28 semaines plus tard

I just finished watching, one night after watching 28 Days Later. This movie is watchable, but it's not as good as the original

The movie uses the same sort of filming techniques that we see in the original, which I like. The low quality camera gives the film a gritty look and feel, and the effect is that the horrific events that occur seem more real and, thus, hard-hitting. The opening sequence involving the group in the cabin is well-done. Jeremy Renner gives a good performance

That said - the movie unfortunately fails to match up to the original for several reasons. The biggest flaw in this movie is that nobody outside of Jeremy Renner's character is likable. The plot is set in motion when 2 kids make a very dumb decision to go outside of the secured area to visit their former home. The 2 kids are, basically, responsible for the deaths of so many people. And that detail lingered with me throughout the whole movie, making the 2 kids unlikable and very hard to pull for. I wasn't interested in their survival in this movie

I also didn't like the inclusion of Americans in this film. I feel that the first movie got some charm for being entirely British.

Lastly , the final act in this movie is unsatisfying, particularly with a a found-footage-esque part.

6.5/10.

Was average at best.

I'm really tired of the stupid things people do in most horror films. This film is no different. The horror films that I consider as really good don't need to have idiot characters doing stupid things to keep the story moving. Death shouldn't need a dumb mistake or a poor decision as a catalyst.

The effects were really realistic, the story even plausible; not that it needs to be. The speed of the virus' transformation however, was inconsistent with the victims and a little faster that what one would expect to be believable.

Average at best.

Six and a Half out of Ten

When I first heard there was to be a sequel to Danny Boyle's excellent 28 Days Later and that Boyle himself would not be directing it, I was less than excited.

Then the reviews began flooding in and I was surprised, shocked even, that the majority of them were positive.

It was then after the well respected film critic Mark Kermode said it was "very good" and "better than we had any right to expect" that I began to raise my expectations.

Im happy to report that they were exceeded by a sequel that surpasses the original in terms of tension and spectacle.

Boyle remained on board with the project, albeit as a producer, but also directed some second unit footage and never allows it to veer away from the look or feel of his original.

Not that he had cause to worry as the new director,Juan Carlos Fresnadillo obviously understood Boyle's vision and expands on it without getting too carried away.

The result is a faster paced, less reflective film, containing a very intelligent political subtext and some fantastic action set pieces that (and this is the most important part) delivers a large number of quality scares.

It also dwarfs 28 days later in terms of gore, meaning true horror fans have much more in the way of visceral glee to sink their teeth into (pun intended).

Bring on 28 months later...

I remember watching "28 Weeks Later" as a kid and being blown away by its intensity and suspense. Back then, I would have rated it a solid 10 out of 10, with its thrilling pace and terrifying depiction of a zombie outbreak. However, after rewatching it recently, my perception has changed quite a bit.

The film starts strong with a gripping opening scene that sets the tone for chaos and desperation. But as the movie progresses, it starts to feel a bit like a low-budget production. The special effects and some of the action sequences, which once seemed cutting-edge, now come off as slightly unpolished and less convincing.

The storyline, particularly the subplot involving the zombie dad, feels awkward and forced. What initially seemed like a dramatic plot twist now feels more cringe-worthy and detracts from the overall tension of the movie. The idea of the dad turning into a zombie and becoming a recurring threat was meant to add a personal dimension to the horror but instead comes across as repetitive and not particularly compelling.

Overall, "28 Weeks Later" has its moments of suspense and still carries a sense of dread, but it doesn't hold up as well as I remembered. The film's shortcomings become more apparent upon rewatching I'd rate it closer to a 6 or 7 out of 10 now-still entertaining in parts, but not the masterpiece I once thought it was.

A sequel to 28 days later and you don't need to watch it to understand this one. The infection has died off and the UK population has been reduced to a few, being backed by US forces living on the Isle of dogs in London. We follow one family haunted by what they saw in the outbreak, some of these demons return. You rarely see the aftermath of an apocalypse with this interesting premise and conflicted characters it really starts well. But once the inevitable returns so does the usual clichés in this genre.