say 28 weeks later takes what 28 days later did and does it a slight bit better. Again, like it's prequel it's an amazing horror/zombie flick, definitely worth a watch!

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

9

TheQuietGamerJun 1, 2011

A fantastic sequel, it has a lot of tense moments, a lot of enjoyable new characters, my only complaints are that it starts of slow, and that the ending is a little confusing, but the atmosphere, and the jaw dropping moments make this a mustA fantastic sequel, it has a lot of tense moments, a lot of enjoyable new characters, my only complaints are that it starts of slow, and that the ending is a little confusing, but the atmosphere, and the jaw dropping moments make this a must seee for fans of the first movie.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

3

UnknownsockMay 1, 2011

The first 15 minutes that Danny Boyle directed was like the original, awesome. But the rest was just too predictable, leaving no room for any intensity or frightful moments.

Yet another IP ruioned by idiots.

2 of 4 users found this helpful22

All this user's reviews

8

juliankleissJan 16, 2011

A terrific movie dealing with the moral problem of utilitarianism: sacrifice a few to save many?

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

8

MrRiggsJan 9, 2011

When I first heard about this movie I was pumped. I can NEVER get enough quality zombie/infection type movies if they are well done, and this is WELL done. Acting is solid, the effects/costumes/blood/gore as all very believable, some partsWhen I first heard about this movie I was pumped. I can NEVER get enough quality zombie/infection type movies if they are well done, and this is WELL done. Acting is solid, the effects/costumes/blood/gore as all very believable, some parts will get you angry tho and thats what I love about movies, some parts you just want to reach through the screen, kept my involved and entertained throughout, same as 28 weeks later, BOTH quality infection/plague flicks that are a must watch for anyone a fan of those things. I wish theyd make more like this...!… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

7

MetalMan95Dec 3, 2010

Effective sequel. The action, gore, and story is quite good. Jeremy Renner definitely shines as the best actor in this. And it does set itself up very nicely for a sequel. With a good film, with a good sequel, i would watch the next one. NotEffective sequel. The action, gore, and story is quite good. Jeremy Renner definitely shines as the best actor in this. And it does set itself up very nicely for a sequel. With a good film, with a good sequel, i would watch the next one. Not a must see, but its a good time.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

PolybiusNov 5, 2010

It's definitely a good piece of cinematographic work, and a really promising sequel. But the acting and the chemistry between the characters is so artificial and (sometimes) forced, you can't actually feel sympathy for them.

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

6

ERG1008Sep 17, 2010

Sequel to the hot & cold 28 Days later.
Britain has been cleared of the Rage infection/virus so the intention is to re-populate. Americans get involved, probably looking for oil under Canary Wharf.
It plods along at an ok pace, few twists &Sequel to the hot & cold 28 Days later.
Britain has been cleared of the Rage infection/virus so the intention is to re-populate. Americans get involved, probably looking for oil under Canary Wharf.
It plods along at an ok pace, few twists & turns here & there but nothing really special.
Top marks for the scene in the subway with the sniper night scope sight though.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

8

NF123Aug 24, 2010

Where 28 days later had subtly 28 weeks later has explosions, however it's a decent turn for the franchise. it's not as suspensful as the original but that doesn't mean it's not as good. OK the militaristic themes basically boil down to "USWhere 28 days later had subtly 28 weeks later has explosions, however it's a decent turn for the franchise. it's not as suspensful as the original but that doesn't mean it's not as good. OK the militaristic themes basically boil down to "US army=bad :(" and it had been done much better by Danny Boyle himself, however that doesn't mean Characterisation is sacrificed and at the end I did care about what happaned. It also helps that all performances are excellent and while its a bit cliched to cast the attractive young women (Rose Byrne) as a doctor her performance is so convincing it works! My personal rule to this is while 28 days later is creepy after the first time you've seen it you won't really jump, 28 weeks later is a lot more rewatchable and feels a bit more like a Zombie film as opposed to 28 days later which felt like a drama that happaned to feature zombies.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

10

LarryBFeb 2, 2010

No, Conor B., how misleading Metacritic users can be. Are you serious? You're suggesting that a zombie movie is...implausible? Are you kidding me? You're an idiot. Zombie movies aren't supposed to be about realism. No, Conor B., how misleading Metacritic users can be. Are you serious? You're suggesting that a zombie movie is...implausible? Are you kidding me? You're an idiot. Zombie movies aren't supposed to be about realism. They're supposed to be scary and intense, and that's exactly what 28 Weeks Later was. Stick to the more important George Clooney type movies with realistic situations and realistic people. Or, you know, you could just go outside and experience realistic situations yourself, but those aren't that entertaining, are they? And, Harry G., what they hell are you talking about? There were only a few scenes that even used CG.... Most of the people underrating this excellent movie don't even know what the hell they are talking about: they're either enraged that this movie is a sequel (and all sequels MUST suck, it's a traditional POV to take on all sequels) or they're upset over the lack of realism...in a movie about zombies. I'll stick with the critics, thanks.… Expand

2 of 5 users found this helpful

10

DanLNov 27, 2009

Absolutely phenomenal. I enjoy this movie considerably more than the first one. The acting was believable, and the special effects definitely worked to convey the gritty, horrific reality of the subject matter.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

1

AlexG.Oct 31, 2009

Do you like movies where you don't have to think? Do you enjoy movies with plot holes the size of an Airbus? Do you enjoy movies with magical zombies that can teleport? How about movies with the most stupid, idiotic unengaged Do you like movies where you don't have to think? Do you enjoy movies with plot holes the size of an Airbus? Do you enjoy movies with magical zombies that can teleport? How about movies with the most stupid, idiotic unengaged characters? Well you will enjoy this film! Now, don't get me wrong, I love gore, suspense, great music score.. which you will find in this movie.. well the first 5 minutes, but after that, you got nothing. Illogical, how does a Janitor have clearance all through-out a military base? How do the kids in the film defy all logic throughout? If you want an engaging horror movie with characters you feel sorry for when they die, with an actual real soul. Avoid this film.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

9

JoshuaHMay 2, 2009

Great film, Shows enough gore to make a horror movie yet creates enough suspense for a compelling thriller that you can't take your eyes off.The director masterfully builds suspense and excitement. Everything was well done from the Great film, Shows enough gore to make a horror movie yet creates enough suspense for a compelling thriller that you can't take your eyes off.The director masterfully builds suspense and excitement. Everything was well done from the camera work to the music cues.Good dialogue and great special effects. loved it.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

RandyMOct 11, 2008

28 Weeks Later is dark. Beyond dark. It's a movie lover's masochistic nightmare. But it's shocking, intelligent, and will leave you utterly exhausted by the time your finished watching it. The movie gives you almost no time to 28 Weeks Later is dark. Beyond dark. It's a movie lover's masochistic nightmare. But it's shocking, intelligent, and will leave you utterly exhausted by the time your finished watching it. The movie gives you almost no time to relax and cleverly instills a sense of panic throughout. Brilliantly concieved and more than worthy to sit among the few top-tier horror films.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

JacobBAug 7, 2008

Well if you were to ask me I would say that this movie was no where near as good as the first one there were a couple things I did not like in this movie for say how stupid the military was and how stupid most characters were I think the Well if you were to ask me I would say that this movie was no where near as good as the first one there were a couple things I did not like in this movie for say how stupid the military was and how stupid most characters were I think the sniper was the only one there who even had a brain but it did have some awesome action scenes that's the only reason I would watch this movie.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

ArjanD.Mar 29, 2008

28 Days Later was, in my opinion, a breathtaking movie, so I expected 28 Weeks later to be of the same quality. I was very disappointed to see the movie fall apart soon after the (second) outbreak of the infection. Most of the actors were 28 Days Later was, in my opinion, a breathtaking movie, so I expected 28 Weeks later to be of the same quality. I was very disappointed to see the movie fall apart soon after the (second) outbreak of the infection. Most of the actors were sacrificed so fast after each other you didn't have time to feel sorry for them. Besides, the atmospere and suspense of 28 Days later weren't matched by far. I think this is the case because a bid-budget sequel to a low-budget movie simply doesn't work. All in all, I think 28 Weeks later isn't worthy of being the sequel to 28 Days later.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

NickM.Jan 20, 2008

This movie will probably go down as a classic horror film. It is one of the scariest movies to date, and it had a classic moment a minute. It's biggest praise is its opening scene, one of the best in any movie ever.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

JudyNJan 19, 2008

Fairly awful. After watching this I didn't understand all the praise that this movie received about it being suspenseful and intriguing. The two points that this movie gained was due to the first few minutes of the movie in the Fairly awful. After watching this I didn't understand all the praise that this movie received about it being suspenseful and intriguing. The two points that this movie gained was due to the first few minutes of the movie in the farmhouse, but then becomes predictable and riddled with sentimentality and cheesiness. It felt like I was checking off a list of cheesy factors that needed to be fulfilled, what with idiotic rebellious children and somehow instead of being killed off, they must be protected. The ridiculous reason the infection began to spread, along with many skips in the plotline. Instead of the riveting story in the first movie that questions the basis of people's humanity in the face of a crisis, this one is basically a compilation of unrealistic human idiocy that's beyond hopeless.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

JanJan 5, 2008

I loved the first movie (28 days later), but this one just doesn't make sense. The plot holes are too big, the ambiance is good at the start, but later you will just be watching to events that follow to each other and make little sense. I loved the first movie (28 days later), but this one just doesn't make sense. The plot holes are too big, the ambiance is good at the start, but later you will just be watching to events that follow to each other and make little sense. Maybe because of the big expectations I had, but when I finished watching this movie, I was was really unsatisfied.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

0

MikeDec 25, 2007

Started out "ok" and then turned into a giant mess, to the point where I lost interest in the movie!

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

MrSmithNov 17, 2007

If you enjoyed the first you should enjoy this, I found the first to be more scary than this.

0 of 1 users found this helpful

6

FrostNNov 16, 2007

Starts out ok, but quickly turns into a big mess. With the ratings this movie has gotten I was expecting so much more. This movie might be best for the people that really likes zombie movies or are fans of the first movie, but for the rest Starts out ok, but quickly turns into a big mess. With the ratings this movie has gotten I was expecting so much more. This movie might be best for the people that really likes zombie movies or are fans of the first movie, but for the rest of us, it's nothing special. Like the last Resident Evil movie, it's best to describe this movie as an action film, rather than a horror film, although you do have the violence and the blood, but that's basically it. The characters are totally uninteresting and you don't care about any of them, and certainly not the kids. This movie is ridden with lots of flaws, both in logic and in how things work in reality, but put all that aside, and it still isn't as entertaining as you would want it to be given the high rating. Conclusion: Not one for the big cozy movie nights, but ok to watch when you have plenty of time and just want to watch something.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

0

PaulS.Nov 16, 2007

Take out the screaming and the bloody faces up against windows and what have you got, somebody drooling blood on to victim's face

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

A.NonymousNov 15, 2007

Grim, brutal, fast-paced but, most importantly, believable. This is what makes a zombie movie great. More harrowing than it's predecessor, but definetely addresses some of the issues that plagued 28 Days Later. The only negative is that Grim, brutal, fast-paced but, most importantly, believable. This is what makes a zombie movie great. More harrowing than it's predecessor, but definetely addresses some of the issues that plagued 28 Days Later. The only negative is that it's extremely depressing; even Days had a happy ending. An excellent movie, the only things critics can moan about it are technicalities. Honestly people, if you can't give a well-balanced review don't review at all.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

1

JohnS.Nov 7, 2007

Entertaining and solid action, but a few gaping plot holes make it hard to believe. First you've got talk about the U.S. Army and tight security protocols. Then, the next moment, there is practically none. People are allowed to wander Entertaining and solid action, but a few gaping plot holes make it hard to believe. First you've got talk about the U.S. Army and tight security protocols. Then, the next moment, there is practically none. People are allowed to wander around quite freely. Two kids escape. Quarantine for a potentially infected person? There is no quarantine. In a real situation none of the plot turning points could have happened. The script writer should have been told 'you can do better than this'.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful

9

JSNov 4, 2007

It's ridiculous that some people and reviewers are complaining about the level of gore & violence in this movie. It's a ZOMBIE MOVIE!!! What did you expect?? In any case, it's one hell of a zombie movie, and one of the best It's ridiculous that some people and reviewers are complaining about the level of gore & violence in this movie. It's a ZOMBIE MOVIE!!! What did you expect?? In any case, it's one hell of a zombie movie, and one of the best I've ever seen. I couldn't take my eyes away for a moment. It's not perfect - they try to make the US military look like jerks, and one zombie that finds his former family again and again is pretty implausible. But the sheer genius here - of how and why a virus that is wiped out suddenly returns is an amazing story. The central family in the story are interesting too - they are not heroes but ordinary people with ordinary flaws dealing with a situation totally out of their control. It's every bit as good as "28 days".… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

JackNov 2, 2007

I actually expect very little plot coherence from horror flicks, still this film annoyed me. Not incredulous supernatural things, but just stupid things like a janitor having unsupervised, total access through a military quarantine facility I actually expect very little plot coherence from horror flicks, still this film annoyed me. Not incredulous supernatural things, but just stupid things like a janitor having unsupervised, total access through a military quarantine facility (under such times, no less) to get through the area with NO ONE noticing. And this scene is a fulcrum of the entire movie, if that gives you any sense of the weak writing. I can think of several more examples like that.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

ConorB.Oct 30, 2007

How misleading critics can be. Washington Post: 100, The New York Times: 90, Chicago Tribune: 88. You've got to be joking. You'd swear this movie was up there with the God Father. Yes it is somewhat entertaining, yes there is some How misleading critics can be. Washington Post: 100, The New York Times: 90, Chicago Tribune: 88. You've got to be joking. You'd swear this movie was up there with the God Father. Yes it is somewhat entertaining, yes there is some good camera angles etc., but the bottom line is that once again this is a sequel that is just cashing in on it's predecessor. "Imaginative" ? I don't think so. How about: predictable, implausible in parts (didn't think "zombies" can teleport) and unimaginative. The ending also is somewhat weak. The acting is good, the action, make-up etc. good but that doesn't make a great movie. If it comes out on TV check it out but don't bother otherwise.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

AnthonyG.Oct 28, 2007

28 weeks later was way better then days. i was shakeing during the whole movie. Its was amazing. if u haven't seen it, then go see it.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

AntonioR.Oct 26, 2007

Amazing!

0 of 0 users found this helpful

0

HarryG.Oct 26, 2007

This movie was utter crap, the first 15 minutes feels like a meth induced hallucination - and really did we really need to have one of the main character gouge out his wife 's eyes for like 5 minutes. Terrible, felt like amateur video This movie was utter crap, the first 15 minutes feels like a meth induced hallucination - and really did we really need to have one of the main character gouge out his wife 's eyes for like 5 minutes. Terrible, felt like amateur video game graphics.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful

8

NoxL.Oct 26, 2007

This movie surprised me. I enjoyed it more than it's predecessor. I love the reimagining of the zombie genre, as "scary" movies were never my thing. The violence in this movie was perfect, it impacted you in a way that really made you This movie surprised me. I enjoyed it more than it's predecessor. I love the reimagining of the zombie genre, as "scary" movies were never my thing. The violence in this movie was perfect, it impacted you in a way that really made you feel claustrophobic and it wasn't lacking in class, as someone said. It makes you wonder how voracious these infected are. Sure, there are some parts that are obviously nonsensical but if you think about this in a real world situation, it might make more sense... The acting was pretty nice too. Actors I've never even seen before that don't look like amazing supermodels, but like normal people who can do a decent job acting. I liked that.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

MarieMOct 25, 2007

It starts and never stops. The zombie/monsters are actually scary - something that's hard to do these days when we see zombies at the supermarket all the time. Robert Carlyle is living with his wife in the countryside - trying to stay It starts and never stops. The zombie/monsters are actually scary - something that's hard to do these days when we see zombies at the supermarket all the time. Robert Carlyle is living with his wife in the countryside - trying to stay away from the plague. Their children live in Spain, and are free of it. After a while, when things are "safe" again, the two children return to England. Much excitement ensues. Jeremy Renner is excellent in his tiny part as a sharpshooter given orders he can't obey. The actor playing the little boy is extraordinary, too. The only bit of miscasting was with the older girl. She's a former model and - guess what? - was in WAY over her head next to Robert Carlyle and the rest. I think she was hired because she has huge eyes and they needed them to look scared all the time. The fact that her eyeliner never smudged despite days of running and crying and screaming really bugged me.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

6

AndrewGOct 23, 2007

Like the first film 28 days later, it starts off well premise and suspense wise but later turns into a mess of action with little dialogue or sense. That isn't to say their aren't some good moments amist the action but both these Like the first film 28 days later, it starts off well premise and suspense wise but later turns into a mess of action with little dialogue or sense. That isn't to say their aren't some good moments amist the action but both these films should have done better with what they established.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

7

KenH.Oct 23, 2007

Several really compelling scnenes make up for some of the logic gaps. This is a zombie movie after all so I'm not looking for a watertight plot. It seems some viewers didnt get the references to the USA occupation of Iraq with the Several really compelling scnenes make up for some of the logic gaps. This is a zombie movie after all so I'm not looking for a watertight plot. It seems some viewers didnt get the references to the USA occupation of Iraq with the military containment of London. That the containment fails from human ineptitude and lack of forethought is part of the point. Its interesting that so many say the first movie was better because that one had several plot problems too.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

jeffc.Oct 23, 2007

I really dug it. Gritty, great music, well done!

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

PatrickOct 22, 2007

I've already seen this dvd multiple times since its release, and have loved it every time. Great zombie movie that is a complete departure from 28 Days Later (so stop comparing the two you imbeciles, they're hardly similar). The I've already seen this dvd multiple times since its release, and have loved it every time. Great zombie movie that is a complete departure from 28 Days Later (so stop comparing the two you imbeciles, they're hardly similar). The sheer terror and manner in which the virus effects all involved always draws me back.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

3

KeithJOct 20, 2007

28 Days Later was original, fresh and clever. 28 Weeks Later was an illogical mess. It features a 40-year-old general (psst, that doesn't happen) and a "Delta" soldier with a buzzcut and regulation uniform (psst, that also doesn't 28 Days Later was original, fresh and clever. 28 Weeks Later was an illogical mess. It features a 40-year-old general (psst, that doesn't happen) and a "Delta" soldier with a buzzcut and regulation uniform (psst, that also doesn't happen), and a genius plan that involves a) herding all civilians into a contained area and NOT guarding the doors, b) killing everything that moves rather than, for instance, saying "drop to the ground so we can shoot the infected", c) killing even people they can tell 100% are NOT infected, such as one of their own soldiers pushing a car, d) firebombing the city but forgetting to seal the exits, so a big team of zombies escapes. It also features a magical zombie who appears wherever any zombie is called for. This movie is pretty dumb. It belongs on SpikeTV or TBS at 3 a.m.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful

4

PhillyDOct 19, 2007

I saw this movie a while ago but I feel compelled to tell someone that I hated it and thought it was an absolute mess. Tedious, unexplained musical montages, idiotic plotline and extremely unpleasant. Now, I've seen a lot of violent I saw this movie a while ago but I feel compelled to tell someone that I hated it and thought it was an absolute mess. Tedious, unexplained musical montages, idiotic plotline and extremely unpleasant. Now, I've seen a lot of violent movies, but watching a man shove his thumbs into his wifes eye-sockets for an extended period of time just somehow lacks class. Call me old fashioned. What a bore this movie was. I seriously could not have cared less what happened to the arbitrary band of survivors who happen to survive the first half of the film. Seriously, it's incredible how much you don't care. You really don't. Live, die, eaten alive, faced smashed in, burned alive, chopped up by helicopter blades. Whatever man. Whatever. The helicopter massacre was pretty hilarious though. That killed me. I love zombies but this movie stinks.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

chadOct 18, 2007

This movie took everything good in the first movie and brought it to the next level ( the infected, blood) and got rid of everything that wasn't good about the first (slow pace) to make for one awesome fast paced movie that had me This movie took everything good in the first movie and brought it to the next level ( the infected, blood) and got rid of everything that wasn't good about the first (slow pace) to make for one awesome fast paced movie that had me thinking about it all day.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

7

SimonBOct 16, 2007

Read a lot of reviews about this movie and I'm appalled at how much people want to see reality nowadays. I mean, aren't you all tired of seeing reality shows on TV? Do you REALLY want that to translate into horror movies? Have Read a lot of reviews about this movie and I'm appalled at how much people want to see reality nowadays. I mean, aren't you all tired of seeing reality shows on TV? Do you REALLY want that to translate into horror movies? Have like, the cameraman really be in the movie, seeing the horror through his lens? A horror movie has to live with the horror factor. If you spend too much time going through the complexities, such as "The U.S. Army not being as dumb" as they are in the movie... Then you're gonna have a three (or more) hours long movie. A horror movie works when it's short, scary and makes you piss your pants. In my opinion, if people get turned off by the whole "Oh he gets through unnoticed" factor, then they just shouldn't watch horror movies. Even better, they shouldn't watch movies in order to be able to reflect on their eventless lives. It's a must-see for people that love movies just to watch movies, instead of being pseudo-intellectuals about it.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

9

JoshH.Oct 14, 2007

I'm not sure what was so fantastic about 28 Days Later. A developed plot? Yeah, RIGHT. It starts out with a monkey that bites someone. The rage virus is let loose, causing everyone to go nuts! Yawn. Sounds a lot like the Umbrella virus I'm not sure what was so fantastic about 28 Days Later. A developed plot? Yeah, RIGHT. It starts out with a monkey that bites someone. The rage virus is let loose, causing everyone to go nuts! Yawn. Sounds a lot like the Umbrella virus from the Resident Evil games… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

6

AdrianG.Oct 14, 2007

I was very upset over this movie, 28 days later was great, it portrait realism and and superb acting. 28 weeks later however was pretty good but nowhere near as good as the first. it seems like they took more of a resident evil approach to I was very upset over this movie, 28 days later was great, it portrait realism and and superb acting. 28 weeks later however was pretty good but nowhere near as good as the first. it seems like they took more of a resident evil approach to it, which i did not like… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

EldonOct 12, 2007

Um... it is NOT better than the original. In fact, I thought it sucked actually. At a point it just got so bad and stupid the whole illusion was lost. I'm stunned these guys are giving it 9's and 8's! Come on! You think this Um... it is NOT better than the original. In fact, I thought it sucked actually. At a point it just got so bad and stupid the whole illusion was lost. I'm stunned these guys are giving it 9's and 8's! Come on! You think this movie, compared with all the other really good ones out there through the decades, is almost a 10? NO, it absolutely is not.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

BryanS.Oct 11, 2007

This was an amazing movie.. like i could just picture another one. i hope they make one cause if the virus hit europe all of asia and africa would fall to and i could see giant barriers.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

GaryJ.Oct 11, 2007

Killing the Dead is Good.

0 of 1 users found this helpful

9

IrritatedOct 11, 2007

Firstly! This is not a zombie movie! They are not zombies, they are infected with a virus! The victims do not die! And as for the person saying that the UK director was trying to say something political, does the name Juan Carlos Fresnadillo Firstly! This is not a zombie movie! They are not zombies, they are infected with a virus! The victims do not die! And as for the person saying that the UK director was trying to say something political, does the name Juan Carlos Fresnadillo sound like an English name?! Secondly, this is a top notch movie!… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

10

SeanP.Oct 10, 2007

Just to let everyone in on a secret. They are not zombies and that is why the father followed them. They are just real angry. Now actually watch the movie and don't go into it thinking this movie sucks because they didn't explain Just to let everyone in on a secret. They are not zombies and that is why the father followed them. They are just real angry. Now actually watch the movie and don't go into it thinking this movie sucks because they didn't explain everything to me.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

9

ChristopherW.Oct 10, 2007

'28 Weeks Later' is visceral and gripping moviemaking of an uncommon order. It manages to reaffirm the terror of it's predecessor while also charting down an unrelenting path of mounting doom and gloom. It explodes at a '28 Weeks Later' is visceral and gripping moviemaking of an uncommon order. It manages to reaffirm the terror of it's predecessor while also charting down an unrelenting path of mounting doom and gloom. It explodes at a fevered pitch from it's very first scene, and the pace never wavers for more than a couple seconds. This is simply one of the finest horror films of recent years. A must see!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

HelloYouOct 8, 2007

One of the best movies of the year (or was it last year...I don't remember). It's been a long time that I left the theater throughly satisfied with a movie in every aspect. On top of that, for it to be a sequel that I felt this way One of the best movies of the year (or was it last year...I don't remember). It's been a long time that I left the theater throughly satisfied with a movie in every aspect. On top of that, for it to be a sequel that I felt this way about is mindblowing. Perhaps the one and only time. I can safetly say in my own mind that I enjoyed it more than the original. It took me awhile to really appreciate the original, tho I liked it. However, 28 Weeks Later has everything that was great about the original and so much more. Better characters, a better story, better action, scarier, more shock value, and a non-happy ending that I luv. When I say "shock value" I don't mean in terms of gore (tho it has that), but I mean that some of the main characters die and I didn't expect it what-so-ever. A lot of the time you can see a person's death coming from a mile away, but my favorite character in the movie...whom shall remain nameless to not spoil it...dies so suddenly that I actually felt EMOTION for a fiction character. That rarely happens for me. The only other recent time I can remember feeling something like that was when Leo's character died in the Departed (ya, spoiler...you should of saw it by now). I also love how the Helicopter pilot comes off as kind of a jerkoff but I know I would do the exact same thing he did. I read a lot of people saying that what the characters did at times was illogical, but I believe the character's acted in a very realistic way and they acted like realistic people...not cut in dry...good and bad. I can't wait to buy it tomorrow.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

9

FaisalH.Sep 18, 2007

One of the few movies which are even better than the original, which was excellent too. 28 Weeks Later will suck you in right from the chilling first sequence and take you on a journey about the aftermath of the virus, right till the One of the few movies which are even better than the original, which was excellent too. 28 Weeks Later will suck you in right from the chilling first sequence and take you on a journey about the aftermath of the virus, right till the wonderful ending of the movie. A well-written script, an intelligent way to bring something new to the series, this movie is a must-watch for anyone who saw 28 Days Later, or even have a passing interest in watching high-quality horror movies. My recommendation - catch it on DVD, the extras (especially the comics) are more than worth it.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

8

MaxC.Sep 7, 2007

An interesting movie that isn't quite as good as the original, it is stick worth watching for the zombie/disease fans. Admittedly, if the military in the movie was the LEAST BIT INTELLIGENT, none of the movie would have happened, but An interesting movie that isn't quite as good as the original, it is stick worth watching for the zombie/disease fans. Admittedly, if the military in the movie was the LEAST BIT INTELLIGENT, none of the movie would have happened, but that would have been a very boring movie. Weird that the stupid military is the United States military. I think the UK director was trying to get something across politically.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

MattMcLovinAug 22, 2007

Too high tech unlike the first. 28 Days Later blows this movie out of the water. 28 Weeks Later pushed trying to making better as the first with a lot more action and blood. Also, the guy who started it all, was everywhere the kids where in Too high tech unlike the first. 28 Days Later blows this movie out of the water. 28 Weeks Later pushed trying to making better as the first with a lot more action and blood. Also, the guy who started it all, was everywhere the kids where in the movie. Just poor.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

CarsonB.Aug 22, 2007

horrible script filled with gaping holes and riddled with extremely illogical and implausible events. Had my hopes up but this movie was a total waste of time.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

MathewB.Jul 8, 2007

Huge Plot holes, and too much camera ramping ruin what begins as a promising sequel. A few o.k. set pieces, but logic gaps, uninteresting characters, and a poorly exacuted sermon hurt this film.

1 of 1 users found this helpful