28 Weeks Later... - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

28 Weeks Later... Reviews

Page 1 of 2375
Super Reviewer
February 14, 2008
Despite some good clean zombie fun, Juan Carlos Fresnadillo gets a little preposterous with 28 Weeks Later.

Overall, the 90 minutes of virus outbreak is acceptable; however, the likability of many a character is low. Aside from the introduction, there is a solid stretch of buildup before the storm, which is a tad tedious.

The second half makes a push to redeem itself with some violence and action. The carnage is bloody violent, although the camerawork during a lot of these segments serves as a distraction.

Notable faces fill out the cast. Robery Carlyle is a standout performer. Rose Byrne is a delight with her role. Jeremy Renner is a bit of a surprise cast for his character.

28 Weeks Later is a mixture of positives and negatives, but when all the running comes to an end, it is a watchable sequel.
Super Reviewer
½ October 21, 2012
I know a lot of people that think this is inferior to the first film based on the "atmosphere" of the first movie. But, I actually like this one more, because it doesn't have long drawn out scenes of nothing happening, but instead is a true full throttle horror movie. This has probably the scariest opening scene I've ever seen in the theater. Not sure why, but the way the house is attacked, and the guy leaving his wife to die just really got me. I saw this in the theater and after the first five minutes I was like "holy crap this is a lot more intense than the first movie". Re-watching it now, five years later, this remains a very intense and brutal horror movie that exceeds the first movie by a lot. This picks up 28 weeks after the virus breakout and London is basically a ghost town. The U.S. army has helped get it ready for people to movie back in and start to rebuild the city, when an outbreak occurs. There's more to it, but that is the jest of it. Good performances by all the actors(keep an eye out for Jeremy Renner, aka Hawkeye), and the violence is just insane. This movie holds little back in terms of gore and going the extra step most horror movies(at least nowadays) won't go. I really like this film and I wish they would have made a third movie along to compliment this movie. Horror fans have to watch this, if you have a squeamish stomach then steer clear!
Super Reviewer
April 5, 2009
I liked this one, its really haunting, eerie and a little scary as its filmed with pace, handheld cams and a gritty look. All this makes the whole thing feel really real and very graphic, it also adds to the haunting feeling, just like the first. The blood is gory and in your face but not overblown, the zombies are great...the running shots just make them so aggressive and terrifying, really hits the mark with the menacing soundtrack.

Basically the story is the usual thing, the infected get into the populace and bob's your uncle...everybody's up shit creek. The government try to kill everybody surprise surprise and fail, surprise surprise, a lot of people you thought would live, die and its all very spooky, especially the deserted London shots. How the hell they managed that I'll never know living in London myself.

Its the same plot really, the same kind of zombie movie as all the others basically, same blood effects, same outcome, same everything to be honest. The difference is the look and feel of it, it just works brilliantly visually and atmospherically. I thought this was gonna be a crappy sequel like so many other cash in's can be...I was soooo wrong, great horror, top darkhorse of a flick.
Samuel Riley
Super Reviewer
June 29, 2012
It is sadly not as good as 28 Days Later, however, it does stand out in certain areas. Its as intense, possibly darker and is more horrific. However, there is less emotional intensity that the first one succeeded in. Another flaw is that too much happened in fairly little time, it lacked a suspenseful pace. All those who enjoyed the original may not enjoy the sequel, but its worth a try for horror fans.
Super Reviewer
½ May 9, 2007
An American led NATO force is sent in to supervise the re-population of Britain when a new outbreak occurs and the military loses control of the situation. A sequel to the OK but not amazing 28 Days Later seemed a little unnecessary to me but I must admit, I enjoyed it. It has none of the social allegory of the Romero zombie films and really is just a long chase sequence, but it is very efficiently handled. I liked the way that none of the characters were sacred cows who you KNEW would make it to the end of the film and the inter-family homicide obviously echoes the influence of the grandaddy of these flicks, Night Of The Living Dead. The basis of the plot actually shares rather more in common with another of Romero's films The Crazies but 28 Weeks Later is actually more successful than both that film and its recent remake. The action is very effective, especially the opening scene which is frighteningly tense and as visceral as a punch in the gut. It is rather plotless and as such will never be considered a classic, but it's an exciting thrill ride that reminded me of a Children Of Men copy with added blood and guts. Better than the first one I think.
Super Reviewer
March 24, 2012
The most entertaining horror disaster movie of 2007.
Super Reviewer
July 18, 2007
Set in a London ravaged by the rage virus (Danny Boyle's contribution to the modern zombie mythos: the change comes faster and the hungry dead are themselves as fast on their feet as anything) this film conceptually answers the burning question: "what if they brought in the U.S. Army against those zombies?" Sound interesting?
Super Reviewer
½ January 13, 2010
"28 Weeks Later" may not have the originality of the the first film, but this equally chilling sequel is not one to miss! The virus has now spread to Britain and 28 weeks later we get the aftermath of the hostile takeover by the zombies, and even though the terror is not as subtle and engaging as the first, we still come to love what is happening to the characters. The action is on a far larger scake this time, and yes it does go over-the-top in some moments, but the fact that they turned it into a zombie vs human war by the end of the film is more entertaining than any action sequence in the original, which is why I give the director props. The cinematography has become much more mainstream (I disliked that portion), the is a slight downgrade from the original, and the zombies are less lifelike. That all being said, I think this is definitely a worthy sequel and a great watch during the halloween season!
Super Reviewer
May 13, 2007
I wouldn't say it's better than the first film and I wouldn't say it's worse, it's on a similar platform. It was very good to watch and whilst the performances weren't perfect from some (excluding Carlyle) it had some really good shots and I liked the idea that one can be 'immune' to the infection. The ending was pretty obvious though.
Super Reviewer
October 27, 2007
Just as good as 28 Days Later, If I had to pick one over the other guess it would have to be this one, but I must say I did really enjoy it. made me jump a few times. Will add it to the collection. 4 Stars
Super Reviewer
February 18, 2011
Sequels to successful films are very rarely ever as good as the original but with Danny Boyle involved as a producer, this manages to retain the success and similiar style he had with his first installment "28 Days Later".
Six months have passed since the outbreak of the rage virus and Britain has now been emptied. There's nobody there. It's completely dead. Now the American army occupy the cities and have plans to start bringing the country back from it's infestation. But, of course, something goes wrong...
As story arcs go, this film is pretty unconventional, where instead of our protaganist Don (Robert Carlyle), being heroic and macho, he is actually quite sensitive and cowardly, and that's only the opening scene. Things get much worse. Right from the beginning, we are thrust into some unbearable kinetic excitement and Spanish director Juan Carlos Fresnidillo does a fantastic job with his handheld camerawork. A highly effective technique in placing us closer to the action. Carlyle delivers a good performance in what is a very underwritten role, but then zombie flicks dont normally spend a lot of time on characterisation. I just wish someone would give Carlyle a role that best fits this great actor's talents. Despite the underwritten roles though, the cast still make you care enough for them which is at least something considering there are gaping plot holes which are laughable at times. However, there's no denying some first-class action and suspense set pieces, namely the opening chase scene and the darkened train tunnel with only a night vision scope as our means of seeing anything.
Visceral and exciting, the way a zombie film should be, and a fine second installment in what is being touted as a possible trilogy.
Super Reviewer
February 9, 2011
Not as personal or emotionally resonant as it's predecessor, 28 Weeks Later still proves that a slight pinch of the Hollywood movie-making powder can't hurt every franchise. On a side note, the helicopter zombie-chopping scene was terrific!
Super Reviewer
½ June 13, 2007
An ok sequel to an overrated movie. Yeah it's gory and it does have some thrillingly shot chase and attack sequences, but that's all it does have really. The sequel is kind of unnecessary, parts of the plot are pretty far fetched, no character development and those damn kids were friggin' annoying! Those of you familiar or who live in London will find the deserted streets of London a pretty eerie sight and it's captured very well in the movie... if only it really was that quiet during the rush hour! If you really really enjoyed the first movie and like the shakey cam style then go see this. It's good fun.
Super Reviewer
½ November 17, 2007
30/10/2010 (AVI FILE)Now this is what I'm talking about, "The Infected" that sprint! Yeah that's right, none of that "arms stretched out" walking like a turtle stuff. You wanna live you better be fast cause these freaks sprint for gold!A fantastic follow up from the first part with again a believable reason for a "Re-infection" to continuate the "Infection" holocaust. Still gritty, not pretty in a terror filled city.A decent horror choice that extracts fear making this film a memorable and unforgettable scare flick of its kind. Terribly terrific.
Super Reviewer
½ May 2, 2007
Awesome production, but this has got to be just about the most depressing sci-fi horror ever conceived. It even sucks being a survivor. A difficult one to sit through....
Super Reviewer
June 9, 2010
This sequel is a rarity. It's a rarity because it's just as great as the first film, as I consider the first film to be one of the best of this decade, I had high hopes for this second film. It delivered and was just as great as the first one. The thing I like about these movies, is that you end up caring for the people portrayed on screen, unlike traditional Horror films where you don't care what happens to the characters, 28 Days Later and 28 Weeks Later is much different. This sequel is electrifying and keeps you in suspense and is really, much like the first one a terrifying and entertaining film. 28 Weeks Later is a rare example of a sequel that is just as strong the first film. One of the reasons why this film is so great is because of the cast. Robert Carlyle gives a great performance and so does Jeremy Renner. 28 Weeks Later is an incredible sequel. I think the reason that this film succeeded so well was because Danny Boyle was still involved in the project. Even if the film is at times predictable, there are still plenty of scary moments and the film is just as tense as the first one. Another reason why this film is great is because of the strong script written by Juan Carlos Fresnadillo. The concept of this film is about the extermination of the rage virus. How the military were able to overcome it. The idea was very interesting, and the film does leave room for a third entry, which one day I hope will happen. 28 Weeks Later and 28 Days Later have put the Briuts on the map in the world of Horror. These two films are some of the best examples of original horror to come out in a long time. I a time where Hollywood seems all too concerned with remaking classics, it's good to see a film like 28 Weeks Later pop up. Both films of this series are a refreshing new take on a dying genre. These films make Horror films fun again. If you enjoyed 28 Days Later, then you'll enjoy this incredible top notch sequel, this film is just as strong as the first one.
Super Reviewer
May 13, 2007
Bloodier and more gory than the first film, it also doesn?t take too long at all to warm up. Whilst the new sub-plot keeps this sequel moving and it does have it?s gory scenes, it doesn?t really touch on the first for me and think that it?s missing Cillian Murphy!
Super Reviewer
½ June 7, 2007
This sequel to the British zombie shocker "28 days later", which invented running instead of slow zombies, starts out wonderfully disconcerting, just like the original film. And while things are slowly returning to normal in Great Britain, we know there will be a new outbreak. Like often in such films the shit hits the fan thanks to stupidity and human incompetence. That's a little frustrating to witness, but the film admittedly has a few wonderfully terrifying scenes later on, like the night vision subway trip. Sadly, the ending comes from the known repertory of the genre and leaves you with a loud: Meh. But for most parts entertaining horror, just not as good as the first one.
Super Reviewer
½ June 10, 2007
I thought 28 Days Later... was great. A breath of fresh air and a thoughtfully entertaining horror flick. So it's not lightly that I say that I think 28 Weeks Later is even better.

The only thing that's missing from the original is the parallel between the rage virus inflicted attackers and the brutality and rage of the main male character and his enemies, at the end of the movie. Everything else is just as good, or improved.

Well, everything except the one specific zombie who seems unnaturally intelligent and obsessed with two characters in the movie. Super Zombie didn't fit at all into the "rules" of the movie, and seemed like an unnecessary plot device. That minor complaint is virtually my only one, though.

28 Weeks is brutal, intense, and more frightening than its predecessor, with the scenes in the crowded parking garage and the pitch black subway tunnel REALLY standing out. The simple story moves along briskly, with no superfluous moments to distract from the tension. The tone is understandably different (there is a new director, after all), but I don't think that the slight change hurt the movie at all. I loved the cast, and the ending is one of the best I've ever seen in a movie of this kind.

Any time that I feel like a movie went by too quickly, I know it's a fantastic one. And that's exactly the impression that 28 Weeks Later left me with, even the second time around. It's less deliberate and more action-focused than 28 Days, but only the most stringent fan of the first movie will have an issue with that.
Page 1 of 2375