Full Movie Reviews
Yojimbo - wrote on 03/31/2012
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 …
Daniel Corleone - wrote on 12/05/2011
Don (Robert Carlyle) and his wife, Alice (Catherine McCormack) tries to escape the infected humans. Sergeant Doyle (Jeremy Renner) and his friend, Flynn (Harold Perrineau) try to save the survivors Tammy, Andy and Major Scarlet Ross (Rose Byrne). Tries to combine the camera styles of Bourne Ultimatum and Blair Witch. The story moves slow but the action and gore was bountiful. It showcases better location settings and soundtrack; however the conclusion depletes the overall story. The pushing of the eyes was taken from 28 Days, and the family’s story was just too depressing and the military exhibits stupidity by even killing the uninfected people. It likewise wastes the talented Renner as he dies with the idiocy of his comrades. Some of the performances were at times irritating, …
Franz Patrick - wrote on 01/19/2008
A sequel that is as good, at times better, than its predecessor. What made this movie better than the original is that there were more scenes where the characters were being attacked. With that comes a sense of danger lurking around the corner wherever they go, so the audiences anticipate what's coming and it becomes engaging. This movie also had some sort of progress: the focus is now on the family rather than the individual like in the first movie. It also embraced a possibility of how the virus infected others society-wise prior to the first scene in "28 Days Later." Not only that, they also managed to talk about the idea of a mutation and a cure which, as a Biology student, I appreciated because the scientists' explanations made some sort of sense. What this film lacked, nonetheless, …
TheWolf - wrote on 07/27/2007
This one was ok, I still prefer the original because it was what built up the story. This one just didn't seem to have the same bite (no pun intended) as the original. There were many scenes that were right in line with the spirit of the original movie but it didn't hold up as well as I thought it could have. The biggest things that I think kept this movie from hitting its ultimate potential would be the following:
1) Different Director - when you change directors in a series of movies it almost always causes problems with the series. This is usually because there is a different crew that the director works with, different screen writers etc.
2) Different Cast - Aside from the obvious reasons for a new cast, the original movie has a mostly lesser or unknown cast. When you have a hit …
Chris Kavan - wrote on 07/02/2007
When a film comes along that's both original and entertaining, it's a rare event indeed. Nine times out of 10, seeing the results of this "new and original" idea, greedy people in the film business immediately rush out a sequel (or two... or three) to capitalize on this unprecedented audience. These sequels are usually lackluster and dull compared to the original. Luckily for fans of the Original 28 Days Later, for this is that 1 out of 10 that gets it right.
After a brutal opening sequence that answers the question “why should you never answer the door during a rage infested plague?” We’re treated to a nifty little timeline of events leading up to the present. Our friendly U.S. troops have, like good world protectors, taken over Britain and are cleaning up the mess left …
Josh C - wrote on 05/28/2007
I didn't think director Fresnadillo could top the first one but he managed to make the movie both entertaining and frightful at the same time. There are plenty of scares that will knock you off your seats and paired up with the emotional struggles of scared people trying to stay alive, you will find this movie to be deeper than the first. The raw camera work that we saw in the first movie was also used in this one and it helped to bring the characters closer to reality.
The best part about this movie is how it tested the idea of what it really means to be human. It is not just a mindless zombie movie but instead a struggle or morals, emotions and what people will do to stay alive. To me, this is why 28 Weeks Later is a must see even if you are not a lover of horror films. There are …